TBPN - New Apple Products, Anthropic's Strategy, Why AI Costs Don’t Hurt Apple | Dean Ball, Scott Kupor & Jared Isaacman, Adam Bry, Matteo Franceschetti, Dillon Rolnick

Episode Date: March 4, 2026

Sign up for TBPN’s daily newsletter at TBPN.com(00:57) - New Apple Products (08:53) - How is Apple Unaffected by AI Costs? (34:13) - Sam Altman Defends Pentagon Deal (38:14) - Anthropic's Strategy (45:43) - 𝕏 Timeline Reactions (01:01:05) - Dean Ball, a senior fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation and former Senior Policy Advisor for AI at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, discusses the complexities of AI regulation, emphasizing the need for balanced, technocratic oversight to prevent extreme outcomes like total decentralization or nationalization. He critiques the government's punitive approach toward companies like Anthropic for contract disputes, advocating instead for modest regulations that allow private AI firms to operate independently while ensuring public oversight. Ball also highlights the importance of maintaining trust in American AI companies internationally by avoiding actions that could erode their perceived independence from the U.S. military. (01:30:17) - Scott Kupor & Jared Isaacman. Scott Kupor is the Managing Partner at Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), where he oversees the firm’s operations and has led investments across enterprise software, fintech, and marketplaces. He is also the author of Secrets of Sand Hill Road, a guide to how venture capital works and how startups raise funding. Jared Isaacman is an entrepreneur, pilot, and commercial astronaut. He founded the payments company Shift4 and later commanded the Inspiration4 mission, the first all-civilian orbital spaceflight. He is also the founder of the Polaris Program, a series of private human spaceflight missions conducted with SpaceX. (01:47:31) - Adam Bry, co-founder and CEO of Skydio, discusses the company's position as the largest U.S. drone manufacturer, emphasizing their focus on AI and autonomy since its inception in 2014. He highlights the transformative role of autonomous drones in law enforcement, particularly through the "drone as first responder" program, which has led to significant reductions in crime rates in cities like San Francisco. Bry also addresses the importance of transparency in drone usage, advocating for public awareness and accountability to ensure responsible deployment of this technology. (02:06:47) - Matteo Franceschetti, co-founder and CEO of Eight Sleep, a company specializing in sleep fitness technology, discusses the company's recent $50 million funding round led by Tether Investments, their profitability, and plans for international expansion into China and Brazil. He highlights the development of new hardware products, the pursuit of FDA approval for sleep apnea detection and mitigation technologies, and the company's commitment to enhancing sleep quality through innovative solutions. Additionally, Franceschetti shares insights into global sleep patterns, noting that Australians, particularly those on the coast, exhibit the highest sleep quality among their users. (02:16:57) - Dillon Rolnick, CEO of Nous Research, discusses his company's commitment to advancing open-source AI by developing tools like the Hermes agent, which integrates coding capabilities with platforms like OpenClaw to enhance user interaction with AI. He highlights the growing interest in AI agents that perform tasks autonomously, allowing users to delegate work and receive completed outputs, and emphasizes the importance of making these tools accessible and cost-effective to bridge the gap between AI capabilities and user awareness. To foster innovation and community engagement, Nous Research is organizing an online hackathon to explore diverse applications of their AI tools. (02:25:21) - 𝕏 Timeline Reactions TBPN.com is made possible by:Ramp - https://Ramp.comAppLovin - https://axon.aiCisco - https://www.cisco.comCognition - https://cognition.aiConsole - https://console.comCrowdStrike - https://crowdstrike.comElevenLabs - https://elevenlabs.ioFigma - https://figma.comFin - https://fin.aiGemini - https://gemini.google.comGraphite - https://graphite.comGusto - https://gusto.com/tbpnKalshi - https://kalshi.comLabelbox - https://labelbox.comLambda - https://lambda.aiLinear - https://linear.appMongoDB - https://mongodb.comNYSE - https://nyse.comOkta - https://www.okta.comPhantom - https://phantom.com/cashPlaid - https://plaid.comPublic - https://public.comRailway - https://railway.comRestream - https://restream.ioSentry - https://sentry.ioShopify - https://shopify.com/tbpnTurbopuffer - https://turbopuffer.comVanta - https://vanta.comVibe - https://vibe.coFollow TBPN: https://TBPN.comhttps://x.com/tbpnhttps://open.spotify.com/show/2L6WMqY3GUPCGBD0dX6p00?si=674252d53acf4231https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/technology-brothers/id1772360235https://www.youtube.com/@TBPNLive

You're watching TVPN. Today is Wednesday, March 4th, 2026. New haircut. New haircut alert. We are live from the TVPEN Ultram, the Temple of Technology, the Fortress of Finance, the Capital Capital. Let me tell you about ramp.com. Time is money. Save both.

Easy to use corporate cards, bill-pack accounting, and a whole lot more all in one place. We have a little bit of a shorter show. Let's pull up the linear lineup. Linear, of course, is the system for modern software development. 70% of enterprise workspaces on Linear are using agents. We have Dean Ball coming on to give the other side of the Ball versus Thompson argument about Anthropic.

Then we have Scott Kippor and Jared Isaacman coming on to talk about space. We're going to the moon, and they're going to take us there. And then we have Adam Brigh from Skydeo, who I actually worked with through Andrews and Horowitz maybe 10 years ago. And then Matteo, CEO of A. A.S.ly, Pessome Exciting News, and Dillon's coming on to break down the latest AI agent, Hermes agent. Well, anyway, there was some big news.

this week. Of course, everyone knew that Apple was launching new products, but there were some surprises, and there's some cool stuff. Starting with the MacBook Neo, the more downstream take is like, how is Apple affected by the AI boom? But let's start with the actual products, because this thing, in the video, it looks so small. It looks like an 8-inch laptop. I guess this is, so this is the MacBook Neo, sort of designed to compete with the Chromebook. It comes in at 599. Well, not even just a Chromebook, just all PCs. Yeah, but I mean, you're not going to get this for, like, if you're in a professional

workplace, go to a desktop with multiple monitors, plug in, you're doing, like, advanced work. Like, this is for students, this is for the low end. Or just a personal computer. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, for normal people. Yeah. Have an iPhone, but don't have a Mac. Yeah.

Because of costs. Yeah, yeah, yeah. they can have an integrated tweet. Yeah, I mean, it's a crazy product. I love the launch video, too. It's very weird when they start because it's just this like blank block and then they're adding features to it with CGI.

It does a really good job. It's sort of anticlimactic because every feature they add is just like what you'd expect. Yeah, I was kind of like, oh, is this going to be a touchscreen? And then it's like, oh, no, it's just a normal screen. Just like, oh, like, guess what? It has a keyboard. Boom, mic drop.

Oh, it has two USB. It is kind of cool that they put the headphone jack a little bit further down. Oh, that was cool. And then they're like, check it out. You're never going to guess this. A camera, we put it on the computer. They're like, hey, we heard you liked having an iPad that you could attach a keyboard to. So we basically took an iPad and put a keyboard.

But it's very cool how they like sort of expand the product, like show you, okay, there's the speaker, it's pretty big. It goes on the side. There's two of them shows you. But this does not look like a 13-inch computer to me. This looks like an 8-inch computer. to me. This looks like a small iPad. And 13 inches is a very normal size. Maybe the model is just like Shaq or something. Yeah, yeah. No, I think they actually use some of the big hands to make it like

maybe look smaller or something. But 13 inch display, 16 hour battery life. The price is the really crazy thing. So 599. For students, it's $100 cheaper. So $4.99. That is one of the cheapest Apple products they've ever made. I'm pretty sure the headphones cost more. The Apple Pro, Apple AirPods max costs like 500 bucks. Remarkably cheap. A18 Pro chip, 256 gigs or 512 of storage, four colors. They got it in ramp yellow. They call it citrus, but I think everyone's going to be referring to as ramped and it now costs the same amount as the entry level iPhone. Yeah. 17E. Yeah. And it has Wi-Fi 6E, Bluetooth 6 connectivity, 8 gigs of RAM, 1080P front facing camera. Like people are sort of like, ah, it's underpowered, but look at the price. This is, this is crazy. The last time Apple had a product that

was anywhere near this cheap was, wow, where was it? Let's see. I wrote about this. So in 2014, so 12 years ago, long time ago, they sold the MacBook Air for $899. And now they have this down at $4.99 or $5.99, which is remarkable, really, really cheap, cheap for 2026, cheap for an Apple product, even cheap when compared to other laptops. So this is sort of like their their escape hatch, their pressure release valve. So they can actually increase the price on the other products more, because if you're price sensitive, well, they have a product for you. And there was something similar that happened with the new suite of iPhones

where the iPhone pro max was getting so big and the camera notch was so in your face and the phone was bigger and heavier and the battery life was great, it was very powerful. And a lot of people want that. But there were also a lot of people who were complaining. I just want a thinner phone. Well, then you have the iPhone Air. And there's going to be crazy trade-offs.

You only get, I think, one camera. The battery life's not nearly as good. Lags. It lags. But for some people, if they're going to be complaining about all the features of the Pro Max, it's like, well, we got the Air for you. Stop complaining. And I think that's a lot of the strategy there.

So the other products they launch, MacBook Air with an M5 chip, MacBook Pro with the M5 Pro and M5 Macs chip. Did you wind up going? How much memory did you wind up going? 48. 48. Is that enough? I feel a little soft.

Is that enough to pull up tweets and react to them on a live stream? It's up there. Apparently, you actually have been maxing out something like 32 gigs of RAM, which took me, but by surprise. I have not had, I've not been memory constrained. But I do actually love the idea of getting the top end memory, which is the thing that constrains you on running LLMs locally. Is that correct, Tyler?

Yeah, I mean, you can always, like, if you have a really model, you can, like, get around the memory thing, but then it gets, like, super slow because you're, like, loading it in and out. Oh, okay, you're loading it in and out for, like, every token that you're generating. Yeah, you need a lot of memory. Yeah, but, but, so, so if I go with the 128 gig, the top of the line ship, I should be able to inference, like, a pretty smart model locally, pretty reliably. I mean, it's also, like, you can always just quantize the models down. Yeah. And so, like, you can actually run, like, really frontier, like, source models on, like, pretty normal hardware now?

I'm just purely thinking for, you know, doomsday prepping, the idea of, you know, you have your library in case you're bored during the apocalypse, you have your DVD collection, you can watch all the movies from start. That's the big one for you because you're going to be able to watch all of American cinema from the beginning. I still don't think I'd actually watch. You wouldn't do that.

What would you be doing? Assuming that the Internet's down in this apocalyptic scenario, you can't scroll. There's plenty of other things to do. What would you do? Take a walk on the beach. What if you can't go outside because there's nuclear fallout everywhere?

You're stuck in your bunker. What are you doing? Whittling? Did you get into whittling? I actually used to love whittling as a kid. Called it. There you go. He's not going to be watching movies.

He's going to be whittling. I will be whittling while I watch movies. While I inference a local model that I can just ask questions to and get all sorts of history and there might be a few hallucinations because it's not queering the internet because, of course,

in this hypothetical scenario, the internet is gone. But I would still have access to all the pre-trained information and basically the world's best encyclopedia, which would be fun. What else do they launch? In a world where computers keep going up in price, it's kind of wild to see Apple drop a $599 laptop, says Theo. A phone priced Mac. I could not agree more. Fry says, oh man, they're going to sell $5 billion of these things. Yeah, this is, this feels like more of a no-brainer for kids than an iPad. for some reason? I don't know if I'm just like old school. I'm like, if it has a keyboard, it's for work. iPads with kids just have really bad aesthetics. It does. It does. A kid with an iPad,

just zoning out, right? You get them a keyboard, they're locked in. But you get them there. I think there's something here. You're like, are they day trading? Yeah, they. Yeah, they're doing something for sure. It might be underpowered, but it'll get the job done. And they, I think there's something about, you know, typing on a keyboard that does lend itself to more creation and less consumption. The iPad is a media consumption device. That's where most people use it for. Throw on Netflix, play a game, do something. There aren't that many people that are power users.

But as soon as you get the keyboard, you're ready to type, you're ready to work. Let me tell you about Railway. Railway is the all-in-one intelligent cloud provider. Use your favorite agent to deploy web apps, servers, databases, and more, while Railway automatically takes care of scaling, monitoring and security. And let me also tell you about Octa.

Octa helps you assign every AI agent a trusted identity so you get the power of AI without the risk. Secure every agent, secure any agent. So, hilarious chart from Andresen Horowitz. Apple on CAPEX, nah, we're good. They looked at the standardized quarterly capital expenditure for Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta, and Apple. And all of the four companies that are working on AI, Amazon, obviously through AWS and Anthropic, Microsoft through OpenAI, Alphabet through Gemini, and Meta through MSL, they are all absolutely off to the races going to the moon on CAPEX and Apple is down 19% since 2015 on this standardized metric that A16Z put together.

Very, very funny. And it's just interesting that Apple has been so unaffected by AI costs, not just on the CAPEX side, which is where every hyperscaler sort of had to say, yep, you know what? Our business is fundamentally different now. we are not the high margin cash flow generating business. We're going to draw down on that cash. We might be taken on some debt. This is a big different financial model. It's a very different financial model from years past.

And buckle up. You're coming with us, shareholders. And the stocks have done well because a lot of shareholders have believed in the goal, believed in the value of AI, believed in the value of building compute infrastructure broadly. And they've been rewarded for it in most cases. But Apple just sort of sat that out and said, hey, we're not going to train a foundation model.

We're not going to build a whole bunch of compute infrastructure. We're going to serve Gemini. We're going to serve Gemini. And we'll pay them, what, a billion dollars a year or something like that? Yes. It's like... Yeah, I mean, this year will be really interesting. It'll be fascinating to see what the new Siri actually looks like,

what it can really do. We'll start to see that, I think, in Q2. Yes. And then separately, we're expecting new devices from OpenAI, right? Oh, yeah. Teasing the Puck time, whatever you want to call it. it'll be interesting to see if they can kind of break the AI hardware curse that I feel like is Well, I wanted to think about that because I wonder if the story's over for some of those like

cursed bad launches product. Like we saw Friend apparently has found a little niche, very controversial, but Humane has sold to HP. It seems like they're not working on that product anymore, the PIN, the AI PIN. But the Rabbit R1, I think his name's Jesse, you know, that product, there's something there where with enough iterations, I feel like that might sell well. I was playing with the board the other day. That hardware, it's like a huge screen, touchscreen that you can play games on.

Like there's still these niche applications that I think you could potentially, if you have a hardware team, you have the ability to sell something. It wasn't polished. The AI wasn't good enough. Well, the AI got better. You still have the supply chain. maybe there's a way to cut through, but it probably needs to be a little bit more niche. Everyone's going to have one.

Tyler, what do you think about hardware in the age of AI? I mean, I think the Mac Mini is like a good example of like AI hardware right now. Yeah, no, that's a great example. Yeah. I wonder what, like, how exposed the Gemini APIs will be in iOS. Because if you fully expose like Gemini kit, like, you know, in iOS, just like you can call like a weather API or a Maps API. Like Uber exists because there was like a GPS API

that you could just call within an iOS application with a couple lines of code. And you didn't have to like figure out where the user was because the iPhone just told you that as long as you clicked like, yeah, share my location with Uber. If you now get an app that has not just Apple's local LLMs that are sort of, you know, mediocre, but it can go and call Gemini and do a whole bunch of crazy stuff. You start running into,

like, will someone build an open cloth app or something? Like, how much of Apple's AI strategy will wind up being vended into the third-party ecosystem, which has served them so well for so long. They've sort of turned their back on it. They locked down Apple Vision Pro a little bit more. There was way less uptake there. And there's a ton of risk because if I develop like a free iOS app that then incurs like a ton of Gemini tokens and ton of charges, how do those get passed through? Is Apple just biting the bullet on it? But there's something interesting there where turning app developers loose to to build software that takes advantage not just of local LLM capabilities, but Gemini under the hood and sort of wrap it up in a neat bow.

that is, you know, available to the consumer. Could be very cool. Anyway, the big question that I had, and I will get into the essay, was, so Apple's unaffected by CAPEX costs, but they've also, with this release, been unaffected by memory costs and the Rammageddon. So I will take you through how I dug into the question

of memory pricing at Apple. But first, I will tell you about label box. R.L. Environment's, voice, robotics, e-vals, and expert human data. label boxes, the data factory behind the world's leading AI teams. And I will also tell you about console. Console builds AI agents that automate 70% of ITHR and finance support, giving employees instant resolution for access requests and password resets.

