The a16z Show - 16 Minutes on the News: Neuralink & Brain Interfaces, TikTok, FaceApp, iHeartRadio

Episode Date: July 21, 2019

with @vijaypande @conniechan @jpm25 and @smc90 Introducing our new podcast, 16 Minutes, a short news podcast where we cover the top headlines of the week, the a16z podcast way -- why are these topics in the news; what's real, what's hype from our vantage point; and what are our experts' quick takes on these trends? This is the first episode of the show, and this week we cover the below topics with the following experts: Neuralink's recent news/ event/ whitepaper and the trend of brain-computer interfaces -- with a16z bio general partner Vijay Pande TikTok video influencers and AI-driven media and commerce -- with general partner, consumer, Connie Chan FaceApp and privacy beyond national security -- with operating partner, security, Joel de la Garza iHeart Radio and direct listings -- with operating partner, corporate development, Jamie McGurk ...hosted by Sonal Chokshi. The views expressed here are those of the individual AH Capital Management, L.L.C. (“a16z”) personnel quoted and are not the views of a16z or its affiliates. Certain information contained in here has been obtained from third-party sources, including from portfolio companies of funds managed by a16z. While taken from sources believed to be reliable, a16z has not independently verified such information and makes no representations about the enduring accuracy of the information or its appropriateness for a given situation.  This content is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be relied upon as legal, business, investment, or tax advice. You should consult your own advisers as to those matters. References to any securities or digital assets are for illustrative purposes only, and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Furthermore, this content is not directed at nor intended for use by any investors or prospective investors, and may not under any circumstances be relied upon when making a decision to invest in any fund managed by a16z. (An offering to invest in an a16z fund will be made only by the private placement memorandum, subscription agreement, and other relevant documentation of any such fund and should be read in their entirety.) Any investments or portfolio companies mentioned, referred to, or described are not representative of all investments in vehicles managed by a16z, and there can be no assurance that the investments will be profitable or that other investments made in the future will have similar characteristics or results. A list of investments made by funds managed by Andreessen Horowitz (excluding investments for which the issuer has not provided permission for a16z to disclose publicly as well as unannounced investments in publicly traded digital assets) is available at https://a16z.com/investments/. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others. Please see https://a16z.com/disclosures for additional important information. Stay Updated:Find a16z on YouTube: YouTubeFind a16z on XFind a16z on LinkedInListen to the a16z Show on SpotifyListen to the a16z Show on Apple PodcastsFollow our host: https://twitter.com/eriktorenberg Please note that the content here is for informational purposes only; should NOT be taken as legal, business, tax, or investment advice or be used to evaluate any investment or security; and is not directed at any investors or potential investors in any a16z fund. a16z and its affiliates may maintain investments in the companies discussed. For more details please see a16z.com/disclosures. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Hi everyone. Welcome to the A6 and Z podcast. I'm Sonal. Sonal Choxi, our editor-in-chief, and I'm excited to share a new show from us today, 16 minutes, a short news podcast, where we cover recent headlines of the week, the A6 and Z way. Why are they in the news? What's hype, what's real from our vantage point? And what are our experts quick takes on the trends? Today's episode is a little over 16 minutes covering TikTok with general partner for consumer Connie Chan, FaceApp with Operating Partner for Security and former CISO at Box, Joel De La Garza, IHeart Radio's direct listing with operating partner Jamie McGurck, but we began with A6NZ Bio-General partner VJ Ponday on the recent headlines around one of the companies co-founded by Elon Musk, Neurlink, and go over that news for the first half of this episode. Elon Musk this week announced advances in BCIs or brain computer interfaces or neural interfaces, and it's something that people have been talking about forever. And while they did acknowledge it's a long road, he even hinted, and this is where it gets a little crazy, but sci-fi cool, he even hinted at the option of merging with AI in the future.

