TBPN - The Death of the Tech Conference, Jake Paul Joins, Dimon Launches Deregulation Blitz | Jake Paul & Geoffrey Woo, Matt Pavelle, David Senra & Lulu Cheng, Casey Newton, Alex Epstein, Jamie Siminoff

Episode Date: January 6, 2026

(02:19) - The Death of the Tech Conference (23:27) - Dimon Launches Deregulation Blitz (27:49) - 𝕏 Timeline Reactions (01:16:29) - Casey Newton, an American technology journalist and founder of the Platformer newsletter, discusses his investigation into a viral Reddit post alleging unethical practices by food delivery companies, which was later revealed to be a hoax. He details his initial belief in the post's plausibility, his communication with the purported whistleblower, and the red flags that emerged during their interactions. Newton reflects on the challenges posed by AI-generated content in journalism and emphasizes the need for enhanced vigilance and fact-checking in the digital age. (01:33:44) - Alex Epstein is an author and energy commentator best known for The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, where he argues that affordable, reliable energy is essential to human flourishing. He is the founder of the Center for Industrial Progress and a frequent speaker on energy policy, climate, and economics. (02:09:09) - Jamie Siminoff, founder of Ring, discusses his extensive experience at CES, highlighting his journey from personally constructing early booths to now showcasing professionally built exhibits. He reflects on his 2013 "Shark Tank" appearance, noting that despite initial rejection, Ring evolved into a leading home security company with over 100 million cameras deployed globally. Siminoff emphasizes the integration of AI in Ring's products to enhance user experience by reducing unnecessary alerts and improving the relevance of notifications. (02:31:04) - Jake Paul is an American professional boxer, influencer, and actor who began his career on Vine and YouTube before transitioning into boxing. In the conversation, Paul discusses his venture capital firm, Anti Fund, co-founded with Geoffrey Woo, emphasizing their founder-first approach and commitment to providing value beyond capital, such as expertise in distribution and marketing. He also highlights their investment in OpenAI's SORA project, where they contributed to the platform's functionality and launch strategy, leveraging their social media experience to enhance user engagement. (02:49:14) - Matt Pavelle, co-founder and CEO of Doctronic, has over 25 years of experience in building startups, including the e-commerce unicorn Moda Operandi. In the conversation, he discusses Doctronic's AI-powered healthcare platform, which has conducted over 20 million consultations for 2 million patients, offering free AI interactions and access to licensed doctors across all 50 states. He highlights the platform's ability to provide timely medical advice, noting that users engage with the system multiple times a month, and shares that in Utah, Doctronic's AI is legally authorized to renew prescriptions without doctor oversight. (03:06:29) - David Senra is the creator and host of the Founders podcast, where he distills lessons from biographies of history’s most successful entrepreneurs. He’s known for his intense focus on long-term thinking, obsession with craft, and the habits that drive exceptional founders. Lulu Cheng is a venture capitalist and writer known for sharp analysis on technology, startups, and ambition. She has worked in both investing and operating roles and is widely followed for her candid commentary on founder psychology, power, and the realities of building companies. TBPN.com is made possible by: Ramp - https://Ramp.comAppLovin - https://axon.aiCognition - 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/tbpnLabelbox - https://labelbox.comLambda - https://lambda.aiLinear - https://linear.appMongoDB - https://mongodb.comNYSE - https://nyse.comPhantom - https://phantom.com/cashPlaid - https://plaid.comPublic - https://public.comRailway - https://railway.comRamp - https://ramp.comRestream - https://restream.ioShopify - https://shopify.comTurbopuffer - 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 Tuesday, January 6th, 2026. We are live from the TBPN Ultradome, the Temple of Technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. Ramp.com, time is money, save both. Save both. Corporate cards, bill pay accounting and a whole lot more all in one place. We actually ran into some good folks at Ramp today at breakfast.

Ann and Calvin. Very good omen to the start of 2026 to run into some folks at Ramp. We had a good time. Anyway, they were here in LA. They're working on a secret project that I'm sure we'll talk about at some point. But you'll hear about it. Where they weren't is they're not at CES. Because Ramp is not a consumer electronics project.

Yet. Yet. You could see them get into the AI hardware phase. Maybe. They shouldn't count anyone out. They should launch a TV. I saw that Razor launched an AI companion. You know, Razor computer.

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, the gaming company. They have an AI companion now. They launched at CES. So you should never count anyone out. Yeah, it really is like the festival of creativity for like weird AI projects, weird tech projects. Everyone has some society. It has a little bit of like hacker culture to it almost, but it's also a little washed, right? Is it hacker?

It's not hacker. It's more just like, I don't know, bizarre spinoff. What do you think? I think it's, I think at this point it's like fairly boomer coded. It's very boomer coded, but it's also like there's novelty. I would describe it as somewhat. So I think I was talking. to a buddy who texted me yesterday morning said are you at cES this week yeah he uh seemed desperate

to uh to hang out and i said unfortunately i'm not and i was thinking about it and it's and in some ways it feels like somewhat of a humiliation ritual for people in tech to say like you just had this nice holiday and now we're going to force you to go to vegas and schmooze for a week for five days get ready to go to get ready to smooz it sounds exhausting i i've actually never been to c yes but um they Do you know what they call CES? They still got it in terms of the branding. They're coming in strong. What is it?

CES refers to itself as the most powerful tech event in the world. Really bringing the superlatives. It might be. It might be. I think it still is. It probably still is. There's a bunch of launches that we should talk about. I want to talk about the smart brick.

Okay, for sure. From Lego. But why don't we go into your op-as? Yeah. So I call it the death of the tech conference because I noticed something which we'll get into. But what's interesting is like CES launched so long ago, 1967. Isn't that like, I would have said like 85, maybe 92, right? What were the, 67? What were the consumer electronics at the first event? So, I mean, the number of things that launched at CES is actually crazy. So the VCR launched at CES.

Like the thing that you put the tape into, I know you don't watch movies and you never had a VCR. I had a VCR. I had a VCR. I actually did. You ever VCR? I actually did. You had a VCR. Like a personal little... Yeah, you put the tape in.

You have to rewind it when you're done watching the movie. That launched at CES. CES started in 1967. It was a sleepy affair until 1970 when Phillips unveiled its N1,500 video cassette recorder. Until that point, BCRs cost upwards of $50,000. Imagine dropping 50 Gs. Okay, at the first one in 1967, they had transistor radios. early colored televisions,

phonographs, and tape recorders. I'm going to tell you more about what launched at CES, but first I'm going to tell you about Lambda. Lambda is the superintelligence cloud, building AI supercomputers for training and inference at that scale from one GPU to hundreds of thousands. Can we show our new... We have the Lambda lightning round.

We have a cloud, a physical cloud. This is not AI generated, not CGIS. It's here. Here in the studio. And we're very excited for it. the land of lightning round. We have a lightning round today with a bunch of folks, including Jake Paul is joining. We have Jamie Simenov. We have Matt from Doctronic. We have a lot of folks. All of that is in the linear run of show, which we can show you with a linear lineup

taking you through. Pull it up. There we go. Alex Epstein, Jamie Simenoff. We're going to dive into the piece that I wrote yesterday about energy with Alex. He's an expert in energy production. We are going to cap it off of Lulu today. We got a massive lineup. So anyway, speaking of lineups, the lineup of stuff that launched at CES, the Atari Pong console in 1975, the CD player launched in 1981 at CES, the Commodore 64, 1982, the DVD at 1996, the Xbox in 2001. And we really got to play this video of how the Xbox launched because it will, 2001, Bill Gates gets on stage at CES. He doesn't host his own conference, which is what I'm going to talk about, my thesis of why the tech conference is dying.

But he launches. And, you know, today we think we're so cool. Oh, tech companies, they have vibreels and they have cinematic videos and they go on podcasts. And they do podcast circuits when they launch things. Get on stage with Dwayne the Rock Johnson. That's the bar because that's exactly what Bill Gates did in 2001 when he launched the Xbox. We got to play this video. We're unveiling the Xbox.

Look at this. This is the product that will be out later this year. And there's an amazing amount going on, working with partners who help build the hardware, working with the software developers, working with the retailers. The program around this thing is really quite phenomenal. But the box itself is another thing that we put a lot of energy in. So you may have been wondering what this great device was here. This is a showmanship.

This is the Xbox. And so for the first time, let me now unveil X-Box. Whoa. Do you ever have one of these? With the controller in the plastic glass, very cool. Yeah, dangling down there. This was iconic. Play called Duty, the original Modern Warfare was on there.

The design here was driven by spending time with gamers. And actually putting the control in their hands. Yeah. The controller was huge. The first controller was so big that they had to make a smaller one because they just went like way too big for some reason. I guess they were testing on the wrong type of people or something. something. Were they testing on you? No, there's this whole meme that it was like really good for

Shaq, but that was it and Shaq loved it or something. That I seem to remember this. I don't know. The test are loaded as you move from level to level. What you're seen on the front, you check, the on-off button, and four game ports. That was one of the big pieces of feedback was people didn't want to be limited to two. Yeah, the PlayStation, I think, just had two at the time. And maybe the N-64 had four, but this was like a big jump forward. And then Dwayne comes out? Yeah, 246, while they are skipping ahead, let me tell you about label box delivering you the highest quality data for Frontier AI. And we can go to two minutes and 46 seconds.

That are so state of the art that they'll only be done right as we finish the manufacturing. So we'll plug those chips in. Except for that, everything in this box is the final design. Here we go. Look at this. Getting a celebrity like that. Like, Open AI had so many announcements this year. Look at the fit, too.

The glasses. They didn't bring out the Rock. Yeah, I might want to use that sometime, Bill. Well, thanks, Rock. And it really is. Thanks, Rock. The celebrity cameo. My box.

Launch is completely forgotten art. We don't know how to do this anymore. All right, pause for a second. Because I think people would be shocked at how inexpensive it could be to. work with a effect, I don't know about A-list, but maybe like an aging out, like somebody that was iconic, an actor, an athlete, et cetera, and just instead of spending $30,000 on some insane launch video, just get a camera and hire some celebrity and have them explain your product. That would be genius.

Yeah, I mean, you see a lot of these. There was that, there was that drink company that did this. Do you remember they had some celebrity? like read every sign. I do remember that. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Orca. Orca.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. We remember it today. And a lot of, a lot of founders have figured out how to marshal the right resources for really cinematic footage, good editing, a bunch of things to introduce their product.

But some of them just aren't charismatic on camera, unfortunately, and they just don't have the reps. So if you bring in a celebrity, it can just, also just way more thumb-stopping, like you're just going to be scrolling. Oh, what is the rock doing there, promoting your product?

Obviously, not everyone has the resources of Microsoft, I bet that was expensive. And who knows how doable it is. But I bet if you get creative, there is a way to do it. Anyway, CES, when it launched, I thought this was impressive. 1967, like, no precedent. There's not really a tech community. It's sort of new. 17,000 people show up, 200 companies put on exhibitions. That seems like a lot. It's grown, not even 10x. I mean, this was, this year, or in 2024, they had 130,000 attendees. Like, it's grown a lot, but it's not, you know, it's starting. it out pretty big. I personally love consumer technology. I've always been like a tech nerd and

liked tinkering with gadgets and whatnot. But I think this year should be more interesting because the Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, IoT, all that stuff was like sort of annoying. Maybe the AI stuff gets annoying, but I still feel like there's more opportunity for actually cool integrations with AI in all sorts of different hardware things. At the same time, I was a Best Buy over the break, and I saw a TV that said it was powered by AI, and I was just shuddering thinking about how bad of an experience that probably was, because what is it going to be trying to do?

It's probably not integrating like a frontier model. It's probably some really, really sloppy thing. Samsung had a big announcement last year. Perplexity integration. Yeah. I don't know if that makes sense. And again, I just think anytime you're in a situation where you could ask your TV for information,

it's probably easier to ask your phone. Yeah, usually. Usually. Yeah, and so I think you need to be. a little bit more first principles when you think about these integrations thing. We'll get into some of the stuff that actually launched that sounded interesting. But I wanted to go into the history of how the tech conference, like the tech conference that's not linked to a single company sort of died and a lot of it goes back to the iPhone, actually. So the iPhone, probably the biggest

consumer electronics product in history, it should have been launched at the consumer electronic show. It is the consumer electronics. Juggernaut. It should have been launched. important consumer product of the 21st century? Totally. And they got Scoop by MacWorld because Jobs wanted more control over how the presentation would go. So he chose to debut the iPhone at Macworld in San Francisco on January 9th, 2007. And Macworld was technically independent from Apple. So the conference was created by IDG, this international data group.

Very interesting story there. They had Computer World and PC World and a bunch of different conferences, publications. That guy started a magazine. Great name. International data group. Fantastic. We don't know how to make names like that. Yeah, he's right up there with IBM. Seriously.

And he kind of scaled this business. Eventually, Mac World was technically independent from Apple, but Apple was obviously the cornerstone draw to the event. So they'd give them the keynote, great floor space, and then all the other independent third-party Mac developers. So if you were developing a piece of software or even just like a phone case, it didn't make sense at that time. But you could imagine all sorts of different peripherals,

a printer. go there and figure out partnerships and do deals. But launching the iPhone at Macworld, which happened at the exact same time as CES, it allowed jobs to control everything about the big reveal, the lighting, the pacing. He was famously fanatical about this. He rehearsed for weeks and weeks and weeks. He wanted things exactly. He wanted certain demos to happen after.

And he just got way more control at Macworld than he would have gotten at CES. And the big thing is that at CES journalists go around from booth to booth. and they compare spec sheets. So with TVs, we know like 4K, 8K, 3D, not 3D, OLED or refresh rate or a number of ports, price point. So they create these like charts and they keep everything in a category. And he wanted to be category defining

and he wanted to break the category. And he also did not want to be compared to the Nokia N95. No, the Nokia N95 was actually the best weird name. It was more performance. Yeah, it beat it on basically everything. at the time? He didn't want to go spec to spec. He didn't.

He didn't. So the Nokia had 3G already. It had GPS. It allowed for copy pasting of text. It had a front facing camera. He's like, until we can copy and paste? We don't have that power.

No, no, the number of features that the Nokia was crazy. It could record videos. The iPhone couldn't record videos. It had a 5 megapixel camera instead of a 2 megapixel camera. It even had an FM radio, which I don't think anyone really wants. But, you know, it had a bunch of features

that if it was just, if you just created a 10, of iPhone versus Nokia N95. The Nokia beat it on like, you know, 10 different specs. The only thing that the iPhone really had going for it was that it had a touchscreen, and the Nokia didn't. But people didn't think they wanted a touchscreen at that point because most touchscreens were terrible, and the iPhone sort of had the first good touchscreen.

And then also it had some other unique Apple innovations, like a full-featured Safari web browser, but it didn't even have third-party apps. The Nokia did. And so Steve Jobs was able to sort of reframe the whole iPhone discussion as like, it's just this own thing, don't comp us to Nokia. Why are we talking about Nokia? We're not going to talk about Nokia. They're not at Macworld. They're not allowed to be here.

Best marketer of all time. Clearly. And everyone copied him. So very, very quickly, every tech company wanted to do the same thing, set their own agenda, have full control over the event from start to finish. Apple actually pulled out of Macworld two years later, started doing WWDC and their own self-hosting. events, self-distributed events, obviously technology itself makes a lot of that easier. Cameras are cheaper. You can live stream. You can get your event everywhere. So you have Google I.O., Microsoft Build, MetaConnect, Samsung unpacked. When Zuck introduced the latest

meta-rayband displays, he didn't do it at CES. He didn't wait for CES. He was just like, I'm going to have my own event. He did it as own event. He created his own news cycle. And it was like, you know, he had full control over that. And so, Everyone's followed Jobs Playbook, and it's been remarkably successful. I don't think it's been a miss. The older trade show format still works for lots of companies, and big tech companies do still have presences. So just today at CES or yesterday, Jensen was there,

and NVIDIA unveiled Vera Rubin, their new... Which looks incredible. Yeah, but also it's not a consumer electronics product. It's kind of an odd place to do it, but it's like a fun event. But even Nvidia has their own conferences now. So, and, but my main takeaway is like, just like, in terms of key moments in tech history, I don't expect them to happen at independent trade shows anymore. And truthfully, they haven't happened there for decades.

We looked at the VCR and the CD player in the Xbox. That's, you know, over 25 years old now at this point, although the rock alongside Bill Gates is an iconic moment. But that is of old at this point. And still, still, there's plenty to get from a show from CES. It's a fantastic place. If you're in the industry, you don't go as like a fan. of people who are Apple fans will watch an Apple keynote just to know, hey, should I buy

the new iPhone? You don't really go to CES with that same idea or that goal. You go because you're there looking for a supplier or someone to distribute. You go because you're in the industry. Your CEO has got it to get ready to drink in Vegas. Get ready to go. Seriously, seriously. Anyway, let me tell you about CrowdStrike. Your business is AI. Their business is securing it. CrowdStrike secures AI and stops breaches. And there are some fun things that did launch at CES. The first thing that I wanted to go through was the Wall Street Journal's write-up of CES coverage

is interesting because it's almost no consumer electronics. So, of course, they highlighted NVIDIA, the faster artificial intelligence chips, Vera Rubin, the CPU-GPU combination. Mercedes-Benz, NVIDIA has a partnership to make the first autonomous. car built in partnership with Mercedes-Benz set to hit U.S. roads in the first three months of this year? The tire of my Mercedes-Benz exploded autonomously this morning on the way it

work. You've been complaining about the roads in L.A. and making this point, like, you need an SUV since the beginning of the show. And what's happened? Yeah. I've got three tires blown out on L.A. roads. I do think I was complaining about, I'm not sure if it was on air or off here, but at least in the last 48 hours. I was joking about needing an SUV for the LA roads, and of course this morning, at 5.35 AM, the tire did not survive

a pothole. Anyways. Ridiculous. Going forward, AMD, the journal says AMD also unveiled its latest AI chips, known as the instinct, which will launch later this year. They're expected to be AMD's strongest competition to NVIDIA yet. Shares fell

more than 2%, however. Uber, the ride hailing company plus EVMaker, Lucid, and Nuro, have begun on-road testing for their planned robotaxi service. Uber expects to offer the service in San Francisco later this year. Stock jumped 5.5%. So CES, at least announcements, are still moving to market. There's some other cool stuff. I mean, Dell's in here.

They're reviving the XPS computer line. But they also launched a massive 52-inch monitor or something like that, a 6K monitor. I feel like that could be pretty sick if you need. If you're monitoring situations, get like six of these. Let me tell you about console. Console builds AI agents that automate 70% of IT, HR, and finance support, giving employees instant resolution for access requests and password resets. Lego launched a smart brick and I-tech Star Wars toys.

This was the launch of the year contender. It's a first week of January. Let's pull it up. Let's watch this. Let's watch it. And you'll see from the sound and the color when it detects it. But it's not just looking for the mini figure. It knows who that mini figure is.

And actually, it knows where that mini figure is. So as I move the mini figure around, you'll see different lights and colors, depending on where the mini figure is compared to the brick. What does this allow us to do? More dopamine for children. Let's go. I think this is good. I remember...

We turned every Lego brick into a mini iPad. I remember there were... We're excited to addict your children to Lego. There was some sort of Lego programmable computer, but it was much larger. It was about this big when I was a kid. And, yeah, Lego Mindstorms. Mind storms.

That was it. That was amazing. Because you could actually learn to program a little bit. And you could do little, like, self-driving cars, like line following. You could draw a line on the ground that can have a little camera that looked at the line and follow it around. And it just let you build. Ryan says the Lego turbo puffers are going to need to rebuild. Totally.

Simon, we need to make this a smart Lego puffer. Smart puffer, for sure. But, yeah, so Lego is launching the most ambitious brickets ever. made a tiny computer that fits entirely inside a classic two by four Lego brick. It will make entire Lego sets come to life with humming lightsabers, roaring engines, light up blasters, and more from the verge. Love it. Coverage.

Very cool. Boston Dynamics. Yeah. Demo champions of the world. Yeah. They got to give these robots some 11 labs voices. 11 labs build intelligent real time conversational agents. Reimagine.

human technology interaction. It actually is a real call to action. Let your robots talk. Yeah. With 11 labs. It definitely needs it as a feature. But so Boston Dynamics is starting the year strong. They seem to be upset that figure is valued at roughly one Ford motor company.

And they're not happy about it. So they're launching, they had a new video of various Boston Dynamics robots in a de facto. Hyundai. Yeah, here. They've been doing this for so long. But I don't know. It looks good.

How tall is it? 2.3 meters. Oh, that's how long it can reach. That's pretty big. I feel like a lot of the humanoid have been really, really small, just kind of like smaller. Is this not CGI?

I can't even tell at this point. This looks like... Wow. Oh, that was a cool move. The way that it can move. That was a cool move. The way that it stands up is wild, too. Yeah, yeah.

standing up, it looks like a spider, and then it was kind of... Yeah, very disconcerting, but... Four hours. That one is crazy. Oh, we saw this from one of the Chinese humanoid makers, where it swapped some battery. Maybe one of their first use cases could be gloving. Oh, yeah, that's really trendy. I've been seeing that.

Gloving. I saw some video of somebody gloving on an airplane or something. You see that one? Yeah, you saw that. Tyler, you need to start gloving. Yeah. Anytime a founder raises more than $100 million, you've got to say, can I glove for you? Can I glove for you?

What is that from like EDM culture or something? I don't know. That's very funny. It's dark. What else is in this? Yeah, the Boston Dynamics Robot has an operating temperature range of negative 4 degrees Fahrenheit, which is pretty interesting, all the way up to 104. 104. 6 feet, 2 inches tall.

104 feels like that's... Got a great build, honestly. six to 198 pounds can work in negative four. What's its midface ratio? How's its upper maxilla? It's a circle. It's a circle. Okay.

Well, perfect. That's a perfect ratio, I guess. Yeah, so apparently Hyundai is preparing to deploy tens of thousands of their robots into their manufacturing facilities. 66 pounds sustained, you know, weight capacity. Most people can lift more than that. Come on. We got to get those numbers up.

But yeah, this will be interesting. I wonder what the future of the... This company's traded hands so many times owned by Hyundai right now. They got to spin it out. They got to go public. They got to get this thing in the public markets again. They got to launch on the New York Stock Exchange. If they want to change the world, they got to raise capital at the New York Stock Exchange.

Great idea. Should we talk about Jamie Diamond? Let's do it. In the New York Times today, Jamie Diamond's 770 million haul shows how bankers are on top again. Let's give it up for the bankers. Is this gongworthy? This is gongworthy. Let's do it.

First gonger. The Trump admin is lifting regulations and deal making is heating up for jimmy diamond. Being J.P. Morgan Chase's chief executive was more lucrative in 2025 than ever. For nearly 15 years, Jamie diamond, the bank chieftain has carried around what might as well be a talisman when he sees regulators. elected officials and journalists. Wait, what's a talisman? What are you talking about? At just the right time in meetings,

he breaks out a single page printout that he calls a spaghetti chart. On it, Mr. Diamond's underlings have crammed in tiny type, a comically complicated flow chart meant to represent the various laws and regulations to which his company, J.B. Morgan Chase, is subject,

that theatrics have finally worked. The Trump admin is not just taking apart regulations, but attacking the whole regulatory agencies that date back to the 2008, 2009 financial crisis, and were meant to keep banks from giving in to their worst impulses. Regulators have also made it easier for banks to peddle in risky assets, again, like cryptocurrency and President Trump paused enforcement of foreign anti-bribery rules. Interesting.