That's a good sound effect. I like that one. I have one too. Surprise. I can't believe you haven't used that yet. I know, no, no. Because I was so burned by the last time I got access to the soundboard and I went too crazy. So there was one show where me and Jordy both had full soundboard access, all of the same sound cues.

One single show. And it was truly a disaster. What's the metaphor from Greek mythology? It was the, it was Pandora's Box for me. Like once I opened it, I could not resist. And I became addicted, and I was pushing the thing. It is too much. And it just didn't work.

So we were like, no, let's have Jordy play the soundboard. I'll do other stuff. The issue for me as a. as a soundboard artist is when I'm not doing the show. Yes. When I'm hanging out on the weekend. Yes. I'm just thinking.

Yes. I'm just, if somebody says something, like we're at dinner. Yeah. I'm thinking about the sound effect. Yeah. Yeah.

I was hanging out with you and you said something crazy and I wanted to just be like, and so I opened up my phone. I went to YouTube and I pulled up that sound and played it. But then I had to turn on my volume and it took me way too long and the joke had passed. But we have a solution. Tyler Cosgrove over there has been working on a soundboard app that can go on your phone and you can have, we should do a widget too so that it's just there on the home screen. Boop!

Your favorite soundboard cues. So expect that soon. Anyway, let me tell you about Apple Oven. Profitable advertising made easy with axon.aI. Get access to over one billion daily active users and grow your business today. So the question, the question, like I get the strategy of Apple saying, look, we're good with Google. handling the AI inference stuff. They have GCP, they have the TPU, they got Demas, who's got a book written about him by Sebastian Malibi. He like the deep mind is great. We're working with them. So CapEx, unaffected. I understand that. How are they not affected by memory prices? Rammageddon has come for us all. And and Ben Thompson of Stratory and John Gruber of Daring Fireball actually had a bet about this and I

I hope I didn't misspell John Gruber's name. They had a bet about this. They said, whoever wins this bet gets a steak dinner. A steak dinner was at stake, and Ben Thompson lost. John Gruber won, because John Gruber said, Apple always overcharges for RAM. Getting a, if you went to build a computer or a phone or laptop or, you know, iPad equivalent, and you just went to retail,

getting an extra 128 gigs of memory or a slight memory upgrade, might cost you $30. In the Apple ecosystem, that's like $200. So Apple has built in this pricing buffer for a very, very long time, and that buffer really saved them this year. But there's a lot more to it. So many companies are dealing with Rammageddon this year and some stats that are interesting.

DRAM prices rose 172% throughout 2025. DDR5 spot prices have quadrupled since September of 2025. Trendforce expects PC DRAM to roughly double in price just in Q1 of 2026 with LPDR pricing, seeing the steepest increases in history. So every wafer that's allocated to an HBM stack, a high bandwidth memory stack for an NVIDIA GPU, is literally a wafer denied to the LPDR5X module of a mid-range smartphone or consumer laptop SSD. So they are truly commodities. There's only so many of them, and they can only go to one place or the

other. Apparently, OpenAI's Stargate initiative alone could consume up to 40% of global DRAM output as it stands today. And this is the problem because there's only three major companies in the memory category. It's Samsung, S.K. Hynix, and Micron. Together, they control 95% of the global DRAM production. Remember, Micron has been trying to build a new facility in New York. Yes. And six people basically blocked it. Oh, I, we talked about that. But I... And the rumor is that it's like foreign funding actually trying to hold Micron up. Yeah, yeah.

I mean, Micron has been very, they've been a huge beneficiary of AI margins and higher prices. And so much so that they've actually reallocated all of their capacity to AI, and they pulled out of their consumer brand, which is called Crucial. So if you ever tried to build a gaming PC, you probably found crucial ballistics, which was like this very aggressively X-Games branded, like PC gamer DDR memory, which was, you know, very important. Like the monster energy of RAM. Exactly. Couldn't have said it better myself. No, it really is.

Like the branding on crucial ballistics is like insane. Anyway, gamers will be rising up soon with monster energies in hand to take the RAM by force if they need to. I already see memes about this all the time. I see these, like, the worst AI slop video you've ever seen, just absolute junk. And then the caption will be like, so this is why I can't afford RAM, you know, or this is why RAM is $800 a stick or whatever. And then on the flip side, people will say, you know, occasionally there'll be a good AI slot video, and people will be like, okay, it's worth paying $800 for RAM because this is so good, right?

It goes both ways. It goes both ways. But clearly people are feeling the pinch. But Apple fans will be sitting out the fight thanks to a few key moves from Apple that help them avoid disaster this year. So one, Apple has long-term supply agreements that allow them to secure memory 12 to 24 months in advance. They also benefit from vertical integration and custom silicate. So instead of buying that consumer-grade commodity DRAM modules that you see go into either gaming PCs or NvidiaGPUs, for example, they negotiate multi-year contracts directly with Samsung and SK-Hinex for customers.

LPDDR packages that meet Apple's exact specifications. And so I think... Yeah, so this is like... Rams always been cyclical. Yep. And so it makes a lot of sense for Apple to say basically like lock up pricing. Samsung's locking up the demand. I don't even think Samsung would have predicted this level of demand even three, four years ago.

Otherwise, they may not have priced it in the way that they did. Of course. The other thing that maybe you get to is... And it seems like still making their default margin. They're just like, the opportunity cost is so high. Yeah. We could reallocate. The other thing is they probably have so much margin in the upsell that they could have

some margin compression and still be. So Apple at various times has had over $100 billion in cash. They currently have over $66 billion in cash. Like they can take the hit there. They can also just take a hit to their margins. Every AI lab looking at that cash being like, Tim, I could really put that day. Yeah, they're the only

hyperscaler that hasn't really shelled out to the tune of 10, 20, 30 billion into one of the frontier labs. Maybe that changes. I don't know. Somebody was throwing out, like, Apple should buy Anthropic or Amazon should buy anthropic, but I think the price is too high at this point.

It's just getting away. So I'm not 100% sure about how the manufacturing supply chain for memory works, but I believe that because Apple's specific requirements, it's harder for Samsung to just instantly reallocate a product that's been already manufactured in a way where crucial ballistics, if it's going into gaming PC, it's easier to reallocate those wafers. So even if they didn't have those contracts,

I think the supply chain's a little bit stickier with Apple because they're vertically integrated. And then, yeah, of course, they have the money to overpay. We talked about how the MacBook Neo is this pressure release valve. So even if the memory does increase, they have the cash buffer. They also have the, they're charging 200 bucks for something that costs 30. If it goes to 60, they can just take a hit on margins buffer. Then they have the contract buffer. Then they also have this Neo where if the MacBook Pro goes up in price, the MacBook Pro buyer is probably less price sensitive. They're like, yeah, you know, this year it was $4,000 instead of $3,000. I'm buying it for business purposes, it's not that big of a squeeze.

And then the price sensitive buyer says, yeah, you know what? I'm not going to go for the $2,000 laptop. I'm going to go for the $600 laptop this year, and they're still in the Apple ecosystem. But my takeaway is like, this is an incredible testament to the operational prowess of Apple to pull this off at this scale. The Sony PlayStation 6 is allegedly going to be delayed until 2028 or 29 because of rising memory costs.

They're going to wait it out. because there are three players, it's not just TSM in this case. It does feel like there'll be more pricing competition and there's more of a race to build capacity. Whereas a TSM, if they don't build the next fab, they can just continually raise prices and increase margins once the next contracts go up for renewal. Whereas if Samsung has a bunch of capacity and Micron doesn't, like Samsung wins. And so there's more of this game theoretic, like they got to, they have to build. And so I think a lot of people, and Tyler was talking about this with me earlier, like, we all expect this memory shortage to be a few years, not more, not like five or 10 years.

So if you push out the Sony PS6 to be not bullish, Tyler? He's bullish. No, I'm very bullish, but I think, yeah, because there's more players, like I think the shortage will be less important. AGI Pelt. What do you mean? I mean, there is a question about, like, if you truly go exponential forever and it's just like, okay, yeah, there's like, you know, trillions and trillions of dollars of data centers being built, it's like, can even Samsung Micron and S.K.

Hinex keep up forever? Yeah. No, so we might be living in, like, a permanently higher price just because, like, it's a more valuable product. Like, we get more economic product. Yeah, this time might be different. Might be different. Also, the Nintendo Switch 2 might go up in price next year.

really bad for gamers. Gaming graphics cards are going up in price, and V-Vity is pulling out of gaming graphics cards or skipping a year. So it's mayhem for gamers, but long-term, the competition between the memory manufacturers should stabilize prices. But just watching all the big companies that are not Apple get caught flat-footed is just crazy to watch. Because it's not like the folks at Nintendo or the folks at Sony are like, oh, yeah, first-time manufacturing something. Like, if you told me that the team behind the Rabbit R-1 was suffering from higher memory costs. I'd be like, yeah, like it's a new company,

new product they haven't in these. Like Sony has been making PlayStation's for decades, and they still got caught to plat-footed on this, and a lot of that is a testament to the brand power that Apple has, the network effects, the scale they built that they're in this position and still not getting squeezed, even when other hyperscalers are getting squeezed

on all sorts of stuff. Tim Cook. Still underrated. He cooked. He cooked. He has cooked, and yeah, the operational side of Apple is always, is just habitually underrated, even in the face of like slight misses on features and products and marketing. And, oh, this ad didn't land. Well, the business is still thriving and dealing with just crisis after crisis.

Like the tariff should have been a major crisis. They got through it. This memorand, Ramageddon should have been a crisis. They got through it. It's all been very, very good news for Apple. Let me tell you about 11 labs. Build intelligent real-time conversational agents. We imagine human technology interaction with 11 labs and get that cha-ching ready,

because I'm going to tell you about Phantom Cash. Fund your wallet without exchanges or middle end and spend with the Phantom card. Apple is exercising the Coase Conjecture. They're waiting for open source models to get better, applying pressure to frontier lab pricing, e.g. rejecting Anthropic overtures. Anthropic wanted more money from Apple. They went with Google and Gemini. This is from Soren Larsson, who is an economist, who I really really,

respect. It may rather be that in it may rather be that impatient buyers have adverse selection revealing actually poor business positioning. So he is he's he's he's he's he's identifying Apple's leverage in the system. They're you know, this consumer aggregator and they've been they've been doing very well. Um, Kyle Harrison says that quote, we ran the math. Open AI is buying three to four times more memory than it could possibly need in the short term. The most charitable explanation is aggressive forward positioning. The less charitable one is that they're cornering the supply to kill on-device AI before it starts. Well, if the on-device AI happens on Apple products, that doesn't seem like

that real of a scenario. But it is an interesting thesis. I think that across the frontier labs, everyone is just very AGI-pilled. They're seeing the increase in capabilities, but also these sort of like stacked exponentials. Ben Thompson was explaining this today, that when you went from LOMs to reasoning, the number of tokens, the number of compute required just to get a single answer when like 10x all of a sudden.

And then we saw the same thing with coding agents where these long running tasks are, sort of like squaring the amount of compute. And so you just keep stacking these things on and you just get more and more compute demand, but you get more economic output. So it winds up being all worth it. When will Apple release the iPhone?

The only other thing, only other thing on the opening eye memory side is they plan to sell a lot of consumer devices. They do. Oh, so they might be buying it for that, right? Yeah, so, so we, We don't really know, but yeah, I think that, obviously, opening eyes kind of rolled back some of like that $1.2 trillion number. But seeing the growth in demand just in this first couple months of the year starts to look like, hey, maybe he wasn't so crazy after all.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, totally. Like the models are justifying the compute. And I think that we talked about this yesterday a little bit with the orchestrators, just this idea that, you know, where will the next 10x come from? Well, it's probably from just running 10 instances of Claude Codex and just firing off 10 times as much inference. And people are ready to do that. You see it all the time on Twitter, people talking about how much inference they're doing. When will Apple release the iPhone 18? Colchie has before October at 35%, before 2027 at 34%. What is the chance that they don't release it this year? That would be probably zero, and I think it is zero. So stay tuned. I'm sure Mark German will have good coverage on the next Iphone.

Nick, let's get the Germanator back on. Yeah, well, I wanted to invite John Gruber to talk about these, but Mark German, of course, is welcome at any time. But we have yet to talk to John Gruber, and he has been covering Apple fantastically throughout his entire career. So he would be an interesting gentleman to talk to. Let me tell you about Gusto first.

Gusto is the unified platform for payroll benefits, NHR built to evolve with modern, small, and medium-sized businesses. And let me tell you about Restream. One live-stream 30-plus destinations. If you want to multistream. Go to Restream.com. TSM submitted a new semiconductor, FAB construction plan for the southern Taiwan Science Park last week.

The site is located on Tainan's Anding District adjacent to the F-18 FAB and covers 15.46 hectares. They're doing more two-nanometer production, the leading edge, with eight hectares allocated for the production area and one hectare for administrative facilities. The project is expected for completion and production start in 2028, says semi-analysis. So we'll see what happens in the actual CAP-X guide from TSM. Ben Thompson has been very disappointed with where TSM has been guiding on CAP-X, but maybe this is a shift. I wonder how much faster it will be to build another TSM Fab over there. If they ramp production of this new facility before Arizona,

if they eclipse and there's a flippening and this gets to scale before Arizona, it will reveal some very serious problems with America's building and permitting system, I would imagine, or maybe talent pool. I would certainly hope that Taiwan, I mean, this is their crown jewel, they should get this up and running fairly quickly without many delays since they've done it before. They are heavily invested in TSM, of course. More importantly, Wendy's U.S. President posts new video amid Burger Battle with McDonald's and Burger King. Let's see.

Let's watch. Let's rate it. Does he put... I like the way that he's holding it, you know. Okay. Seems normal. Wonderful. Kind of...

Not to burger. This is good. I like talking. This is exactly... Okay, yeah, going back for a second. You got to top it off for the fries and frost. He's not saying product. Product.

There we go. Yeah, no hesitation. No hesitation. Wait, wait, what did he dip in the frosty? Was that bait? What did he do at the end there? He dips a french fry in the frosty? Whoa, okay.

Okay, doesn't call it a product, no hesitation, talking with the food in his mouth. Yeah, yeah, that's bold, that's bold. I'm giving this an eight out of ten. If you scrolled out, I like Colonel Sanders after seeing it. Sanders after seeing this. Also, also the way he kind of puts the fry in and quickly, you know, kind of pulls, pulls the hand back.

Yeah. It's got style points. Dude, here's a good job. If you're looking for a gig that will bring home the bacon, apply for the job of CEO at McDonald's. Apparently, the guy makes $18 million a year. Right, do they have an open job application? No, but after this, it's entirely possible.

Oh, okay. that if you put on a masterful performance, chomping down, you can make a run. I don't know. It is funny that there's just like one after another of CEOs. This is probably good for all of them. I don't know. This is fun.

People are, I want no jump cuts. Somebody should have seen swallow. Somebody should be seen swallowing the food. Oh. Okay. People are analyzed. That's somewhat fair. analyzing the details.

Let me tell you about Gemini 3.1 Pro. Gemini 3.41 Pro is here with a more capable baseline. It's great for super complex tasks like visualizing difficult concepts, synthesizing data into a single view or bringing creative projects to life. Berbergen came in the Wall Street Journal. And shared Altman defended Open AIs Defense Department contracting in all hands yesterday, calling the backlash, quote, really painful. This was an example of a complex, but the right decision with extremely difficult

brand consequences and very negative PR for us. in the short term, he told staff. Yeah, I still stand by that given the events that have transpired in the world since last week, like being there to like meet the government. Yeah. Feels like being on the right path. It was just, yeah, it was just odd that the, that like Google strategy was to not, say anything. Do nothing win, basically, I would think. Or do nothing, don't go up or down.

Like, Gemini just... But I don't think Gemini is involved in this contract. It's GROC. It's GROC. Rock was the other one that came in with the same term. So Gemini doesn't have any relationship with the Department of War? I think they do. I think, I thought that there was a, there was an announcement. I might be, they might. I just don't think they were involved in this contract negotiation. Because I've seen Palantir show that they have like three or four models that they sort of like mix together to get responses. I don't know. Open AI announced its Defense Department deal on Friday hours after the defense secretary Pete Higsef designated rival Anthropica supply chain risk. There's still a question as to whether or not that's going to go through.