What's interesting is they announced a sewing machine, which is basically a robot that sews in delicate, flexible electrodes called a neural lace, which, by the way, is not a marketing term that Elon Musk invented. It's actually a term from the culture of sci-fi series from Ian Banks, which was written from the late 80s to 2000s. The processor is an application-specific integrated circuit, and basically it monitors brain activity, decodes it, and ideally in the future, way future claim is that you could even potentially translate machines to not just read, but actually even read. right to the brain. But the paper they release, which you can download, it's called an integrated brain machine interface platform with thousands of channels, was not peer reviewed. It's a white paper. So I think we want to figure out, Vij, like, what's hype, what's real here, especially given the trend of brain computer interfaces, like, where are we really in this journey? Well, you know, if you think about, like, what this technology can do, there's different

styles. So one style is to be non-invasive. That sounds appealing because you don't have to, like, literally go into your brain. But the reality is there's just very little information you can get out if you're not invasive. Now, of the invasive categories, there's one maybe slightly less invasive technique where actually they go through your femoral artery, which is the artery on your leg near femur, and it's well-known path to go from there all the way into your brain. Yeah. And they insert through the femoral artery, something that would go into your brain. So this is invasive, but you're not drilling holes in your head. But I don't know how reliable you can depend on where it's going to stay there. What Neurlink's doing is literally drilling multi-millimeter

your holes and then sewing wires directly into your brain. Like flexible electrodes. Yeah, flexible electrodes. And so this has the greatest chance for bandwidth and getting real information out and in. It's almost like a direct connection. I think, you know, all of us have sort of a, ooh, the ouch kind of reaction to that. So they make analogy to LASIC, which if we were, let's say, 50 years ago and I told you

that, hey, look, I'm going to have these lasers and they're going to fix my eyes. and by cutting them and reshaping the eyeball on the lens. I'm going to do that on the mall. I think everyone would think that's insane. That's actually super interesting analogy. So LASIC when it was new, it sounded very invasive, but now it's like cookie cutter. Now, I mean, it's still, I don't know if everyone like loves the idea of LASIC, but it's pretty standard, you know. And so it sounds like there's a huge adoption issue or concern, but really I think the question is what can it do?

Okay. So where are we in the technology now for what it can do? And where do you, given your vantage point in the bio world, think BCIs or brain computer interfaces are interesting? Yeah, it's interesting to think about where you can start because start with a population that really probably is in dire need. You know, people that are paraplegic, quadriplegic. Their lives are obviously very limited compared to what they were at birth. In terms of movement. In terms of movement.

And really just in terms of access to the rest of the world. You know, because their brains are just like ours, but they can't move their limbs. And it's just really tragic. A natural place to start would be, and I think where they're starting, is just in communication. And it's not just typing, but it's really being able to use a computer. And you think about, like, what that means, that's. the difference between being in the modern world and being isolated from the modern world, that would be a huge game change.

And is it only for paraplegics and quadriplegives or are there other like sort of neurological movement disorders where it could play? I think in time, I think they'll, would you shift from cases where it's sort of an easy, it's so hard to avoid puns, like no-brainer, easy, no-brainer kind of a thing to where, okay, maybe it's less obvious but become more accepted. Maybe, who knows, 20, 30, 100 years from now, we could get to the Lasic point. but let's talk about the timing. The company's been around for two years.

Five years is roughly the FDA process for them to get to human trials with five patients, or so they claim. They said the road is long. So given the evolution of BCIs, I mean, it's a topic that's been around forever, where do you see, not prediction, but where are we in the evolution

of this entire journey? It's clearly very early in this journey. What's interesting, though, is that we're actually talking about, even if it's just a trial, putting this in patients. Because right now I think it's only in rats, implanted. And monkeys. And, oh, that's right, he claimed on stage, I think it surprised his president who's like,

what, are we talking about this now? I didn't even realize this, which is so funny and so typical Musk. Yeah. And so to be in humans, that's a pretty major job. Is it? Because I was going to say, don't people argue that our DNA is very similar to that? Oh, yeah, yeah, no, but I'm just thinking from a cultural point of view. Not from a technology.

The thing is that actually humans are probably easier than mice because mice brains are really little. So actually, ironically, I think that part would be easier. But the reality is now you're talking about people and you don't want to mess around with people. Okay, so assuming social acceptance is a separate issue altogether. technologically, and this is the heart of what you love when science becomes engineering. Yes. Where is the engineering reality of this?

Where the engineering comes in is that I think much like we see Moore's Law and other things on the computer side, once you can make this interface, then the advances on the computer side get to translate over. So, for instance, machine learning is a very, very natural way to take the signals out of our brain and then use that to interpret what you mean and what's going on. And so as machine learning gets better and better, and that's sitting on Moore's Law and other areas of compute, that would just come along for the ride. The other one is I suspect the sewing will get better and better and that you'll have more and more electrodes in there and be able

to sort of pinpoint other areas. And so year after year after year, if it only gets, let's say, 20% better every year, you know, that's a dramatic change over 10 years. So bottom line it for me, though, because getting that the social thing can happen, getting that engineering, it can be empowered by Moore's law, still not sure where it feels a little nutty that there's literally electrodes floating around in our juicy, gooey brain. And that's pretty much like a mess, if you think about it, like reality. But, you know, people have artificial hearts. Oh, that's a good point.