The deregulatory bonanza alone makes it the best time in a generation to be a banker, but there's more. Falling interest rates and a permissive set of antitrust overseers are helping reverse a lull in the lucrative business of arranging M&A, as the $100 billion bidding war between Netflix and Paramount for Warner Brothers, Discovery shows. Once imperiled real estate loans look steadier, thanks to the rebound in office work. Stocks are near record levels. The bond market had its best year since 2020, and gold and silver have soared, all of which feeds the trading businesses that keep Wall Street's profit machine humming. In other words, as analysts at Keith Brewette and Woods'Reilly,

recently put it, there's something for everyone. Big bank stocks rose 29% in 2025, almost doubling the gain of the U.S. stock market overall. Smaller lenders and community banks, which tend to have a narrower focus on areas such as residential mortgages and consumer checking accounts, also gained but performed considerably less well. So again, I mean, a big part of this is banks have just been, you know, obviously lending with their hands tied behind their backs as the Pete as the private credit chat. That's true. That's actually true. So they're just sitting here.

And it's sort of the same thing with like crypto. It's like, you know, if there's going to be a, if you're going to have a competitor that's like on less, way less regulated, that is a very, that's a huge. And why would I work with J.P. Morgan Chase when I can work with World Liberty Financial, which is reinventing. Yeah. Yeah. Like the whole debanking self, or not debankinging bankless movement and stuff.

Like I don't know that it's been a huge headwind. No, I think the combination of M&A and private credit that they have just been, you know, private credit is just much more loosely regulated. Yeah, yeah. A combination of salary, bonuses, dividends, stock grants, and appreciation in his allotment of the bank shares yielded roughly $770 million for Jamie Diamond. For the chief executives of City, whose shares rose more than 65% in 2025 after the bank slash tens of value. thousands of jobs and a year's long restructuring. And Goldman Sachs shares them. Tyler,

dropping for labor displacement. Not because you're going to be, no, because they were up 60. Oh, okay. Yeah, because the way that you reacted there looked a little suspicious. No, obviously. For the labor displacement.

But this is not, this is not AI driven, of course. Yeah. So anyways, they're counting some unrealized gains here, of course. Yeah. But anyways, big, big year for Jamie Diamond. Let's see.

Do we pop over to Tuna? Yeah. Tuna says your soul. But 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, baby. That's right. Tuna says your soul is out of balance because you have fallen out of touch with your consumer demographic.

Pay more attention to your personalized ads. Let them flow through you. Yeah. Pay attention. They do really tell you something about where your energy. I've been getting, I mean, speaking of the CES consumer products, I've been getting personalized ads for the board, the smart game board. But we had the founder on the show and I bought one.

I bought one too. Give me your review. What do you think? Haven't played it yet. No. So here's a challenge. Yeah. We had less help around the house

Over the last two weeks And board is designed for, I think kids I think it's like six and up It's not like a under five game And so trying to pull that out and play When you're just going to have You know like a one or three year old Just like you know messing with it

It's pretty much impossible But I'm excited to play it hopefully this week You guys should play live during the show right here We should yeah The review from the four and a half year old was A plus. He loved it. What'd you play?

We stuck to the more simple games, I think. Also, they're still rolling out some of the games. So it ships and you get a number of pieces in bags. And some of the pieces that they shipped to you, the games haven't actually finished, they haven't finished coding them, I guess. And so they're not live. But we played this sort of like Space Invaders game

that you put this like sort of triangle block on the screen. And then when you, you're in this one zone, you're basically firing at these like asteroids that come by and you break them up and you get the score. And it was, it was interesting. It was like, it was intuitive enough that the four-year-old could pick it up and actually get some points. But there were enough layered mechanics that if you collected enough of this material, you could turn on this massive laser beam that would sort of like destroy everything. So there was like, I found myself being like, oh, I know that it's possible to get 4,000 points,

even though we're averaging like 2,500 points now. If I really max this out and we were to play this at a high level, like the skill ceiling's actually sort of high, which was fun. So I thought that the game design was pretty good in that one. I love how you don't, you don't, every game, anything like that, you're just like, I need to max it out. Oh, for sure.

I need to max it out. For sure. Even if you don't care about it, you care about maxing it at the score. Yeah. It's a good personality. At one point, I had the high. highest score in Robo recall in the world? Okay, so apparently, so bike on our team says,

my three-year-old nephew loves the weird alien dog game. So, apparently this is, apparently it is suited for three-year-olds and I need to get into it. Is the weird alien dog one where it comes in the house and you have to wash it off? That's the one, right? Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, because that one's really funny. It's more like a Tomogachi. Like you're supposed to check on it every day and it comes in from the house, it's all dirty, so you wash it off, you soap it up, scrub it, And you have all these different tools. So you have a little watering can. And you put the watering can on the screen of the board.

And when you do, it sort of showers the pet and then washes it off. And so that mechanic was really fun too. For board to sell a million units, they need like a super, super viral individual game. Yeah. I don't think it's going to, it won't be enough to have like a hand, you know, eight games that are all fun. Yeah. They need a breakout. This is a hits business, right?

So they need... Like a Caton. Yeah, like they're gonna need... People are getting together specifically to play this game together. Yeah, none of the games were at that level. All of the games felt like a couple minutes and you're done and the mechanics. You could play them again. There's some repeatability.

But none of the games were so intense that... Also, there just aren't that many pieces. Like, most of the games have like six pieces. There's 10 pieces. And so if you have resources, I guess all those resources could be sort of digitally, like, counted, which might be nice, actually, because you can play a more complex game with more resources where, you know, have you ever played one of those board games where there's like 17 different resources and you have all these different tokens and counters, and it's like, it actually gets overwhelming and annoying. I don't know. But let me tell you about vibe.com, because maybe vibe should advertise on streaming TV, because vibe.com is where D2C. You mean bored. Startups.

Oh, yeah, bored. AI companies advertise on streaming TV, pick channels, target audiences, and measure sales, just like on meta. That should be their next place to advertise. I like it. And it's a lesson to everyone to get in touch with their consumer demographic

and pay more attention to the personal ads. They need to let them flow. Did you want to talk about capital in the 22nd century? Yes. Let's read Philip Trammell's post. He says a week ago, do our cash and cash. him, Phil, posted a fun essay using Thomas Pickety's capital in the 21st century as a lens through

which to explore the possible impacts of AI on inequality, as the Financial Times kindly put it. That was all it was meant to be. The discussion has definitely become more intense than I'd expected. This is my first time on X in any serious way. Welcome to the arena, brother. Get in. Buckle up. Welcome to the dive bar. Yeah. But it's been good to see so many people engage with the essay and the topic. I can't complain about the negative responses, since I expect most of the positive responses were from people who did not read it at all,

and just like seeing another person another reason to tax the rich. That's funny. I hadn't thought about that. I think there's also people that gave it positive responses just because they liked Dorcasch, right? And they're like, oh cool, new Dorcasch thing. I'm a fan.

But there is one point some people, mainly economists have raised, that I should acknowledge briefly. Also, I mean, this was a, I don't think they wrote it, knowing that there was going to be this whole, Rokana, Peter Thiel, Teddy Schleffer, like the whole wealth tax thing that was going on in California. And they just happened to drop something that read like a critique or commentary.

It was in the zeitgeist at the same time. But I don't think that was intentional. I think they were working on this piece for like probably months. It's like a very, it's like a paper. And so it's not like they were like, oh, let's react to Rokana's viral post and let's hammer this out. I might have even dropped like the day before. But he says he's responding to the economists that put him in the truth zone or at least tried to. He says, and before I read this, let me tell you about Vanta,

automate compliance and security, the leading AI trust management platform is VANTA. So they say, the labor share could rise if human provided goods and services are gross compliments for capital-provided ones, quote, in our utility functions, what Nordhaus 2021 might call on the demand side. And even if we build machines physically capable

of producing everything people can, what Nordhaus might call on the supply side, this gross complementing. at the utility level could be maintained indefinitely. But only enough, on the long list of blog posts, I've been hoping to write for a long time. One is titled, Is Labor a Luxury, is about how this possibility is underappreciated,

but then makes a case for why I think on balance, it probably won't happen in the long run. Naturally, I'm especially prioritizing that post for now. As for now, my only substantive reply on the question is a lame, just give me a month. But whether the case is wrong or right, I promise it doesn't rely on a conceptual mistake, like assuming that galaxies made of capital will have to get a higher share than labor because they'll be large and productive at producing the incomplete set of goods they are used to produce.

Maybe that blog post should have come before this one, but I figured that in writing the current blog post, exploring the case against long-run gross complementarity, on the demand side would be a distracting rabbit hole because, one, Pickety implicitly assumes gross substitution across the board already. Two, Nord, House, and related discussion have taken the position that advanced enough machines would probably yield gross substitution across the board so that we need fast-growing all-purpose robots to drive the supply side singularity or gross substitution on the demand side so that

we were satisfied with large quantities of IT consumption goods instead of shifting our demand for non-I.T. goods for capital to accumulate rapidly, but consumption to be bottlenecked by labor, the price of consumption goods would have to rise relative to that of capital goods. This is totally fine, of course, we're imagining a very different future in all sorts of ways, and I think it is a very far future, but it is one interesting to think about. Maybe it'd be helpful to kind of summarize people haven't read it, the kind of key fact, so the thesis is basically like inequality is going to get worse because of AI. That's core thesis, and maybe you need to figure out a way to different methods of taxation to redistribute the wealth that is ultimately created

if people cannot effectively increase their own capital via their labor. So key factors, they talk about privatization of returns. So very, very hard to get exposure to X-A-I right now if you're just a normal person. Two, most people have their wealth in their home, right? And the issue is like home equity is not a good way to benefit from increasing returns to capital that come from automation, right? So if you have a home, I think they said if you have a home in Ohio and you have like $300,000 locked up in that, you're not going to get, like, you're not going to get some massive incremental return from that. maybe maybe somebody that is pursuing AI automation or building factories or something

they could like buy your home at a premium but they could also just buy acres and acres and acres of just like land somewhere else in the US at far far less they talk about the end of international sort of catch up which is basically that poor countries historically had a lot of cheap labor they'd bring in capital they would turn that

and they would create, yeah, they'd create value and retain some of that value, even though a lot of the investment was foreign. And then the sort of, they talk about like wealth transfer as a lot of more developed economies are sort of like aging, aging out effectively. So we'll see, we'll see, but certainly sparked debate. I thought this post from,

Tomas Barger Tour was interesting. This was sort of reaction to the post. Tomas says both to our cash and his critics. Imagine an absurd world. Think of the future they argue about political economy doesn't change rapidly, even as the speed of history increases in a literal sense that the speed of thought of the actors who produce history will be the thousands of times

faster, not to mention way smarter. These are agents to whom we've seen, who we seem like toddlers walking in slow, motion. It is complete insanity to expect your opening eye stock certificates to be worth anything in this world, even if it is compatible with human survival. So many can't contend with the scope of what they project. They can't hold in their mind that things are allowed to be different. So we get bizarre arguments about nonsense. Own a galaxy? Question mark. What does this mean for a human to own a galaxy in an economy operated by minds running thousands to millions of times faster than ours? Children,

what sort of children? Copies of your brain state? Are you even allowed? yourself to think about the level of bizarreness required because these are table stakes and even they will be economically obsolete curiosities by the time they're created. Things will be much weirder than we can possibly comprehend. How often have property rights been reset throughout history? How quickly will history move in the transition period? Why shouldn't it trample on your stock certificates if not the air you breathe? But institutions are surprisingly robust.

Maybe they are. How long have they existed in their current? current form. How fast will history be moving exactly? Suppose Open AI aligns AI, whatever that means. Will it serve the interests of the U.S. government, the CCP? Will they align it to a humanity weighted by wealth to Open AI stockholders, to SAMA, to the codery of engineers who may as well be AIs who actually know WTF is going on, to the coding agent who implements it, tax policy, question mark? Truly the important question. What does it mean to be a human principle in this world? How robust are these institutions. How secure is the human mind? Extremely insecure, given how easy humans are to

scam. There's going to be a lot of incentive to break your mind if you own check notes, a whole galaxy. Oh, you will have a little AI nanny to defend you now. Wow, isn't that nice? Please return to the beginning of the paragraph. A human owning galaxies, that's bad space opera. Treat the future with the respect it deserves. This scenario is not even close to science fiction. enough to happen. So anyways, I guess pushback here generally like hey, even in the scenario that you lay out things could get so crazy that we won't have any the institutions just break the way that the world currently works breaks. The thing with the thing with I was thinking about with if you own a bunch of open AI shares in in this sort of fast-takes. takeoff scenario, is this, you know, to, maybe there's a world where you could pay for things with Open AI shares, right? But is a super intelligence going to say, oh, oh, yes, I would like to buy some Open AI shares, right? Or where they just, corners the market.

Bys them all or just rebuilt, you know, effectively just rebate, you know, so, so this, I think it's, in any type of these, in any type of like fast takeoff scenario, how do you actually, it's hard to have, I think the, I, I, I love, you know, reading, I love reading this essay. I'd like to see more of them, but it's so difficult to any scenario you can imagine. There are 50, there's an infinite number of parallel realities where none of the same ground rules apply. Yeah, yeah. I wonder the, the 22nd century thing is, is, it does, I mean, you keep, you keep coming back to like this idea a fast takeoff. And it feels like even in some sort of like slow progress, like if you just extrapolate like the default trend lines and nothing really changes, like you still see a lot of

these effects happen with tech companies becoming more powerful and the owners of capital becoming more powerful. Ben Thompson had an interesting and interesting interpretation of this saying that he said, this gets at what I found the most frustrating, what was most frustrating about Patel and Trammell's point of view. The core assumption undergirding their argument was also about the human condition. It just happened to be negative. And he basically said that, like, you have to imagine a world where humans remain the same and that they are still, like, bothered by wealth inequality. Because in this scenario, there's abundance and there's enough, like, robots can just create everything so you have, like, unlimited, you know, everything you could possibly want for. from a consumption perspective, but you're still bothered by the fact that like, that guy owns 10,000 galaxies and I only own 1,000 galaxies. Yeah, it's not right.

And that, yeah, yeah, it doesn't feel balanced. And that's, and it's odd because you have to think about this world where, okay, you own galaxies that are hundreds of thousands of years apart, and so it takes you a million years to get there. And it's like, and maybe you're still bothered by that. Like, it would be funny if we discovered aliens that were just extremely rich, like, would that

that make us all worse off? Like, would Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos go to bed sadder if they found aliens like a, you know, a million light years away? Like your size is not size. Yeah, we're just like, yeah, we actually, we're actually sitting on an entire planet of diamond. And we're worth quadrillions of dollars. Everyone here is worth quadrillions of dollars. You guys are nowhere near us in terms of wealth. Would that actually bother you? Or would you just be like, ah, it's okay, there's those aliens that are over there. I can't even get to them. It doesn't affect me. Like how much is it how much is wealth inequality a direct focus on like the keeping up with the Joneses like the neighbor effect the direct memetics of like the person that you see as your is your equal? But I don't know, but he, Ben Thompson kind of returns to this idea that you have to assume that that that something about the human condition holds where humans are upset by wealth inequality.

but they don't value other humans or the work of other humans or the creativity of other humans. And they don't see any value in that. And so because he's making the point that he quotes Louis C.K. in an October 2008 appearance of late night with Conan. And he says, everything is amazing right now and nobody's happy. He says, you've almost certainly seen this clip, but if not it's worth watching. Louis C.K. focuses on three incredible technological... Yeah, let me send it to the team and see if we can drop this.

So he says, Louis C.K. focuses on three incredible technological innovations and how quickly we took them for granted. Smartphones, internet access on planes, and the act of flying itself. It's certainly a sentiment I can relate to in just the last 72 hours. I have chafed at slow airplane Wi-Fi, complained about jet lag from how. having literally traversed the globe, he went to Taiwan and back, and gotten frustrated at an iPhone bug that is sapping my battery. It is all so terrible. Until I remember, I have access to everything, anything everywhere, can be anywhere, any time. And oh yeah, I can achieve both simultaneously. If anything, you can make the case that technological innovations by virtue of conferring their

benefits on everybody has actually had the perverse effect of making everyone feel worse off. That's a very, very weird concept, but I feel it as well. Let's watch this Louis CK clip. We may be going back to that, by the way. But in a way, good, because when I read things like the foundations of capitalism are shattering, I'm like, maybe we need that. Maybe we need some time where we're walking around with a donkey with pots clanging on the side. You think that would just bring us back to reality? Yeah, because everything is amazing right now and nobody's happy.

Like, in my lifetime, the changes in the world have been incredible. When I was a kid, we had a rotary phone. We had a phone that you had to stand next to, and you have to dial it. Yes. You don't realize how primitive, you're making sparks in a phone, and you actually would hate people with zeros in their numbers, because it was more, like, oh, this guy's got two zeros. Screw that guy.

Why do I want to... And then if they called and you weren't home, the phone would just ring lonely by itself. itself. And then if you wanted money, you had to go in the bank for when it was open for like three hours. It was stand in line, write yourself a check like an idiot. And then when you ran out of money, you'd just go, well, I can't do any more things now. I can't do any more things. That's it, yeah. That was it. And even if you had a credit card, they, the guy would go, ugh, and he'd bring out this whole shunk, shunk, and he'd write all credit. He'd have to call the president

to see if you have any money. It's all true, kids. You had to call the president, yeah. It was ridiculous. Yes. Do you feel that we now, in the 21st century, we take technology for granted? Well, yeah, because now we live in an amazing, amazing world, and it's wasted on the crappiest generation of just spoiled idiots that don't care,

because this is what people are like now. They got their phone, they're like, ugh, it won't. Give it a second. It's going to space. Can you give it a second to get back from space? Is the speed of like too slow? Yeah.

Yeah. I was on an airplane and there was internet, high-speed internet on the airplane. That's the newest thing that I know exists. And I'm sitting on the plane and they go open up your laptop. You can go on the internet. And it's fast and I'm watching YouTube clips. I'm in an airplane. And then it breaks down.

And then it breaks down. And they apologize. The internet's not working. The guy next to me goes, pf, this is bull-s-h-ha-ha. Like how quickly the world owes him something. Yes. He knew existed only 10-7. seconds ago.

Right. Right. And on planes, flying is the worst one because people come back from flights and they tell you their story. And it's like a horror story. It's they act like their flight was like a cattle car in the 40s in Germany. That's how bad they make it sound. Right.

They're like, it was the worst day of my life. First of all, we didn't board for 20 minutes. And then we get on the plane and they made us sit there on the runway for 40 minutes we had to sit there. had to sit there. Oh, really, what happened next? Did you fly through the air incredibly? Like a bird? Did you partake in the miracle of human flight, you non-contributing zero? That you got to fly! You're flying! It's amazing.

Everybody on every plane should just constantly be going, Oh, my God! Wow! Yes! Your flight! He wants to bring back clapping, clapping on after the plane line. All right, pause it. Pause it. This reminded me a couple days ago.

Before you tell us this, let me tell you about Plaid. Plaid powers the apps you use to spend, save, borrow, and invest, securely connecting bank accounts to move money, fight fraud, and improve lending now with AI. Great stuff, John. A couple days ago, my one-and-a-half-year-old has not been sleeping super well. you know, toddlers, they go through periods where they sleep well, and then they stop sleeping well. And with my three-year-old, we hired a, when he was going through a similar phase, we hired a sleep consultant. These are people that just help your baby. It's like a sleep coach for your baby

and the parents or whatever. And with my three-year-old, we hired somebody and they effectively, you know, the effective rate is like hundreds of dollars an hour, right? Because there's some retainer and blah, blah, blah. And it works really well. Like, it's a lifesaver. But with one and a half year old, a few days ago, my wife just goes to an LLM and just like breaks down exactly like what's happening. Gets the answer. And it is effectively running calculations based on the child's age and their sleep patterns now and how to get them back on a better sleep pattern. And within 24 hours, like the problem was totally solved. Like back to sleeping on the right schedule, napping on the right schedule, like basically one shot at it.

Then I was just thinking how, you know, opening eye has gotten so much, specifically Sam has gotten so much pushback because he'll go out and say, like, we're going to solve this. You're going to have, you're going to have like a personal tutor in your pocket and all the stuff. And then people like, you know, hammer him because it's like, well, then we're doing SORA and we're doing, you know, adult entertainment and things like that. But it's actually, like, AI is actually already delivering on this sort of. Do you remember the Fallon clip that went viral? where Fallon asks him, like, do you use Chad GPT to parent your kid? And he was like, honestly, like, it feels weird to say it, but yes. And it's like, that's exactly your experience.

It is helpful. And, yeah, it is, it is a weird thing. But it's this, it's this when technology goes broad, it becomes available to everyone. I was reflecting on airplane travel over the break. You know those pictures of like, back in 1965, planes used to be so nice. and now you were stuffed in the back like cattle. You know these photos? We got to return to 1965 planes.

I ran the numbers, and it turns out that the total amount of flights, the total amount of passenger flights, like individual person gets on a plane, goes somewhere in the United States. In 1965, in total across everything, is the same number, almost exactly the same number, as total first-class flights in 2025.

And so basically, anyone who could fly, in 1965 is now flying first class. And then you added, there's 10 times as many non-first-class flights that are happening as well. And so it's like you basically actually kept that level of service. It just became known as first class. Different product. But in 1965, even just getting on a plane

was first class because it was really expensive. It got cheaper, but all the rich people stayed in first class. And then you gave the ability to fly at all to 10 times as many people. And that just continues. But it's this weird thing because that doesn't feel satisfying. Because you see the people up in front of class, and you're like, I want to be up there. Let me go back to Ben Thompson and close this out.

But first, let me tell you about Figma. Figma make isn't your average VIDE coding tool. It lives in Figma. So outputs look good, feel real, and stay connected to how teams build those back prototypes. John, you always have this critique of the coding models, and you're like, oh, they're not being used by everyone because the United app is so bad.

Yes, yes, yes. You always have this thing. Yes, yes, yes. And then, so there's this post, it's in the timeline. Okay. It's someone there's say, one of the things I love about United is how good their iOS app is. Oh, no way. Yeah, because it works well and they're just like glazing it.

Yeah, I talked to Roon about this as well because I brought that up when I was talking to him, and he was like, and then I talked to him again, and he was like, actually, I think it's better than you think it is. I think it's actually pretty good. And so, so I think that you're right, and it's a good. point that like the software, the quality of the software is increasing. And I think I've probably been unduly mean to the United App. It's probably, it's probably better than I'm giving it credit for. I'm probably just remembering bugs from years ago and I just have a bad taste in my mouth.

But there, there's, there is something that AI is not at least solving immediately, which is just the business realities of where businesses have walled gardens or adversarial business incentives. So I'll give you an example. Apple TV. It's a great product. I love the Apple TV, plug it into your TV. Works really well. Are you talking about the Apple TV? The physical device. On the Apple TV physical device, yes, we're going here, is an app called Apple TV. And they have set this to be the default. I didn't know this, but you can actually change the button, the home button on the Apple TV, the Apple TV remote, to go to the home screen, which has all the icons. So if you watch Netflix or HBO, you can go there. But by default, it now ships with the home button

goes to the TV app, which is a unifying layer over all of the content. And so if you want to find sports or you want to find the latest Apple TV show, or you want to find something that's on Peacock or Paramount Plus, that will be integrated in there. And it's a great universal interface. At least it should be a universal interface, except Netflix said we're not participating. We want to be in our own app. So you cannot find a Netflix show. in the TV app on the Apple TV box. And that is something that like no amount of vibe coding, it's not a coding issue.

It's a business model issue. It's because Apple and Netflix are in competition. And so they have decided not to do a deal. And that results in a worse user experience, but are like profits for both companies and it's a rational thing for them to do. And there's no amount of like Claude Code that can solve for that.