So Kalshi has it at a 42.8 percent chance and it hasn't really moved. It's unclear if that's just like staying in Tweetland and is like bluster or well they? there be something there will there? I mean, I have to imagine that at this point, both the Department of War and Anthropic are talking to each other. Do you have more information? Yeah, Gemini does have deals with the DOD, yeah. So there's the 200 million one that was in July. That was, Anthropic was also in that one. Yeah. And then they did, there was the recent, like, genaI.comil. Do you remember Seth was tweeting about this? Oh, interesting. But they're, like, involved in that too. Yeah, but I am, what I'm so shocked by is

how does AWS have an advantage in 2026 on FedRamp and like federal classified networks? Like I get that it's like hard. You have to do a lot of cybersecurity. You have to really harden the servers. But you would think that Microsoft and Google would have figured out how to fully support the deepest depths of the U.S. government and get full approval before like, maybe Amazon would have gone first. but I would have thought that Microsoft and Google would be like a year or two behind.

And so you would see Gemini and OpenAI like checking those boxes really fast. But I don't know. I guess AWS does have like a material advantage there still. Albin said that while he didn't regret signing a deal with the Defense Department, he wished he hadn't announced the decision so quickly telling staff that it looked opportunistic and not united with the field. And I think that's a good point. I agree with him on that. Marks echoed a memo he shared with the staff and on X Monday in which he said the deal looked opportunistic and sloppy.

A groundswell of AI researchers at the company and across Silicon Valley spent the past few days criticizing Altman and the company for what they saw as a capitulation to the Pentagon by essentially agreeing to a deal that allowed AI to be used in all lawful cases. And we will see where the laws go. I've been digging a little bit more into the rules around surveillance. There's actually a ton of them and it's a very nuanced thing. it feels like it's hard to bake it down into a single line, but a single line is what hits on social media for better or for worse. Yeah. And so you can see a single line and be like, that's amazing.

It's exactly what I think it means, and that could either mean good or bad. Yeah. Very, very tricky. Scott Besson went on CNBC this morning and said, no private company will ever dictate the terms of our national security, Anthropics, attempts to push use clauses into their context. contracts with the United States government are unacceptable and their products will no longer be utilized by the U.S. Treasury or any other government agency. So doubling down there. There was also a story in Semaphore this morning from Reed. He writes, Anthropics investors don't have its back in its fight with the Pentagon. This is very interesting. Anthropic may be standing its ground against the Pentagon, but the AI powerhouse is doing so with a noticeably quiet quarter, its own high profile backers. Despite the company's defiance, Silicon Valley's biggest players,

have remained silent. In a recent meeting between Amazon CEO, Andy Jassy, and Pete Hegseth, the issue of Anthropic came up, according to two people who were briefed on the encounter. Amazon has invested billions in the startup, a crucial part of Amazon's custom chip strategy is the largest consumer of the company's traneum AI chips. And Hegseth has been threatening to designate Anthropic a supply train risk, which would make it impossible for many of the military suppliers to do business with the company. Jassy Demurred declined. to take Anthropic side, the people said. He wasn't alone.

Despite Anthropic CEO Dariomedes, very vocal opposition to the Pentagon's demands and rival OpenAI Sam Altman's running commentary on the matter, a number of anthropic investors have remained silent. One investor told Semaphore that speaking up might further inflame things with the admin and that they were still holding out hope

the issue could be resolved. Another said that Anthropic requested they say nothing. Anthropic and Amazon declined to comment. The Pentagon didn't immediately respond to a request for comment as well. The most important thing here is that we get Pete Huggseth on Twitch. Amazon, Andy Jassy is sitting down with Pete Hegseth. Hegseth likes Twitter.

He likes X. Get him live streaming those press conferences. Put them on Twitch. That's the goal here. Go direct. Go directly. We'll talk directly to Ditch. About the back and forth.

Noah Smith summed it up, honestly, in the Ben Thompson versus Dean Ball debate, we have Dean Ball on the show at noon. I think Ben is right. Noah agrees with Ben. There was just no way or in any nation state, there was no way America or any nation state was ever going to let private companies remain in total control of the most powerful weapon ever invented. This is a big question about like, where are we? Like, are we there yet? Like, is this the most powerful weapon ever invented that feels like, this feels very much like a training run for something that's coming in the future. important conversation, but we're not necessarily there yet. So we'll see Dean Ball replied.

He said, also Dean versus Ben is wild and an honor for me as a guy who's been reading Ben since the days of Android will not commodify iOS and use Ben as a core inspiration for my own project today, even though I disagree with Ben here. You will hear much more for me on this soon on a certain podcast. I hope he's referring to TBPN. But the thing is, Ben is anti-regulation and does not own the consequences of state seizure of AI, neither do you. There was another post by Dean Ball, I want to get him to unpack a little bit more. He said, it is so clear that the important fissure in AI politics is not, right now, is not liberal versus conservative, Democrat versus Republican, EAC versus EA, or safety versus anti-safety,

but instead takes advanced AI seriously as a concept versus does not take advanced AI seriously. And why this is so interesting to me is because it feels like both both Dean and Ben are in the takes advanced AI seriously as a concept camp. So we'll see if he agrees with my understanding of both of theirs positions, because it seems like they both are in the same camp of takes advanced AI seriously, but then they disagree about the level of pressure that the government should place on a private corporation. And so very, very interested in digging into that. Let me tell you about Figma.

No matter where your idea starts, Figma Make, Cod Codex, or Sketch, the Figma Canvas is where ideas connect and products take shape, build in the right direction with Figma. Let's move on to Wilmanitis. He has also been chiming in on Darius' statements. There's a set of strange little fictions that tech has chosen to believe as some sort of basis. set for the perceived morality of their work. Chief amongst these is the idea that the legal system doesn't exist, and when it does,

it's a precise mechanistic process. Tech is a positive sum and a community, which means you pretend that the standard weapons that exist to the modern corporation, coercive litigation, IP blocking and trolling, standard white shoe law firm stuff. Really taking shots of white shoe lawyers there. Is negative sum or something bad we don't do here.

This leads to a weirdly formalist view. of the legal process that we must avoid it at all cost. But if we must engage in it, then it's a fair and repeatable process that must necessarily yield, if not the truth, then at least the same outcome repeatedly and provably. It's this instinct that gives you Anthropics odd contract formalism. This is how you end up thinking your best moves to show your cards at the forefront and thinking you've won the hand. There's incredible potential for outperformance available to you for betraying any of these silly norms that tech uses to feel good about itself, the modern corporation must avail itself of all possible edge, and holy wars require holy weapons, so get busy.

The idea that sticks with me here is that if we engage in it, then it's fair in a repeatable process. I talked to someone who is doing something with the legal system, and he said that, Like on this particular issue, it was a true, like, left, right issue. Like, a liberal judge would always cite on one side of the case, and a conservative judge would always cite on the other side of the case. So no matter how well he argued, it came down to, did his case get a liberal judge or a conservative judge? And I was like, oh, well, like, that seems simple.

Like, like, get a judge that's aligned with your company and your position. And he was like, yeah, bad news. the way they decide which judge I get is they literally spin a physical wheel. And I was like, and so there's nothing you can do it? He's like, yeah, no, like it is secure. It's like a real process. And like that's by design. Like some things are better left in the democratic process to inject a little randomness

so that you can't put your finger on the wheel and pick the right judge and get exactly what you want. Like that's not possible. But it is potentially like the least bad system, but still very staccount. and still very random. And so you wind up in this weird situation where things are not necessarily repeatable. Repeatable is the interesting thing. That you can go into an engagement in a legal context

and wind up with a different scenario just somewhat randomly, and that is almost by design. Let me tell you about turbo puffer, serverless vector and full-text search built for first principles on object storage, fast, 10x cheaper, and extremely, Scalable. Dario was at the Morgan Stanley Tech Media and Technology Conference today and was dropping bombs.

On defense, he said, we believe in defending America. Anthropic has been working with the national security community for two years. We are the most lean forward on AI's acceleration. He says, we do not see hitting a wall this year will have a radical acceleration that surprises everyone. Exponentials catch people off guard. We are at the precipice of something incredible. we need to manage it the right way. I'm very interested to hear, like,

this idea that he thinks we're at the end of the exponential. I feel like most technological processes, where Carpathie was saying this, maybe, he was saying, like, AI is a continuation of, you know, previous technological

revolutions, right? Yeah, that was why he said, we're not going to see, like, massive growth in GDP. I think that was his reasoning. Yeah. It's just kind of the same process. Same process. Or you saw computers.

and you saw internet, and AI, it's the same curve. Yeah. It's very interesting. I mean, there are people that, like, he's saying there, like, we don't see hitting a wall this year, but it begs the question, like, do you think that there's going to be a plateau? Because at a certain point, like, you plot out the AI revenues, and you get to something that's larger than GDP, and the GDP has to move in order to grow. Like, what happens at the end state? What does the end state look like? I feel like, we got to talk about this.

me and Tyler were talking about just the general like AI safety discourse on both sides always ends with people just saying like we got to talk about this no one has any answer to you know we gotta figure this out guys

we gotta talk to each other yeah yeah no one's like no one's like I have a clear plan I think it'll work you might disagree with me but this is my plan and this is what we're going to do and here are the steps and like I think this gets us the good the good outcome, everyone's, everyone's just like, I don't know. It's very, very weird. Just from a

comms perspective, it's very weird. I mean, I feel like that's how decisions get made in companies. Like, if a decision is really obvious, you can handle it over text. Yeah. If it's not, it's like, let's discuss live. Yeah, but I mean, you talk to a lot of companies about, about their plans. And, and, I mean, the good companies can think in decades and think, like, okay, we're going to do this and then we're going to make a, I mean, the original Tesla plan. We're going to make a sports car and then we're going to make a sedan and then we're going to make a cheaper car and like that's the plan and and there was no like oh we got to talk about this It was like it's like yeah we're going to make a bunch of cars and then we're going to make more factories to make more cars and like this is the plan We're just not we're just not really seeing that from from from from lab leaders at the moment

But still plenty of optimism There the the the square packing circle packing discourse has hit the timeline. I absolutely love this first Let me tell you about Shopify. Shopify is the commerce platform that grows with your business and lets you sell in seconds online in store on mobile on social on marketplaces and now with AI agents So John Bidwell in 1997 found a more optimal way to fit 17 squares into a larger square the smallest square that contain all 17 looks like an absolutely deranged solution Everyone would expect that it's just a nice even grid you'd take you add one, but if you pack them in this way, you get 17 squares of absolute chaos on the next, on the next slide. And, and someone made a waffle maker. Someone made a

waffle maker that optimally packs 17 squares into, into the squares of the, you will get mocked at breakfast. You will get mocked by anyone except a mathematician, I suppose. Yeah, so Kevin says for years, society was limited to only 16. syrup squares per waffle, but with recent combinatorial optimization breakthroughs, our research department has achieved previously unheard of densities of waffle syrup. It's great, great news. Very, very funny that this came through. And then someone in the previous post was posing, the universe is not real dude. This is ridiculous. I'm going to fight God because it looks very crazy to pack an arbitrary number of squares within another square.

But that's... So what should do this for cubicles in an office? Can you imagine if you're in the one cubicle that's slightly off kilter? And everyone's like, look, dude, like you have the same amount of space as everybody else. And you're like, yeah, but I'm at a 37 degree angle to the wall and it's driving me insane. That would be very, very odd. Did you see researchers at the University of Southern Denmark developed a limbless soft robot that crawls

using air-filled chambers in kiri-gami-inspired flaps? You're going to love this. I hate it. You're going to love it. I am the Indiana Jones of tech podcasting. I hate snakes. I absolutely hate snakes. Very, very weird.

It's over, boys. It says autism capital. Very weird. But, you know, exciting. people are working on robotics, and I'm sure there's some odd application. Yeah, I'm sure there's no, like, ultra nefarious use cases or something like this. We're going subterranean, and Errol's already working on it. What do you got, Tyler?

These look like, uh, these would be good for like, for what? Medical, you'd make it really small. Yeah, maybe. That's also like, yeah, would you volunteer to, as a trial subject? I think you should go first. If you think they're so good, I think you should go first. someone launched siggies. app the most comprehensive archive of Chinese cigarettes to exist on the western internet discover new packs in their history track favorites and packs you already tried share your collection

the Chinese cigarette industry is absolutely fascinating it I think it makes like hundreds of billions of dollars in profit for the government the the main cigarette company is nationalized oh wow and so they make an absolute ton of money. They fund their military with it. It's a fascinating... Yeah, really lovely website. We really got to go into the history of nationalization

because the nationalization and privatization is interesting all over the place. I looked into nuclear weapons and how those were nationalized. Fascinating sort of like hybrid public-private partnerships with a lot of consultants in the private sector, and then obviously the defense primary. making the missiles, the ICBMs, but not the warheads.

But in the tobacco industry, there are some fascinating examples of countries that start cigarette manufacturing businesses, develop large sort of deeper supply chain operations, and then privatize those, and then that, when they sell that asset to a Western tobacco firm, there's sort of like a cash windfall for the government that can be very beneficial. They can go build roads with the money, or, I don't know, cut people's taxes. But there's the other side of, okay, a company is getting large and then it gets nationalized. But plenty. Are there any other industries that stuck out to you, Tyler, as you were talking about it?

I'm still, like, kind of looking at. There's so many, like, weird, like, ways to view nationalization, though. Because, like, so at least in the U.S., like, historically, it's been mostly, basically, during wartime, or if, like, a really important company is facing, like, huge a crisis, right? So, like, 2008, like, I think GM, at one point. Government motors. Yeah, the Treasury owned, like, 60% of GM. Yeah.

So there's all, like, interesting thing. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage lenders. But even, like, if you think about tobacco in the U.S., like, almost, like, having super strong taxes is, like, almost, like, kind of a form of nationalization, right, where you're basically taking, like, a ton of the profits away. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, that was always the pushback of, you know, if there's runaway profits by the AI companies, Just, you know, instead of nationalizing them in that scenario, you can just tax them and then redistribute the profit. Yeah, there's like this real spectrum, right? Because like if you think of like Intel. Yeah. So the government now owns like it's like 10% of Intel, right? So like, but what does that actually mean? Yeah, like running Intel. Yeah. Like do they have a say like right now they're not supposed to? Yeah. Maybe that changes. It's like this interesting spectrum. Yeah, totally, totally. Anthropic is on track to generate annual revenue of almost $20 billion a projection based on current performance,

more than doubling its run rate. This is from Bloomberg, and ZeroHedge says, unprecedented damage control, leak after leak, just how bad is it? And Matt Slotnick says, the leak is bad, sir, really bad. Now everyone knows we're the fastest growing software company of all time. We must put a stop to this. I think what Zero Hedge was getting at was that the reason you leak, you know, strong economic performance is to allay concerns around, you know, pressure from the government,

supply chain risk. Because really the revenue would not be growing if, like, companies were pulling out because they're so worried about those supply chain risks that they got to move on so fast. But still, funny. Clearly, adoption is outgripping any kind of pullback from, you know, the Department of Treasury and various other kind of organizations in the government. Yeah, Ara Karazian over at Ramp has some extra data. He said, most people in tech know Anthropic commands the majority of API spend by U.S. businesses. As of January, Anthropic took 50% of spend on enterprise AI subscriptions to. Open AI still leads on business count, but the biggest spenders go to Anthropic all from Ramp data. And Ben Thompson had some extra context here about the data, but I was actually DMing with Ara last night. And it is fascinating what's happening. The market is so, so big that everything is growing. And you see these charts and you're like, it's over for this company.

It's over for Cursor. And then Cursor puts up $2 billion. And there's just more and more growth that's happening because of the diffusion problem and the fact that companies onboard and just more and more companies are onboarding to AI tools every day. Ben Thompson said there are some caveats to the ramp data. It only includes Open AI and Anthropic, not Azure co-pilot or Google Cloud Gemini. Ramp is also probably tilted more towards startups and smaller companies and larger enterprises.

That noted, it certainly matches the vibes Anthropic established that coding foothold and has been on an absolute tear over the last six months in particular in terms of not just its model capabilities, but also cloud code. And the overall sense that it is in the lead and enterprise CTOs are a smaller and more easily reachable set of customers than consumers at large. Meanwhile, an AI subscription business model has always been more compelling for the enterprise than for the consumer space for the same reason that productivity apps always end up as enterprise products, not consumer ones. There's no consumer CRM, for example. Enterprise actually value productivity and are willing to pay for it.

Consumers don't and won't, which is why the business model makes sense for the consumer space, at least at scale, is advertising. So he's once again ad-ed, ad-pilled. What else is in the news? Eddie, Endowment, Eddie, you put this into context. Even in Q4 of 2021 public SaaS quarterly net new ARR peaked at 2.6 billion. Anthropic has added nearly 11 billion in early 2026. Yeah, this is from out timidor.