People who have Parkinson's often have devices that are actually in their skulls that are put there to sort of mediate that. So there's actually a lot of precedent for this. I think in all those cases, the alternas are pretty dire. I mean, right now, they don't have like transmitters right now. They actually get from their rats. I think they'd take it out via USBC sticks. So in this case, you'd probably for a while,

I assume we're going to be wire tethered. But again, for this population, it's better than they have, and they have limited mobility, unfortunately. Right. They already have wheelchairs and devices that they're tethered to already. Any final thoughts? Yeah, you know, I think this is like a great example of something we talk about in the firm is sometimes really great ideas,

look like bad ideas. And what makes them great is that they're just so inherently controversial, and it's so inherently paradigm shifting. And I don't know what could be more controversial paradigm shifting than drilling holes in your head to access the Internet. or something like that. Now, also, bad ideas look like bad ideas. So time will tell.

And there are many other players. And that's what partially makes this particularly exciting is that there's going to be, I think, in time, an ecosystem of alternatives. By the way, DARPA tweeted, they're the ones who pioneered the sewing machine technology with UCSF and funded it as part of their thing. So what Musk is doing is actually using that technology.

But the funnier part is this paper. So I came out of academia. I'm an editor. I care a lot about bylines. I think it's crazy that the author said, Elon Musk and Neurrelink. He didn't list his authors. Like, do you think that's okay?

You run a lab. Yeah, I mean, I think, especially if you want to reach the academic audience, that's not the way to do it. I don't know if an average person cares about the individual authors in there. But if I were in the company, I'm sure I would love to sort of have my contributions. Yes, exactly. Well, maybe when they do a peer-reviewed paper, this is how I justified it to myself. They might then do that paper with the actual authors, whereas this was like a marketing white paper. You could also choose to interpret it in a more positive way, which is that he wants to really acknowledge the whole company.

Ah, it could be the other interpretation. There's generous and non-generous interpretations of this. I like your glass half-full view of the world of UJ Ponday. Thanks for joining. Yeah, thank you. So the next item on our list, TikTok has actually been in the headlines plenty of times. It's the third most installed app worldwide since Q1 of this year behind WhatsApp and Facebook messengers. It has 1.2 billion MAUs, monthly active users or something in the last reading.

So given that phenomenon is happening and it's been happening for a while, the news this week was about them having a huge influence at VidCon, which builds itself as the world's largest seller. of digital video and online creators, basically a huge-ass conference for a video. It's sponsored by YouTube, but ironically, it was not dominated by YouTube. It was actually dominated by TikTok stars, according to Taylor Lorenz, a writer at the Atlantic.

It's actually the first time that TikTok had such a huge presence at VidCon. But on top of it, the other recent news is that there's talk of banning it in India, which is its biggest overseas market. The question here, Connie, for you is, what is going on with TikTok? Tell us really quickly, what is TikTok? Frankly, the ability to do short 15-second videos is a very familiar model. Vine tried that. Many people have tried that. It's a series of short video apps, but the difference between that and say like a YouTube is rather than search for anything, there's no search bar.

The app completely dictates what you see by using AI algorithms. It's purely AI-driven. There's no preference selection except by what you choose to watch. Yeah, I mean, if there's a TikToker that you really love, you can follow them. But when you initially start, that whole entire feed is dictated by the platform. So it chooses things that are high quality or high impact, and it surfaces that. And that's why it was such a big deal at VidCon, because you had all these people who had trouble becoming famous on YouTube, because YouTube's been around for so long right now. It was so much easier to become an influencer 10 years ago than it is today.

But on TikTok, it's different because you create one really hit piece. It can, through AI, be shown to a ton of people worldwide because it'll trigger the algorithm to share it with a lot of people. And that's how you can gain followers really quickly, whereas on YouTube, unless you're searched or unless a friend shares it, it's much harder to get surfaced. The article talked about how someone who tried to become famous on YouTube struggled for a really long time getting followers. But on TikTok was able to amass a following far greater and a much shorter period of time. So this particular segment is focused on our friend Taylor's piece in the Atlantic on this. She has an open-ended question at the end, though, which I think is worth answering, which is how are they going to make money?