So my take now has evolved to be that... Why don't you move the goalpost? I will move the goalpost. Move the goalpost. I got to move the goalposts. Because the AI coding models until they can solve fundamental

business competition issues with a single prompt, it will not satisfy my AGI. I need Netflix in my Apple TV app and then it will be AGI. Then it will be AGI.

Because it's not a coding problem. It's a business model problem. I'm sure. I'm sure we'll have an opportunity to move the goalpost back, back where they started the show. And business model problems are enduring. And Ben Thompson makes the case that there are human conditions, there are human elements that will be enduring, even in a post software-only singularity. I had some, there was a post I put in from Samuel Hammond over at FAA. He said, I was just asked about my current views on AI takeoff speeds, both in the sense of GDP economic effects.

and the time gap between AGI and ASI, given, I believe, we'll get fully automated AI R&D by 2029. He said, here's my response via quick email reply. Re-GDP, I think we'll get a higher trend TFP level growth rate as past general purpose technologies. This will be a new higher growth regime, 5 to 10%, but not hyperbolic exponential growth. So not with the Elon triple digit.

Yep. So bear. Real output will still be bottlenecked by infrastructure, legal, and regulatory regimes. supply chains, human in the loop, we will still see a digi fume software singularity, but this will feel more disinflationary than anything, i.e. mostly captured in consumer surplus. A lot of knowledge work will be outright automated, but a lot will still remain given human rents, social relationships, celebrity status, and demand side factors, people liking other people,

science. Yeah, the big question for me this year, you know, Anthropic is, you know, they have created the drop-in software engineer, right, with Claude that it's clearly working. But, and it's changing that industry. Today, you know, their goal for 2026 is clearly like the drop-in replacement, like what is the cloud code for every other industry. And it'll be very interesting to see if we see a, if we see progress in AISDRs, because that historically has been steak dinners, wine, relationships, like getting

to know people. And it's been a much more human role that hasn't. been verifiable and some, you know, oh, you know, you checked in this code. It worked so you're, so you get paid. Yeah, it's not, it's not just hitting the right key strokes in the right order. Yeah, any good SDR will tell you, like, it's not actually about the emails that you send. That's just one piece of the, yeah. Anyway, so he says science and R&D will speed up dramatically, but these also will have delayed GDP effects, given production cycles and the fact that a lot of fast-fusing beneficial science greatly improves quality of life, i.e. GLP ones, without necessarily,

necessarily boosting GDP. I think this interim TFP growth regime will last until the mid-late 2030s before entering another even higher growth regime greater than 10% as robotics matures and reaches scale production volumes, fully automated factories and robots that can themselves build the factories that build other robots will have much more tangible effects on economic output. This is also when you start to see the Bommel effects start forcing adoption in areas that may otherwise be resistant. EG. we get robo-com. cop and robo nurses because the human cops and nurses become prohibitively expensive in comparison. And he goes on to some other stuff.

But thought that was just kind of relevant from a timeline standpoint when you're trying to understand capital in the 22nd century. Let me tell you about Gemini 3 Pro, Google's most intelligent model yet, state-of-the-art reasoning, next level vibe coding, and deep multimodal understanding. to close out what Ben Thompson is talking about here. He says when he was a child growing up in a small town in Wisconsin, he said, I had some sort of vague sense that there were rich people in the world, but from my perspective, taking my first airplane flight around the age of 10 was a source of great wonder.

And it even provided a sense of status. After all, many of my friends had never flown at all. That was the comparison that mattered to me. Social media or more accurately, user-generated content feeds, which increasingly not social at all, has completely changed this dynamic. All I or anyone needs to do is open Instagram to see beautiful people on private jets or on beaches or at fancy restaurants living a life that seems dramatically better than one's dull experience in the suburbs or a cramped apartment. Never mind that the means of achieving that insight is a level of technological wealth

that would have been incomprehensible to the richest person in the world 50 years ago. To put it another way, what Luis C.K. identified in this clip was, the extent to which human happiness is a relative versus an absolute phenomenon. What we care about is how much we have, is not how much we have, but how we compare. That, by extension, is what drives the technological paradox I noted above. More capabilities, more broadly distributed, has tremendously enriched the world on an absolute basis. But the end result, however, has been the dramatic expansion of our comparison set, making us feel

more emiserated than ever. If we discover the trillionaire, quadrillionaire aliens, we're all done for it. It's going to be brutal. It's just like, oh, there's an alien out there with a two-mile-long yacht and a plane that holds 700 people. Their yacht is actually an asteroid. Yeah. He has so much chrome hearts. Yeah, and he has piles of chrome hearts everywhere.

He'd be truly, truly only. He never wears the same pair of chrome jeans twice. No, never, never. one more post from Boaz Barak he's over at probably mispronouncing his name he's over at OpenAI

he wrote a post on Less Wrong on New Year's Eve he said What's that? I mean a White Pell title certainly Yeah the title of the essays You Will Be Okay He said seeing this post

Which is another post On Less Wrong And its comments Made me a bit concerned For young people Around this community I thought I would try to write why I believe most folks who read and write here and are generally smart, caring, and knowledgeable

will be okay. I agree that our society often is underprepared for tail risk. As a general planner, you should be worrying about potential catastrophes, even if their probability is small. However, as an individual, if there is a certain probability X of doom that is beyond your control, it is best to focus on the one-x fraction of the probability space that you control rather than constantly worrying about it. A generation of Americans and Russians grew up under a non-trivial probability of total nuclear war and they still went about their lives even when we do have some control over possibility of very bad outcomes. It's it is best to follow some common sense best practices, but then put that out of your mind. I do not want to engage here in the usual debate of

P. Doom, but just as it makes absolute sense for companies and societies to worry about it as long as this probability is bounded away from zero, so it makes sense for individuals to spend most of their time not worrying about it as long as it is bounded away from one. Even if it is your job to push this probability down, it is best not to spend all of your time worrying about it, both for your mental health and for doing it well. I want to recognize that doom or not, AI will bring a lot of change very fast. It is quite possible that by some metrics, we will see centuries of progress compressed into decades. My own expectation is that, as we have seen so far, progress will be both continuous and jagged. Both AI capabilities and its diffusion will continue to grow, but at different rates and different domains.

I believe that because of this continuous progress, neither AGI nor ASI will be discrete points in time. Rather, just like we call recessions after we are already in them, we will probably decide on the AGI moment retrospectively six months or a year after it had already happened. I also believe that because of this jaggedness, humans and especially smart and caring ones, would be needed for at least several decades, if not more.

Let's go. It is a marathon, not a sprint. Again, you have two months to experience. escape the permanent two years. It's really, you know, even if you believe that, try not to operate on that. Like trying to become rich in two months is going to make you do things that are not super productive, not super enduring. And I think that young people just need to get that concept out of their head.

And still, you don't need to be thinking on, don't try to think on a 10, 20, 30-year time horizon, maybe like a legacy career, right? Which is like, I'm going to be a lawyer and I'm going to get a 5% raise every year until I retire. But think on three, five-year time horizons and don't have this stupid sense of urgency and this sort of insane scarcity mindset. I just don't think you're going to do very good work. He continues, people have many justifiable fears about AI beyond literal doom. I cannot fully imagine the way AI will change the world, economically, socially, politically, and physically. However, I expect that, like the Industrial Revolution, even after this change, there will be no consensus if it was good or bad. This is, I was thinking here, people have

been kind of asking like, hey, why are we trying to automate everyone's jobs? You know, people are like, I actually like, I know I was complaining about my email job, but I like that I go and I write some emails, I get paid, I go home. Do we really need to automate this? Continuing, us human beings have an impressive dynamic range. We can live in the worst conditions and complain about the best conditions. It is possible we will cure diseases and poverty and yet people will still long for the good old days of the 2020s where young people had the thrill of fending for themselves before guaranteed income and housing ruined it. Nothing like the thrill. You've had that thrill in the tenderloin back in the day on a on a on a YC budget I'm just thinking if they if they really do

cure cancer with all this AI it's just it's so over for the grave diggers yep for the morticians the coroners anyone in the death economy is just going to be displaced immediately cooked they're out of a job they'll have to find something new to do but I I'm I'm optimistic that they will find a new new new job anyway let me tell you about Apple oven profitable advertising made easy with axon dot AI get access to over one billion daily active users and grow your business today. Speaking of DAUs, do you think OpenAI is going to buy Pinterest? Where is this coming from? It came from the information.

They made a list of predictions. We went through a number of predictions yesterday on the show. This was just one of them. But it seemed like it hit a nerve because people did sort of report on it like it was a rumor or like it was some leaked document. It was just a prediction. But do you think that that would make sense? this idea that, you know, SORA was sort of, you know, supposed to be a social network. It's still in the charts.

It's just, it hasn't seen, like, massive adoption. Maybe you go and you, and you buy a social platform. I thought it was incredibly unlikely, just because I can't, I personally am trying to find the logic of why this is a strategic asset to them. I mean, X-AI has X and Twitter. and... Wildly different. I mean, I would have to understand what percentage of content

that is uploaded to Pinterest today is AI generated. It's a lot of it. I would expect that a lot of Pinterest content is just... It used to be so good, too. I remember when we were doing the initial brand exploration

for TPPN and Technology Brothers, I'd go on Pinterest and find interesting images, and it was a lot of still frames from movies and stuff, and you would see a little bit of AI, and now it's just so much AI. And so they did around four billion.

of revenue in 2025. Okay. So I just, I just don't know, I just don't know what they're really, I just don't know what they're really buying here. But the CEO's name is Bill Ready. So the nominative determinism would be that he's ready to do a deal. Ready, ready to do a deal. So that kind of takes me from, you know, one to two percent.

And the founder, Ben Silberman is, and Silver has been mooning, and they have similar, similar name, so maybe Pinterest will moon. This is the level of an awesome. You can only get here, folks. Let's go through this written house research post about Open AI's business. But first, let me tell about graphite. Code review for the age of AI. Graphite helps teams on GitHub ship higher quality software faster. So Alex Cantorwitz sat down with Sam Altman December 18th, right before the break. He says he had a long substantive conversation with Sam Altman about OpenAI strategic position. It's planned to build memory into chatypte, which is already ongoing. It's enterprise play, compute AI devices, and whether AGI is still a useful term.

Rittenhouse's research breaks it down and says, the biggest takeaway from this very good interview was Altman's outline for how OpenAI's financial model could eventually work. Open AI enterprise is growing faster than consumer. companies do not want Open AI to train on their prompts. Apparently, right when we said you will be okay, the stream went down. No way. Okay. Technology is like, no, actually, you're not.

You're cugs. Open AI enterprise growth is constrained by lack of compute capacity. Enterprise is coming to OpenAI asking for custom APIs and ability to process trillions of tokens, which OpenAI can't provide yet. Rapid growth in inference revenues from these enterprises. at a stable to improving gross margin percent will eventually drive inference gross profit dollars large enough to fund OpenAI's training investments.

Open AI could curb training investments today and reduce cash burn, but training investments should translate to more inference revenue down the line. If OpenAI is not seeing overwhelming inference demand, there is flexibility in their $1.4 trillion dollars of commitments. Have to think a good portion of these are earmarked for training runs. 1.4 trillion of commitments takes place over a number of years.

We kind of knew this, but it feels like Sam's maybe just signaling to the market that there is more flexibility in the spending commitments than maybe people initially thought. And that was sort of always penciled in because there was a gradient from like, this is a press release, this is a handshake deal, this is still being papered, this is contingent on milestones

or there's some flexibility here. But it kind of got all lumped together. And mentally, people were just putting it on opening eyes, balance sheet as liability when, in fact, there was some flexibility there all along. While the $1.4 trillion of spending commitments is, of course, absurd and almost surely was intended to position Open AI as too big to fail, I feel like there's much more logic to their capital planning process

than I previously thought after watching this interview. That's great. What a comeback. I mean, people were really flustered by Sam's appearance on BG2. It feels like his appearance on the big technology podcast is sort of a return-to-form, resetting of the narrative. and he clearly thought about how to peel back the onion of the $1.4 trillion commitment. So Riddenhouse closes by saying, if you assume they raise $75 billion in one last private round,

25% haircut to the rumored $100 billion, and another $75 billion in an IPO, there's so much money, the model probably pencils out where they have enough capital to bridge until they reach cash flow positive. So they can do it. They can get out and there is enough. So, I don't know, Nathan, wasn't a huge fan. He said he found the pod a little too spoon-fed and not very info-dense. Interesting.

I don't know. I'll have to give it a listen. But I will have to tell you about linear. Linear is the system for modern software development. Linear's a purpose-built tool for planning and building products. The product planning tool behind OpenAI. Oh, yeah. Should we take it over to Jocko?

Yeah. Jocko Willing. I'm the greatest. Jocko. One of the greatest podcast capitalists, maybe, right? Apparently, I didn't even know he had this brand origin, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. You have so many products. Made gear.

Apparently somebody in the government is a jaco supporter because they threw Maduro in some origin, got them out of the Nike tech. It's called Origin Built by Freedom hoodie on Maduro. We got to get Maduro on some. MTVPN merch. I think we absolutely do not have to do that. That's ridiculous. But yeah,

silence, in turn. Into these photos. There's a whole bunch of I guess he was transferred and he made the cover of the Wall Street Journal again. It was interesting. He says he's innocent. So, you know,

innocent until proving guilty. I think Marker Rubio was talking about how they don't have to pay out the reward now because they just got them themselves. We, of course. I feel like we deserve a small slice for promoting the. We did do a promoted post for the capture Maduro back in Q1 of last year.

But yeah, I ultimately think the Delta gets all the credit, maybe the DEA. They do. Osted Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro pleaded not guilty to drug trafficking charges during his arraignment in U.S. federal court in New York City on Monday, defiantly telling a judge that he was still the head of. of his nation despite being whisked away by U.S. forces over the weekend. I am innocent, he said. I am not guilty. I am a decent man. I am still the president of my country, he said through a Spanish interpreter, adding that he was a prisoner of war and had

been captured from his home in Caracas. Maduro's top lieutenant Delci Rodriguez was sworn in as Venezuela's acting president Monday, and Delci Rodriguez is picked by Maduro, so should be a Maduro ally. But there's been back and forth on how much she'll be cooperating with the United States. Security officers were out in force in Krakis running checkpoints and patrolling neighborhoods to prevent protests. In Manhattan, Monday's hearing kicked off a nearly unprecedented legal battle over a foreign leader in a U.S. court. The arrest of a head of state presents challenges for both prosecutors and the defense. The two sides could spend years sparring over the legality of Maduro's arrest and charges before he goes to trial.

So. Chat says, Maduro uses perplexity because of Ronaldo. Not because of, somebody's got to ask you. Yeah, maybe the Lewis Hamilton's

The Lewis Hamilton helmet sponsorship, honestly massive props to perplexity. That is a remarkable one. Because apparently the drivers can sell the stickers on their helmet themselves or something like that. And so when you watch Lewis Hamilton's

helmet cam, he has a perplexity logo right on his helmet that I guess he was able to sell directly. And it didn't go through the team or something so he gets to keep all of that money or something. That's a crazy. It seemed like an interesting, interesting. He had some leverage there. I wonder the chat is

going off saying good, you know, the Jocko line. Do you think Maduro is looking in the mirror from the clink? Got captured by US Delta Force? Good. Good. wearing his origin. Arrested, arrested on drug trafficking charges. Good. Good. More inspiration to grind harder. Time to lock in. More, more, more, it's an opportunity to learn about the U.S. legal system. You're going to learn a lot. Anyway, fin.a.I. The number one AI agent for customer service. If you want AI to handle customer support, go to fin.com.

We have a surprise guest joining us. Casey Newton from Platformer, dug into the whistleblower, the Reddit, the AI food delivery story. We're having him join the show. We're very excited to be joined by Casey. How are you doing, Casey? Welcome.

Welcome to the show. Hey, guys. All right time, first time. Nice to see you. Thanks so much for hopping on on short notice. What a moment. So great to have you. Absolute scoop of the century.

Incredible story. I was riveted reading it. Thank you so much for the hard work. Potentially go to the Scoop Hall of Fame. Scoop Hall of Fame, I think. I don't even know if this is a scoop. This is more investigative journalism. This is capital J.

I don't know. It was great. But how did you see this go out on social media? Were you on Reddit? Like, how did you encounter this story first? That's exactly right. Believe it or not, I first saw the screenshot on threads with somebody saying, like, look how evil the food delivery companies are. And, you know, I was like a few days from having to come back and write a column again.

And I thought, hey, maybe this turns into a scoop for me. So I was super bummed when the whole thing fell apart. But then it was actually my boyfriend who said people might actually be more interested to know about how the whole thing fell apart. So I think he was right about that. So what was the process like to actually dig into it? What was your interpretation? Because we read the Reddit post. I saw the screenshot now.

It was kind of like, and people were going back and forth, is it AI generated, blah, blah, blah. It didn't feel AI generated to me, but there were some red flags in there, like being drunk at a library seemed weird. And he said something, there was some other element in there that was like very, very odd to me. I forget exactly what he said, but. Some people are like pointing out the m-dashes that were in there. And, you know, this is one of those where like the moment that that everyone knows it's a hoax, everybody knew it was a hoax from the first work. You know what I mean? Like, everybody figured it out before I did.

But that's fine. The truth is, I didn't figure it out right away. I did think it seemed plausible. Like, we both know that Uber and DoorDash had been caught doing some pretty shady things over the year. So I thought it was at worst. It was at least worth messaging the guy and see what he could tell me about it. Yeah, yeah. Great, so did you message him on Reddit?

I did. And I sort of assumed that, you know, by that point, the post had like, I don't know, 80,000 upboats. I thought there's no way I'm ever going to hear back from this guy. But instead, he messages me. me back within nine minutes, which again, in retrospect, was probably a tell that maybe there was something fishing going on here. But yeah, he was happy to get on signal. He did sort of strangely only give one or two word answers. Like, I was expecting him to, you know, be a little bit more

verbose based on the post. Again, another red flag in retrospect. But, you know, I've talked to a lot of sources like this over the years. And initially, a lot of them are pretty skittish. They don't know you. They don't have any reason to trust to you. You're going to have to build up that trust over time. But, you know, this thing sort of went away. We had that with, uh, was with Soham Parique. came on and he was just like, yeah, I worked for five companies at once. It wasn't skittish at all. He was immediately admitted to doing something really bad. It was a very odd moment.

Yeah, the thing that stuck out to me in here was he claims that the speed up fee, what is it, is psychological value add? But then, so he says it does nothing to speed you up. But then in the next paragraph, he says that, that in fact, they're slowing down all the other orders, which again, so you are getting a speed up. So it's not logic. It wasn't logically consistent to me, which was a little odd. That was more of a red flag than any of like that it's an AI generated text. And I want your reaction to this because if you were a whistleblower and you're writing something and you're worried that your boss is going to be able to clock your writing style, it doesn't seem crazy to me to pass your testimony through.

chat GPT and just say, hey, rewrite this like it's, you know, GPT5. Because then, yes, it will have MDashers. Yes, it will have telltale AI generated things. But the points will stand, the facts will stand, and then you'll be more anonymized. So do you think there's anything to that? Sure. I mean, this is a lot of what the job is now of being a reporter, particularly in tech, where we're working with really savvy companies.

You know, like I've reported a lot about meta. They have former CIA agents over there who are doing, you know, investigation. of leaks like this. So we have to spend a lot of our time trying to do Opsack with our sources. So yeah, the source that, hey, I might run this through an LLM to sort of take the stink of me off it. I would say, go for it. Yeah, yeah, yeah, that makes sense. So then what, okay, so you message this guy, he responds, he starts sending you proof. What kind of proof is he sharing? How did you process that? Yeah. So the first thing that, you know, I'm obviously want to know his name. He's not comfortable sharing that at first. He says, I could send you an employee

badge with my face and name blurred out. And, you know, in this line of work, it's, you kind of just want to keep them talking, right? Like, see what they'll share. It'll all sort of add up to something over time. So I said, sure, let's see it. He sends over a badge. I don't know if you're able to sort of show it on the screen. I have a new funny story about it. But basically it says that, you know, it's an Uber Eats badge. I learned today from a reporter at NBC News that she had sent him her employee badge. And he appears to have used that as the basis for this. And, you know, It said, transform this image into an Uber Eats batch. I've now seen her original image,

and he literally just must have put it in nanobanana and said, turn this into Uber Eats. Yeah, that's super interesting because I was looking at the actual image being like, are there any telltale signs? I'm, like, pretty good at clocking little things, but nanomana really is good at, like, leaving enough of the original image that you don't get any of those weird artists.

I feel like you can prompt things to make it look like an iPhone photo anyways. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Totally. the tell by the way i've heard from some uh former uber folks today and the tell that they wanted me to know is that there are not actually uber eats that's what that's the other thing i was going to say it's it's it's not a separate company that's funny why would it why would you have a separate badge and then you got and then there was some internal document that you got as well what was up yeah so this honestly wound up to being the most interesting thing to me was that i had said look is there anything you could do to corroborate your story and he was like well i'm sort of of uncomfortable with that, but let me see what I can do. He disappears for a full day and then comes back the following mornings. This is Sunday morning and says, does this work?

And it's an 18-page document that presents itself as a sort of highly technical overview of how they built the system that sort of takes advantage of driver's desperation. Okay, so what's your theory on who this person is? What's the point? Because in some ways, in some ways, like, I feel like DoorDash was the last. loser here. Because I feel like DoorDash has a reputation for just like being incredible, ruthless operators. And so people are just like, oh, this is DoorDash for sure. And then, and then they had to come out and defend themselves and say, we don't even use this language.

There's probably like some fourth tier, like the fourth player in the ecosystem that we don't even know is languishing at like $400 million market cap. And they're like, we're trying to be as ruthless as that, man. Like, trust us. Like our profits. to be great next quarter. And we're like, no one thinks it's you. No one thinks it's. Yeah, I just, I just don't understand the point. Is this, is this, is this a driver? Could be a short seller, could be. Could be disgruntled driver. Did you get any, any, any interest or any ideas of what this could be? Like, why are people doing this? Again, like, this guy, like, his, his answers are so short that I never really got any sense of motivation. I, you know, I do think, like, this was over the

holiday break. I do think that there's a chance that this is like a bored teenager, you know, in the basement type of thing. But, you know, one thing I haven't done, and I, you know, you know, would encourage people to do is like, were there any polymarket or Kalshi trades around the type of this post dropping? Like, because it would be crazy to me if somebody was trying to like tank the Uber or Dordash market cap and, you know, make a few bucks. Okay. Yeah. Well, I mean, they could do that in the public markets or I guess some prediction markets or maybe because sometimes there's like a dedicated prediction market for this specific thing. Like is it real or not? And then they can be trading that. Yeah, yeah. Because they know it's fake or something. What do you think the,

the actual platform should have done? I mean, DoorDash. was very, they did the founder led comms, they did the corporate comms, they did a number of things. Do you think they handled it well? Is there something that they should be doing with journalists when something like this happens to like not put their finger on the scale too much, but be open with you? Like how should they respond? I think they did the right thing. They both came forward and they just said like, this is categorically false. You know, the Uber comm said like this is a fake document. You know, they really just sort of like went all in. They put their credibility on the line. And, you know, often corporate comms are a lot more measured. But

With this one, they were just very confident in knowing that this did not come from them. And so there was no reason not to just leave with that. Yeah. Yeah. Where else are you seeing interesting, like, AI, fake news stories pop up? I've been, there's this interesting irony that, I mean, I don't know where you stand on, like, the water issue, but it feels like the electricity issue is something that people should be talking about, and the water issue is maybe way less important.