That, of course, is like a run rate, not actual ARR necessarily, but still absolutely shocking. Yeah. Tyler said, for those kind of traffic track at home, Anthropic just added a palenteer and revenue in the month of February alone. Yeah. Pretty unprecedented. Howard Lanzon said Anthropic pulled off the rare quadruple-lindi. Great product.

People pay for it. People love it and promote it even though they pay. And the people like Dario's handling of government. Next up, the people tear Dario down. There is this interesting like tall poppy syndrome in Silicon Valley a little bit where, like whoever's at the top it gets like you know triple glazed and then

it needs to be torn down a little bit so we'll see where all this goes but putting AI growth in the context of the shoe market yes Darren Rovel former guest of the show shares that new balance is up almost 20% year over year at 19%

Adidas 13 Llemon 9 Lou Lemon's doing well and then every other brand here in the negative Puma at minus 8% Under Armour minus 9.4, Nike minus 10% and Jordan Brand down 16%. Really insane to see such a huge line. If you like the sneaker era, the Jordan era is over for now. Is this more of like changing in taste that New Balance and Adidas are growing and Nike is not? Because if they were all, if all of these like major household name brands were trading down, I would say like, oh, this is like the Timu effect. This is the white label effect. This is the Albers, the DEC, like just more competition from newer brands, challenger brands. But it seems like there's more just like a reallocation from Nike to New Balance and Adidas. Like Adidas might just be on a brand tear doing some good advertising. But New Balance has been killing it with their positioning. Interesting to see total revenue.

as well. Nike is huge, $46 billion. Adidas is down at 26. Lululemon's at 10. Lulu Lemon has done really, really well. New Balance. They're bigger than new balance. Anyway, my portfolio every day at the opening bell looks like D-Day says, Human. This is an absolute disaster. It really is so crazy. I was trying to explain yesterday to a friend like how the market, I was like, you're probably getting destroyed, right? And he's like, It's terrible. And I was like, well... Is this your retail investor friend?

Yes, it might shock you to learn that the market overall is like flat for the year. It's an absolute tale. Korean stocks are crashing. The KOSPI Index, the Korea Stock Exchange, is down 10%. Korean stocks are crashing, says Joe Wisenthall. The South Korean stock market fell over 8% and triggered a circuit breaker. Jim Kramer said, beware of South Korean spill it over. to our markets, WDC, STX, SNDK, MU, all still vulnerable.

So there's lots of companies that are at risk. We will dig into the South Korean stock market collapse soon, but we have our next guest in the Restream Waiting Room. First, let me tell you about Century, Century Shows, Developers, what's broken and helps them fix it fast. That's why 150,000 organizations use it to keep their apps working. And without further ado, let's bring in Dean Ball from the Restream Waiting Room. Dean, how are you doing? Good to see you.

Good. How are you all? We're fantastic. I've been enjoying your coverage. We had Ben Thompson on the show Monday. It's very funny that this debate is phrased as the ball versus Thompson debate because it feels like you agree on way more than you disagree on. But I would love for you to sort of set the table for us and just kind of give us your run of like what actually happened because there are a lot of things that have been said. but not enacted. There's been bunches back and forth. So what's the, what are the rules of the road? What are the, the, the table

of facts that you think, like, are the most reliable here? Well, there are very few people I respect more than Ben Thompson and who have inspired me more than Ben Thompson. So, yeah, I think we agree on the vast majority of tech policy issues and other tech stuff. Yeah, I mean, I think basically

what's going on here is that, you know, there's a dispute about a contract, right? And that's fine. Brownups can have disputes about contracts and they cannot come to terms of business, and then they don't sign the contract or they cancel the contract, and that's fine. The problem here is the punishment. The problem here is that the government is saying, if you don't do business with us, we'll destroy your company or will threaten to. And that just can't be the way that America works. And I don't really, like, you know, there are people who say, including, I think, you know, this was an argument that Ben made,

that, well, what should Anthropic have expected, you know, what should they have expected, the way they talk about AI being so powerful, how could they not expect the government to bully them and quasi-nationalize them in these ways? And my view is like, well, no, what we should do is have like modest technocratic regulation so that we can avoid these sort of extreme outcomes of either like, yeah, total decentralization, total anarchy

or like bullshivism, right? Like we can avoid that. It's called capitalism. It's called like the system that we have now. And I've spent the last two years being confused as to why we don't try to do that. So in terms of... Okay, okay.

So I guess so far, Anthropic has not been labeled a supply chain risk. Yeah. Officially. Is your belief that the Department of War is just really busy right now for obvious reasons and they haven't gotten around to it yet?

Or do you think that it's coming? And that's why, you know, like where do we actually go from here? I truly don't know. I operate under the assumption. So as the war secretary, Pete Higsef, said last Friday that they're going to do it. And they're going to do an extremely expansive version of it. So I operate under the assumption that he's not lying about that. Basically take him at his word. It'll happen eventually. But I don't know. Do you think he, I mean, I know that there was some debate over the shape of supply chain risk, whether that means you have a partnership with Amazon, Amazon works at the government. you can't work with Amazon at all, or Amazon can't use your software specifically,

your model specifically on government contracts. Do you have any idea of where the clarity might be found there? Well, so in terms of what the supply chain risk designation actually allows, my reading of the law is that it would be only in the fulfillment of the government contract and not more broadly. But there's a lot of things, first of all, you could just write it more broadly

and try to fight it in court and see what happens, right? And who knows, right? You could also jawbone, right? You could have the president call Amazon and say, hey, we don't think you should be working with these guys, right? Very hard to sue about that because that's not a policy action. And there's also a very, very large range of other things that the federal government could do if it wanted to,

if it wanted to really harass, which, you know, the irony of this is that we all know this because of what happened to Elon's companies during the Biden administration. I objected to that then and I object to this now. Yeah, unpack a little bit of that history. Take us through it.

Yeah, so, you know, basically, Elon being kind of a political enemy of the Democrats, the Biden administration brought on a very large number of investigations, regulatory actions, FCC, DOJ,

a lot of different other things. I think there's a chart somewhere, and it's like 12 to 20 things. You know, it's a huge number of different things that they brought. And each one of those is going to entail millions of dollars in compliance costs and legal costs for these companies. So it's non-trivial amounts of harassment that's going on. And I, again, I think we shouldn't do that kind of thing.

Sure. Is this broadly under the umbrella of like lawfare? Yeah. Okay. Walk me through this idea of, the fissure in AI politics right now is not liberal or conservative, Republican versus Democrat, EAC versus EA, safety versus anti-safety, but instead takes advanced AI seriously as a concept versus does not take advanced AI seriously as a concept. It feels like you and Ben Thompson both are

taking AI seriously as a concept. Does that map with your reading on his arguments, your arguments, it feels like there's just a different downstream understanding of how this plays out in a world where advanced AI is a serious concept to grapple with different than making pencils. Yeah, right. Like, I mean, I think the other way to put this would be like, do you think that Dario Amade and Anthropic are directionally, and the other frontier labs is worth noting, are directionally right about where this is going, or do you think that, you think they're not? And also not just do you think they are,

but do you really take that seriously? Do you own the consequences of believing that these guys could really be correct? And I think a consistent theme of my writing over the last year especially has been kind of being confused that there's people who just do not take... They might say that, like, oh, AI is progressing very quickly,

but they don't actually, like, their downstream assumptions and conclusions about what we should do don't seem to sort of reflect that. It's very hard. It's a very hard thing to do. But yeah, that would be like my broad take. So this is where I start to get confused because if I take advanced AI seriously, I do, then it feels like nuclear weapon level technology in a few years.

Maybe it's five, maybe it's two. But that leads me more into the Ben Thompson camp where I say, well, of course there's going to be a dramatic showdown. between the U.S. government and the private company that has invented something akin to nuclear weapons. And so walk me through how you are thinking of, you know, if we're developing new, new, you know, powerful technology, how should the government actually interact with that, aside from like the lawfare and the short term? Like, what's the long-term solution?

Yeah, I mean, the long-term solution, I think, is probably going to be a hybrid system where there just is regulation of these frontier labs, and there is government oversight of them. But it's just like, it's like, you know, J.P. Morgan is a private entity that lobbies against government policy all the time, right? They're a totally independent actor of the government, and yet they're also deeply intertwined with the government.

I'm not saying that we should regulate AI companies like banks, I hope not. But I'm saying that, like, you know, technocratic regulation exists in, you know, capitalist republics. and it's not communism, and we didn't, like, nationalize the banks, right? So it would be, my proposal would be to sort of take step-by-step approaches to solving actual problems, not just doing regulation for its own sake, but really trying to shape this so that it isn't some sort of violent, or not literally violent, but some sort of conflict.

And instead is, you know, a gradual development of, like, yeah, this is how the government and the public ultimately achieve oversight of these labs, because I would agree that if we are going to this place of near-term super intelligence or something, that isn't going to just exist in an unregulated fashion. That's kind of been my point for a year and a half now. Yeah, so what's the gap between regulation and nationalization? Because at a certain point, if we're in the nuke analogy,

it feels like the government takes that, and then they get to decide where they point those nukes. And as I was reflecting on the creation of the atomic bomb, I was sort of left optimistic about the American project and optimistic about the way that played out. I don't know if you have a different side, but I feel like the government did get control of nuclear weapons. There hasn't been a nuclear war. And the whole concept of like the person that you're voting for will have their, they'll have the nuclear football. They'll have their finger on the button.

Do you trust them? that is an animating force in our electoral process, whether you like the current administration or the previous administration, whether you trust them or not. But Americans vote on that question every four years, and I think that that's a good system. I like that.

100%. I think that the nuclear bomb analogy starts to break down. But one thing I'd say about nuclear weapons is that it's true that nuclear weapons, we got that and that way, I think basically pretty okay as far as these things go. But, you know, what we didn't really get is nuclear energy nearly to the extent that we could have.

Completely agree with you on this. Yes, continue. Right. And so that created this single regulatory sort of point of failure. Single points of failure are often problematic in complex system engineering. So, you know, what do you do? Well, you know, maybe we shouldn't have done it. You know, maybe we should, maybe the government effect on the sort of the equivalent to the consumer side, the economic, benefits. We didn't really get those as much as we could have. So that would be one thing,

but the other thing is that even nuclear energy, you know, it's not directly useful to you. It is not, nuclear energy is not like, you are not personally going to express your liberty, exercise your liberty through nuclear energy or nuclear bombs, but you will with artificial superintelligence and you certainly will with today's coding agents, right? And so the question is like, should the government be able to own that? And my view is that without really substantial guardrails, that is just almost certain

to devolve into a profound act of tyranny. And so I think that having the companies separate and apart from the government, but still overseen by the public through regulation, that is kind of like my view as to what is ideal. But the problem is that saying that view, hey, it's really hard to get that right.

Regulation is tough to get right. You want to get it exactly right. And it's possible that all my ideas are terrible and they're all going to go to shit, right? That's totally possible. But what you want to do is you want to, yeah, you want to at least try, try to get that, right? The problem is that that has been, that view has been characterized very often as sort of supporting regulatory capture. So it's like, you know, what did Anthropic expect the way they talked about these models? Well, maybe they expected for like California's SB 53 to pass and for there to be like modest,

modest technocratic light touch regulation that only affects the frontier labs. And like, I don't think that's lobbying for regulatory capture. I think that's actually just the prudent thing to do. Even if I don't agree with every regulatory impulse that Anthropic has, I think that in broad strokes, that's the play. Yeah. How do you, sorry, Jordan, you go. Yeah, I wanted to ask, like, how much do you think information asymmetry played into the dynamic of the negotiation and the results. I mean, you have the Department of War who presumably everyone on that side has some idea that we're about to enter a conflict. And Friday comes around. The Department of War knows they're hours away from a strike. Dario, according to Emil, isn't kind of engaging with him.

And out of that, maybe the admin says, hey, this is not a partner that we can rely on. And we don't want other groups in the government to be relying on it as well, and it just kind of blows up. Yeah, I mean, so I think some of this is about personality. Some of this seems like it's about personality clashes. Some of it's about politics, undoubtedly. I think some of it is also about principle, though, right? And I think the DOD is not crazy at all. Like my problem here has never been with the DOD's policy principles here. They're saying, anthropic can't put usage restrictions that look like public policy because we set public policy.

Dario Amade doesn't decide when autonomously the weapons are ready for prime time. We do. And I think they're 100% right about that. But the solution to that problem is you don't try to destroy the business of Anthropic. You tell Dario no thanks to the business.

And you move on and you find somebody else who will do business on your terms. Which is what Dario said in the CVS interview. He said there's other providers. We can agree not to work with each other. Sure. Yes. Right.

That's fine. That's fine. I mean, frankly, the tokens are probably higher margin for Anthropic, sold to private entities, not to the government. Because Anthropic is subsidizing them for the government. So it's a bad business. As we're seeing. What's the good outcome here? I think we cancel the contract.

And look, the other thing is like the DOD says, well, we have all these other contractors. There's Palantiers of the world. And Palantir might rely on Anthropic. And so we can't have our contract. can't be relying upon anthropic, because if that's true, then we're still relying upon anthropic. So it's fine for them to say, no one who has usage restrictions like this can do business with any of our contractors. I think that's fine in the fulfillment of DOD contracts. Like, I think that is perfectly fine. Isn't that basically supply chain risk by any other name?

Well, no, because supply chain... Sorry. Supply chain risk would be specific, would be done at the company level as opposed to like at the At the contract level. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I agree. Also, can you explain a little bit more about the logic of supply chain risk? Because I was shocked with, like, DJI is not on there.

DeepSeek doesn't seem to be on there. Quinn doesn't seem to be on there. This feels like very bad if I'm just trying to think of like my short list for things that I might want to supply chain risk. Like, yeah, it's good Wawa's on there. But I got 12 other. Unitary. Yeah.

Unitri, I don't think, is on there. Yeah, like, when should the government apply this? Does it matter if it's international? Is the national versus international designation important? Well, one thing I'll say is we don't know everyone on the supply chain risk list because sometimes those designations can occur in classified contexts. But it is the case, I think, that the supply chain risk designation, if you go and look at the statutory history, it's really intended for.

our foreign adversary companies. This is about, it's really about China, frankly. It's really about China. And so it is kind of, you know, wild to be in a, whatever you think of the chip export policy of this administration, of, you know, wanting to sell

more Nvidia GPUs to Chinese companies. It is kind of wild to have that policy and then also to say that we're going to treat American companies that we don't like like Chinese companies, like enemies of the state. I don't think we should be doing that. Can you talk to me about what your 2025 was like, what your goals were, what of those goals have been

achieved, like give me sort of a scorecard on like AI policy and DC. Well, you know, what I wanted to do is, I mean, first of all, you know, obviously getting the action plan done, that was a, you know, 18, 20 hour a day kind of thing for four months in my life. So that was, that was an intense sprint. And getting it done is obviously a career highlight for me. I didn't get. get it done unilaterally, of course. A lot of people worked on it. But, you know, that was a big part of it, sort of course correcting from what I thought were some of the excesses of the Biden policy,

a lot of which was, by the way, this national security inflected control over the labs. So it does disappoint me to see us sort of regressing back into Biden-era mentality, which is what this is. So that is a little bit concerning to me. But yeah, like that. And then more broadly, you know, I don't, I just, I want two AGI pill people, you know. I want people to, like, feel the, feel the, like, the importance of what is going on.

And, and hopefully, you know, try to think more strategically about this issue. Because the thing is, is that it can't just be one or two people doing this. It has to be a community of people. So, so walk me through what AGI pilling means in March of 2026. More Mac minis than people on Capitol Hill. Yeah, I mean like there's terms like software only singularity, that robotics will be delayed, that there might be, Dario talks about like the end of the exponential. He doesn't seem necessarily super intelligence pilled. He seems like we will get someone who's 150 IQ and you will be able to run it in a data center.

Like the, what does he say? A million geniuses in a data center. It's not one. It's not one god, a country of geniuses in a data center. It's not one god that's like so like time traveling and teleportation. Like it's not entirely all this crazy sci-fi. It's a little more narrow. So in terms of timelines, expectations, like what are you telling to elected officials these days?