The answer to me is really obvious because TikTok is, you know, the English version of a Chinese app, same company, right? Yeah. All by bite dance. And then the Chinese one is called Doing. And it has a bunch more features and monetization methods that you just don't see in the English version yet. And if you just imagine that stuff translating in America, which I think it perfectly can. Can it? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, a lot of it is around e-commerce. A lot of it is around becoming a super app actually even, allowing people to. define restaurants or even book hotels. You have leaderboards of top brands. Basically, commercials you can instantly buy, right? In the U.S., we've talked about when is this interactive TV, you know, world ever going to happen. I don't think it's going to happen on the TV. It's going to happen on the mobile. And short videos are a great way to do it because short videos are, in essence, commercials you want to watch. They can become commercials you want to watch. It's fascinating to me because in China, you have a lot of these TikTok doing short videos,

and you can purchase directly there with like three taps. Right after the video loops twice, a little thing pops up. You can click in, you can buy it, and it gets delivered to you. I'm talking like buying physical things. Fruit is a huge category. What? I'm not kidding. Like, fruit, random gadgets.

Like for the fruit, the grower who's growing oranges, he's showing you his orange farm. Or he's squeezing the orange juice. So you see how juicy it is. And then you can just buy a box of oranges. That's a thing. Oh, my God. It's a huge thing. That's fantastic.

The fruit meme is way better than a 10. next engineer me, I got to say, well, Connie, thank you for joining this segment. All right, so we're doing the next segment on Face App, which is an app that is in the headlines this week. First of all, what it does, it basically morphs your face. So if you're women, you can change your gender into a man, vice versa. It can show you how you age, like how you look when you're old. And of course, people are freaking sharing this because how interesting to share it. Now, I personally am too vain to share something like that. So I would not even share that. The reason it's in news is not because it's going viral because that's not news. The news is that there are claims of Russia collecting facial

recognition data based on this. And it's so concerning that a U.S. Senator wrote a letter to the FBI and FTC asking for investigation into its potential national security threat and its risk to the privacy of Americans given the fears of election hacking. The privacy policy basically says you're allowed to have a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive royalty-free, worldwide, fully paid transferable, sub-licensable access to your photo. But that's kind of a what all apps already do? So what I really want to talk to you about, Joel, especially as a security expert, I want to get your take on should people be worried the people who downloaded this, or is this just app business as usual? Well, I'm a strong believer in the fact that you should

never waste a crisis, right? And so any opportunity we have to get privacy front of mind in people is really important because consumers just don't really appreciate or understand privacy. That said, I think that you actually really, risk is a really funny thing, and it varies from person to person. And so does the average teenager need to care about this? Probably not. If you are a Democratic or a Republican politician that is in the public space, it's probably a bad idea that you give your access to your photos to anybody, right? Why? I don't understand the distinction there, to be honest. Well, there may be photos in there as a high profile individual that may make you susceptible to things like blackmail. When you're a public official, when you're working in the

national security space, when they say something as a threat to national security, they don't always mean that they're going to get the launch codes and take our weapons, they often mean that you're going to get some kind of information that you can use as leverage over a public official. And if you look at most of the national security investigations that happen in this country, they're usually over someone trying to get negative information or they're over some form of kind of information leakage, right? So that helps explain the national security side. I'm very patriotic and, of course, I'm worried about people hacking elections or other things. It did strike me as, you know, kind of xenophobic, actually, to just blandly atta.

accuse an entire country of anything that comes out of Russia and China and all these other countries is dangerous. Absolutely. That just feels like a little bit of fearmongering. I think the important thing that we should be talking about rather than saying that Russia, China and these countries are evil, that's just kind of a ridiculous position to take, right? I think the real discussion we should be having is that every country conceives of privacy in a different way.

What's the U.S. is? Well, in the U.S., generally, we're in this weird place where convenience or features or user experience, right, will always trump privacy and security. So if I can provide you with a widget that gives you 15 minutes of joy, there's some amount of private data that you'll let me extract from you. And so I think the fundamental problem here is that U.S. consumers generally undervalue their private data, whereas I would say German or European or people that have very strong data protection cultures have a much higher price on their data. Right. But these apps are global. I was going to say these laps. Absolutely. Because it's like global apps. These apps are global. And so is their infrastructure. Like in the case of face, that specifically the servers are in the U.S. or so they claim in their response to the concerns.