And yet, like, AI has created this, like, somewhat fake narrative about itself that it's, like, a victim of its, but it's not fully AI generated, but there's just a weird, like, paradox there where people seem to be distracted. I mean, to me, the thread that ties all those together is that AI is a superpower for motivated reasoning. Like, if there is something you want to believe, like, AI can immediately generate the materials

that will help you sell that case to other people. And, you know, we're all just going to kind of have to, like, upgrade our cognitive hygiene and say, we now know that there are tools that can get me to sort of believe my own eyes, when I shouldn't be doing that. And, you know, it's screwing with my mind. That's why I wrote this piece. Like, this whole thing is screwing with my mind.

And I want all of us to be having a conversation about it. Yeah. There was a very interesting thread just like two weeks earlier maybe about someone claimed to have delivered a DoorDash delivery, but they just generated an image of the person's front door or something, which I guess they got that image from Street View or something. And that feels like a fraud that would make you like $10 and then you'd get deplatform. But it is weird that, like, I mean, Rune was posting that hopefully DoorDash will be the first major company incentivized to build a reliable deep fake detector, very doable, though it will become a red queen race and hopefully license out technology. I never would have picked DoorDash as the company to do.

I would have thought YouTube or Instagram, but I don't know. I don't know if you've seen anything else going on in this. how do you uh so so do you think that uh this post even though it was fake ends up creating any type of change in terms of how these platforms are operating because it seems like right now that you have kind of like from my view is like actually like as these platforms have saturated and everybody uses them whether they're you know using them to earn a living or or supplement their income or they're using them as a consumer. Everybody seems to be, like, frustrated with the platforms. Is that just the enduring state of delivery products where people, and maybe it's solved

through robotics, where eventually these platforms say, like, we heard that you hate working on our, on our platform. And the good news is that you don't have to anymore because we have drones and, you know, little, little toy cars driving around. But how do you think the, the, if anything in the industry changes over the next kind of year? It's a good question. It's a big question. I think that anytime you feel dependent on a platform, you come to resent it. And people do feel dependent on Uber Eids and Dordash to bring them their dinner, particularly, you know, if you're living in Silicon Valley and ordering from them like three or four times a week. You know, I think one reason why the fake resonated was that it was so easy to believe a delivery platform

would want to figure out how to pay their drivers less. We've seen them do it in other real ways. in the past. And so my hope is that if there's any change here, it is that these companies now realize, look, if you truly build an exploitative system for your drivers, there will be a backlash and people will turn against you. So that would be my hope coming out of it. Yeah, yeah, yeah, odd vibes for sure. Um, yeah. What I'm interested to know about your process using AI tools as a journalist. I feel like the hallucination, uh, incidents has definitely gone down. Like, just in terms of like if you just need a fact or you just need to know what's the biggest company in the world. Like these are good knowledge retrieval tools, but obviously you have a very high bar for what is factually accurate and what you're printing.

What is your process for when you need to maybe not hunt down a specific fact in a story, but you need to corroborate it with, you know, you're just looking up a whole bunch of extra context around how Dower Dash operates, is Uber Eats a wholly owned subsidiary, all of these different things? Like, would there be a badge? Like, how are you using AI tools in your day-to-day? Absolutely. So I think that I probably use AI tools maybe more than the average reporter. Like, I feel like I understand the ways in which that I can trust them. I'm happy to turn to them to say, hey, give me an overview about this industry that I haven't

written about very much. The reason that I'm comfortable is that I'm using bots that cite their sources. And, you know, as a long-time journalist, I know which sources I can trust. So I'm happy to do that. The other thing that I do is I'll sort of go out and, you know, get my own facts for the columns that I'm writing, but then I'll feed them into chat GPT. I find it's really good at this and just say, hey, fact check this for me. It does a really great job of catching my mistakes all the time. That was not true a year ago, by the way. So that's one of the places where I felt the most

AI progress is in using these things as fact checkers. Don't let them write the column, but absolutely let them try to catch your mistakes because in my experience, they will. Yeah, do you agree with this idea that for what you do, the writing, the instantiation is not the hard part. Well, how do you mean that? Because there's a lot of days where I'm on deadline where the writing absolutely is. Oh, really? Okay.

Because so what I've heard is that it's the, you know, it's the ideas inside. It's the facts. It's the scoop. It's the information that you spend, you know, seven hours. And then when it's time to go type it up and file. Yeah, you kind of know the phrasing. You know how to write. And sure, you might dictate a little bit.

But like, you're not just going to chat, you be D and say write a call. No, I'm not. And honestly, like, even if I wanted to do that, I still think that they're not great at it. Although, I will say, the most recent version of Claude when I gave it this test was, like, good at mimicking my individual style in a way that sort of freaked me out a bit. But I just think that, like, at least my readers, like, they want to know what I'm thinking. And if I delegate that job to a chat pod, they're probably just not going to want to pay me. Yeah, I also think people are, uh, surprise, readers are surprisingly open to like the rough edges. Like they actually don't necessarily need everything to be in the super consistent style guide that you would get from enforcing an LLM on top of everything you published.

Uh, and if you use parentheses one time and then quotes another time or brackets and other, like it just doesn't really matter. It actually gives more flavor and texture to the writing. And so people are open to that. I don't know. Yeah. I think like readers tend to be. forgiving when you tell them what you're doing and like if they hate something listen to them like there was a time when I was illustrating my columns with AI generated images because I thought it was like

cold out the superpower to do that yeah so many readers were like please stop doing this we hate this slop and I was like all right like we're in this together I'm going to stop doing this yeah yeah that's funny uh yeah there's been there's been all sorts of like yeah it really depends on like the community that you're building how how uh respected uh that's do you think you'll ever come back to X. Guys, it's now just like a C-SAM generator and nudification app. Like, what are we doing? If you remember how that people got at Cambridge Analytica?

Oh, yeah. Like, literally, what are we doing here? Mute, mute all that. And then hang out for the André Carpathie posts. You know, there's some good stuff. You know, there's some diamonds in the rough. The Tarpathy posts are great. Yeah, you got to really honed in on the AI researchers who are still hanging out there.

We, yeah, you have to accept. You have to accept that you're getting engagement farmed. I think Nikita shared earlier that like all the highest engagement days of an ex-history history have all been in the last week. Part of that is like the Maduro story. But yeah, yeah, still. Anyway, thank you so much for hop-in-off. Yeah, great to finally have you on.

And anytime anytime you have a story, give us a show. Where can people find you? Give us the landscape of the Casey Newton Empire. Sure. It's very simple. You can just go to platformer. News. You can find this story, and I also co-host the Hard Fork podcast. And why don't you head over to YouTube backcom slash Hard Fork, check that out too.

There we go. Thank you so much for coming on this show. Have a great thing. Cheers. We'll talk to you soon. Goodbye. Let me tell you about Turbo Puffer, serverless vector and full-text search, built from first principles on object storage, fast, 10x cheaper and extremely scalable. That's right.

Our next guest is Alex Etzine. He's live here in person in the TBPN Ultrodome. Alex, welcome. There he is. You brought us books. Thank you. Yeah, just in case. Great to see you.

Welcome to the show. You don't have to have these happy dads. That's for later. We have a happy dad investor coming on the show. Nice. But for those who don't know you, please introduce yourself. How are you describing yourself these days? Obviously, you're an author.

The book is Fossil Future. You can get it wherever books are sold, I'm sure. Yeah, traditionally I do energy expert and philosopher, because I actually think philosophy is the reason people disagree about energy. Okay. And then these days, it's really independent policy advisor, since most of the stuff I do is behind the scenes with government trying to get them to adopt energy freedom policies. Interesting. Do you feel like the book touches on the philosophical debate around energy? It touches would be a, would be an understatement. Yeah, I mean,

I think of my life really, or the last 19 years in energy have been basically two things. One is trying, and the one the book addresses is trying to shift the conversation from an anti-human conversation to a pro-human conversation about energy. And actually, I think, did we meet at Hereticon? Is that word? I think so. We might have met a Hereticon or one of Peter's other things, but I gave an example in my talk there that I think is the easiest way to see that we have an anti-human way of thinking about energy, which is I'll ask people, hey, which of the following words would you use to describe our current relationship to climate? So are we on a climate crisis? do we have a climate problem?

Do we have a climate non-problem? Or do you have a climate renaissance? And, you know, that audience is going to be more, it might even consider renaissance, but most people won't, right? Most people will say crisis or problem. And then the extreme is non-problem. But then I share the data,

which you can actually look at the rate of deaths from climate disasters, such as storms and floods, extreme temperatures, etc. And it's very clear cut. And we have this just incredibly dramatic 98% decline in those deaths. Which would imply Renaissance? Which would imply Renaissance. And that's over like 100 years?

That's over the last 100 years. Yeah. And if you go back further, it's even more. And then if you look at the data in terms of damages. Even with the California wildfires a year ago, I think there was something like 30 deaths, which was the most deaths in a fire in recorded history in California. from what I remember. Yeah, and wildfires actually,

I was going to mention the economic piece of it. Like, even economically, if you adjust for GDP growth, the damages are flat. So you would say it has to be a renaissance, right? I mean, we're much less threatened from climate than ever. And if you think about that in fossil fuels, then you think for a minute or two, you think, well, that actually might have to do positively

with fossil fuels, because fossil fuels power to the irrigation systems that alleviate drought. Drought is actually the number one climate killer historically. They obviously give us heating and air conditioning to deal with extreme temperatures with and even abnormal temperatures and cold is by far the bigger killer than heat and we have all kinds of sturdy infrastructure and storm warning systems. So it's this really interesting phenomenon where what actually happened is as I put it, fossil fuels didn't take a safe climate

and make it dangerous. They took a dangerous climate and made it safe. But the interesting question in terms of philosophically is why is it that so many people say we're in a climate crisis, even though from a climate livability perspective or a pro-human perspective, we're in a climate renaissance. And I'm telegraphing it a bit, which is that they're not looking at it from a pro-human moral perspective. They're looking at it from an anti-human moral perspective. But specifically the perspective that our goal should be to reduce or eliminate our impact,

which is the idea of being green. Yeah, is there a factor here of just media awareness, like the fact that, you know, in times of old, you wouldn't, if there was a fire, like the Palisades fire, you wouldn't see that everywhere for weeks on end, but now there's much more visibility. So I hear about an earthquake over there or a storm over there. And so it feels like there's more happening. Well, that's a mechanism that people can use, but of course they could use the opposite mechanism. I mean, they could say, and this would happen all the time, look at this, look at this minor climate problem

that 100 years ago would have been a total disaster like compare this to the Galveston storm 100 years ago. My conclusion is the people leading the charge who think it's a climate crisis, like there are a lot of people who are just ignorant of these facts, but the people who know these facts who know that we're in a renaissance from a climate livability perspective,

they're evaluating the state of the climate not by how good it is for humans, but by how little impact we've had. Sure, sure. So their goal is an earth with minimal human impact. And by that standard, we are in a climate crisis because we have had some impact. Of course. And so my view is if our overall impact is positive for humans, that's a good thing.

Their view is if there's more impact, that's a bad thing. And this illustrates that this is overwhelmingly a philosophical disagreement. So whether you view today, once you know the facts about climate livability, whether you view it as a climate renaissance or climate crisis, that's not based on science. Nobody has disputed these facts. I mean, New York Times tried. Everyone tried. Nobody has successfully. Vivek really popularized this when he ran for president because he learned this in fossil future.

And everyone tried to refute him and nobody could do it. So it's only that you have a different, what I call in philosophy, what we call in philosophy, standard of evaluation. You're looking at the same facts, but you have a different measuring stick. And my basic contention is if you look at fossil fuels in a balanced way from what I call a human flourishing perspective, the benefits are obviously far, far greater than the negative. including climate-wise. But that's why, like, I have the moral case for fossil fuels and fossil future,

which is about why global human flourishing requires more fossil fuels. But it's the number one thing I'm doing is I'm just changing the yardstick by which we're measuring it, and I'm using that very consistently. Do you think AI is taking the wind out of the climate crisis sails in the sense that the climate crisis was a powerful story for the media industrial complex? because let's say, you know, I have a slow news day or week. The TV can just show a big chart on the screen of a bunch of counties, and they're all red, and it looks really bad,

just because the way the graphic design is done. Yeah. And now we have this, like, worldwide sort of systemic fear of this impending. I feel like that. Oh, so you mean you just, there's two sides. People are talking about AI doom, not climate doom anymore. We're just using way more energy. were using gas turbines.

But then there's also the media story of just giving this sort of like media, the media industrial complex loves a sense of impending doom. Like, I think Eleazar Utakowski is more popular than like Al Gore as of yesterday or as of last year. Yeah, that content is getting much more.

AI doom is just a bigger, media story. I think right now it's much more of the energy side. Yeah, it's coming back. It's coming back. Yeah. But the doom side really concerns me and AI is actually the only issue I'm considering getting into

in terms of mastering it and mastering how to communicate it, just because I feel like nobody has really mastered it from the pro-human pro-technology side. And it's hard to do. No, no, I said this yesterday. I mean, the tech industry right now suffers because nobody can speak into, let's say, like the Super Bowl demographic.

If the tech founder went and talked at the Super Bowl during the halftime show, and they were like, we're going to automate all the jobs. everyone would be like, boo, boo, I'll hit the boo button. But like, boo, like, this guy sucks. Get him out of here.

And so it's been very difficult. And people talk about UBI and this sort of post-scarcity element if you can just bring a bunch of robots online. But nobody, especially at the labs, I feel like has, I don't even think this idea of, like, personal tutor or personal expert in your pocket

is really, I don't think people appreciate it that much. even though the labs talk about it. So finding the pro-human narrative, I think, is super important. It's something that's, like, critical to the industry because I think we're in the second, the beginnings of, like, the second real tech lash. You had the sort of like social media tech lash era. Now we're in the AI tech lash era. And it's only going to get worse if we just keep promising the world,

hey, we're going to automate your job away. You're motivating me to, this is the tension in my life right now because, you know, I've been working energy for a long time. we've gotten to this point where the opportunity, like a lot of the debate has shifted, and I've had some role in that, but also the politics have shifted where I and others have never had more opportunity to actually change the policy for the better. But then AI... You're kind of getting shiny object. Well, I'm not deterred yet, but it's... But also, I need to innovate an AI actually for what I'm trying

to do in energy. And there's... Anyway, so it's tempting, but I would just say if anyone here is watching who thinks that you might be able to be this, I would much prefer to help you and teach you what I've learned in energy and apply to AI than do it myself. It would be more of a matter of, like, I got plenty to do an energy, but there needs to be somebody doing this. So Alex at Alex Epstein.com just send me an email. Can you set the table for me on like the state of American, the American energy industry, because I grew up at a time when the big oil companies were the biggest companies in the world, Exxon Mobil, was the, the largest company in the world. And then now we live in the era of big tech. And I'm wondering if

the big oil companies are still well run. Like they don't feel founder led. They don't feel like they're in founder mode. I don't know the names of people who are running large energy companies. I can't name Elon Musk of Energy where I can name kids at elite universities are not like, clamoring to go there. Yeah. I'm working oil. Yeah. I'm older than you guys. And I remember because I was at one of the top math science high schools in the country, and then I was at Duke, and I just remember thinking later, because I myself had no interest in fossil fuels at the time and a little bit of an aversion, I'm like, looking back, none of those brilliant people wanted to do this. Like, it wasn't aspirational. So interestingly...

But is it an industry where the product has such insane product market fit that you don't need the most elite executives and operators? You get some, but so here's the thing is, I don't think oil and gas has attracted overall the best of the best. There are definitely some brilliant people. The bad news is that electricity is much, much worse. Okay, explain that. So, well, so the thing about oil and gas is, and a lot of this, the two variables are going to be, what's the degree of freedom in the culture, or in the political system, for achievement? Because that's going to determine largely the economic upside. And then there's the issue of the culture. So with the culture, obviously, there's been huge hostility toward oil and gas, and, of course, coal as well.

And that deters a lot of people early from even wanting to go in. The positive of oil and gas is that it's within the energy industry, it's by far freer than many, many other parts of the energy industry. If you look at, say, particularly in Texas, you look at where the Permian Basin dominates. You can get a permit to drill in the Permian in a few days. Now, if it's the Texas Permian, if it's in New Mexico Permian on federal lands, much different story.

You know, that stack of papers probably 10 times higher. But there's a lot of oil and gas. doesn't involve federal permitting, which I hope we talk about trying to fix that at the moment. So that means that you can act a lot more quickly on good ideas, which attracts good people. Now, if we shift to the electricity sector. I had, real quick, I had a last year I was at a kind of a VC founder dinner, and one of the founders there had some company, I think, in advertising, but he had a piece of land in California that he had been drilling for oil. He just had like a small, like, kind of lifestyle business.

That's crazy. But he ultimately, there was some new regulation that was getting passed, and I think that basically put him out of business. Yeah, I mean, I admire all these people in California to some extent Colorado, and it's hard. I actually refuse to invest in energy just because I advise politicians, and it creates conflicts of interest. But I just say as a hypothetical investor.

Are we not in a post-conflict era? No, I mean, I'm very extreme about conflict avoidance. I appreciate that. But it's, yeah, California is really hard. I mean, you can, you can, of course, imagine high risk, high reward things, but it's just you look at the governor on down. You would think we import so much oil, wouldn't we want to produce some? Yes, and there's just, I mean, there's a bit of a shift there, just as there is in New York

and Massachusetts, they're a little bit more open. But it's bad. But if we take the power sector, I mean, first of all, we're talking about something that is institutionalized as a monopoly in the first place. And then not to go into too much detail about the power sector. but there's, we started quote unquote deregulation, which is just a new and in many ways worse form of regulation. We start that a couple decades ago.

And broadly speaking, there are two really big types of electricity systems. One is a traditional utility model where the utility does everything. So they have the generation, what's called the transmissions, so the longer distance travel, and then the distribution, which is the more local stuff. So in that, you can imagine that doesn't tend to attract the best people because like a lot of monopoly type things, like a lot of the minimums, military stuff, it's a cost plus model. And you get paid for spending more money. You get paid

for incurring more cost. But then as bad as that is, the market model is a mess, in part because they allowed once intermittent solar and wind came on, they allowed that to be treated as a reliable power source when it's not, in fact, a reliable power source. Now, it has utility, but it's primarily a fuel-saving device. So people think, like, oh, you hate solar, you hate, It's not about that. It's just what does it functionally do? What it functionally does in the vast majority of cases is it saves you fuel on a reliable power source. Because most of what we need in electricity is we need on-demand electricity.

And with the solar panel or wind turbine, you can't get on-demand electricity. It's both the existence and the amount is weather dependent. So if there are situations, such as, say, China with coal, where they have, you know, a lot of coal power and they need enough coal power, they need that much capacity to meet their peak demand. But if you have a bunch of solar, and particularly if they overbuilt a bunch of solar that they were trying to sell the rest of the world and it didn't work as well as they thought,

you can have basically coaler, right? Coal plus solar where every time the sun shines, yeah, to what extent the sun shines, you're saving fuel. And depending on your fuel cost, that can be efficient. Yeah, that makes sense. Now it tends to be efficient at lower levels versus higher levels.

But so the electricity markets got screwed up for many reasons. but that was the biggest one, where if you allow solar and wind to compete as reliable sources, it screws up everything, and in particular, it screws up the economics of the reliable sources. Because if it's a monopoly and one person owns everything, you can decide, hey, I'm going to pay this much for solar for fuel savings, and you can make it work when it works. But if you have a quote market where all the generators are competing independently, and you allow solar to be its own independent generator whenever it's available,

that natural gas plant doesn't benefit from the fuel savings. it loses operating revenue. So this is what we did to all the reliable power plants on the grid is we subsidized the hell out of solar and wind, spammed the grid with this fuel-saving infrastructure, but on the power markets, it doesn't benefit them. So it's screwed up. So this gets technical,

but you can imagine that a lot of the people who've succeeded in this field are, there can be a scam element. You have some smart traders, but their efforts are not going to a productive thing. So it's both talent-level issues with the utilities, but then you even have some smart people, people on the markets, but their intelligence isn't being well directed.

Sure. Because it actually can screw up the grid. And then the culture has pushed so many people into the green space where the relative opportunity was much less than in fossil fuels in a nuclear if you had a proper market. So that's, it's really bad situation. You mentioned nuclear. Get us up to speed on how you're thinking about nuclear these days. It feels like there's incredible energy, both the government just announced a $2.7 billion

dollar grant yesterday. Right. And it feels like there's nuclear startups for the first time in my lifetime getting funded. I learned yesterday that we get enriched uranium from Russia. Or we did. Hopefully not. Used to.

Yeah, there are other people who can do it too. It's rare. So I know, you wrote that really interesting essay yesterday on energy production. And I think in your space, there's many forms of energy production, but the main thing is going to be electricity production. Yeah. And specifically, it's what's called dispatchable or reliable electricity. production. So on demand. We can talk about how AI fits into that, but in general, I think there are

four things that have screwed that up. And one is the near criminalization of nuclear power. The issue with that is that's a hard one to unwind quickly. So if you look at, there's this attempted a nuclear renaissance, and I'm working as hard as anyone to try to make that happen. But we don't yet, we're not yet having any kind of rapid build of new nuclear infrastructure. you know, since the establishment of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 1975, we only started building any reactors from, we only started conceiving and completing reactors in 2023, which are the Vogel plants in South, right, in South Carolina.

And when did they actually, you're saying they didn't? There was nothing that went from conception to completion from 1975. So they got completed in 2020. 2020, but with, you know, 10x cost overruns. So we have now, there was already some progress before this administration. We had what's called the Advance Act, which was a significant improvement, tried to redirect the NRC. They're definitely much better people at the NRC now. So they're headed in a much, much better direction.

Congress, both Republicans and Democrats are aligned. But we're just talking about something that we've lost arguably 50 years of potential progress. Because we had something in the late 60s where nuclear was, by many estimates, the cheapest form of electricity and the safest in terms of reliable electricity. It was already true with that technology. Cheapest, safest, cleanest. Yeah, obviously. So, yeah, I mean, the talking point that I hear about the NRC is that we haven't approved any new nuclear reactor designs, but we also haven't just been copy-pasting the ones that work. Right.

So it's like two-fold problems. And this, the nuclear industry is fascinating in terms of communication, because their usual thing is just, we have to change everyone's opinion about perception about nuclear and then we can do stuff. Yeah. Which I think that the public is more pro-nuclear than they think, even historically. Right now it is. I think what we have to do what you're looking at, which is say, wait a second, we could already produce these large nuclear plants and get this incredible result. Why don't we fix that problem first?

Because we actually know how to do these things. They're all these exciting companies doing new things. But part of the reason is these communications people have an aversion toward traditional nuclear because it has these negative associations. But you have to kill those associations. You have to kill the idea that this was uniquely dangerous. No, it was uniquely safe. Like Chernobyl has nothing to do with what we would ever do in the United States.

That was like a half weapon, half reactor. And even that damage doesn't compare to the damage done by a lot of other things in the Soviet Union. As one economist put it, Soviet toasters probably did more damage than Chernobyl. I don't know that's a step, but that's... No, no, no. So nuclear, it's like what we need to do is we need to fix the political stuff as quickly as possible. And we're getting some funding there, but we have to recognize that it's... The overall problem is just a political.

restriction problem. So that is a very exciting thing to do, but it is the least near term of the four things. So the other things are I mentioned, the electricity markets are screwed up. That's part of a broader set of preferences for solar and wind, for intermittent energy, let's just say. And the other piece of that, which I was involved in and has largely been fixed, but not totally, is the subsidization of intermittent energy. So that was in the big, beautiful bill.