Well, I think the very challenging part is that there's the trajectory of the technology and then there's the effect of the technology in the near term, right? So the technology that we have right now is already legitimately. science fiction in my mind. But we don't live in a science. We don't, the world is not obviously more science fiction-esque than it was three years ago. We don't have flying cars. We don't live on the moon, right? We're not doing it. And we don't have Dyson spheres assemble around the sun or whatever. And the reason for that is that it takes a very long time to transform institutions and to transform the way that organizations are structured. And so again, like that's the important

thing is that to me, it's about the actual winner of the AI competition is going to be the country, the civilization that is like most imaginative at like, we went from artisanal types of, you know, manufacturing to factories to eventually assembly lines, right? We're going to do that but for the next generation of things and inventing that. What is what is all that? What does it look like? And, you know, that's the, that's going to be where the real economic benefits come and the real things that change the world come from. But those take time and they're really conceptually difficult.

How do you think about competition with China with the backdrop of nationalization? I heard this, I heard this quote that was like, if you nationalized SpaceX a decade ago, like you just get NASA. Like you don't get SpaceX if it's owned by the government. It needs to be independent. And so with that backdrop, like what does a healthy American? AI lab ecosystem look like that can actually go and win on a geopolitical scale? Well, I think first of all, yes, it's got to be private companies because they can move faster and be more innovative. Also, very importantly, it's about trust, right?

Like selling, if we're going to sell these services internationally, we need other governments and foreign companies to trust our companies, to trust that they're not just ultimately linked to the U.S. military, right? Because that's the problem is that doing business with China, you sort of know, well, at the end of the day, every company in China is ultimately a military asset. And that diminishes trust in Chinese companies. That's something really profound that we're eroding with this action right here. And that worries me quite a bit. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've been thinking about that in the context of like sovereign AI throughout Europe. And I was just like, yeah. Look, France didn't need its own Google. they could just use Google.

Like it was fine. But when you actually take AI seriously, then you start to wonder about, okay, well, does their strategy as behind as they might be, does it actually make sense? Yeah. One of the things I hope we invent is open source models,

I think are useful and good. But I actually think what's more important right now is like open source infrastructure, such that more people can sort of like really put their own imprint on models. And more people can feel that sovereign experience without having to like build, you know, multi-gagawatt data centers and whatnot. I hope we can do that. That's a really interesting thought.

Would that be like a national compute reserve or something like that? Or like. Yeah. That like academic institutions could access? It could be like that. but also even more than just the compute itself, also like all the infrastructure that connects the compute and all the, like, I think there's something really interesting there

and I'm excited to see more people do things like that. Yeah, what do you think about the concept of like an FDA for new models? You're releasing a new model, like it has to pass a battery of tests or benchmarks that are maintained by a like a federal institution in the same way that when you release a new cancer drug, you have to test it on mice first, something like that. Yeah, I think the problem with that is that there's too much to test for because the models can do too much. And so we don't know what to test for.

So we have very clear endpoints when we're testing a drug in a person, right? We have very clear things that we want to test for. It's much harder to do that in the context of a generalist AI model. So that's one of the things that worries me about licensing. In addition to licensing can slow things down and it can regulatory capture is very real. It's a very real thing. I have always thought of AI as being a little bit more like financial services, where the regulation is not actually targeted at the products per se.

The regulation is more generally targeted at the entities themselves. So we regulate banks. We do regulate loans, but we do that by way of regulating banks. There's not a government agency that approves every single loan that a bank makes. What we do is we look at the entity of the business. bank and we say this is a sound institution. This is a soundly governed institution. That's the kind of thing that I think will be, that's, I don't know, again, I don't think we should regulate AI like banks per se, but I think that is a useful structural intuition for thinking about AI regulatory policy.

Yeah. Yeah. Jordy, please. How much, how much attention is D.C. paying to the news out of Square, the pushback from, or block, the pushback from Silicon Valley was, hey, you're blaming this on AI, but it doesn't feel like maybe that's a small part of the reason to do this riff, but certainly not the entire story, but then a bunch of groups are going to use this as, you know, example number one as to changes in the labor force due to AI. Well, it's a bad combination because it's all these companies, all these tech companies

that overhired in the sort of immediate post-COVID. and then now they're also the most exposed to AI, right? They're the ones that are adopting AI the most aggressively. They do the things that AI is best at. There's lots of software engineering. And so it's both things happening at once, I would say. And that creates an exaggerated sort of fun house-like effect of the actual impact of AI on the labor market. I'm very skeptical that we're going to see things like that at wide, you know, firm level anytime soon.

in the broader economy. I think we could see it more in the software engineering discipline because there are a lot of big software engineering enterprises that hire too many people, right? So, like, you know, I think that's a very live possibility. But DC is DC. People are going to interpret the news for whatever is convenient for them, you know? And if you, when you play the long game,

you have to try to just build credibility over the long term with people. But, yeah, I mean, everyone's going to say this is evidence for whatever I'm on about. Yeah. hypothetically, how do you think something would play out if there was a battle on the moon and NASA says, hey, we want to buy a bunch of rockets from Blue Origin or SpaceX, and we want to go to the moon to fight this war on the moon? And the private company CEOs say, like, no, we're not interested in that. We want to just launch more satellites. It feels like another

analogy for like the nationalization conversation. And maybe it's just a weird time because I feel like in previous eras, a lot of the, you know, you go back to like the dollar a year men, a lot of, a lot of American industrialists sort of like stepped up to the charge and we're like fans of the government. And now there's like much more, it feels like we're more divided than ever. but what is the correct way to marshal a cornered resource as a government? Well, I would think in practice that the companies, the SpaceX's and Blue Origins of the world would actually eagerly help the government there.

But let's take your hypothetical and say that they didn't. There's an authority called the Defense Production Act, Title I, which there's something called Priorities Authority, and the government can quite literally just put itself at the front of the line for any launch of any rocket. And that's what I would suggest they do in that situation. Rather than commandeer the rockets themselves, that's kind of what I would suggest. That makes sense. So, Defense Production Act, but it requires extraordinary circumstances.

The president can do it basically whenever he wants. The president can make a unilateral finding. The other thing I'll say that's funny about all this is that, like, you know, one of the things I was enthusiastic about putting in the action plan, a little notice provision of the action plan is basically, saying in the event of a national emergency, DoD needs to have, DOD needs to know with the hypersalers how it's going to commandeer the data centers for like if it needs like tons of compute in some sort of national emergency.

That's in the action plan. So like I'm not here saying like total liberty, you know, whatever, like no government involvement. That's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying that like Anthropic has a right to exist. Yeah, yeah. If they don't do business with the government, we shouldn't kill them. That's all I'm saying.

Yeah, yeah. I think the Wall Street Journal called it like a fight about vibes. And I think most people are not at the point where they say, yes, AI is actually nukes. And yes, like, one company should, like, you know, like they should be destroyed. If they don't give it all up, like that's a very middle-of-the-road position that I think a lot of people agree on. Yeah, 100%. Yeah, that makes sense. Jordi, anything else?

Not for now. Well, thanks so much for coming on. Yeah, good to see you. Hey, guys. Thanks so much. Good to see you. We'll talk to you soon. Cheers.

Goodbye. Let me tell you about vibe.com for DDC Brand. B2B startups and AI companies advertise on streaming TV, pick channels, target audiences, and measure sales just like on meta. Tyler Dean said that the reason we don't have Dyson spheres is because institutions aren't quick to adapt. So you have no more excuses not to build a Dyson sphere. Yes. Make it happen.

This is a high agency organization. Yeah. We have very little institutional. Make it happen. No, no. In the limit, I believe. I mean, it's like a, it's a long chain of events that require all of these different diffusions to happen. We got to ask Jared his Dyson sphere timeline.

Yes, yes. I mean, obviously the big question is moon versus Mars, but I like getting up to speed on the plan for the Dyson sphere. That should be firmly within the 100-year plan for NASA, I believe it. Let me tell you about the New York Stock Exchange. Want to change the world? Raise Capital at the New York Stock Exchange. exchange, just do it. And let me tell you about graphite code review for the age of AI. Graphite helps teams on GitHub ship higher quality software faster. And without further ado, we have Scott Cabor

returning to the show and Jared Eisenman for the first time. Welcome to the show. How are you doing? What's happening? We're doing great. How are you? We're doing fantastically. Thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us. Please take us through the news today because I'm very excited to hear from you. I'm I'm excited to be joined by you today. Well, I'm just here for moral support for my good friend, Jared. So, Jared, you want to give them the news? Fantastic. Sure.

And by the way, I appreciate giving me a 100-year time frame on the Dyson sphere. We'll get to that. I mean, we're over a half century here just getting back to the moon, so we've got to take things and steps. But really, that's where the partnership with OPM comes in. And Scott has been a champion for us here with NASA Force. we got to rebuild some of our core competencies here at NASA. You know, we made some big announcements last week that said, look, if we want to get back to the moon, we want to achieve President Trump's vision within the timeframes that have been

established, we're going to have to do things differently. We're not going to launch moon rockets every three years. We're going to try and launch them in less than a year. And people are like, that's impossible. I was like, have we, you know, I literally went and got the data from the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo era saying, you know, we used to do this every three and a half months. We literally, from the time Apollo 7 splash down to Apollo 8 launch to fly around the moon is measured in weeks. It's eight, nine weeks here.

So what do you mean we can't do it? Well, they said, look, we don't have some of the same expertise we used to have during the space shuttle era of turning our mobile launchers around. You know, if you're launching every three years, you build up all this experience and expertise, and then they go out after the mission is launched and they go into industry. So we got to do some things differently right now. And one of which is we got to start bringing in folks back from industry that have the expertise to grow our young talent. Because we have no shortage of people that want to grow up and work at NASA. I mean, you know, from the time they're kids, they want to get there. So plenty of, you know, young talent coming in the system.

But what Scott and OPM are giving us the ability to do is bring in term-based appointments from industry, some brilliant minds from, you know, SpaceX, Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, all our great tech companies who say, I want to serve my country. I want to stick around for a couple years under a term-based appointment, elevate some of the talent. That's how we're going to get back into turning rockets around in months instead of years. That's how we're going to get back to the moon. So there's amazing.

This is part of a broader thing that I think you and I've talked about a little bit, which is there's kind of two pieces we're trying to solve on the, you know, the government tech side. One is obviously can we get early career young people in? As Jared said, you know, kind of NASA, unlike most of the federal government actually has done a really good job there. The other piece is how do we leverage the private sector to help make sure that we have much better connectivity in the private sector and public government? And so the second part of tech force, right, was always the private companies, having people come in.

Obviously, we want to basically double down on that now for NASA force and make sure that we've got kind of all those relevant industry partners who are saying, hey, look, we want to have like some of our best people come in, succumb themselves for a year or two, help make NASA, you know, as effective as possible and bring up the next generation of folks. And then if people want to go back to the private sector, like, that's great. They can go do that. Yeah. So talk about the type of roles that you need at NASA. When I think NASA, I think frontier science, rocket science, but also the actual astronauts. And then when I think of industry, I think of like the manufacturing expertise, the person that's going to build the rockets repeatedly because there's this beautiful partnership

between the private industry and NASA these days. But how does that actually, when the rubber meets the road, who do you? you need to come join NASA that might not, you know, they're perfectly suited to advance NASA's mission right now. Yeah. Well, I'll tell you, there's two categories there that you mentioned that we don't need to worry about. So astronauts, we always get, you know, tens of thousands of applications there, so that's good.

And I would even say on science, because when it comes to the planetary science and heliophysics that we do at NASA, no one, we're the only game in town. Oh, yeah. You know, in 2028, we're going to launch a nuclear-powered octocopter to tighten to search for signs of life. You're going to want to come to NASA to do that job. But there are areas where we have, you know, some overlap with industry when it comes to building our heavy lift rocket, SLS, where, you know, industry is also doing very similar things, which, to be honest, is a problem. NASA should only be focused on the near impossible, what no one else can do.

But SLS is a component of a broader strategy that President Trump laid out with Artemis. We're starting with SLS. Eventually, we'll evolve to other vehicles so that there's an Artemis 100 and beyond someday. But while we have some of that overlap, when it comes to our launch pad, turning launch operations, mechanical engineers there, we need propulsion engineers that can be helpful on our vehicles, those that have cryo-fluid specializations, so we can stop some of these hydrogen leaks, some of these helium flow. issues we've had before. Those are areas that industry is extremely well-versed because we have the healthiest commercial launch industry that we've had in the history of America's space program,

and to get people that want to serve their country, give us a couple years over at NASA, elevate our talent. Like I said, it's going to make a huge difference in terms of turning our vehicles, launching with greater frequency, and achieving the president's national space policy. Can you walk me through the current top few reasons why the moon is a important just as a high level. I want to go back. I'm already on board, but for those people who say, I want to hang out on Earth, why are we going to the moon? Why is the moon important? Why is it valuable? Okay. So I'm really glad you asked this question and there's quite a few answers that go along with it. First, the whole like, shouldn't there be other things that we should be doing?

Yeah, and we do. A very small percentage of our resources are actually invested into a, you know, a national imperative goal like returning the moon. This isn't the 1960s anymore. You know, where it's four and a half percent of the discretionary budget, it's a quarter of a percentage. And you know who's making up the difference? Private industry. You know, folks like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are putting billions of their own resources in play to build capabilities for the good of the American people and really all of humankind. So it's not, you know, the taxpayers footing the bill to do this like it was in 1960s.

Now, what are some other reasons that we should do it? How about we made a promise to the American people and have for 35 years? Every president for 35 years he said we're going to return to the moon. It was only President Trump under his first term when he created the Artemis program. Now in his second term, my first day on the job where he signs a national space policy that says not only go back to the moon, but also build out a moon base, are we taking steps in that direction? And after $100 billion, I think we owe it to the American people to do it. I'll give you national security reasons to do it.

1969, July 20th, America lands, Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin on the moon, brings him safely back to Earth. that sends a message to the world. What else is America capable of doing? Well, if you take 35 years and 100 billion and you fail to do it, well, it sends the exact opposite message. That's a real national security implication because then it says something's broken and now I'm going to encroach on America's leadership

across all the most important technological domains. Here's another good reason. We don't know what we're going to find. I mean, that's the best part of the greatest adventure in human history is going out and learning. Scientific, economic reasons, we will go to the South Pole of the moon where there's ice. We will use that as a proving ground for power, navigation, communication,

in-situ resource manufacturing. The capabilities we're going to need when we someday send American astronauts to Mars, and then we've got to be able to bring them back. And the way you're going to do that is probably making propellant on Mars. I'd rather do that two and a half days from Earth than nine months away from Earth. I love it. Jordy? Those bars.

Fired me up. It fired me up. How do people actually apply to NASA and how broadly are you casting the net? I think you identified the astronaut program being like the most elite of the most elite. We've all seen that one guy who was like a Navy SEAL and then a doctor and then he became a... Honey Kim. Yeah, yeah, that's right. What's he doing now, by the way?

Any idea? I don't know. Is he still an astronaut? Oh, yeah, he's definitely not. I mean, Johnny Kim is a rock star, right? I mean, you know, Navy SEAL, you know, Navy SEAL sniper, then goes and gets his MD. I think he got it from Harvard, right? So he becomes a doctor.

Then he becomes a NASA astronaut. While he's waiting for his mission, he goes to Navy pilot training, becomes a Navy, a naval aviator. There's nothing this guy can't do. He just came back from the space station. He was up there for nine months. He actually went up on a Russian Soyuz rocket. Wow. So now he's entitled to some time off, although I'm, I'm,

going to do everything I can to convince him to come to HQ and help us out a little bit. Because that kind of leadership and confidence, like, we need as much of that as we can get at the top of the organization. Yeah, that's amazing. But I guess your question on, like, where do people go? Like, if I'm not, if I'm not a Navy SEAL sniper and I'm not, you know, I'm just a guy who's hardworking, I'm an American, and I want a job at NASA. What are the different roles that are open?

What are the skill sets that you're looking for? And how do you actually apply? Yeah. I mean, I tell you, we're looking for a lot of engineers and a lot of technicians. There's a lot of ways to learn about opportunities. You can go anywhere from NASA's website to USA jobs. We certainly have positions open, and we're hitting this in a couple fronts. Another area where Scott has been super helpful, one of the biggest surprises when I was on the job is 75% of our workforce is contractors.