They also claim that, you know, images are deleted within 48 hours from the upload date. So I guess my question for you is as a user in a practical way, how should someone who's not a politician with a high profile, how should someone really think about like whether they should trust these apps or not? I mean, there's the no-brainer kind of answer to that question, which is that if you have stuff you don't want other people to see, don't give them access to apps that let them get access to that information. Right. And so generally, I think, you know, be conscious and cognizant of the fact that these apps are taking information. They may be taking information that you're not fully aware of. You know, the way that these companies present their terms of service is really designed so that they get people to kind of buy in and accept that transfer. Quite frankly, I don't know anybody who really fucking reads them. I just hit accept. I've never read a policy.

I must shamefully admit that I am one of those people that does. I'm also going to be home alone on Friday. But the fact of the matter is that this language and this legalese is just done to. to confuse consumers. And so exercise some level of practical caution, understand that access to your private information is actually really important. And as we move into this new world and you look at these new apps, these are essentially becoming massive data collection efforts.

And just wait till we add neuralink and BCIs into this whole equation. Well, thank you for joining, Joel. So let's do the last segment of the news on direct listings. Our next A6NC expert is Jamie McGirk, who runs our corporate development function and is a former investment banker.

We recently put out a post all about direct listings, which explains what they are, how they work, and especially given this new trend of companies like Spotify and Slack having done them. So the news here, though, is that IHart Radio, which this shocked me because, first of all, I'm into podcasting, and they're an audio company, and they've been around for a while, and they just announced a direct listing, and that shocked the hell out of me. So, like, that's the news. Like, what's going on? No news, actually.

Okay, you're telling me we shouldn't bother recording this episode now. So I guess what people don't realize is this product has been around for a long time. There were two primary use cases previously for doing a direct listing. One was companies emerging from bankruptcy, and the other was companies being spun off of larger companies. And so IHeart Radio falls into the former category emerging from bankruptcy. So the direct listing product has been more or less repurposed by Spotify and Slack. In recent history as an alternative to the IPO,

they don't suffer the dilution of a traditional IP. and there's no lockup period. So, you know, traditionally you would have 180-day lock-up period in a traditional IPO, and that goes away. So there's a strong momentum for a new way of going public. I mean, basically the point of direct listing is that the company's not raising capital. They're not raising capital, and they're not doing so at an artificially low valuation that exacerbates the dilution that they would otherwise get from fundraising. Right.

But just in the big picture, why this matters, why do you think it's going to be such a big trend in terms of the importance of it? In our blog post, we talked about several different features of the direct list. and why we think that it'll be more popular. You know, I think the short soundbite is that, you know, there's a lot of things broken about the legacy IPO process who really benefits. Is it in the company's best interest to raise capital or to go public in this way?

Yeah. By the way, a lot of those are structural things that are due to lack of technology and transparent information and just time and old policies. Doing things the way that things have always been done. So it's more of an inertia argument as to maybe why the legacy IPO has persisted as long as it has, you know,

it works at really, capital and it works as entering the public markets. It just so happens there is a better way. That's the trend that we see. That's what you and I wrote about. So to bring it back to IHeart Radio then, why this is different Spotify and Slack versus the IHeartRadios of the world. So I think IHeart Radio got a lot of attention because it fell in close time proximity to Slack. It also has a business model that is very similar to Spotify. I think they drafted off the PR headlines of those two by the direct listing, but the emerging from bankruptcy use case is a well-worn path. It just so happens that they had similarities to two of the

recent more, you know, the newer use case direct listening. Thank you, Jamie, for that. And just to be clear to everyone listening, please note that the content here is for informational purposes only, should not be taken as legal business tax or investment advice or be used to evaluate any investment or security, including the ones that we mentioned. It's not directed at any investors or potential investors in any A6 and Z fund. And honestly, any investments or portfolio companies mentioned, referred to, or described in this episode are not representative of all A6 and Z investments, and so there can be no assurance that the investments will be profitable or that other investments made in the future will have similar characteristics or results. You can find a full list of

investments at A6NC.com slash investments and more details on our disclosures at A6ancy.com slash disclosures. And thank you everyone for joining our new segment today.