That was a lot of what I spent 2025 on is killing as many of trying to help people who wanted to kill those, kill as many as possible. So we've got the nuclear criminalization. We've got the preferences for intermittent energy. The biggest thing by far is we have the prohibitions on reliable solar, a reliable fossil fuel energy. And that's, you'll hear about things like the endangerment finding. There was the Biden Clean Power Plan 2.0 that basically made it illegal for existing coal plants to function, for any new natural gas plants to be built past a certain date. So, and then we have the general permitting problem, which is anti-development permitting. So you just imagine we had all of these factors restricting the supply of electricity, and then we had the

previous administration and others artificially increasing demand through electrification, right, forced electrification, so trying to shut off natural gas and homes, trying to force us to use EVs, which I'm totally in favor of people using freely, but we pay over $50,000 per EV. Like taxpayers pay over $7,500. No, no, no, no, no. That's just one small part of it. We could go into all the different subsidies because there's a lot of, fuel economy trading where you basically get, well, it's wild, too, because you get the subsidy and then the consumer buys a vehicle for $60,000, and it's worth half that in like 12 months. Yeah, but it's also the way the fuel economy things work at the federal level and the California

level. A lot of what they do is they set the fuel economy standards impossibly high for regular vehicles, and then they give EVs this ridiculously low, high fuel economy score. And so everyone, Tesla on down, just trade, makes huge amounts of money, trading their emissions credits. Oh, got it. And that's where, per vehicle. Yeah. And by the way, this is something that current administration has been doing a good job in terms of the administration, executive actions try and undo a lot of these things.

But you want as many undone congressionally. So again, we have these factors of artificially restricting supply, artificially increasing demand. And then, of course, the one you guys are focused on is the organic increase in demand via AI. So what I'm trying to fix is just stop restricting supply. How do you how do you predict that this feels like rising energy costs have always been a political issue. They're going to be like at the forefront I think of a lot of debates going forward. Politicians I imagine are going to try to score points by you know beating back data center development just because they know their constituents are going to cheer it on. How are you advising all these

different players at the center of these debates on on how to how to how knowing that energy usage is going to go up dramatically with with data centers one way or another what is your how do how do we kind of thread the needle so there's there's what to advocate policy wise and what to advocate messaging wise so let's start with messaging wise so one thing is to pin the recent and and baked in rises on the proper culprits So there's an attempt to pin it on reducing subsidies. I try not to be political about this, but there's this idea of Republicans reduce subsidies. Therefore, that's why your electricity bills go up.

The timing doesn't even work on these things. The logic is actually the opposite. The subsidies, by depriving, one of the things they've done is they've deprived the reliable power plants of capital. They've had less reliable power. And so what happens is you have shortfalls in supply relative demand, and that puts the market prices up. In particular, what's called capacity markets, which you see, particularly in regions like PJM, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, that whole region, like those prices go up.

So there's just this, all this false narrative. So what people need to recognize is the reason prices are going up is because of prohibitions on reliable power and preferences for unreliable power and then artificial forced electrification. Like they need to understand that. The data centers, one thing people need to understand is new demand does not inherently increase. electricity prices. In fact, usually what it does is it decreases electricity prices because you have the same amount, you have relatively the same amount of capital spending spread out over more different entities. You'll have different, you know, Bergam Interior Secretary, former governor, like he and Chris Wright, Secretary of Energy,

have been pointing out, hey, North Dakota is looking really good price-wise and they've had massive increases in data centers. Because they've been investing more in energy? Well, no, no, no, because the data centers, there's on any grid, you have the peak usage, and then you have the regular usage, and you very rarely hit peak. So when you have more demand, you're actually spreading out the costs among more.

One of the questions with AI that's interesting is, what's the flexibility of the demand profile going to be? Because the more flexible it is, the less you need to increase the peak, which is good to increase the peak, but that's the most expensive thing to do. The more you can use off-peak, the more you're actually lowering prices.

And this is already happening a little bit where sometimes if you prompt an image generator, it will, in the middle of the day, it'll go across the world and it'll use it where it's dark there in the middle of the night because there's maybe more energy or something away from peak load. What do you think about my question of energy production, growth in America, 2026, are we going to see a break in the curve?

Are we already seeing a break in the curve? Is this even the right question to be asking about just energy progress in America over the next few years? I mean, it's a good measure of progress, particularly industrial progress, to look at energy production in general in a country and the fact that we've had flat electricity usage. If you look at ours versus China,

I think we're at about one-fifth, they're industrial electricity usage. So those are really bad signs. So it's a sign that you're being less productive than you can, and often that you're offshoring things because you have such a restrictive anti-development environment. With the electricity thing, it's one of these things where I'm trying to create the future,

so I try not, like I'm trying to make the future happen. But you're rooting for 5% growth this year. Well, yeah, I'm rooting for the enablement of the capacity. And the nice thing is you have a lot of smart people in the administration who are really interested in this problem. So that's a good thing at the margins, because then you can make things happen more quickly. You have private industry is very focused on this because of AI,

whereas they haven't been before. So you're getting a lot of ingenuity. And it's going to be really interesting to see, there's going to be a lot of things at the margins and we'll see how they add up. I mean, one thing is we're using very small oil plants, natural gas plants. They're talking about using the backup generators

in Walmart on the grid. There's going to be these interesting questions. And we have a new class of smart people who are now being added, who's now focus is on generating more dispatchable power. There's lots of things you can do. I mean, there's interesting things you can do with batteries. Like you can, this I'm in agreement on Elon with, like, you can build batteries and

you can charge them off peak. People think you need solar and wind to go with batteries, but actually the easiest way to deal with batteries, and the way most batteries get charged today is you have a reliable source of energy and you charge it off peak. You can run your nuclear power plant at night and charge batteries, and then for a few hours you'll have those batteries to meet peak demand. You can also, what's called, uprate natural gas plant. So a lot of the natural gas plants in the country were built a generation or two ago,

and they might get 30% less capacity than a new natural gas plant. But you can, without dealing with the fundamental supply chain issues in many cases, you can actually add capacity to hundreds and hundreds of existing gas plants. So we've got, there's a lot of industrial potential. There's a friendly administration. What we have fundamentally, though, is ultimately the administration doesn't properly make any law. It enforces the law. It administers the law.

is what we need as much as possible is to do things congressionally. So subsidies were one piece of it. The thing right now that I'm very focused on is permitting reform, and that is because it's impossible to get permits for things. So it's so difficult, and I don't know how much time we have, but there's a lot that needs to be fixed, and it's actually hanging by a thread right now. We have to.

We have a lot of time because you're our new energy corps. Yes, yes. We can't let you leave without talking about the actions in Venezuela, how that's impacting kind of global energy, markets, you know, everybody on X has their own theory of why we did it and all that stuff. But let's talk about realities of like how this can impact just different geopolitical dynamics. All right. Let me just say one thing to the audience, because one reason I was excited about coming here is

you've got a group of people that's very engaged and I think interest in these issues, but that I don't always get to speak to. And I just posted this on X, but I want people know, like, if you find this exciting, we're hiring And I just put out, you know, for one of my group's Energy Freedom Fund, which is the only principled pro-freedom lobbying group in the world, basically. We are, yeah, $50,000 referral bonus if you can find anybody. So, yeah, yeah, and we have an assessment. There's an assessment that will tell us whether you can do it or not. So it's two hours.

So if people are up for it, it's worth doing. If you do a decent job at all, we'll at least give you good feedback. But, yeah, that's my limiter right now in fixing these problems is we have enough. money, fortunately, but we have a talent deficit. So this is one reason I wanted to come on today. So let's talk about Venezuela. I mean, Venezuela, I try to be a master of energy and not pretend to be a master of other things. So obviously, many aspects of the Venezuela situation are beyond energy. I think there's two really interesting things about this that are important. So one is that this is not making a difference, a big difference to global oil markets in the near, near

future. So we're talking about something where Venezuela is kind of like, Venezuela and oil in some ways is like nuclear power, whereas it used to be good and it should have gotten better. But you know, you're talking about going from... It's all potential. Yeah, well, it's, you know, it was once, I think its peak was three and a half million barrels a day. So right now we're about 102 million barrels a day. And by the barrel is, barrel is 42 gallons. It's about, you know, 500 million gallons or so of oil, you know, produced a day. And one percent of that right now, a little less than one percent is coming from Venezuela. And both because of how dilapidated so much of the industry is,

how much incompetence there is, and also because physically the crude they use in terms of heavy crude is more difficult to process than other things. It's not like this is just you're going to go from one to three anytime. So there's a lot of investment, you know, this is not any kind of slam dunk. By the way, Canada has in some ways better oil. It's a lot for your country. I think we're totally underutilizing Canada as a trading partner.

So it's an interesting, I think economically in your term, it's not super interesting. It's not as exciting as people think. It's probably most exciting for oil field services. If you invest a bunch of money and send a bunch of people down there, yeah, that benefits Halliburton and Schlomburgé and that kind of thing. Also benefits potentially Gulf Coast refineries who are very good at this kind of crude. Then they don't need to get it from Canada, so then it comparatively hurts Canadian people. So there's that whole thing.

The thing I find most interesting, though, is that for the first time that I can ever remember, a pet issue of mine is now in the public, or this pet issue is in the public, which is that all of these oil countries stole our oil. Like this is, I'm really, I don't always agree with exactly how the administration is saying it, but it's very important. And read the, the book, the prize is really good in this regard by Daniel Yurgan. Yeah, yeah. He's, he's not as judgmental as I am about this. He probably doesn't have as negative a judgment, but you just look in country after country, what happened was they had some, you know, random, mild dictator type person or king or, you know, wasn't the most evil person in the world.

But they made a very clear deal with the West. So you take Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia couldn't even find water before we came there, you know, before the West and particularly the U.S. came there and standard oil, right? And they couldn't find water. That was their big problem at the time. And then we, of course, make it possible. We get what's called these concessions.

we're getting a kind of right. And what happens is just they keep pulling back on these things. And because of cultural and political forces at the time, nobody stands up to them. So they keep stealing more and more. And then they just totally nationalize it. They declare it their national heritage. They've totally broken the agreement. And then they use this to fund some of the worst dictatorial behavior in the world.

So I think it's very, very important that people are now saying explicitly, hey, we had rights to that oil. And it's been stolen. And there's some sort of reparations. meme to no end over the last few days, which is, you know, when people see Trump say, that's our oil or something to that effect, people normally dunk on it because they're like, well, how could that possibly be the case? It's we don't own, this is not the 51st state.

It's not our land. But you're pushing back and saying, no, we actually did originally have. Yeah, I mean, it's not we. It's specific companies, right? So we need to be clear on it's not necessarily, it's not the government's thing. But it is an interesting, it's a real case of reparations because the seizures happened not too long ago. You're talking about a lot of them culminated in the 70s and then happened. You're talking about the 40s, maybe through the 70s and 80s.

And then even once they nationalize it, they screw over companies in different kinds of ways. So I think this is a really good thing, but it needs to be talked about in a very precise way. One thing that Trump will do that I think is wrong is like he'll have sort of a feeling of like, I want all these other countries resources. So like I'm so excited about Greenland and even making Canada the 51st state and then talking about Ukraine in certain ways. And I think there's, you're on really firm ground when somebody actually broke contracts with your companies.

There's a difference between like, oh, I'm really excited. Like having the mentality that others have. It would be nice to have access to that versus there was a time when there was a contract in place. And access, we can access them. in a very real way by trading with them. So with Canada, we have enormous opportunity that I think we're squandering right now. I think we should be,

there's a lot, when Ukraine is a whole other issue, but I think we should be supporting Ukraine a lot more. So, yeah, but it is a really interesting narrative shift that is a good thing. Well, thank you for getting us up to speed. We have to jump to our next guest. Come back on again.

But we'd love to have you back on the show. This was fantastic. Thank you so much. The book is Fossil Future. The author is Alex Epstein. Go, go get that job for the assessment. for stopping by. Before we bring in our next guest,

let me tell you about public.com. Investing for those who take it seriously. They got stocks, options, bonds, crypto, securities, and more, all with great customer service. Our next guest is the founder of Ring at Amazon. Jamie Siminoff is at CES.

We're going to have him break down how CES is going. Jamie, sorry for keeping you waiting. Thanks so much for taking the time to jump on the show. It's great to meet you. How are you doing? It's doing great.

I would love to do. here. How is CES? I imagine you've been going a long time. I've actually never been. It feels like a playground for me. I'd love to go sometime. But how is it this year? How does it compare to other years? What are you introducing there? It's it's pretty fine. Overall CES is pretty fun. I think this is like my 15th or 17th year or something like that. So it's been a long time. Yeah. I started I started you know building the booth myself and driving and here and in a U-Haul truck. And, you know, I've graduated now to a booth that, you know,

built by professional. Wait, what, how do you build the first booth? Is this, like, plywood? Or are you with scraps in a cave? I actually took, I actually took the shark tank set. You know, I was on shark tank. Yeah. And I took the shark tank set and we, like, put it in a U-Haul truck,

brought it to CES. It turns out that you can't use power tools as a non-union person at CES. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And so, like, we were, like, violently, like, threatened. I couldn't afford union labor. So I'm like, guys, you're going to have to, like, pull me out of here in handcuffs. Like, I have to get this booth done.

That's crazy. That's wild. We would literally build the booth, and it got bigger and bigger. And now we've, you know, we've graduated. Okay, tell me the story of Shark Tank. And I want to know if you could play it back with everything you know now, do you think you could have convinced the sharks to invest? I mean, everything I know now, sure,

I would tell them I'm going to build the world's largest home. security company and sell it for a billion dollars, you want to invest? But you could have told them that? You think they would have gone for that? I should have just told them. I'll, you know, don't worry. I'll let you invest in a seven million valuation. It's going to sell for a billion. You're fine. Yeah, one of the greatest misses. But it is like to be fair to them at the time. Like I didn't know what it was going to do. You know, it was, we were door by it. We were figuring it out. Like a lot of, you know, like a lot of startups and things, we didn't necessarily pivot, but we pivoted it inside of our own sort of mission many times to get to where we are today.

Yeah. And how do you describe the scope of the company? I mean, you teased it. You said it's the world's largest home security company. But what's the shape of that? What's the footprint? What does your organization look like? Take me through sort of a day in life? Yeah. So, I mean, you know, because of an Amazon, there's some things we reported. So we're over 100 million cameras out there, profitable business. Hit that gong. Hit that app loving gong, John. there we go it's a camera shaking hit love it

congratulations I mean did you ever think you'd be at that scale or what was the initial introduction no I remember when I launched this thing Nest I think when Nest sold to Google it was reported I don't know if it's true but they were doing like

30,000 like units either a month or a quarter sure and I remember thinking to myself man If I ever got to 30, if I ever got that big, you know, holy.

And, and, you know, we're now, I mean, it's like, you know, literally 100 million plus cameras out there,

global. And it's, yeah, for me, we, the mission to make neighborhood safer, the impact we've had there has been substantial. And that's,

I truly am proud of, like, I really try to focus on those things. And then the output, let it happen. Let people reward us for purchasing a camera, because they think it's going to make their home or neighborhood safer. Yeah, yeah, it makes a ton of sense.

Can you take me through sort of how you are thinking about the product suite, the feature sets, like how you're positioning the overall portfolio, and then some of the announcements today? Yeah, so, I mean, from a macro side, I look at AI as IA, so we're the intelligent assistant. And so our job is now where, you know, when I launched Ring, a motion alert was like mind-blowing. Like, dude, you've got a motion alert from your front door to your phone? Like, that's crazy.

Now you hear them too often. And so our job is to use AI to basically curate for you as an individual unique to your home, what you want to see when you should be interacting with it, and really take down the number of alerts and increase the efficacy of them. So that's like it from a macro. That's what we're doing. How are you thinking about the tradeoff of like cloud-based artificial intelligence? obviously processing a ton of video constantly.

That feels like something needs to be done on a server. At the same time, there's privacy, so people might want it done on device, but that creates power constraints and all sorts of things. I mean, also, I feel like being at Amazon's great because I feel like most people trust Amazon to be secure because ABS and all this stuff. But how have you, have you tussled with, like,

where the AI lives and the benefits and costs and tradeoffs there? So for us, it's layers. You try to determine it's a human or emotion event at the camera level, so you're not just flooding, to your point, like, you're not flooding the AI or the servers, the cloud. With the stuff, because it's very expensive. I mean, it's usually a lot of power, using a lot of processing. So it's like trying to have, like, these different layers.

But where we like to end is the cloud. We like to have the cloud as the place that's doing the final processing. AI is moving so fast that in our area, I think anything you put at the edge is going to age like fish on a hot day. And so we're trying to be very careful not to put too much intelligence at the edge because that intelligence, it decays so quickly that by the time you actually ship that product,

it's maybe no longer intelligent. I want my team to be able to write on and build code and put out features that are literally the best in the world at that moment. And the cloud really is the only place to do it right now for that final sort of piece. Where are you most excited for various models to improve? Do we need capability advancement?

or do you feel like there's a capability overhang where there's enough product that it's more about implementation? It's such a good question because there's so many places where we're putting models and different models and custom models and there's so much coming out, but I would say where you're going with it, I think we are starting to now, I think that the AI is ahead of what we can sort of chew

and sort of digest our food with. I think it's actually getting farther along than we can put the features around it, the UI around it and have customers understand it. So I do think it's actually starting to get almost faster than we are in that. And it's up to us now to try to figure out how to get. Because again, no one, our customers don't buy technology. They buy something that makes their home feel safer, makes their home better, gives them more attachment to their home.

They're not buying the best AI. They're buying the best service for their home. And so it's our job to sort of not sell them technology. but sell them, obviously technology in the background, but sell them the features and the services. But I do think I have not been able to find lately, and it's amazing how quickly this is happening. Every idea I have, it's like the AI is ahead of the idea. Whereas before, the team would be like, well, it's not really there yet. You can't do that. Like, you don't understand. And now it seems like it's really just going so much faster than even I can sort of think. Is that re-engaging you as a leader?

I mean, it's been over a decade. I feel like there's a lot of times when, you know, post-acquisition, you're at a large company. It can be exhausting. Maybe you want to go fish all day or something. I don't know if you fish, but the AI moment, it feels like it's been re-engaging a lot of business leaders. Have you had that effect over the last year? Oh, I totally. There's so much we can do.

We can build it so fast, get it out. I mean, we launched today. I live in Pacific Palisades, so I live in the fire. zone. Yeah. And, you know, it's like, yeah, as you know, like, it was a crazy thing. Yeah. So I was able to go from, like, living there, seeing what happened there, you know, and then building a feature that we launched today, which I think will hopefully be a way to assist in future fires, which we did with watch duty, where now you'll get an alert as a ring customer if you're in a fire zone. We had over 10,000 cameras in the Palisades area. Yeah. And so now you, now you would

get an alert that says, like, would you like to join into watch duty and give them. And, you'll get an sort of data and now we'll have an accurate up-to-the-minute map from AI looking for embers, looking for smoke and seeing where the fire is jumping. And so now we can give real-time information to everyone and hopefully deploy. I want to talk a little bit yeah kind of a little bit about kind of some more sci-fi stuff. I'm curious to kind of get your opinion on. So John and I, John's in Pasadena. I'm in Malibu so this time last year. John like I didn't have electricity, cell service, anything like that. So you live in a house that previously burned down.

Yeah, my house burned down in 2018 was fully rebuilt. And six months after I bought it, I was like, oh, it's... There's a reason it burned down. No, but it burned down because like an ember had floated from a faraway fire, and embers floated to like six houses in my neighborhood. And all them just burned down. And luckily, the majority of the homes were fine. And I was just thinking, like, there's got.

to be better as we head into the kind of robotics era there has to be better you know detection is one thing but then actual response feels like an inevitable next step over time when if it's literally a single ember that can you know be the reason that a multi-million dollar property burns to the ground we should be able to detect that quickly and put it out without having you know a bunch of heroes and a truck drive you know 10 miles and come put it out with water right so how are you thinking about kind of like actual response and and is that even something that ring would do or do you think there's other startups that should leverage your guys's detection so um this is where we were we worked with watch duty so our fire watch which is our system that we go into where AI is now watching your

camera you've put it in this mode and said like yes i want to share this that then pipes right into watch duty watch duty is what's happening the command center has watch duty up residents have watch duty on their app. So that is the centralized place where the map is forming on the fire. And my hope is that, and being in the fire myself, I saw that like a bush is smoldering next to a house and I could go put it out with my feet. People are like, how did you put out the fire? And I'm like, I literally would stamp on it until it was out, put some dirt on it. Now, if that had kept going, you know, I don't know like the exact incident, but like, yes, that's what happens. Like that keeps going and it burns a house down and that house starts up

fired and puts out more embers. And so if you could see that on a camera and say, oh, wow, like this thing has jumped over to this area. That's a quarter mile away and there's smoldering next to this house. You can put it out so much easier and deploy those resources. So I think that's why what's great on this one is we're bringing the information in and then it's going to watch duty, which is already being used by all of the people that are deploying the resources today. Yeah. Are you excited about robots and drones as response? to various home, you know, home security wildfires. You have Boston Dynamics.

Sorry, Amazon has a drone that flies around your house, but is that a ring project? Or is that? I built that. You built that. No way. Tell us about that. How is that coach? And then specifically, so Boston Dynamics has been showing off their new humanoids.

I've been wanting somebody to build a humanoid home security product forever. I'd love to have a, just a manessing. I mean, deterrent, it's having, you know, various criminals knowing that most homes now, have the video. I mean, just there's signs that you put in the in the ground. American flags apparently help. That helps a little bit. Yeah, I'd love to know more about drones and robotics.

So there's different, like different layers to drones. I mean, so you have companies like Axon out there that are doing police drones and like literally are, you know, going miles. So for both fires or responding to something, there's that layer. And then I think there's going to be layers down all the way to where we were,

which is like, I'd say the complete other side, which is inside the home. So having like a small drone inside the home that can fly around, see what's going on for security. I'm very bullish on the whole robotic space. Like in general, I think AI has also, you know, what took, what was so hard for us years ago when we were building this thing is now, I don't want to say it's easy, but wow, is it different? Like, like, there's a real tailwind behind us. And so, hopefully, I mean, you guys are, you guys are in L.A. Maybe I'll bring something by the studio in a few months. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, I'd love that. Yeah, but more specifically, is the idea of a humanoid pacing around your property is, is that, is, is that a reasonable deterrent? Have you built one? Is one in your breath right now? So here's the reason I say is because like when people are like, oh, you have a robot that's going to do your laundry. It's like, well, I have a wonderful woman who does my laundry and I like employing this person.

and if you give me an $80,000 a year robot or $80,000 robot that's going to depreciate and it's going to do a worse job, I'm like, I'm happy with the human, at least for the next few years, right? Whereas hiring somebody to stand in your backyard all night long. That's a brutal job. That's like 150K year. I don't know for somebody that's actually like worth worth. And it's also, there's all these studies of security guards that, they like their effectiveness goes down like it literally like

algorithm it's like it just falls off and you think about it's like just because you get so bored right like you're sitting doing the same thing every day nothing's happening so it's like the effectiveness of a security guard is actually like a human security guard is very tough to be because you're not it's not normal that you're actually doing something on the security

side so I do think robots I think at the higher end places enterprise maybe there will be humanoid security we always look at it from high volume low cost. I'm always on like the high volume low cost residential size where we start. And so, you know, what can we build to bring robotics into and around the home in the neighborhood that's affordable at high volumes? I don't think, I don't think that's going to be a humanoid for

a long time. That said, if a humanoid costs $500 or something at some point and you could do it, of course, like it's great. I think that's going to be great. I was saying to John, the teleoperation potential here, which is like, hey, ring dissect something. I have somebody, somebody could be anywhere in the world. Suddenly they can pop into this embodied form factor and actually be a physical deterrent because, I mean, so many people in, I mean, L.A.