Now, they get paid almost exactly the same thing as civil servants. They don't necessarily get all the same benefits, but they're working for companies that have a 40% then gross profit premium on top of it, which actually, you know, is about a billion a year, a little more than that, that we could be using for science and discovery. But even more than that, they have different tools for collaboration, for HR systems. Just, you know, you take 75% of your workforce as contractors, and then you combine that with five prime contractors and hundreds of subcontractors building your rockets. Probably no wonder why some things take a little longer than they should cost a little bit

more than they should. So we're converting a lot of contractors back to civil servants. We have this great pipeline of young talent that comes in through our internship programs. We have over a thousand every, I think it's on like a trimester type basis we bring in fresh talent. But then really, how do you bring up that talent and make them, you know, make them lethal within the domains that we focus on here at NASA, you know, those critical engineering capabilities and science, operations and technicians? That's where NASA's tech force comes in. Scott? Yeah, I was going to say just on the, yeah, from a tactical perspective, if anybody's interested

today, just go to, you know, U.S. Tech Force, and we will obviously make sure we have it. And then as we roll out formally the NASA Force side of it, we'll have a separate landing page for people and make sure that we can get folks, whether they're coming down on the engineering side or whether, you know, they're coming from private sector. But easiest way to go right now is just go to U.S. Tech Force, and we will absolutely make sure that we can get you in the queue here? Fantastic. Jared, can you reflect on going to space?

How did that happen? What does it mean? Would you recommend it for other folks? I think like a lot of things in my career, I got very lucky. So I certainly, I mean, I definitely can tell you when I was in kindergarten and I said I wanted to grow up and be an astronaut. The chances of that I thought would be, you know, near zero in life. But got very lucky, you know, kind of, you know, reached out at the right time. I mean, this goes back actually 2008. I went to Bikinor, Kazakhstan to see a Soyuz launch with a lot of the early pioneer. of the commercial space industry. And I just kept knocking on the door

until it was the right time. And then got lucky to lead, you know, SpaceX's first mission to orbit, Inspiration 4, followed up with a developmental program in September of 2024. We went farther into space. We tested a new spacesuit. We communicated over a beam of light.

It was very cool. But I'll tell you that despite the views that I've seen, the opportunities that I've had in space, I've got the best job in the world right now. Do you see part of your mission or part of your legacy being not only the economic opportunity on the moon, the national interest mission on the moon, but actually just allowing more humans to experience space. Is that important? Yeah, well, and they go hand in hand with economic opportunity, right? So I do point out all the time that I actually think one of the most important KPIs is more people living and working in space. Now, for that to happen, I mean, because I'm not a believer, there's a huge tourism pipeline in this because it still costs a lot and it'll never be the safety level of an airliner.

So you're still, you know, taking a controlled explosion, you know, 1.8 million pounds of thrusts send somebody to 17,500 miles an hour. That's, you know, and when they get there, odds are really good. They're not even going to feel good. So we got to crack the code on the orbital economy that some days necessitates more people living and working space. But if you're asking what I hope the greatest contribution in NASA, because it's not landing on the moon. That's just, that's just luck, honestly, to be here at a time where President Trump gives us the mandate, the resources from the one big, beautiful bill,

congressional appropriations, like you have all the tools to execute on that. Really, in my mind, it's concentrating our resources here at NASA on the needle movers. You know, sometimes you get, you know, mile wide, inch deep on all the things you're trying to do, but really focus on the things that no one else is capable of doing but NASA, and then empowering the workforce, like the best and brightest across the nation, get rid of as much needless bureaucracy and things that impede progress.

And if you can do that, then things like returning to the moon and building a moon base will be pale in comparison to what we're capable of achieving in the years ahead. Last question, a bit of a funny one. The chat asked, what's the best watch to bring to space? I mean, I don't even know if I'm even allowed in this world to invent.

Doris of brand. Exactly. You're going to get yourself in real trouble here, Jared. Probably not. I guess anyone that keeps the time accurately. Well, thank you so much for coming on the show. Have a great rest of your day. It's great to be, Jared, and always good to have you on the show, Scott.

Yeah, we'll talk to you, Paul. Thanks, Scott. Goodbye. Let me tell you about MongoDB. What's the only thing faster than the AI market? Your business on MongoDB. Don't just build AI. Own the data platform that powers it.

And let me also tell you about Lambda. Lambda is the superintelligence cloud, building AI supercomputers for training and inference that scale from one GPU to hundreds of thousands. It is, in the government role, there's so many things you can't do. But according to the chat, he has a fantastic watch collection. I was wondering if there was a memento that he brought with him

because you know the story of the moon swatch? You know this whole thing? Yeah, yeah, yeah. The moon watch. Was it going to be a Rolex? Was it going to be an Omega? wound up being Omega. Very, very interesting bit of watch history.

We can dive into it some other time. Breaking news from this morning. What happened? Tucker Carlson's shipment of nicotine was hijacked. Very traumatic. An attack on one nicotine pouch brand is an attack on us all. I mean, Tyler asked me this morning. Tyler was like, hey.

Oh, you think I'm guilty. I'm not guilty. You were a little bit late for the gym today. And we thought maybe. A little hijacking. A little Hidjack. Fast and Furious. That's what Josh said.

Billinson says, stealing a truckload of Tucker Carlson branded Nicodine pouches is like the plot to a zoomer reboot of the Fast and the Furious. Yeah, yeah.

Have you seen the original Fast and Furious, Jordy? No. It is so embarrassing. I've seen, I've certainly seen trailers and or scenes.

Have you seen any Fast and Furious movies? Any of them? There's so many good ones. Anyway, in the original fast and there's like 40 of them, right? Yeah, and there's like 12. And they all have like puns as names. So there's, the original movie is called The Fast and the Furious.

Then later they just came out with one that's just called Fast and Furious, which is very confusing. Then they had Fast Five. They had Two Fast Two Furious, which is hilarious. I was really hoping that for the 10th movie, they were going to do Fast 10 your seatbelts. That would have been a good pun. But they didn't. And then they did the Fate of the Furious FF. All right, Dad.

I got you. Anyway, in The Fast and Furious, they, they, they, they did you. they're stealing, I think, DVD players. And so they hijack a truck. Because they love movies so much? They love movies. It's insider dealing because it's like the movie industry is like, we got to promote the DVD players, make them, you know,

oh, you want these DVD players, right? What else you got, Jordan? Trey says the IWC that Jared wore to space. Jared auctioned off for charity. Okay, okay. Well, I should have asked a more pointed question about that. Anyway. Patriot.

Let me tell you about Vanta. Automate compliance and security. Vanta is the leading AI trust management platform. We have Adam Brigh from Skydeo. He's the co-founder and CEO in the Restream Waiting Room. Welcome to the show, Adam. What's going on? Great to see you.

How are you doing? Great to be here, guys. Thanks so much. Give us the backstory of Skydeo. Get us up to speed on Skydeo. I'm obviously familiar with the company, but for those who aren't, there's so many places we can go in drones and defense and DJI.

There's a million places I want to go. but introduce the company and take us through the shape of the company right now. So we are the largest U.S. drone manufacturer. We sell drones to military. We sell drones to public safety and law enforcement. We sell drones to critical infrastructure inspectors. We serve a number of our allies around the world. And the big bet that we made when we started the company was on AI and autonomy.

So we started in 2014. We've been at it for 12 years. So we made very big bets on AI and autonomy when they were not nearly as obvious. as they are today. And we're at a very exciting moment in drones where they're really having their moment. And the way people use drones was transitioning from, you know, manually flown to dock-based and remote and autonomous. And we're just seeing incredible stuff happen now with our customers. I remember Chris Dixon, I believe this is the story, showed me a video of a Skydeo drone flying around a house and doing sort of a roof inspection. Is that a real business now or

insurance agency? Like, walk me through some of the less. Everyone knows about Ukraine, what's going on there. But like, how are drones actually getting used in the American economy today in an industrial context? So that is a real use case. We have customers that are doing insurance claims adjustment with drones. So rather than taking out a ladder and climbing up on a roof, you just take a drone out and push a couple of buttons, it automatically digitizes and inspects the whole thing. The biggest and fastest growing use of our products today is in law enforcement and public safety, where there's just been this huge paradigm shift. So law enforcement has been using drones for like the last 10, 15 years, but historically it was typically a pretty small team. They were manually flown. You know,

they would get called out every once in a while if there was an event. But the paradigm shift now is the drone lives in a docking station on the roof of the police department. It can be flown remotely. And when a 911 call comes in, you click one button on a map and the drone will launch itself. It'll fly there. It'll give you real-time awareness. And it just changes outcomes because you can see a crime in progress. You can find a missing person. Yeah, we've got a good one here. So this is close to home.

This is San Francisco Police Department. Okay. This is called Bronas First Responder. So basically this was a report of a stolen vehicle. They launched the drone. They're following this guy from the air. He doesn't know that they're there. So they knew that people would do this.

They'd steal license plates after they'd stolen the vehicle. Wow. They'd never actually caught anybody in the act. But with the drone, it's easy. So now he's got his stolen plate. Oh, he's putting it on the car at the same time. Wow. So he nicely holds it up so we can read it from the drug.

No way. This is not an actor. This is a real criminal. No, this is real. Wow. This happened last year in San Francisco. So now he's tinting the window. So this is bad news, right?

This is a stolen vehicle, cold plate of the vehicle, tinting the windows. He's going off to do a bunch of bad stuff. But they know exactly where he is thanks to the drone. They send out a plane-clothes unit. They roll a spike strip. So he's got flat tires and that's basically end of the story. And this is happening all the time. This is happening like every hour, almost every minute,

somewhere across the country that cops are responding to calls with autonomous drone. So take me deeper into that example. That feels like a replacement for dispatching a whole helicopter. That feels like there's probably enough bandwidth at a police department to have someone sort of manually piloting that, even if there's some autonomous systems that are just keeping you from crashing into the walls. but what level of autonomy are we talking about right now for like the most functional use cases? So the way that our customers talk about it is force multiplier.

And it really is a force multiplier because you can have one person sitting in an off center. They call them real-time information centers. And they can be flying up to four drones at once because there's a lot of automation built into the software. So you can just click a button on the map and the drone will fly there. Or you could click on a car or a person of interest and the drone will start following it. So it's a highly, highly leveraged activity. And it's also just faster to get somewhere. So rather than taking half an hour for an officer to roll out on the ground and find the address, whatever, it's like 30 seconds for the drone to get there, it can very quickly determine what's happening.

And yes, you're right. You do have sort of a remote officer who's flying and controlling this thing, but they're just much more highly leveraged. And so the impact is kind of two-sided. One of the ends is what you saw there in that video where it's like high-stake scenario, prime and progress. we're going to use the drone to change an outcome. The other end of the spectrum is like the most mundane stuff where somebody reports that like, you know, there's a car parked where it shouldn't be or something. And with waste an hour, somebody's time to go check on it.

But you just send the drone, you can very quickly see what's going on. And so the law enforcement, I think default expectation in really probably like the next two or three years is if you call 911, a drone should show up in 60 seconds or less. And this is happening that, you know, San Francisco, New York, Philadelphia, Oklahoma City, Miami, the big cities across the country are all using Skadiou. Yeah, so when a city signs up as a customer, deploys your product into the field, is there a lag time before you see, like I'm assuming crime statistics must start to change as criminals realize,

hey, I don't have like, you know, 15 minutes to, kind of get my act together after committing a crime. I have like, you know, 120 seconds, and then I'm going to be being tracked, and it just makes it a lot more complicated, so maybe you end up, you know, getting a real job or something like that instead of committing crime. But what kind of shows up in the data? Economy booms as criminals. Exactly. Crime goes down, employment goes up. Yeah, that would be good. So, like, San Francisco has been public this. I think that, I think that crime is down, like,

30% auto thefts are down close to 50%. Wow. Yeah. Since they've rolled this out. So I think, and there was actually like an unintentional testimonial from a guy who, you know, who had lived in this world. You might have seen this. I remember. We should actually find that clip. Yeah. But he was basically saying like, Prime is over in San Francisco because you're screwed. You know, like you steal a car. They're going to show. The drone's going to show up in 30 seconds. There's nothing you can do. And it is, you know, it's satisfying for me. And I think it's also, you know, for us as a company and for our customers, there's just an asymmetric advantage. Like when there's a drone following you from above. Like, there's not a lot you can do. And, you know, I was asking one of

our customers, they were showing a video of a retail theft where somebody had had lifted 50,000 bucks from a store, $50,000 worth of goods. And they, the drone got there. It, it IDed the person just as they were getting into the getaway car. They followed the getaway car to the person's residence. Then he just arrested him. I was like, oh, man, this is incredible. Can you use this video in court? And the chief said, there's no way this is going to court, right? Like, we've just, we've got this person cold. We've got video evidence of the whole thing from the drone. And so it's also just way more efficient. Yeah, way more efficient through the system that you don't have to go through like a long trial. Because the defense attorney shows up and doesn't say, oh, there's a bunch of

wiggle room. They just say, okay, they got your gender rights. Like you should just plead it out and just and just do the time. You did the crime. Talk to me about what's on an exponential and what's on a linear trajectory. What I mean by that is AI progress, clearly on an exponential. When if you're trying to read that license plate, I believe that you're going to get better at reading that license. plate twice as better, like the quality of your AI systems is going to just double constantly. Probably same thing with your production capacity. You're probably, you know, exponentially growing the amount of drones that you can make. But battery technology, range, flight time, security, like what is still not on an exponential? It's a really interesting question.

So the way that I kind of think about it is we have a similar kind of dynamic. to the self-driving car companies. We're building this really hardcore real-world technology that has to deal with the full complexity of what the real world can present. Different weather conditions, different operating paradigms, different visual lighting conditions. And a lot of these, you know, AI is on an exponential curve,

but I also kind of think the real world is exponentially complex. And so there's this very, very hard real-world grind that you have to go through to make this stuff work reliably and scalably. I mean, you can kind of think of our drones like self-driving cars. that fly. And that is the hardest piece. And we've been at it now for 12 years. And there's really, unfortunately, no shortcuts.

I mean, it's taken us a long time. Millions of flights, tens of thousands of drones we've built to learn a lot of these hard real world lessons and then incorporate them into our hardware and software to make the system reliable. So we're benefiting now. We made big bets on computer vision. That turned out to be right. We're on a great exponential there.

But the visual complexity of the real world is also exponential. high. Yeah, walk us through the importance of like dock-based drones. When did you start building docks? Because I imagine you started with drones and then eventually realize that you need to actually sell the infrastructure, that there is not, there aren't just going to be sky ports with charging infrastructure that just pop up everywhere. So walk us through what we're, what we're seeing in that video and sort of the rollout here. Yeah, so that's a dock in action. So vertical integration, there's different ways you can approach it. I think. I'm a big believer in vertical integration,

like building the dock and the drone and writing all the software that runs on it and writing all the cloud interfaces to manage it. All these pieces need to work together to deliver kind of this solution. Like, at the end of the day, we're kind of a boring enterprise solution to our customers. There's just a bunch of cutting-edge robotics

under the hood to make it possible. And it's been a journey to get to where we are. We were talking about docs when we started the company in 2014. One of the things I believe is you've got to have, for these really big technology plays, you kind of need, you need an incremental business path along with the incremental technology. Like, I think the biggest success is Tesla did this, basics did this.

You've got the grand vision, but you've got to find ways to make incremental technical progress and unlock incremental business value along the way. So building the brougham without the dock is an obvious example of that. I think in 2019 is when we really like went all in. And so like we think these enterprise markets are ready. We think the dock is the way to serve them. So it's been a six, seven year path from then to now have our products really being produced at scale, reliably working at scale.

And, you know, there's just a lot of little problems, little and big problems. You've got to solve along the way to make it work. Yeah. Talk about a little bit about privacy, surveillance regulation. Can you spy on me? Can the government spy on me? I love the idea of finding my car if it gets stolen, but I'm a little bit hesitant about having a drone follow me around everywhere for no reason just in case I go two miles an hour

over the speed limit. Like, how do you grapple with those tradeoffs? the regulation, how you think the government uses this technology? So I think these are civilizational questions, and I think ultimately they are like policy and regulatory questions. This is a hot topic today, like what's the role of companies and how their government customers use it. So, you know, we have a voice in this conversation.

We have a strong posture towards trans. I really think transparency is basically the key, especially in law enforcement, because if the police are transparent and if people see you guys hear me? I'll just lock my earphones. No, no, we're good. If you take them out, you can probably just switch to the computer audio. Yeah, we can hear the hum of your

your massive facility behind you. Workshop makes it sound like it's like Santa's Workshop. It is Santa's. It's a manufacturing facility, Georgie. They have out. The biggest ground factory is massive. Yeah, we can hear you now. Okay, great.

You're good. Yeah, so I think transparency is the key. Because, you know, if people see what law enforcement is doing with drones, they can form their own assessment and there's natural accountability built in there. And really one of the things that I think our customer is doing an amazing job of is being maximally transparent on this stuff. Like when an agency watches their drone his first responder program, they're not trying to like hide it in the back room. They're like hosting a press event or explaining what they're doing.