I talk to anybody that lives, I mean, the palisades had like, prior to the fire, an insane break-in epidemic. I have friends who would have multiple break-ins in their home per year. Super like elite operators that would come in, use metal detectors,

figure out where your safes were, pull them out, throw them out in a truck, it would be like five minutes, everything's gone. So there needs, like video is not enough for true deterrence. Like, there's going to have to be physical. And we have stuff like virtual security guard that is, you can set it in, like, you know, for my house, when I go to sleep, I set virtual security guard on.

If someone comes on the property, they're notified, those are human. So, like, there's response. So I think that's, I do think you're correct, though, and how you're looking at it, which is like, it's not just technology. The idea that just technology is going to solve everything is not correct. I think we can use our IA, like our intelligent assistant, to bring people into the scene when they need to be on a limited basis.

And when you do that, I think that's how like it, for example, what you're talking about the Palisade, it's like how you would reduce that crime or even try to zero out that crime, which I do believe we can do over the next few years with deploying the AI as well as merging it with other human responses. How is the enterprise side or the B-to-B side of the business evolved? What's the shape of it? What trade-offs have you made to focus on particular niches or verticals? I'm interested to hear because obviously this technology applies everywhere. Yeah, so we really started focusing residential. That pulled us into small, medium business. We're in over half a million small medium businesses use us.

We don't even know exactly all of them. Let's go. Yeah, of course. They treat it like homes. They buy it as like a prosumer effectively. Exactly. So we don't like know exactly how many, but we think it's, you know, it's definitely north of, call it half a million.

Yeah. And, you know, just like, it's like how the iPhone sort of slowly got into, or not even that slowly, but got into the enterprise. Oh, yeah. Like the iPhone, like, you know, Apple didn't have a bunch of sales. People go out and sell enterprise iPhone. Yeah. It's, you know, the CEO brought the iPhone in that they had and said,

I don't want this other one. Not using BlackBerry anymore. Not using it. That's exactly right. And so I think we've kind of gone slowly up the stack. Today we actually launched a whole line of new cameras that are multi-4K lens, like really higher end. We call it the elite line.

And I do think that will sort of get us just kind of similar to the iPhone getting into Enterprise. I think it will pull us in. And we'll see, we'll kind of see how that goes. We also have an app store that people can build custom applications because historically, again, pre-AI, a camera did security. Like, that was all it could do in sort of reasonable, you know, cost-efficient way. Now, if you think about like a coffee shop, if you have ring cameras all over your coffee shop, why isn't it telling you that a table was dirty and someone wanted to sit?

Why isn't it telling you about the line? Why isn't it telling you about which team is the fastest? Why is it like, like we're seeing it, like it's all there? And so being able to allow the long tail to be built by entrepreneurs, just like any marketplace or any app store, I do think we're going to unlock a lot of value for enterprise and small media business that way. So I'm really excited.

We actually just launched that today, too. We launched a bunch of stuff today. Yeah, yeah, I can imagine that being really good. Have you been focused more on job sites than large enterprise, like, software campuses, that type of security? That feels like maybe a separate problem, but I could imagine you getting there at some point.

Yeah, I mean, like job sites have been great. We have a lot of solar power camera. So people use them. They put them on, you'll see them on a poll. Like, you'll see like, we have cameras with lights.

Yeah. So that's also good on job sites. Like someone walks onto the job site at night. Yeah. Light goes on. Cameras there. We have a talk down so you can say, like you're being reported.

So like there's a lot like we had the virtual security guard. Sure. We launched today one of the trailers. So if you see those trailers that are out in the parking lots. Yeah. Yeah. It's usually solar panel on top and a bunch of cameras. Yep.

That type of thing I've seen this. Yeah. So we launched one that's more of, I'd say like a product, lower cost in that market. again, high volume, low cost. So we're going to, I wouldn't be surprised in the next couple of years.

We sort of really have a big dent in the enterprise, but we're not going to do it through the front door. We're not going to sort of not really responding to RFPs. We're not going to have an enterprise sales force. We're going to just, you know, come in like the iPhone. Like let it come in. I feel like you could spin that up in a heartbeat at Amazon, but it makes sense for the overall strategy.

One last question, and we'll let you get back to CES. How do you think about camera sensor technology? in security cameras and door cameras. I was looking specifically at like a wildlife, like a squirrel cam for my son who's four and a half. And I was, but I'm also like a camera nerd. We use like, you know, Sony FX3s and full frame cinema lenses here. And I was like, I sort of want like a 4K, not just 4K, but like full frame cinema lens, hardened just to find my squirrels. And it's like a ridiculous thing. I don't know that that's a real product, but how do you think about the learning curve and just the diffusion of just better camera sensors, better lenses into

these commodity consumer products over time? Yeah, so there's definitely a diminishing return. You can go to like a 20K sensor. It's like not going to for a normal, again, very special applications, yes, but for like a normal home, it's not going to give you any more value. I do think 4K is a giant leap. We have a whole 4K line. With our elite line, we have like now like multi, multi, 4K lenses that are, are, um, lens down to the pixels. So it's really pixel, like what you really want to look at is pixel density. Like that, it's actually not 4K, 2K.

It's like, what is the pixel density? Yeah. Um, that the camera delivers. And then that's also like the AI can only process what it sees. Like the camera can only be as smart as what it sees. I do think the current line of 4K cameras we have right now, for most residential use cases are as good as you're going to want at the price point and then we'll just kind of let just think everything in technology as 8K sensors come

down as bandwidth goes up we'll kind of keep adding that but I do think we're right now like kind of right at the edge of that curve of price um you know price to sort of quality what you need yeah that makes a lot of sense geordy anything else no this is super fun thank you so much for coming on the show this is a lot of fun appreciate you making the time great great to meet you and uh happy customer overnight's success thank you for yeah yeah yeah exactly overnight success exactly it's amazing it's amazing uh well enjoy the rest of CES. Have a great rest of you. And we'll talk to you soon. Cheers. Goodbye. Quickly, let me tell you about Restream, one live stream, 30 plus destinations. If you want a multi-stream, go to Restream.com. We have an exciting set of next guests. We have Jeff

Lou and Jay. Let's bring them in. Joining TBPN. There they are. How are you guys doing? Welcome to the show. Good. How are you? Thanks for having us. We're good. Congratulations. Can you? Can you set the table for us on the most recent raise. How did it come together? What's the goal of the fundraise? How are you describing the strategy of the fund these days? I mean, I'm happy to kick it off. I mean, anti-fund. We think that boomer vCs are boring. And just like there are U.A. companies and the next generation of American entrepreneurs like taking over just like the business ecosystem, I think that the same opportunity exists for VC. What was the original anti-ante fund?

Like, how did you come up with that name? Why? What are you anti? The boomers. Yeah, a lot of, a lot of time, we're both founders and we know how hard it is dealing with VCs and move slow and updates and not providing any value and they just become a nuisance. And I think we were a very founder first and wanted to bring a value add. I think what we can bring is like distribution, marketing, all of these things.

expertise on social media advertising. We worked with obviously invested into OpenAI, but then worked with the SORA team to help launch the product, brought in the content. So that's just like one really good example. But that's what we wanted to do is just be anti the establishment essentially and bring something new to the table that wasn't just money. We believe money is a commodity and that things beyond that are way more valuable.

helping grow the companies. And I think the double click on that, I think as founders and as VCs, you have to be anti-establishment. I mean, we are disrupting existing large players. If we don't want to take over existing large markets, then you should not be in this business. So that should be what you expect as a founder, but you should expect that from your investors. If your investors is not as hungry as you, maybe you choose other investors. What can you say on fund strategy? ownership targets. My assumption is that you guys are multi-stage, so you're kind of flexible. I imagine there's pre-seed rounds that you'd be excited about leading, but at the same time, you don't mind participating in a later stage round where it's a breakout company and you can

add fuel to the fire. I think the way we think about it is that we've taken barbell, but we call it extreme barbell. We want to be the first check in technical founders, and that's people just dropping out and where their first phone call will put 100, 250K, just put them in the business. Or we identify and built really great relationship with like Sam Altman and Mark Chen of Open AI

and we want to support what we think will be generational defining companies. And I think everything in the middle is very hard. And I think we know who we're strong and where we're potentially, you know, weaker. Yeah. Tell me more about this

SORA partnership or that project. Like how did that come together? What was the reaction? I feel like... Yeah, did you hesitate at all about giving up your name and likeness? You and Sam Altman, you guys kind of jumped first. And I think it went surprisingly fine, right? Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, but what was the reaction? Yeah, so they wanted to build a social media platform. And we met at the inauguration with Sam Altman. We were like talking about how there needs to be a new social media platform. what does that look like, et cetera. And so we just started having idea of brainstorms and it eventually turned into what SORA is and then just helping them on the functionality, you know, me and my brother's expertise of however many years we've been making content. All the little dials, triggers, change this button, change that button, make this easier. Boom, boom, boom.

This is what fans are looking for. Super detailed stuff. But then once it finally came to launch, yeah. Yeah, I gave my name, image, and likeness, and I knew it was going to get crazy. I wasn't hesitant, and it just caught like fire, and obviously we saw the results in what happened. And it was a pretty phenomenal experience in marketing and, like, showcasing what the Internet loves these days. Yeah, one of our portfolio companiesarchive.com tracked a billion impressions in six days of Jake. Well, so many.

What advice are you given to folks who want to become creators in 2026? It feels like a completely different era from the Vine Days. At the same time, there's some lessons that never change. But how are you seeing it? Yeah, I would say authenticity is everything. I think showing your whole entire life is the key. If you're a new and up-and-coming creator, like the struggles, what you're going through, tell your audience about financially what you're doing or what you're having to do.

Talk to them about your ups, your downs, share with them your life story. And then you just have to be posting and posting. And I think a lot of people aren't good at editing, like simple stuff, captions, music, video, timing, how long is the video? So it is very difficult. And you're competing with every single platform as a content creator. You're competing as a content creator. I'm technically competing against Netflix. Why are they going to watch some Jake Paul Instagram videos versus going on to Netflix?

And so you have to realize that you're actually playing one of the hardest games. And people think it's easy, but it's actually a very, very technical thing. And you have to have a certain skills that to be able to do it. And you have to be entertaining. You have to be providing something that's a niche that no one has ever seen before. We have the Paul brothers. We have the speeds. We have Mr. Bees doing his videos.

We have whistling diesel blowing up trucks and cars. So what are you doing? Yeah, John has talked about this. You used to be able to get a million views by just having a Ferrari. Now you need to blow it up. The games change. It went from have the car or rent the car to give the car away where you take the tax deduction to now you must destroy it. How do you – so 2025 there was a lot of founders doing –

like rage bait marketing. This style of like using rage bait in content was popularized on YouTube and various social media platforms. I would say, Jake, you've done this very, very effectively at times of being under knowing. I'm going to put out this video. It's going to make a lot of people mad, but a lot of people are going to enjoy it too. And they're going to become fans and I'm okay to alienate some people. How have you kind of like evolved like that even?

And like, what is your framework? What is the right amount of rage to generate in an audience? And because you really need to thread the needle. Yeah. So the way I look at entertainment is invoking emotion. You want to invoke fear, sadness, happiness, joy. That's good. Good, good, good.

But yeah, you need all of them. You need all of them. The full spectrum. That's what I'm committed to. And I don't care who likes it. or not, that's what I'm doing. I posted a video where, like, I was acting like I was depressed, like, traveling around the world and, like, my jet and on vacation.

I was like, what is life even about? And I was trolling. And, like, my friends text me, like, yo, bro, are you okay? I'm like, yeah, bro. But the video got like 30 million views because everyone was like, oh, this is like, I'm kind of sad too. Yeah, what is life even about? And just different random things like that.

So just be committed as an entertainer to invoking emotion. and you can't care about the result of what anyone thinks because at the end of the day, people will come back because they feel something. That's the key. Someone asked me to ask you an all-time record for bench press. I've done 315, like three times. There we go. There we go. What do you find yourself when you're talking with founders bringing up stories from like the,

fight game and different because I met like building a company kind of can feel at times like waking up opening your email getting punched in the face maybe an investor is rejecting you a customer went with a competitor et cetera et cetera you're pretty used to getting punched in the face and chewing glass at this point and I imagine some of those learnings carry over yeah well 100% you know I say after boxing everything is easy because you're actually physically having to fight every day and taking the licks and punches and you have to bob and weat sometimes after the first round you go back to the corner boxing is a great analogy for life and your companies you have to go back to the corner talk to your coaches reset come out for the for the next round and you can be losing

a fight and still win in the end um not me against anthony joshua my jaw is broken but um but you're still yeah but he didn't take you still here people were watching wondering, can he talk on the show? And, you know, here, it's proof. Yeah, I have a little bit of a list right now because of it, but we're just pushing through. This is storage shake, actually. Yeah. This is the AI version of me I tapped in. Yeah. Can you talk about me, both of you could talk to me a little bit about focus. You're both involved in a ton of stuff, you know, boxing, content, investing, building companies. At the same time, yeah, W, at the same time, I think of you is, uh, very, very much of you is, uh, very insightful early on on the importance of daily work, daily repetition.

It's Every Day, Bro, is a meme, but I actually think it's deeply insightful and the key to many successes. And I credit a lot of the growth that we've had here with becoming a daily show instead of just this show that is every once in a while. And I'm wondering how you deal with focus and when is the time to go all in and do something every single day. Yeah, you have to figure out that org chart for yourself in terms of what do you know feeds the rest of the ecosystem the most. And for me, that's boxing. But I look to Elon Musk as an example, right, how he's built some of the biggest companies in the world. And he's managing all of these teams. And he's devoted and, you know, sleeps on the couch in the offices.

You have to be that level of committed. and it's a non-stop working, hustling, you know, whatever it is that you have to do. But I think the importance of having a great team around you allows you to be able to do a lot of things. I have Jeff that boxing fuels the rest of the ecosystem, the content, the businesses, the attention, all of these things, the networking, the connections. So then Jeff can put his priority as anti-fund, et cetera. and it all turns into this great flywheel. But it's definitely just staying committed and working harder than anyone else that's doing it or just as hard. And just really checking the temperature if you're actually doing that.

Have you guys done any recent deals? The most recent things that were excited, I was going to say, what are you getting happy, Dad? They just happened to crack open a happy guy. Yeah. I just wonder. Yes, we are. Yes, we're happy investors and happy dad. Obviously, the milk boys are homies and big pros are great.

It's a great operating team. Plus, I think that influencer-led CPG play, I think is challenging, but like the very, very best operators are the best celebrities we like to partner with. So another example of that is Chloe Kardashian's cloud popcorn. and obviously our own business is W. Yeah, what's your guys' framework for for investing in celebrity brands? Because people have the sense that, oh,

they see celebrity brands that work, and they just assume that all celebrity brands. They don't see the Travis Scott with his canned cocktail brand that looked like it had a lot of potential but didn't go anywhere. And there's a bunch of other examples like that. I'm curious, like, what you guys think the formula is, is a creator limited to, you know, one brand?

over a 10-year period? Do you see multi-brand strategy emerging? What do you think? Yeah, I think it's, I mean, similar, I'd say similar assessment as a normal investment, right? 90% of start to fail.

So I think we just like look at that statistical norm and just expect and even for a celebrity letter not to just have that statistical pattern. But then I think after that, it looks at, but what you do have is that you have an unfair distribution advantage and you need to make sure that the market

in which that distribution focuses actually makes sense. I think Happy Dad is a great example where Milk Boys to me is like the fratbro older unk of internet. I don't know, they're like 30 now, so they're their unk. But to me,

that is a very good founder market product fit. Right? And I think if celebrity or not, you just look at that thing as an asset, just like there's a technical advantage. Why are open AI researchers just like raising a ton of money out the gate? Because like there is an assumption that it have some technical ability to have to find product market fit. So it's the same thing with a celebrity.

It's just like the rate distribution oriented. And I think it's maybe a little bit less quantitative. It's maybe more taste driven. I think that's where I think Jake, I value and I think Logan as well where they have seen over, you know, 10, 15 years of being famous, how many people that have come and gone as famous people. I think it's super rare to be top of field and relevant across multiple platforms for a long time. So I think those are patterns we pull out. What about the launch of W? I thought it was interesting because you didn't do what I thought you would do,

which is direct to consumer purely, just sell just to the audience. You came out of the game with a big retail partnership. And I think maybe some influencers or just celebrity type people, they forget that the CEOs of big retail establishments might be in their audience. too. They might be able to get that introduction to Walmart sooner or target sooner. And I was wondering how deliberate that strategy was, as you reflect on that strategy, would you recommend it to someone else in that position? Yeah, well, 100%. I think playing across the board also is key. But we wanted to go retail first, and we saw the success of that with my brother's brand with Prime and the accessibility of,

you know, all of our fans walking through these stores on a daily basis. I would say, lot of my fan base is a Walmart shopper and etc. So yeah, being able to have those content points digitally, but also in person and people seeing the things in stores. And yeah, being able to have retail D to C, all of that, I think is super important. But we decided to go with the retail first strategy and it's worked out great. Part of, I think, the way that you guys have maintained such relevancy is just reinventing yourself, obviously you reinventing, you're going from a YouTuber to a fighter. Do you think about

fighters have notoriously short careers? I mean, I'm sure you'll be able to come out of the woodwork when you're 60 and do the Tyson thing, you know, lock up another 100 million pay-per-view. But I imagine at some point maybe in your 40s you'll reinvent yourself again. Do you think about, are you thinking five, 10 years out around how you want to reinvent yourself again? Or are you just tunnel vision on boxing at the moment and nothing else matters? No, yeah, definitely no. I naturally will lead myself into politics without a doubt. Like it's within me. I'm passionate about it. I follow it very closely behind the scenes. And I try to speak up as much as I can to help my audience better understand it and to state my opinion on things.

But I don't know what that exactly looks like. Are you thinking like AI czar or president? What? What? What? What? What? I just want to help the,

the world. And I know it's needed, especially in the generations moving forward. And that's, you know, something that Charlie Kirk was doing. I don't know if it's something that looks like that, but it is needed.

And it's very important. And I think since the beginning of my whole entire career, I knew I wanted to help kids and help the world. And that's what I've done with my charity and boxing bullies and renovating gyms and all these things. But I know I can. do it at an even greater level. And so working on some things in that area in the future will definitely be exciting.

Well, chat saying Vance Paul 2028. So let's see it. Let's go. Well, thank you. Awesome. Well, great to have you both on. I'm sure you'll be back on soon. And yeah, congrats on the new fund and the recent fight.

And the portfolio. They got everything in there. Yeah, you guys pretty much got them all. So it's been very cool to watch. Fantastic. Thank you guys. We'll talk to you soon. Talk soon.

Goodbye. Let me tell you about MongoDB. Choose a database built for flexibility and scale. With best in class embedding models and re-rankers, MongoDB has what you need to build. What's next? Our next guest is Matt from Doc Tronic. He's the co-founder and CEO.

Here we go. What's happening, Matt? How are you? Can you hear me? Not yet. I don't know. I'm about the airports. There we go.

We go. AirPods. Air pods are rough. They create the split-second delay. Now it feels like we're face-to-face now. How you doing? Great to meet. Yeah, great to meet you, too. Thanks for having me on. First time on the show. Would love a quick introduction on yourself and the company. Yeah, yeah, sure. So I'm Matt. I've been building startups for a long time, 25 years at this point. Built a big success. Yeah, right. Built a big e-commerce unicorn called Modo Opera Andy a long time ago. All over startups, computer science from Carnegie Mellon. Doctronic is the number one AI doctor. So we've got 20 million patients or 20 million consult so far, 2 million patients.

Wow. And we're an AI doctor, where anybody can come for free, talk to AI, et cetera. And we have a telehealth practice behind it too. So you can talk to the AI. It's going to diagnose you at the end of that. You can take all that information, full diagnosis, full treatment plan, et cetera, and talk to our doctors. So it's a pretty straightforward, simple process. Our doctors are available 24-7 license in all 50 states.

When did you start the company and what's been the primary kind of distribution method? Is this something that people just, they end up, they have a pressing need. They want medical advice, guidance. They're going to find you. Or are you selling through, you know, how are you actually getting 20 million people using the product? Yeah. So we're direct to consumer. we launched in September of 23, so been around for a while.

Actually, when we launched, there was this open question, you know, did anyone want to talk to an AI about their health? It was kind of an unknown. It was, you know, early in the GPT4 days. Yeah. And it turns out it's a resounding yes, right? Yeah, I really want to talk about their health. The other question was, could you make an AI accurate enough to practice medicine, right?

Yeah. And it turns out you can. You can't just use the foundational models. You have to do a lot of work with them. And so we're direct to consumer. We get a huge amount of our traffic from just organic search. You know, we get 100, 150,000 people hidden inside a week. And then, of course, we're doing social networking, paid stuff, et cetera.

How much more do people, when people have a doctor in their pocket, do they, are they going, are they effectively talking to a doctor or an agent that's acting as a doctor? Is it 50 times more? Is it 100 times more than they usually would? because, I mean, I think everybody's experience, like, you know, researching it was, you know, doing a search, adding Reddit to the end. Now people might try a foundation model, and it's obviously giving a disclaimer. Well, we're a foundation model. We can't actually give, you know, medical advice. Do you have to put a disclaimer like that or still? Or how does it actually work? Yeah, super interesting. So first off, let's talk about, like, how often people use it. So I think the stat is the average American sees their primary care doctor three times a year, which is, you know, kind of crazy. And of course, they're just arm in a primary care doctor.

For the guys out there, they're like three times in my life. Yeah, right. I haven't seen mine in years. My wife is a doctor, which makes it a little bit easier. But yeah, you know, but my wife doesn't want to help me anyway, right? That's not something you ask your wife. But yeah, so people are using the system multiple times a month. Right. So we're close to weekly active users for a lot of people. So the question is to like, what would happen if you have? a real doctor in your pocket is, I think you'd talk to them about everything. You'd talk to them about how you wake up in the morning, your back is sore, you know you have herniated discs. Is it worse than a couple days ago? You don't know, but you talk, right? And it suddenly gathers all this

information about you, right? So it's certainly changing the way people are interacting. As far as disclaimers go and such, we are, so our AI for most situations outside of the state of Utah right now doesn't practice medicine. So it's going to talk to you and it's going to always say, look, in Utah, in Utah, you guys, it does practice medicine? Yeah, that's the cool part. That's what we announced today. I'll tell you about that in a second. Okay, sorry.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So outside of Utah, you know, let's say you're on a diagnostic pathway and you go through the diagnostic agents, et cetera, right? The AI is going to kind of come to this consensus and they're all going to say, look, it's probably one of these four things, right? And here are four treatment plans for each of those. And here's a note that you can take to your doctor. and we're not practicing medicine.

You can also take this to our doctors. This is all just for you to take to your doctors. It's a tool to help you communicate with your doctors. And it's more accurate than Chachybt and Gemini and all those because we're feeding it all sorts of, you know, this massive corpus of medical documents that our doctors have written for the LMs and we've got lots of agents.