They're showing videos like the one that I just showed you. And we actually have, we do a bunch of transparency features in the product. So we have a transparency portal that, basically makes it easy to, for an agency to publish all the flying they're doing, and citizens use this. You can log on and you can see like, oh, were they following me around to see if I was going through miles hours? No, they were like busting somebody who stole my car. And this is kind of a side, but one of the things that I've come to appreciate working with law enforcement is there's very high direct accountability there because these police chiefs and

sheriffs, I mean, they are either directly elected themselves and they're downstreet from an elected official. And if something goes wrong, they're on the nightly news explaining it. don't want to be there. And so they take this stuff really seriously. So it's not to say that there aren't legitimate concerns and that everything is going to be perfect, funky dory, but I think the feedback mechanisms are in place to get us to a healthy place. And the safety benefits are just incredible. Like when people see like the one that I show, they tend to get it. Yeah, I've been pretty, I've been pretty satisfied with the way local jurisdictions have been able to decide as a small community, whether or not they want license plate readers or whether

or not they want, you know, doorbell cameras to be accessible. And it hasn't been something that's been forced upon every community or banned from every community. It's been on a city by city basis. And that feels like the correct formulation structure based on what we know we're entitled to as Americans. It's exactly right. Yeah. Sorry, just on that note, like when you're selling to public safety and law enforcement. It's basically a community sale. All this stuff goes before city council before it gets approved. And they're the ultimate people that are carrying the purse train.

So that's agency knows that. We know that. They're our ultimate customer. We got to DJI. DJI got added to the FCC's covered list and the end of last year. Well, they just, long time of, long.

They just had a cool feature where I guess like anyone can access any of them. So like if I have one like, Yeah, we had the guy that hacked, that basically vibed his way into being able to control and look at the video feed of 7,000 DJ. He found the back door. Yeah, he found the back door. And then he hacked into a vacuum and drove it to the back door of the house that he was in. Anyways, you know, sometimes say that Chinese drones come prehacked. But no hacking required.

But yeah, what are you expecting that? How is the FCC's action impacted your business? I'm assuming that's something that you felt, would have been an obvious decision for the government for many years prior, but give us a history. Yeah, look, I think that part of what's happened here is, like, when we started the company in 2014, drones seemed like toys. You know, they were like kids, toys, people flew them. And they've been through this evolution from, like, toys, to, like, useful tools for expert operators to now,

I would argue, like, critical infrastructure. And then the conflict in Ukraine, the foreign Ukraine, I think, just demonstrated everybody how important these small light drones are from a national security perspective. So I think there's been kind of just increasing awareness over the last 10 years that this is critical technology with very high national security stakes. And from our perspective as a company, our goal is just to win on the strengths of the product and the tech. And I think that the shift to dock and autonomy really plays to our strengths, both as a company and as a country. And you can see this in the market. Like, historically, DGI had like 70, 80% market share in law enforcement.

And in the dock world, they're still our number one competitor. So, like, flock safety is effectively a DGI reseller. Like, all of their droneist first responders work is done with DGI drones today. But the scoreboard is flipped. You know, we are winning the majority of these deals, even before the FCC action, on the strengths of the product and the tech, because it's just sort of a different recipe. It's similar, but it's a different recipe to deliver the solution. People are a little bit price sensitive because the value is so high.

You know, price is probably DGI's greatest strength. So, look, from our standpoint, like, our goal is just to have the best products and tech in the world. We certainly benefit from policy and regulatory tailwinds. And, you know, I'm not neutral on this. We have a business stake in it. But I think there's a lot of reasons why we want a domestic drone industry and why that's important for our national security. I mean, this stuff is critical for military. critical infrastructure, it's critical for public safety. And so it's exciting to see, like,

huge momentum now towards domestic industry and domestic manufacturing. But ultimately, the only stable long-term solution is to have the best products in tech design and built right here in the U.S. and that's what we're doing. That's what the factory behind me is doing. I think this new chapter of drones as infrastructure is a huge opportunity for us as a country. And one that we have... How are you thinking about scaling manufacturing capacity over the next decade. I mean, we're all in on it. It's a fun set of problems.

I mean, it's just it's a, it's all engineering of some flavor. It's a different set of engineering problems. So we're adding more and more automation to our factory. We're investing in the systems and processes. I think that the combination of AI and robotics is changes the way manufacturing works. Like it's possible to automate more stuff. It's possible to have what happens on our factory floor being more software defined. I think that's, you know, that's going to be.

more to our advantage versus just pure low-cost labor. Like, that's not our strength in the U.S. We have phenomenal work of claiming drones, but it's, you know, it's a different, it's a different labor equation than it is in Asia. So, you know, we're investing very heavily in, like, the software aspects of manufacturing, and the automation around it.

And it's part of our core identity as a company. And we're continuing to scale. So, you know, we're in an 80,000 square foot facility now. A year from now will probably be in a 450,000 square foot facility. It's a huge facility. huge facility. Congratulations. And thank you for taking the time to come chat with us. Good luck with the continued scale up. And I mean, I think I met you over a decade ago. So a true overnight success. Overnight success. Come back on when you have news, Adam. Yeah, we'll talk to you soon.

Really cool to get the update. Have a good one. Cheers. Thanks guys. Let me tell you about cognition. They're the makers of Devin, the AI software engineer. Crush your backlog. with your personal AI engineering team. And you know what? I got another ad read. Finn.AI, the number one AI agent for customer service. Did I mess it up? No, it didn't trigger.

Finn.a.I. is the number one AI agent for customer service. If you want AI to handle your customer support, go to fin.a. And without further ado, we have Mateo from Aid Sleep. Back on the stream is fifth, sixth time. We can't stop talking to this guy. How you doing, Mattio? Looking rested. Good to see you.

Oh, good. Great to see you guys. I have absolutely loved my eight sleep. I continue to sleep on it. Negative 10 on my side, plus 10 on my wife's side. My five-year-old has a feature request. He says, where's my zone? I sleep in the middle.

And we're like, you don't sleep in the middle. You sleep in your bed. But I'm sure you get that all the time. But how are you? Oh, good. How are you doing, guys? We're fantastic. We're fantastic.

Back here with some good news. Always great to have you. Big news. Give us the news. What happened? We just announced a new round. We raised $50 million, $1.5 billion. And who'd you raise it from?

From Tether investments. So it's in the Tether company, they are doubling down on AI and health and I have been friend. Paolo, the CEO for a long time, is a really big fan of us and very quick. He said, okay, how can I accelerate you guys even more and we were able to close the deal very quickly. Amazing. Give us an update on the business overall, everything you're focused on this year, all that good stuff. Yeah.

Well, the best part is in between, now in 2025 we raised twice, right, including this round. But the best part is we were profitable. So that's the part I love the most. We didn't need money. But, you know, when you have the right investors that they can't really push you further, it makes sense from a strategic standpoint. So we were profitable. We launched three products last year.

Now we sell in 34 countries. We're going to launch in China in a matter of a few months. So we'll be in China as well. And then we will launch Brazil as well this year. More hardware products coming. As I say, strong unit economics, a lot of people loving us. we just need to keep shipping. What actually goes into an international launch for 8Sleep?

For 2026? Yeah, I mean, like, you know, it's a heavy product. It's not the easiest thing to ship in the world. You know, some brands would have entered Brazil or China a long time ago, but you guys are going kind of country by country clearly focused much more strategically, maybe. Yeah, we almost wanted to. to prove the strategy even at the board level. So we started with Canada and then from Canada,

we went to Australia, and then Europe, then UK, then we launched Middle East, which was super successful. Then we launched Mexico, which was super successful. And then Saudi Arabia, Singapore. Now the next big bet is China, which will happen in around April. And then Brazil, Brazil is quite complicated.

The interesting thing is we sell everything direct to consumer, so we don't use this three stores or we don't go into any retail store. So we control everything. That makes things faster, but at the same time, there are still a lot of requirements also in terms of approval as a consumer electronics device. So usually that is the thing that requires the longest and then the supply chain and the shipping. But that is honestly fairly triggered. What key kind of health trends are you tracking?

I'm sure you were... I have a question about that. Are peptides changing slowly? sleep at all? Yeah, I think there is one peptide that specifically targets sleep. I'm just curious. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So we are running some clinical studies, but yeah, there are a couple that seem promising for that. And then there are also some drugs about sleep apnea. They seem really effective. They were not approved yet, but there are certain pills that it seems they can really help with the mitigation of sleep apnea. And then we file.

for FTA approval, both for detection and mitigation of sleep apnea. We invented a new technology that mitigates sleep apnea without you wearing anything. I think it could be a massive home run for the business. Obviously, we need to get to the finish line and approve it and get the FTA approval. But if that happens, it would be a game changer for millions of people. You know, 40% of people with sleep apnea, they don't even know they have it. And this is a life-threatening disease for certain people. I think we have a really nice solution that is extremely convenient, seamless.

They will have millions or billions of people. Billions. 93 last night. Oh, how'd I do? 95% quality, 100% consistency, 7 hours and 18 minutes. Not too bad. Not too bad. 91.

Oh, let's go. But doesn't it adjust? Isn't it possible that I got a better night's sleep than John last night. but he on average gets worse sleep. And so he put up an okay, a good night for him. John's best night's sleep is a nightmare for me. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But take me through.

What does it take to get me to 100? I know that there are other pieces of the puzzle. I have the mattress cover, of course. But should I be taking supplements? What else do you have for me that could get me to 100 more? regularly. Yeah. So I would think in three dimensions. On one side there is consistency. So going to bed at the same time, waking up at the same time. I'm very consistent about drinking like a full bottle of wine before that. Is that good? That's not going to help with your

with your HRV. I just black out and then I wake up and I'm like, I fell asleep. It was effective. It made me sleepy. I give a presentation to a bunch of entrepreneurs. and some of them start that's challenging me and say, yeah, I know that you keep saying the thing of the alcohol, but every time I have a couple of drinks,

I pass out to look up in the end, I believe alcohol is not bad for me. And I say, look, man, we can look at your data. You can look at your data. Yeah, I got the data. That's hilarious. But statistically is not good. Yes.

But on the supplement side, what's interesting, melatonin, give me kind of sort of your thesis about the other things it impacts sleep. Yeah. Honestly, the one that works as well known is melatonin. The problem with melatonin is you cannot keep taking melatonin for too long.

That's right. So usually we have run a bunch of studies. And what we have seen is you should keep it below 0.5 milligrams. Okay. That otherwise it creates dependency. Then when you're traveling or you want to adjust for leg, you can go up to 2 milligrams, something like that. But you should stop up to 3, 4 days.

Not much. Yeah. Well, instead, a lot of people take three to five milligrams every single night forever. Yeah, and then they build a tolerance and they don't get anything out of it. Like, you know, you can't just drink caffeine every single day and expect to have the same results. Exactly. Then some people report some benefit with magnesium, magnesium, extravaganda, and some of that. But usually the benefits are fairly minimal.

Right now, the only one that is very well proven to work is melatonin. Yeah. How many hours of sleep data do you have? Me? Yeah, at 8 sleep. How much data are you studying these days? Oh, we cross billions of nights. Oh, he's right.

He just wanted an excuse. The interesting part is what excites me is because we sell in 34 countries now. Yeah. It's so interesting, right, to really think that we are powering the sleep across the whole, right? Different genders. not different, everything. Can you tell us what country sleeps best? Australia.

Australia sleeps best. There is a specific place in Australia on the coast where they sleep like babies. They're like unbeatable. That's amazing. Americans don't sleep very well in the grand scheme of things.

What's the thesis there? They're just by, they're hanging out of the beach, they're super relaxed. Yeah. They're lazy. Yeah. Yeah, I think so. It's probably just a no local culture where they're still active, but they're probably way more consistent and they have more time for sleep.

And then the other interesting thing is sometimes you see weird spikes in a good or bad direction for sleep. We published a long time ago, I know how sleep deep during the election day. Or there are all these studies about when, you know, you change the time. forward or backward all day. Daily savings time or probably the Super Bowl. There's a whole bunch of different dates. Super Bowl, other kind of things. So it's, yeah, it's pretty funny.

In video earnings, probably people losing sleep. Yeah. Even after COVID, a lot of things change it. People started sleeping way longer after COVID. Particularly during COVID, they were sleeping like an hour longer, on average per night, which was pretty impressive. And still today, you see the difference across even the different days of the week. Wow.

Yeah, that's impressive. Well, thank you so much for taking the time to come chat with us. Congratulations on the new round. And we will talk to you soon, Mateo. Yeah, it's great to see you as always. Thank you guys. Goodbye. Let me tell you about CrowdStrike. Your business is AI. Their business is securing it. CrowdStrike secures AI and stops breaches. And let me also tell you about Cisco. Critical infrastructure for the AI era. Unlocked seamless real-time experiences and new value with Cisco. And without further ado, we have Dylan Rollneck from News Research coming on the show. What's going on. Dylan, how you doing? Yo, great to meet you guys.

Big fan of your show. Happy to be here. Thank you so much for taking the time. Since it is the first time on the show, please introduce yourself and what you're working on. Yeah, I'm Dylan Rolnik. Like you said, I'm the COO. And broadly, I would say,

research is working on being a super internet native AI lab. Okay. Essentially just focused on bringing open source for the forefront, and all weekend for open source AI. Yeah. Talk about agents, harnesses, conductors, orchestration. How do you envision this year playing out for how people, your customers, your users, will interface with AI?

Yeah. Well, so, I mean, I think this year has already been pretty heavy on agents. We did our, I mean, claw, right? Open claw, ours. We just put out Hermes agents. I think people are just starting to get used to a kind of different way to interact with AI that maybe they're not as used to. That's like blowing people's mind. So if you're like super close to it, some of the stuff might not be that shocking.

But I think you saw with how things became very popular, very fast, people getting a first glimpse of like putting an AI out there, kind of like letting it do its thing and coming back to something that's finished or done like a work product is pretty incredible with the rap game. Yeah. Maybe Kim is focused on open. Maybe Kim is focused. He's getting Mac. He's stacking Mac minis. I did. It's crazy.

Yeah. We got to convert him. That would be a big win for us. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We think it's super powerful. We put out our Hermes agent, like I said, sort of an alternative kind of, you know.

We view it as sort of taking the best of what you would see in a coding agent and what you would see in something like OpenClaw. And then we added a bunch of capability that's important to our own work to advance the stuff that we're doing. Because like if anyone's going to use an agent to advance their work, like it sure as hell is going to be us first. So, okay. So when you say advanced work, but it feels like there's still some consumer angle, like what are the textbook use cases that you're seeing? We're just starting to get some feedback on what people are doing. But I think, you know, from the professional standpoint, it's like people want a way to just have a task be put out there and they come back like they're messaging with it on telegram. They're saying like, I'd like for you to do some research for me. And then by the time I get back to my desk, I'm able to look over that kind of thing. Sure. But from our advantage, we put in, like, you know, we have traditionally made our name basically doing post-training. Okay.

So all the tools that we've been using, we've been trying to feed into that tool so that this thing could actually help us advance that goal as well. So are you building on top of open source pre-trains then? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So what we did to initially gain some popularity was like it was Lama was putting out base models. Yep. We fine tuned those into something that we thought would be like something the market would want.

which is why I'm excited about the agent stuff, because we were kind of sitting there being like, okay, here's what we think is like a gap between what models are doing presently and what we could add to the fine-tune world. But once you actually have an agent out there that's like touching people and doing like economic work and helping, you get more feedback as to what it is

that you actually need to post train. So for us, it's kind of like, now we have this thing out there. Can we shape an open source model into something that makes the best out of this harness and is cheaper or like better across some vectors? How are you thinking about go-to-market? The open-source piece is interesting, but what are the other levers to get people to adopt the product?

Yeah, I think just bludgeoning people with how you can use this thing is important. I think there's a huge gap between what people know about AI and what AI can actually do. Even some of the people that I consider some of the most savvy non-technical users of AI are continually blown away by what Hermes' Agent can do. Hermes agent again is just like a harness on other people's agent. It's not even like the compounding effect yet. Sure. So I think like making that super easy for people to dive into and get. So yeah, what are you actually like pitching them? Because like, you know, chat chitp t comes out. Everyone's like this can do your homework. Like this will replace like Wikipedia. This will replace

Google search, right? Like go here and instead of just typing, you know, tell me the history of the Roman Empire in Google, you just do that in chat chachy pt and you get something that looks different and is better in a bunch of different ways. Like, what's your pitch for, like, the first prompt that they should fire off? That's a good one. I think the first part of the pitch is, like, I think open source is crucial for a lot of people and they might not realize it yet. But I think one of the things I hear from folks that use any agent is, like, I'm willing

to spend a couple bucks, but maybe not, like, you know, a hundred bucks a day. Yeah. And Claude, while extraordinarily capable, is expensive because it's just, like, Omni capable. So I think the ability to like hone in on the agentic capability at a cheaper price point is definitely part of the pitch. And I would say just like get in there, figure out what you spend the most amount of your time doing that you don't want to do and ask Hermie's agent to solve that for you.

I think we need some more specificity. If we want to pitch these people, it's tough. People need a killer use case. They need their hands held. And there's certainly there's certainly opportunity out there. but hopefully, you know, this will evolve. I'm always taken by that example of Mid Journey where if you gave, David Holes, Mid Journey,

he said, if you give people like a blank box and just say, prompt whatever they want to prompt, they will just type dog, and they'll just get like a picture of a dog. And they're like, I could have gotten a dog on Google Images. Like this doesn't do anything special. But when they went into Mid Journey, they saw everyone else prompting. They say, space dog on Mars with a, you know, rocket ship, blah, blah, blah. and then they would remix and enjoy.

How are you thinking about bringing the different community together, the different Hermes agent? I was on Instagram and I saw someone who used OpenClaw. This is just like a family friend, used OpenClaught to build a new photo album piece of software to collect photos from all of their different family resources. So they have some in Google Drive. They have the grandparents use some Microsoft product.

and they wanted something that would synthesize all of this together into one, you know, central place, tag them all, do all of this. And I was like, that's an interesting use case. I like that she built that. And that's something that I could maybe say, hey, maybe I want that. And maybe that becomes a product one day. But how are you thinking about bringing the community together? Yeah, that's a good point.

So here's what I'll say is when we put this out, we were kind of thinking of it as like a gift to the community. Like we're very open source focused. Like I said, like let's just see what people can make use of this thing. And we're probably in that discovery phase of like, what is it that people are doing? So we had a bunch of immediately cool stuff that I thought came out. And then we're putting together a hackathon right now to try to get more of that. Like you said, you want to be inspired by what other people are doing.

So we're putting together a hackathon that's going to start tomorrow online. Let everyone do. I think we're in play mode. Like do the coolest stuff that you can. And let's figure out what exactly hits. Yeah. I mean, it is like the best time to go to a hackathon, to host a hackathon. Like, we are truly at this, like, incredible moment where the tools are so much better.

I would use the agent to figure out homes in my area that look like castles. Ooh. Because I'm very inspired by our, somewhat of a castle. This is a cool building. Yeah, I'm in a castle. But, I mean, you might not want to give that away because that could be a hit for the hackathon. You're going to have to bid against, you know, Casey Hanmer. He, uh, terraform.

He, uh, he operates his business out of a castle in Burbank. It's amazing. It makes you feel very secure. and strong. It has like true turrets. It was built. It's not really like a defensible castle. I think it was built more for maybe just a crazy person or something. Maybe from a film industry or something. But it looks fantastic. And your office looks fantastic as well. Congratulations on all the success. Yeah. Shoot us shoot us a note on who ends up winning the hackathon. Yeah. That'd be awesome. I'm sure I'm sure you'll be awesome. Awesome. Appreciate that.

Anyway, Dylan, have a great rest of your guys. Great to meet you guys. We'll talk to you soon. Great to meet you guys. Have a great one. Goodbye. Let me tell you about public.com. for those that take it seriously. They've got stocks, options, bonds, pretzel, treasuries, and more with great customer service. Did you know, according to Tyler Cowan, this is how people talk, according to Sardius, brutally sweater-mogged by Boomer-Foyd doomslop maxing on change-gooning your sweater is not ready for. That sentence, it's like it's completely escaped velocity to the point where I don't even understand it, and I follow most of this lingo pretty closely.

But I appreciate that Tyler Cowan has just reflected on the fact that the vernacular is fully changing on the internet, and it is in many ways indistinguishable or indescipherable. It is, it's a mess. It is, it is its own form of slop, the looks maxing lingo. The ANW CEO has joined the Burger Wars. This just continues and continues. I mean, I guess it's free press if you're in the fast-form. food industry. I didn't know that A&W was even a store. I didn't know that they sold burgers. I thought they just had root beer. A&W. Have you ever been doing A&W, Jordy?

Never heard of it. Never heard of it. Never ever heard of it. You mentioned it, but here is the picture with beautiful lighting. Baby Keem says three more to go, two sparks on the way. Is that the Nvidia Spark? DJX Spark. DJX Spark. That's an expensive computer, right? He's really wiring everything up. 10,000 likes. He's having a great time. I appreciate that baby Keem is having a good time in the open source AI agent world. Sudo says developers are cooked.

I vibe coded a worst version of an existing product in four weeks with serious security calls. Yeah. It's a wild time. Be careful out there. The other interesting thing that's going on is like there's new. data on serious, serious traffic declines across tech publications. This is from Danny Crichton. It says no discussion of tech media can get past this basic traffic fact. In the AI world, Google and social no longer refer traffic, which means that the vast majority of readers just

never find you in the first place. This is, of course, a reaction to Trace Stevens' proposal that maybe that he should buy wired and it's unclear if he's just having fun. but there's been a call from the tech community, like bring back the wired we read in the magazines as a kid. You know, it used to be so techno-optimistic. Now it's this hypercritical, maybe semi-political outlet. But what Danny is pointing to is that these publications have seen just in the last two years since 2024 traffic declines of between 30% and 97% for digital trends.

The interesting one there, I think it was, of course, Wired. In November of 2024, Wired was putting up 7.7 million views in traffic. Now it's down at 2.9. And there's another one on here. I had no idea that Mashable was still so big. Mashable has actually done pretty well 16 million two years ago. Now it's down at 11 million, not too bad. But ZDNet, that was the website where I would go and the verge is on here, two,

five million views down at seven. Yeah, I wonder how much of this is due to AI overviews and, you know, Google search results now are more ad, more paid links than organic links. There's a lot of that. There's a lot of, like something happens and just get screenshots and shared on X? That's pretty new. The screenshot, there's a hundred, for each one of these publications, there's a hundred or a thousand people that will take whatever news and just make it more socially native. So I would imagine that the stories these companies are telling are getting a similar amount of impressions overall.

That's just not happening. Potentially more because a lot of the stories that they write about, at least the ones that do scoops, are more interesting than ever. The Verge has had some great reporting. Alex Heath, who formerly worked at The Verge and is now writing at Sources.News, his substack, says, more viscerally, these traffic declines represent directionally aligned revenue declines. And so if you see a publication that's down 85% in traffic, they might be down 85% in revenue. And that is going to completely change the way they think about the business, both from a staffing perspective, but also from a content. editorial perspective. Because if you are seeing traffic decline in one niche or one category, you might need to go viral by doing a listicle or doing something that doesn't feel like your

roots. Well, you know, the roots have been dug up in some ways. Yes. On some publication. We're not seeing a decline in VC podcast viewership. That's true. That's true. There are a number of DC podcasts that are racking up a million views for interviews with series A or series B founders. Yeah. Very, very impressive numbers. I mean, it's a white guy. A lot of people think that, you know, technology is niche, some series A founder that you haven't heard on. They can't attract a million people to sit down and watch them on Zoom talk about their business for an hour. But apparently they can. And many venture capital firms have showed us that it's possible. you do have to pay the people to watch

and the views might be a little low quality, but if you pay the viewers... And people won't comment. If you pay... Yeah, they won't comment. That's an extra bill you've got to pay, and it's very unclear why they aren't buying comments, because if you're buying the views,

just buy the comments too. The reason is that they are running paid traffic on meta at their own YouTube videos. Oh, is that what's going on? They're getting the views. The meta ads, as of a couple days ago, we're public, so you can see them. they're just like running.

If you're on Instagram, you'll get an ad for a podcast. That was on meta? Because apparently. And Google. Because you can actually just run ads for your content on YouTube. And then you get people who are in YouTube to click on that content. Now, are they less likely to comment? Absolutely.

Like the example on the right is Dwar Cash. He got a million views. And it had 4,700 comments. I went back and checked some of my videos just to kind of know, like, what is the the correct ratio, then if I got a video with like a couple hundred thousand views, like there were probably a thousand comments on there for a variety of reasons. Also just people saying like when the real fans show up, they say like first, second, oh yeah, still watching in 2026, you know, people will just do this.

And very, very odd just to go by views because it doesn't create a lot of value and it sort of sets you up for this type of dunk, although Matt Turk is being nice and not calling out the particular podcast that did this. Max Ferens, who runs, he's the general manager of the Dorcasch Patel podcast, says, deep down, I know these are pictures of screens,

but it really looks like you printed these out, mark them up with a pen and highlighter, and then took the photos. Max is so funny, and he had a bunch of things. He says, he was quoting this and said, you have no idea how long it takes, me to write 4,783 comments like he's, you know, responsible because of course he's not faking the numbers at that scale. That's not what's happening.

What else is going on? Kyle Corbett says is highlighting some news. The New York legislature is rapidly pushing through a 2025 bill that would prohibit LMs from providing substantive legal analysis or advice in New York. It seems that LMs could still provide substantive health. help to lawyers under this bill is written. Consumers, however, would be stuck with the chat bot refusing to answer their legal questions.

So again, this just seems bad. The entire point of LLMs and AI is to give intelligence to anyone, right? Like the fact that an individual can get the equivalent of five hours of legal work in a single prompt by uploading a contract is very good for consumers. I don't even know how bad. it'll be for lawyers, especially given that at least right now, even if I could generate entire legal docs, I still want a lawyer to, you know, play a part in it.

But again, Kyle Corbett says, I sold my company last year at GPD5 Pro was at least as valuable in that negotiation as our attorneys who billed us $450,000. This is a terrible law. The Primogen is chiming in. I saw him on a podcast recently, and I just really liked the way this guy talks. I've been getting a bunch of his Instagram reels, too. He's a great streamer. Responding to former guests of the show, Gerge Orjoz, or Roche, says, Things that were not on my bingo card.

One, Anthropic marked as U.S. supply chain risk by the government, same as Huawei. Again, that hasn't actually happened, but it's predicted. Two, Clod going viral across non-tech people as a result, number one, on the App Store. three mass chat GPT cancellations thanks to open AI becoming the government AI supplier and prime agent says then they will release 5.4 everyone will say aGI and forget all about last the last week and this week that that's why it's so fun to cover AI because everything changes every two weeks it's it's not it's not the something big is happening like I was reflecting I was someone was asking me about that something big is happening say and I was like, well, actually, they predicted that in March it would be like April of 2020 in regard to COVID and the fact that we're just having this normal conversation and walking down the street normally and things are pretty much the same. Sort of re-shortening the gates that. But it's still worth paying attention to. And I don't know. I'm excited for the next model shift.

Which I think is to our theory was they said GPT 5.4 sooner than you think. No, no, no. No. It's GPT5.XX Extreme. Satrini chimed in. It said, the next AI model will have extreme reasoning. Probably try to jump to the top of the meter chart, I would imagine. That's sort of the benchmark that a lot of people are tracking. So you've got to do a lot of reasoning tokens, a lot of high long context reasoning. But whatever they call it, it'll be fun to test drive and see what happens. there is a new company selling a device called Specter,

the first smart device to stop unwanted audio recordings. This was so crazy. Yeah. And this post went super viral. People are pretty excited about it. Someone else was highlighting that there's hundreds of products on Alibaba and spy shops that sell these sort of portable audio jammer. There's also a company that sells to doctors that's for transcription.

Remember we talked about it? and the company's printing like $100 million and they just like have a very niche sort of like boring use case? That's for recording. This is for jamming. Oh, this is for jamming. This is for T.J. People like T.J. Parker who don't want to be recorded.

Because there's both of these. Anthony Popliano said, we have to live in a simulation at both these companies launch on the same day. And it's one company launching, you know, a note taker for real world meetings. It records everything around you. And then on the same day, they launch. a different company launched Specter 1, the first smart device to stop unwanted audio recording. So the battle for the sound waves is well, well, under way.

But yes, so there's other posts that you said is sort of putting Spector 1 in the truth zone on the first smart device to stop unwanted audio recordings, talking about the idea that there are mic jammers elsewhere, and these are available if you want them. but they certainly haven't been marketed, and a lot of people were unaware of them until this product launch. So, you know, is distribution important here? Is distribution always important?

Yes, probably. And so good luck to them. Good luck to the ongoing Cold War between the recording and the jamming. It's going to be like just a crazy, crazy battle. Let me tell you about Plaid. Plad powers the apps you used to start. Spence, say borrow and invest, securely connecting bank accounts to move money, fight fraud, and improve lending now with AI.

Accenture is buying Down Detector. I saw this. I saw this. Why? There must be somebody to this business. They said as part of a deal, a $1.2 billion deal. So is it possible that Down Detector is owned by another company and Down Detector just sort of came along for the ride? Because I can't imagine that down detectors worth $1.2 billion.

I mean, respect to everyone who runs that site, it's certainly valuable. but that seems like a lot for what they do. But I don't know. I mean, I could imagine this having business value if you've implemented a system and you want to make sure that the system that you implemented as Accenture stays up, having the infrastructure to track uptime is valuable.

A lot of companies are struggling with uptime. Doug O'Loughlin was talking about GitHub's uptime. There's been a lot of people posting about Claude having patchy response time, because of the surge in demand. This is clearly something businesses care about because every dollar, every minute of uptime is dollars.

Maybe in the age of vibe coding, every product is going to be going down so much. Accenture's helping companies, you know, unlock AI. And they're like, wow, this stuff's, this is going to be pretty bad. Yeah. Down detects, bull market for down detector. Julian Weiser interviewed,

a founder named Ben Sarah. He's building a company called Pulsia. They've gotten to 1.5 million of AR in two weeks with zero human teammates. Very, very cool

progress. But Zareem says, why is the company named AI Slop backwards? Is that intentional? Is that a nod? Or did they just get lucky or unlucky? No, I think it's maybe a happy accident. That's so funny. Really, really good.

Donald Trump is at a roundtable, I believe on energy on the data center buildout. And Donald Trump, according to Mike Isaac, wistfully at the tech roundtable, speaking about Open AIs, Brad, Lightcap. Brad, so young. Look at how young. That's so funny. Brad Lightcap does look very youthful. He has aged very, very, very youthful business man. Also an absolute dog who's been on a generational run and done fantastic things throughout his career.

So congrats to him. But this is so, so funny. What a weird, that's a total like record scratch, freeze frame. Yep, that's me. Here's how I wound up at a White House roundtable with the president of the United States saying, so young. Look at how young. Thanks, Mike, for.

good place to close out the show. Brian Johnson walked at a fashion show at Paris Fashion Week. A Capitol says from Immortal Unk to Runway Unk. Let's give it up for Brian Johnson walking the runway. That's a bucket list item. I don't know if it's on my bucket list, but I'm certainly glad that he had the opportunity. Congrats to it. The only thing is it kind of looks like a futuristic funeral. It does. like a sci-fi. Like, it doesn't have, it doesn't deal. The clothes look fairly comfortable, though.

I like the functionality. But he is looking absolutely jacked. He's looking jacked. That is true. He is looking very strong. This is some mass surveillance going on. They're surveilling his mass. That really is mass surveillance.

And whether you like it or not, they're going to be taking a video of you when you're looking massive and putting it on the internet and going viral. Well, thank you for watching the show today. We will see you tomorrow at 11 a.m. sharp Pacific time. Leave us five stars on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Sign up for our newsletter at TBPA.com. Give us a follow on LinkedIn. I have been doing a magic trick recently where I will post

on LinkedIn while I'm live. It's a certain hand signal. You have to figure out how it's happening. How can John possibly be live on the internet on this stream and simultaneously posting content, great content, some of the best content on LinkedIn at the same time? It's a mystery. No one understands how I can do it. Right now over at LinkedIn it's... No, no, no, that's not true. I got 100,000 impressions. It's working. It's starting to work. But we figured it out that on LinkedIn, we are going to be focused more on behind-the-scenes storytelling about how we think about media, how we think about the business of TBPN. That has been what's resonating. And so we're going to be focused a little bit more on that, as opposed to

some of the tech analysis that we do on X and here on the show, some of the interview clips. The clips that just aren't really flying there like they do on YouTube and X and Instagram. So we're starting to find our audience there. Give us a follow on LinkedIn. We'd love to hang out with you there. Anyway. And we hope you have a wonderful evening. We'll be back tomorrow for a big show.

Goodbye.