We can get into details some other time, right? But it doesn't practice medicine at all. It's going to just say, do you think that this aspect of Gen. is still kind of underrated by the world. I had a kind of a weird cool moment this week where my one-year-old wasn't sleeping that well. My wife was about to hire a sleep consultant that we had hired for our first kid. She started talking with an LLM and it basically within 24 hours had like got the one-year-old on a sleep schedule that was working again. And that was such a

cool moment because I was like, we were happy. Historically, it was so worth it to hire a sleep consultant because if your kid's not sleeping great and you get them sleeping great, it's like life-changing. But most families are not going to spend $1,000 to have some expert come and coach them on sleep schedules and things like that. So it feels like underrated at a society level. People just see the slop in their different social feeds and they're like, this is dumb, why are we building data centers? And yet, it's still right. I think it's totally underrated. I read the other day that 20% of chat GPT traffic is health related. And for things like that, helping you sleep train your child, awesome.

Like, use chat GPT, it's great, right? But when you actually want to start getting into medicine, like real actual medicine, chat GPT can't do that. It can't, I mean, even if it could, right, it probably shouldn't, right? But it's not going to help you understand a prescription and what the dosage should be and what the schedule should be. If you have high cholesterol, it's going to say you probably need to take a statin and then you need to get some exercise, which is great and true, right?

And that's just helping you with your health. That's not practicing medicine, right? Yeah. And which, you know, again, outside of the state of Utah, we're not doing that either. But we have a partnership with the state of Utah now with the Utah AI Learning Lab. And so that launched a couple weeks ago, but we just announced it. So our AI is allowed to legally renew prescriptions for residents of the state of Utah with no oversight from doctors. Wow.

I see Tusk ventures on the cap table. And Faye Faye Faye Lee, the goat. I mean, Fempe A Lee, amazing. But Faye Fai Lee signals like you know what you're doing technically. Tusk ventures signals like this is going to be a city by city, state by state, like battle, at least. For those who don't know, Bradley Tusk worked with Uber and did a lot of the on the ground. Regulatory athlete. Aftlyte Hall of Fame.

Exactly. Regulatory athlete. And so I'm wondering, like, Do you think that there needs to be regulatory change on a state-by-state basis? Is there a federal preemption discussion in the mix? Like, where does all this go? And are there any, like, keys to the success for you on the regulatory side? That's an awesome question.

So historically, not even historically, currently, states regulate the practice of medicine, right? If you want to practice medicine in a state, you get licensed by that state's medical board. Yeah. We believe that what we're doing is practicing medicine. Obviously, the state of Utah agrees. And so we have been kind of mitigated from the laws in this AI sandbox with Utah that prevent non-licensed doctors from practicing medicine. We think this applies to other states too. And other states have regulatory sandboxes for AI and we're talking with them as well.

It's just that Utah is super innovation-friendly and forward-thinking. They're the first. They're the best. They're really good at this. That's great. What do you think the state's right? Okay. What do doctors think about doctronic?

Are they happy that they're- They love it. Their patients, because the patients coming in, they're informed. The doctronics already kind of summarized the symptoms and the conversations, gets them up to speed quickly, helps them process more, see more patients themselves. We see it like a 10x efficiency in our doctors in treating patients because the AI has done all of the work gathering things. My co-founder, who is a doctor?

I'm not, but he is. He says it's like having the best chief resident in the world seeing every single patient for you. It just does all that work. But then it says, look, it's one of these four things. You figure it out. But it's almost always the first one. The AI is just that good.

Yeah. Yeah, I've had a couple funny experiences lately. I went to the pharmacy, picked up some medicine. My wife asked me to ask the pharmacist how to use it. And I watch the pharmacist, you know, just use an LLM to get the answer. I was like, wait a minute, I have a more expensive plan. I should just be doing this myself. So the demand is clearly.

Wait, you're not even using premium plus? Yeah, wait, you didn't even run the deep research report on this one. But do you think that there's, is there going to be some sort of stopgap where there's some sort of hybrid where you have a human in the loop to accelerate progress? Do you already have that? What role do you see as like building out the hybrid portion of the business in certain states that are maybe less aggressive about moving quickly on this? Yeah, there's certainly a place to use those efficiencies you get from AI in the states that are not able to. move that quickly. Our hope is that that hybrid approach won't last for long because we will prove that this

is effective and works really well. It saves the taxpayer money. It makes people healthier. It reduces costs, right? The healthcare system is enormously complex and far too expensive. There aren't enough primary care doctors. No primary care doctor wants to renew prescriptions. Nobody went to med school saying, gosh, I hope I can renew prescriptions.

So I sure hope that we'll be able to move faster, but there are definitely hybrid approaches. we're already doing that with a bunch of our video visits in other states that don't allow for this. Sure, sure. You have a background building in e-commerce, so a little bit of a tangent, but I was curious what you expect to see at the intersection of LLMs and commerce this year specifically. It feels like last year people started discovering and doing a lot of product research using LLMs. It feels like this year will be the year of action. What's that?

I said, I sure hope we're shopping in ChatGPT or Gemini, right? I should be able to buy something from there. I shouldn't have to go to Amazon. I should just be able to click buy. Yeah. Yeah. Love to see that. Yeah.

Yeah, something as simple as that. Amazon's like, actually, we like our search ad revenue business quite a lot. Well, they'll figure it out. I'm sure they'll have their own LLMs or something like that. What do you think about, like, the actual feedback loop on the, I feel, like there's the value of medicine is not just treating the patient, but then filtering those results back into future research efforts to update on what's working, what's not, both on the individual patient level and also on the societal level. How do you think about improving

the system over time? It's a little bit different than just coding, in my opinion. But are you thinking about successive interactions with the patient? Yeah, I mean, you know, and AIs can learn more and remember more about patients anyway. And the funny thing is, you know, we measure NPS with the AI and with our human doctors. And we have great human doctors, right? Like, we pay a lot. We hire the best. Yeah.

Everybody still likes the AI a little bit more. That said, I don't think that AI is going to replace that deep human interaction. Yeah, of course. That's right. Like, like, there's this easy 80% of these rote interactions that you have with a doctor where you're just like, look, my kid's sick. I need an antibiotic. Yep. Let's just figure out which one is most appropriate.

Let's get the AI to handle that. Yeah. I don't, you know, specialists, diagnosing chronic conditions. Yeah. At the same time, with that, if the kid's sick, they need antibiotics, I feel like you should still maybe bring them into a clinic, get some data that can't be accessed on the phone. And so doesn't that lead you to some sort of like B2B scenario or somewhere where you're

acting more as a co-pilot than. you know, a B to C company? Do you think you'll get there or is that something that's like adjacent? I think that's adjacent to where we are right now. I guess the way I think of it is we are pretty well positioned to handle anything that can happen during telehealth visits right now. That's kind of our goal, right? There's already this a bit of a line drawn that said these are these are things that can happen with telehealth. And so I mean, you're right. There are certainly cases where you just need to see someone. We, had one the other day. I mean, they happen all the time, but we talked about one today. Someone had an

appendicitis. Right. The AI said, look, you need to go to an ER. You have an appendicitis, and it's about to rupture. Yeah. And the person still chose to see our doctor. And it was great because the doctor said, I totally agree with the AI, but this is pretty emergent. Like, you probably should go to the ER. Yeah. And they did. And they were taking care of and it happens. Yeah. So, you know, we're not going to try to do those things that we can't do via a tele-al visit anyway. Yeah, that makes sense. Well, congratulations on all the progress. Thank you so much for coming on the show today.

Yeah, very cool. And I hope you have a great 2026. Are you the first AI license to practice law? Or sorry, not medicine, medicine. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. First and all. Wow. That is, that is wild.

That, uh, I feel like, yeah, I imagine in five years, we'll look back on today as a very big moment. So congrats to you and the whole team. It's great to meet. Congratulations. Thanks so much. We'll talk to you soon. Goodbye. Appreciate it.

Let me tell you about Gusto, the unified platform for payroll benefits in HR, built to evolve with modern, small, and medium-sized businesses. Let's Gusto. Let's Senra. Let's Lulu. We'll bring them in in a couple minutes. In the meantime, I'm going to tell you about cognition. The software, they're makers of Devon, the AI software engineer.

Crush your backlog with your personal AI engineering team. We have some breaking news. What's the breaking news? From two hours ago, from XAI, they've raised a $20 billion series E. 20 billion. XAI completed its upside Series E funding round, exceeding the 15 billion targeted round size and raised 20 billion. It's a huge.

Investors include Valor, equity partners, stepstone group, fidelity management. Antonio Grososos, Qatar, Investment, Authority, MGX, and Barron Capital Group. What is Baron Capital Group? Is that Baron Trump now? No, no, since 1982. too. Okay. Not Baron Trump. Strategic investors in the round include Nvidia and Cisco.

Let's give it up for Cisco. Investments getting in the mix. We're still working out the kinks with this gong. We're figuring out that that was a clean hit. That was a clean hit. But we're figuring out the new kind of method, how to strike it effectively. But that was a great hit. XAI says 2025 was a year of breakthrough momentum where the XAI team advanced a multitude of key

initiatives including data centers grok for grok voice user metrics and grok imagine i'm very excited to see what grok pulls off uh grok and the xa i team pull off this year they are highly highly motivated highly capitalized crushing it on the infrastructure side and a lot more to come well before we bring in our guests let me tell you about phantom cash fund your wallet without exchanges or middlemen and spend with the phantom card you can see that coin is back up 93,000. There we go. And let me also tell you about railway.

Railway simplifies software development, web apps, servers, and databases run in one place with scaling, monitoring, and security built in. And with that, we are ready to bring in our guests. Elon is saying that we've entered the singularity. So he is fully AGI pill, fully singularity pill. Lulu's singularity. GDP growth is going 100%.

With GDP growing 100% of, year, 20 billion for XAI in Series E seems like a steal. How about 200 billion? I'm dying to see the user metrics. Eventually people will pull out, why are we doing bubble talk? Welcome to the stream. We have Lulu. Welcome.

We have David Senra back in the studio for the seven time. Good to see you. Welcome to the show. How long are you in L.A. Lulu? It's a matter of hours. Matter of hours. Oh, it's like 28 hours. 28 hours.

Would either of you like a happy dad? What is it? Is it beer? Oh, it's a fruit punch? Gluten free proof. It's a fruit punch with 5% alcohol. I'd like to see it for the ingredients. It's the latest anti-fund investment.

That's great. We've had no choice. I think I'm the wrong demo for Happy Dad. I don't think it's funny. It is. I think it's a mindset. It's a frat-boy, Unk frat-boy brand.

It's a hilarious way to do. I am the right demo. We're all on. I turn 30 over the holiday. That's all my gosh. I was going to ask. Yeah, I could tell. Yeah, yeah, you can tell.

You can tell. It's just the lack of looks maxing. Lulu, take us through the most recent post, burning up the internet, three million views. Give us the pitch. Okay. The pitch is that every year has a big theme. All right, let's get, thank you. There you go.

All right. Every year has a big theme. for where narrative alpha is going to come from. And you decide it as the narrative executive. And then I share what it is. And then hopefully we do the thing. So in 2024, it was going direct. That was where the alpha was coming from because everybody was going through three different layers of intermediaries.

Then last year, it became just grab attention for some people at all costs. So that's when you saw the cinematic launch videos. That's when you saw the kind of cluelification. No, it's too many, too many gaps. Stop going direct. I said, I said, uh, Lulu. A little bit less direct. Stop going direct.

Some of you are not good on the mic. Some of you just... Some people should go direct some of the time. Well, I also said, I said if everyone has a cinematic launch video, no one does. It just got to the point where it's like, I'll just read, I'll just go to your website and I'll see what you do. Yeah. I don't need to see the 50th. And they're all kind of the same.

So companies are spending six figures on these cinematic launch videos. No, they are. They're like 150K. And they're all the same. So anyway. How much did you guys spend on yours? two grand two grand oh these are three and I included a helicopter rental yeah yeah the helicopter was like 1900 of that yeah yeah shout out shout out for a couple hundred bucks for uh handling the

right that's a fantastic video yeah value per dollar off the charts so this year the narrative alpha is going to come from doing real things that are enduring that are hard that are going to stick around and then just to keep doing that for a really long period of time so I liken it to going to the gym instead of fasting for 72 hours and not drinking water and then showing up for the bodybuilding competition one time, just go to the gym three times a week and do somewhat normal stuff, but do that for infinity weeks, and then you'll be a fit person.

Which founders doing the best version of that right now, or the best job at that right now? Okay, there's a bunch. Toby Luca. It's hard to pick a favor. It's hard to pick a favor. Toby Luca. I'm biased being on the board of Shopify,

but I think if I were to look, objectively, Toby is somebody who doesn't try to do the flashy thing. He's actually kind of averse and nauseous for trying to do the flashy thing. He's showing much more of his personality too on his Twitter feed lately. Yeah. Well, he also can't not. You know, some of these people, Brian Armstrong is another example. My favorite Toby's story is he did an obscure Starcraft podcast where he just, he's a Starcraft fan. And so he just went on and talked about Starcraft strategy. And that was a cool like going direct moment years ago. This happened like seven years ago. But it just felt like, okay, he's, a lot of comms people would probably tell him like, no, stay on message.

Like, you should be talking about Shopify. But he's like, look, there's probably people in that audience. Also, I'm just having fun talking about StarCraft with some people that are interested in StarCraft. And so he did that. And it made, for me, it made him a much realer CEO. It just kind of painted a broader picture of who he is. And the StarCraft stuff directly translates into how he runs Shopify. He runs Shopify like a ZergSwar.

That's like his corporate strategy. You know it's funny. What? I had breakfast with Kareem from Ramp. Do you guys know about Ramp? Yeah, we're, yeah. Yesterday. And we talked about Toby and his using, like, his love of video games for how he actually

run Shopify. We had this conversation yesterday morning. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I think more and more people are feeling that with agents now where it's like it feels like your puppeteering. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Can I say a few more things about this year, by the way?

Okay, so the overarching theme is to do real things that are going to be enduring and lasting. A couple of the sub things under that. what makes things enduring and lasting. One is beauty is back. Being beautiful is allowed again. We've had a decade. Looks maxing for companies. Pretty privileged for companies.

Like the same way that people get better treatment. And they're literally seen as Tyler's smirking because he's like, this is my era. The same way that people are seen as more confident, more intelligent, more trustworthy if they simply look and present better. The same is true for companies and products. So just like put an inordinate amount, almost an extravagant amount of effort into that.

Another one is... It's so much harder too because it's not just enough to have a pretty website. Like every animate, you have to somehow demonstrate that it wasn't one-shotted by some vibe-coding app. Right, which you can make me a website that looks like linear.

Like that's really easy now. And that was like the cold standard. You saw Dylan Fields demos of Pygma Make here. He like vibe-coded like 10 different websites and they all had like the most obscure, because he has a lot of artistic references that he can pull from. It was things that I would never come up with,

but all of them looked like not linear clowns. Like they looked like very unique and, I don't know. It's like beauty and original thinking. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. The instatiation of it was not one made it special. Yeah. So there was basically a decade when we just had to pretend

that every single thing in person was equally beautiful. Sure. And it was not allowed to say that something was less beautiful than another thing. And now it's allowed again. apparently the Victoria's Secret Runway show with the Angels and the Wings is back. It's just, it's allowed, it's allowed to be pretty again. Another one is things that are not perfect,

that just be yourself, but like CEOs just being themselves in a way that is maybe not optimal, like Palmer Lucky can go on any show in the world at any time. He did a recorded Zoom with me. Toby did that StarCrafting a while back. Brian Armstrong went on a podcast with like, I don't know, 500 listeners or something a little while ago just because he liked the guy's content. Palmer Lucky is literally the best podcast guest in the world. I can't tell you the details of this. I just spent eight straight, I spent a longer time with this, eight straight hours trying to

stump the guy. I was with him for eight straight hours. I had to call in other podcasters that just happened to be there. We could, I was like, I don't, I have nothing else to talk about, man. I just can't. And he was unlimited with like his knowledge on every single subject. Storytelling is off the charge. I've never met anybody with a mind like that. Okay. So here's the thing, though. So people see Palmer. He's an archetype that founders want to emulate now. You can't. He's the ultimate Joe Rogan CEO.

And I think that founders shouldn't feel this pressure that they need to be, like that is a certain archetype. And it's possible that you can say like, oh, you should every founder should just have a growth mindset. Maybe you're not great on a three-hour podcast. You should just become great. But I think people need to pick other. archetypes. I feel like Toby is another archetype. Like he's not just trying to put up 50 hours on podcasts, right? It's more like strategic and

using different channels. He's about to do my new show so. Fantastic. Now it goes. So he'll be making 420 minutes of sustained intense eye contact. I love this concept of calling in other podcasters for Becca. You're watching. So like doing

sustained effort, you know, accomplishing something great. That sounds amazing, but in the short term, like, you do have to acquire some attention from investors, employees, customers. What do you think of, I love Jocko Wellink's Instagram, where he goes to the gym every single day and he takes a picture of his watch in the morning just to prove that he wakes up. And it's an interesting thing because it's not as labor intensive as, like, going on a podcast, doing a whole tour. It's not really self-aggrandizing, but it just, like, reminds you of him every single day. And,

I'm wondering if there's a, I don't know, I don't know, you never forget about Chaco. I never forget about Jock. Yeah, that's true. But I wonder if there's like a business equivalent of that that might emerge. Maybe we can't just come up with it right now, but I wonder if someone will come up with something like that, oh, this person is in the zeitgeist constantly with something that's actually very high leverage as opposed to doing, like spending $150,000 on. So, that's true.

Steinman does that way. He's done a good morning. Good morning. Good morning we are going to win. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Augustus does this. So anytime it rains anywhere in continental America, he has a comment on the quality and quantity of the rain. Sure, sure, sure.

And if it's not raining, he's like, why is it not raining? It's raining in China. Why is it not raining over here? He just made himself the weather guy. So any day that has weather is a chance for Augustus to remind you that he has a company. What were you going to say about, Jock? I know you're a fan. I also just spent time with him.

How many hours? You've been on a podcast tour. You talk to everybody. So there is funny. Is that the first time you met him? Yeah. Wow. And.

What was that like? I mean, you're like, can you give some context on your relationship with Jocko? I can't tell you what was going on. I can give you the context. No,

I'm talking about it. Basically, yes, I can't tell you. Was it a brunch going on? I can't tell you anything about it. All I know is we were, we just happened to be in an undisclosed location. We're the only ones up at 4.30 in the morning.

Strip club. And so, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, I think he was in the,

deep in the Pacific. No. So, anyways, I'm in this like, hut and there's nothing but, like, windows. Circular room surrounded by windows, all dark. And I see a slow, huge silhouette. I'm like, what the fuck is that? What the freak is that?

And then I see his, I know his face, and I just see his giant head. And I have a big head, so I'm not making fun of him. I see his giant head. And I was like, and I open there, I go, Jock, come in here. And I was like, you don't know who I am. And I basically told the story.

I go, just sit with me for at least a minute. Because as he was coming in there, he's been my alarm clock for like five years. And he's like, get up, get to the gym. Like literally, that's my alarm clock. It has been forever. So, yeah, I wound up having, like, of course, we talked for podcasts about podcasting for like an hour. And I explained to him, like, the reason I started a solo history show reading books of, you know, autobiographies, is because I found your podcast in 2015 that was doing that for people that served in combat.

And these stories were crazy. and the book review was like an hour. And I was like, I'm learning so much. And then I'm also reading all these books. I was like, I should just do that for business. Yeah, I should go back and listen to some of the old Jocko episodes. We had a long talk because he just hit episode 500. And I was like, dude, you're a very clear communicator.

I listen to your episode 500 where you're talking about this is what my podcast is going to be. I don't know what the hell you're talking about. And I was like, I don't know what I want to do yet. I go just talking to another person like you've been doing, it's like not really differentiated. Go back to the book reviews. Read Patton, read Napoleon, read. Frederick the Great, all that other stuff, man. He's really good.

Do you learn new things from meeting someone in person? So you study them from afar to the maximum extent possible, but then when you interact in person, is there like new stuff that comes up? Yeah, 100%. Like, it's just, it, man, like, I'm in trouble. Like, I'm in real big trouble with this new show because I am completely addicted to it. It's all I want to do. I called Rob Moore.

We're going to have dinner with him. We're all having dinner tonight. I guess everybody else knows. But, uh, so. Doxing. I'm just closed locations. And he's just been lining people up. I was like, I want some fucking smart-driven other maniac in front of me every single day.

Like, I want to do this every single day. I can't do it every single day. Lulu's been insane with connecting me with all these people. She sent me, we were together with Gabby in New York at the Cognition Event. And you had the funniest thing. You're like, David, you have groupies. But your groupies are.

90-year-old billion. No, middle-age. Not 90. Ninety-year-old. Middle-age. billionaire men. And so she's been incredible about connecting me to those people, and then I'll get on the phone with them, and

like, immediately. You just click and we can talk forever. So yeah, of course, you just learned so much, and then I'm high as a kite. I don't do any drugs. Justin was texting me about this masseuse. I guess I shouldn't say something. You got to finish that sentence really fast.

Lulu text me, like, remember a couple weeks ago, you're like, we need to travel everywhere together. You need a crisis. He needs a crisis comm person And on staff, it's like hockey teams travel with a dentist. Yeah. He needs a crisis comms person next to him to tell the waitress like, oh, no, what he meant.

Oh, sorry, man, he doesn't. So to answer your question, yeah, you just learned so much more. And then, like, even with somebody like James Dyson, right, I read his first autobiography five times. I've read his second one at least two times. I read highlights from both those books dozens of times. I read his encyclopedia on the history of greatest inventions over and over again. I thought I knew everything about the guy.

And then I got to spend three hours with him in New York. And it was just like I was learning more about what motivates him, how he was. And the cool thing is how great all these people have been. Unbelievably witty, kind, generous, just like great people. I think I ended that episode with everybody says, hey, don't meet your heroes. I was like, fuck those people, they're wrong. I meant my heritage. Has James Dyson seen the Dyson Airblade meme?

Have you seen this? No, I haven't. So there's this meme that goes viral every Christmas. So you're familiar with the Dyson Air Wrap? Of course. It's the hottest gift for men to give their wives, probably something like that, but it's usually used by women with long hair. And Dyson also makes the Dyson Airblade, which you, which is when you're at the,

when you're at the airport bathroom, you put your hands in and it, and it dries your hands very aggressively. And so, yeah. And so the, and so the joke is always someone takes a picture of the Dyson Air Blade and says, I got this for my wife and she's upset with me. What happened? And it's just a very funny thing because, you know, imagine giving some. Can I use Dyson?

Okay, one of the best case studies comes from Dyson. This is when the predecessor to the air wrap, which was the blow dryer, was coming out, like the hair dryer. And I actually flew to China and met with the guy who was responsible for spreading

the gospel of the Dyson hair dryer in Asia. At a time when everybody still thought of them as just like air filters and vacuums and stuff. So what they did was okay, normally what you would do is you have an ad campaign and then you put it in the stores and then you you advertise that they're in the stores and you try to get people to buy them.

What they did was they went in completely stealth mode under the cover of night and put them into the most expensive salons and then didn't say anything. They told me about this. So then, okay, I'll tell you the first of them I heard. No, no, tell me, go ahead. So they put them into the, we should learn to speak in unison. They put them into the most expensive salons. And then after every cut, at least for women's hair, what men do.

For every cut, you get a blow dry. I once tried to not get the blow dry. and they tried to make me like pay extra. Like, you must get a blow dry. So you get a blow dry. So they just start doing your hair with it and then blow drys it much faster and better, I guess. And then the women ask, what is this thing?

And it looks really different too. It looks super futuristic. What is this thing? Where can I get one? I'm sorry, you can't get one. It's only for salons. You know, you have to be a special. So now you've got the richest women in China

with the right hair for it who like really care about their hair obsessed with this thing that they hope that they can get. That they can't get. Is it? Yeah, that's the story. Does that come from Dyson or people he hires? I don't know who came from, but the interesting story is...

But is he a distribution genius in addition to being an inventor? Or is he someone who's very good at hiring marketing? He describes himself as an engineer. There's a lot in the way Dyson thinks that's very similar to Kareem, where like, I asked him about this on the episode too, where he's like, he has a very, Dyson is a very simple organizing principle. It's just like, he picks up a product and he's just like,

why can't this be better? And so he goes, then I make it better. And then I put it back down and then I pick it back up and go, why can't this be better? And I find another way to make it better. And he goes, I just never interrupted the compounding. So I've been doing it for 45 years. And so he's the, I just read about his family office. He's reorganizing his family officer now.

He's the richest person in Britain. And from what I understand, the numbers are reported are vastly under- Do you want to hit the gone for him? Does he have an error to the Dyson empire? Like, do we know who this next CEO is going to be? Is it like a Warren Buffett situation where Greg Abel was going to come in? His son works in the business. I highly suspect they're going to go the route of,

of what the Waltons did. We were like transition to professional management. That's something they told me, but that's just like my read on the situation. What was the question about Dyson before? Oh, just is he a marketing genius? Oh, no. The engineer.

No, so, yeah, his whole thing was just like, I just have to make it better. The largest, the crazy thing about the beauty categories, which she's talking about is like, how do you actually infiltrate and, like, spread that? And it's exactly what Lula Ler said. And then what they told me is, you know, the biggest revenue category is still obviously the vacuum cleaners.

just like everybody has them. They're $500, high margin. But their beauty category is only 10 years old, and it's already the second biggest source of revenue. I highly suspect they think it's going to be bigger than the vacuum cleaners, but it gives you insight to Dyson

because Dyson is obsessed with vertical integration. And so he starts with beauty supplies, and then what else you need? Well, what else you... Now he has, like, styling creams and stuff like that. But he's like, I'm not just going to make a styling cream just to make a styling cream.

So he also has... That's not vertical integration. That's horizontal. No, no, check this out. I'm about to get there. Okay. So next year they want me to go to their UK. We're going to do another episode with them.

I'm going to tour his UK headquarters and the farming because he's essentially like applying some of the highest tech. Oh, okay. So all, so this is the way he thinks, though. If I'm going to do styling cream, every single ingredient from the styling cream and all these other things have to come from my farm. Interesting. Yeah. He's like Zuckerberg with the macadamia nuts. Wait, he's doing macadamia nuts.

I think he's only doing beef. No, he's got to make. The nuts to feed the... No. Wait, really? He plants the macadamia trees to get the macadamia. I have no idea. You don't?

You just use store-bought macadamia nuts? Whoa. I get chicken fingers from... I talked to a guy that listens to... I talked to a guy that listen to founders that, like, corner the world market on macadamian nuts. He's like a young kid. What's the brand that's advertised on Rick Rubin's podcast and all the other ones? Okay.

It's one, like, 28-year-old kid in, like, South Africa. Wow. Can I tell you about that? a beauty thing? Yeah, please. Yeah. Hit us. So anytime something becomes a beauty thing, the margins get better and the cost goes up.

So like Stanley Cups, remember how a year and a half ago, Stanley Tumblers became viral? They did this massive influencer campaign, but they didn't go to, like, water influencers. So the way that Stanley Cups were positioned before was a blue collar working man would take a Stanley Cup to work alongside his, like, pale. Yeah, I always saw it as a camping. It was. And then they went to beauty influencers and grew. it as a wellness product along their wellness and beauty things. So you might pay $10, $15 for, like, a water bottle to drink water out of, but you would pay nearly

infinite dollars for wellness and hydration. So they went to, like, beauty and wellness influencers who would do, like, yoga stuff, and then after their workout, they would do, like, dewy skin care, and then they would have, like, their Stanley thing there the whole time, so you could charge, like, 5x more. That's very interesting. When you talked about the... That looks delicious. I love these things.

I'm drinking way too much, by the way. So when you talk about the Com's predictions for 2006, and you talk about there's going to be emphasis on beauty, like what is that actually, like, what's an example of that? An example is the basics, like the website looks good, the product looks good, but then the experience is beautiful. The experience feels calm and serene. There are some things where it just feels chaotic and stressful.

It's like a beautiful experience, beautiful physical spaces. So physical spaces in general, I think, are going to be a big deal because these are, you know, solid, tangible. Anti-A-I. I don't think it's anti-A-I, but we still exist here in Meetspace, IRL, in the world of Adams. And so, like, making beautiful spaces. It's a little rough. It's a little rough. It's a celebration of podcasting.

It's masculine beauty. I feel like I'm in like a spaceship. Yeah. Yeah. But it's very intentional. So with spaces, how do you coach founders on the value of community events? Because I've gone back and forth on this. Sometimes when like a small company is like, yeah, we're hosting a dinner with like a bunch of founders.

I'm like, should you really host a dinner or should you like... Any founder that's a dinner is aren't good. So that's your, that's your take. No, no. No, but how do you like, how do you, like, how do you understand the value? of like community building, an IRL community building. So you have to define the community. If you're going to create beautiful spaces, obviously you want people to,

whether they're your team or customers, et cetera. So one of the other things, themes I think are useful to, one of the other themes that I think is useful to think about for this year is qualitative over quantitative. So last year was very quantitative. It's just like get as many clicks, get as much engagement as possible. This year, I hope that we all think more about, well, who is it and what is it? And so who is in the community?

People will say our community and what they mean is anybody with a credit card. And actually it should feel like, well, there are some people who don't belong in this community. Because if it's exclusive, then there's more value to be. Like you don't want to go to a club, whatever secret club you went to with Jocko. People don't want to go into a club that anybody can walk into. You don't want to go into a club that has no bouncer. It's a crossfit gym just for podcasters. That's great.

do you think we're actually in a post rage bait era because we okay he's mad at the question you're rage bait because we saw a lot of rage bait projects and then and then they are and then and then and then jorny wrote rage bait is for losers and it felt it felt like it did it did sort of update the valley and vc's to where a VC would kind of say like yeah this is maybe not the deal I should be doing they're going to think twice about it it it's a little bit less like handcuffs off. But when we had Jake Paul, we had Jake Paul on earlier. It just works and it's human.

He's going to make, effectively make a billion dollars from rage baiting, right? Like he's rage baited his way to 100 million. Yeah, 100 million. He, every time he fights now, he makes 100 million dollars. But how is that rage bait? I mean, the entire marketing process is, is right. It's the way he shows up. He's like, he wants to be like the most punchable.

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. He wants to be the guy that people want to see. It's being the heel, the heel. Yeah, he's the heel. Sure, okay. So that's like a durable strategy. But there's something underlying that. So underlying that is the heel persona,

and then the actual punch to the actual face happens. He's actually in the ring. There are people who are, at least have, created things that are just pure rage bait. And then when you sweep away the rage bait, there's nothing else there. It's just rage bait all the way down. You said something interesting that me, John and Jory,

talk about off camera all the time, that people are chasing numbers, but it's more important than the numbers. It's like who is in that number? What does that number represent? So, like, if you ask John and Jory, They're not trying to be like Mr. Beasts. They're not trying to get the most views.

They said, I don't know. Quality of audience. I'll just say this publicly. They were like, we want the top 200,000 people in tech and finance and business paying attention to every single thing. Like the best of the best. And if we hit that, they'll get everything they want out of life as opposed to having 20 million, you know, people sitting in Idaho, or no offense to your new, your new hire.

Nothing wrong with Idaho. We love Idaho. We're like, sitting at a couch eating chips or some shit. Like, it's just like, that's not interested in entertaining that person or educating person. But like this is something that, it's fascinating, you brought that, like, you're bringing it to, like, what's happening in 2006, where it's like, I feel like if you talk to podcasters, especially, like, in business, it's like something we've been doing for a long period of time, where it's just like you're not just going after views, you're going after actually high quality

people and giving them useful information so they can actually, like, utilize in their day of life. Like, you would not trade one Michael Dell listener for any number of non-Michael Dell listener for, For 500,000, millions. We wouldn't take it. How are you thinking about, does AI have a narrative problem? Does it have a reality problem? Are we entering the new tech lash, updated tech lash probably? We talked to Zelligieg about this all the time.

Yeah, and I just think, like, you can't, you know, we have venture capitalists come on the show, and they'll say, like, I don't care about margins because we're displacing labor. And I'm like, you've got to rephrase that. You've got to replace that. You got to re-position it. You got to reposition that because you're pissing off everyone. On one hand, you're saying, like, we're burning money. Even the investors are unhappy in this case.

David Senator is like, you make some money. You're excited about, like, you have a, people are, yeah, people are basically like, they're like, no, this is amazing because it's going to create job loss. And it's like, yeah. Well, we're destroying jobs. You've got to figure out a different. Yeah. And I don't even know.

know, again, you can debate on whether or not that's actually going to be true, right? Like, you, hundreds of years ago, if you told people, like, you're not going to have to work in the field, you're going to have to, you're going to go get your macha, go to a Pilates class, and then you're going to send three emails, and then you're going to go home, and that's going to be, you're going to earn a living like that. They feel like, day in the life. Day in the life. It sounds like a good TikTok.

Office cafeteria. But, yeah, the comms issue in AI. And just tech fraudly. There's so much. We just talked to a guy who now has made an AI that is, licensed to practice medicine in Utah, right? Should be a huge white pill, right? It's going to be like the cheapest possible way to get access to what should be quality

care. And also just inconvenient. Even if you have the money, you have to go to the doctor, a bucket, it's a whole thing. Lowering access, it's like amazing. But there's a lot of tech leaders who aren't making that case effectively. What do you think? You know that David Foster Wallace anecdote that he said with the two young fish are swimming and they come across an older fish

and the older fish says, morning boys, how's the water today? And they said, what's water? AI feels like water to fish now. It's like everywhere all the time. And so when I see companies try to use having AI as a selling point, it's like bragging that you have cloud storage.

Or like, you know, right? Like, yes, and. And I think there's a lot. Software now in the class. With connected solutions. It feels. feels not only just tired and worn out, what is it that Dave Chappelle said about Afghanistan? It's bombed out and depleted. There's just no more value to come from using the list of AI

buzzwords. People are fatigued. So just skip to what is the thing that it actually does and then prove to me that it actually does do that. And then you're good. And then as for the broader messaging, it feels like tech is right now is a heel, right? It's like, yeah, we're going to automate a bunch of work. and tech has historically played the role of we're connecting the world, we're changing the world. Or we're just giving you something that delights you. And right now, the tech industry is like unintentionally operating as the heel. So it's like if you want to be a heel like Jake Paul and you want people to kind of try to punch you.

You want to see you get punched. That's one thing. But I don't think the tech industry actually wants the entire world to hate it. No. No. Well, there's a tension between what you want to say. to attract talent and then what you want to say to not be hated and maybe get customers.

And these people live in different worlds. So the customers and please don't hate me, category of people are not in this tech bubble, whereas the engineers and technical people you want to attract very much are. And so sometimes companies feel like, I get this question a lot. Like how do we talk to both audiences at the same time?

And sometimes what they'll do is they'll say, okay, well, talent matters most of all. We're just going to talk about how awesome and technical this is and how much money we're all going to make and how many jobs it'll replace. And then that lives forever. And now they have to go and counter normal people and their reputation is. And the old interviews are going to get pulled up, right? Like how often do the lab leaders have a comment that they made about like at some like at a

less wrong like a recent convention like seven years ago comes up today? And it's like, wait, you're trying to sell me AI. You told you were telling people seven years ago that it was going to kill everyone. How do I square these things? Yeah, the famous quote is Sam Altman, something to the effect of AI might kill everyone, but in the meantime, it will create a lot of profitable businesses. It's like, you're clearly trying to talk to two different audiences in that same sentence. One is like, I'm taking AI doom seriously, which is good, but in one community gets that and likes that.

And then another is like, hey, there's economic opportunity here for businesses and startups. And he's kind of put his YC hat on for that one. And it's like two different messages in one sentence. So what people miss is that. that there is overlap in the Venn diagram. So it's not just over here and over here. Like there's actually some overlap, even if it's just a sliver.

So for example, the concept of what makes my own life better and it's made my life better so much that I want this for other people too. That appeals to talent, that appeals to normal people, or something that is like, okay, in this world where a lot of things are ephemeral or fake or are not making our lives better, I want to make something that is high quality

and enduring that I'm proud to one day tell my grandkids about, That's a great message for talent. They don't want to build the next little toy that goes away in six months after raising a bunch of venture money. They want to build the thing that is like an enduring, an enduring artifact of human ingenuity. And that's the thing that people also want to experience. I think Bezos has the best line of this. He's like, we're trying to build something that we can be proud to tell our grandkids about. If you look at what you're doing, like through that lens, it's like, your grandson's on your lap 20, 30 years from now.

would I be proud of like grandfather did, granddad did this shit. We're on the phone. You mentioned about being anti-ephemeral as like something else that you think is going to happen in 2026. Like, can you say more about that? I don't know that it'll happen, but it's what I hope will happen and it's what I would encourage founders to try to make happen, which is so much is happening all the time. So I looked up the literal technical definition of white noise, and it's basically just

maximum intensity at every frequency altogether. so that it's mushed into this nothingness. And that feels like the information environment that we're in. And the only way to break through the white noise is you don't actually compete on being loud. And competing on like temporary intensity is not it. But one normal volume or quieter note that is sustained for a long period of time

actually does cut through. The other thing that cuts through is super personalized and super local things where someone could only be talking to you. Like if you're at a cocktail party, Have you heard of the cocktail party effect? If you're at a cocktail party... I wouldn't be at a cocktail party.

You're at a secret podcaster crossfit retreat in the ocean before the Venezuela raid. And there's just noise and you can't hear anything. But if somebody says, David Senra, by David Sanra featured David Senra, then you would hear that because this is like the secret frequency for you. Yeah, people love hearing it on him. Yeah, but people also love hearing it on him. hearing the thing that they are feeling and can't express articulated in words that they wish

they could have thought of. This is going to be a random thought that kind of affirms what you just said. I just spent a crazy amount of time reading Bruce Springsteen's autobiography, and it's kind of crazy to get 600 pages, and he wrote the entire thing by hand. It took him seven years. He wrote it like longhand multiple times. But he said something that I feel one of the reasons people listen to founders is very similar to why he says people go to his concerts.

He's like, people aren't coming to my concerts to learn something new. They're coming to remember something that they already know is true. To be reminded of what they already know is true. It was very powerful. There are not that many new truths in the world. Play the hits. Play the hits. There's a few eternal truths that resonate to all humans from the dawn of civilization.

I need to put faces on these ideas, though. So, like, who else is doing comms the way that you would recommend? Like, who do you just think is doing, the founders are doing the best at this? Are they just literally your fucking all your clients? Just like, go to them. Well, part of it, part of it is you're selective about the clients you work with. So you can, you have the luxury of being like, well, I only want to work with people that I think can be great because I am going to be limited in my ability to provide a great service by how great, like, somebody like,

Augustus, like, fresh out of college, you can tell from a first conversation with him that he has a potential to be a Joe Rogan CEO, right? Like, that it's just something within him, right? And you can identify that pretty quickly, at least I personally can clock that in like a 15-minute interview if somebody's going to actually, if somebody's like well-suited to be the kind of going direct CEO, that kind of thing. But there's different, again, there's different archetypes that work for Augustus is amazing. He does his own stuff. Like, he's had these huge high-profile interviews. He just sets it up. I have a couple Augustus stories that I think are so emblematic of how he does these things.

One is the first time we ever met was after this founder, after like a Founders Fund event, and everybody had this huge sushi dinner. And then the next morning, which was eight hours from the time the dinner had concluded, he texted me. He's like, want to lift? He's just like, always on. But the second thing is there was this incoming potential hit piece about how, it was about how the gundo was too male dominated. You know, there was some reporter that was still stuck in 2019, wanted to write an article about like there's not enough female representation in the gundo.

And he texted me and he's like, got to go consult with the boys. So he goes and consults with the boys. And he's like, all right, we're ready to deal with this. this, what should we do? And I said, well, I think you should just talk to her. And he said, has anybody ever tried just being hot and charming? I actually think, no, it hasn't really been tried. You should go try it.

Do you want to know the advice I gave Augustus? Didn't that work with Schrelly too? Martin Schrelly? Didn't he, like, riss up? Did he, like, journalist? Her marriage, and then she wrote a book about it. She left her husband. That's great.

Alpha widow. Guess the advice I gave him. You need to spend more time with these older entrepreneurs. I swear to God. Because he's like, me and my boys are killing it. I go, listen, listen, man. Like, I like you. You're a nice kid.

There's 100 fucking companies there. Five are going to be here five years from now. Like, they're all dead. They don't even know it. Like, you're just, you don't know what you don't know because you're so goddamn young. I go, go spend time with older entrepreneurs. I just promise.

Like, still hang out with the young guys. Still do whatever you're doing. It's like, just talk to somebody that actually survived. We're successful to survive for half a century. This is good. You're going to bait the gondow into having 100% success rate. We're not going to let this podcast or come over from Miami and say that only five of us are going to be standing here.

That is how they operate. Yeah, this is good. I can see what you're doing. No, it's all startups. It's not just that. It's nothing to do with wherever they happen to be geographically concentrated. It's just most of them are all dead. And that's the point.

Just like you're paying attention. Building during things. Exactly. I'm anti-ephemeral. I am succeed today tomorrow, five years from now, 10 years from now, 40 years from now. Like that's the, I think the important thing. I'm scared. You told me that I introduce a lot of people.

to you, I'm scared to introduce someone to him who hasn't been in business for like 10 years and made billions of dollars because he's not being a guy. He's like, call me when you're a billionaire. No, that's not you. Kind of. No, I've been doing a bad job of just hanging out with all the older entrepreneurs because this is what I happen to be interested in. And no, because you just learned, dude, I told this story recently. It's like I spent, I'm part of the thing about differentiation, which is why I love Dyson. And I think we talk, me and we talk about this all time, podcasters don't think about differentiation, so I'm like, okay, yeah, I'm going to grab some interesting podcast guests that I know are really good, but I also want to convince people

that don't do podcasts at all to come on. And I've spent a lot of time doing this, and it takes a long time. He's getting it. You saw that? I didn't curse. Almost, but he pulled it back the last second. And so I talked to one guy. He's 71 years old. He worked in his company for 50 years. He just sold it for $50 billion. And I spent an hour with him in New York. And the information he transferred to me in an hour. It's just like, it's crazy. how much information that could happen. So I would have to do a better job of like taking that information. I mean, I guess the podcast.

No, I don't have to do a better job at this. I do this on the podcast. Just listen to the podcast. Like take the generation of the information from the old guys and push it to the young ones. You just got to listen. I want to go back to this though because I'm still not getting what I want. Who's doing it well? I loved your pirate writer's piece that came on, I think, yesterday or the day before.

It literally just comes down to this last paragraph. Like the people who are really going to stand out are the people who are willing to be candid and truthful? Yes. So. How. Agree was Jake Paul. That was his number one. advice for creators in 2026. It's very similar. You, me, Jake Paul. Yeah. Everyone's three-way

well, I feel like when people are like the idea of authenticity is important. You will have just heard that so much. It means nothing anymore. It's just like, yeah, it's important. But then they don't actually go and practice it. Can I tell you a secret? Why don't you think they practice it? I think people are they're scared. They're scared. And they're getting gaslit. They don't love themselves. Why do you have to take it to another level like that? Because that's all The stuff that's important, it's like, I'm looking for what's real in the noise. No, I think a lot of people, I think of people, I think a lot of people. They're getting gaslit from the outside.

A lot of people are so terrified of what other people think about them. They have low self-esteem. I have this argument on with, most people think entrepreneurs are like too arrogant, and I say the opposite. I was like, we can have so many more entrepreneurs. We don't have an epidemic of overconfidence. We have an epidemic of humbleness. We have an epidemic.

America's too humble. We have an epidemic of people that don't believe in themselves enough. Which is why they let themselves get gas-loness. It's really true. How? I'll give you a little bit of a roundabout answer because you asked who does this really well. Eric and Kareem were great before I met them. What companies?

Time and funny. Time's funny to say both. They were great before I met them. No, oh, goddamn. We're on it. We're live. This is why they were great before I ever met them. Yeah.

And if I had never met them, they would just continue to be great. And when we talk and brainstorm, a lot of these, it's not like they want to do nothing or they want to do something that sucks. And I'm like, no, you should do something that's good. And they take that right. They have the fire, the ideas. There's a million things that they want to do. And sometimes it's helpful to have somebody bounce that with you and say, like, even if this is not normal, do it anyway. Right?

A lot of times, CEOs going to say, you got a little like Rick Rubin and you. Has anybody ever told you that? Is it the beard? No. I'm stuck in this edit from hell for like 15 hours. Damn episode's only going to be like 40 minutes long, but I kind of mess it up. And so I'm like, I've been inside of his brain for a while.

And I also re-listen to the old episodes I did on him. I really admire, like, do you remember when I text you? I was like, dude, or I didn't say, dude. I was like, I want you to do the new show. Do you remember how you responded? You said, you're crazy. And I was like, no, I'm serious. No, it's like, I'm serious.

Oh, I said, David. out of your mind. Yes. Yes. And then you hit me with the meme. Do you remember the meme you sent? Have you ever seen this meme? It's like, oh my God.

Oh, is the Big Bird at the table? Yes. I sent on the Bigbird at the table. And so it's like Lulu's Bigberg and you have like Daniel Ack or Brad Jacobs on the other ones. I'm very fascinated and kind of obsessed with people that have singular careers. And that's what I told you. It's like you are literally like, people don't, I don't even know how to say your last name. I have no idea how to pronounce it.

Because I don't even hear it. I don't even ever hear it. It's just Lulu. You have a very single career. I'm only seen in writing. But the stuff here that's coming on your mouth is very strange to me because it sounds like I'm hearing Rick Rubin, which, like, you should read his book, The Creative.

I have, it's great. Oh, yeah. There's a lot of, like, you got a lot of Rick Rubin here. But sometimes you just give people permission to do the thing that they would have liked to do, that the world is telling them is not normal and they shouldn't do it. Yes, yes. And his whole thing is about listening without judgment. And just like, you go into this idea where, like, the world is way more complex

and you, you, you, we tell stories about the world, but we don't actually understand what's going on, right? And so his whole point was just like, stop over-analyzing, stop over-thinking, like, try it, and then see what happens and see how it feels. And he basically goes off a lot of intuition, and he thinks, like, the, essentially, I'm not going to speak for him, but I highly suspect that he thinks the truest human wisdom is actually in, like, from the subconscious, not from, like, the rational, like, part of our brain or the, even the storytelling part of our brain. Yeah, which suppresses the good thing. Again, he does a great job too because, like, obviously, he went direct. He has his own podcast. But when he goes on other people's podcasts, it's not like, oh, who's this? He's the same person everywhere he goes, which goes back to your importance of consistency.

John, don't even try to end the show. We've got to hop on with Munich. Sorry. This is been a fantastic show. I can feel the body language as soon as you do this. Thank you so much for coming on the show. It's been a fantastic. We almost made it to the fifth hour.

We almost did. We do have to hop on with Munich in just a few minutes. hours. And we'd love to have you back on the show many times this year. It's going to be a great year. It's going to be fantastic. Thank you both for coming on. Cheers to the year. Thank you guys. David just had, he just had to get one more podcast in for the day. He just couldn't. He's got a true addict. Thank you everyone for listening. Thank you for TVPI today. We will be back at 11 a.m. Pacific tomorrow. Goodbye. Thank you for tuning in. Cheers. Goodbye. The four of us need.