E170: Tech's Vibe Shift, TikTok ban debate, Vertical AI boom, Florida bans lab-grown meat & more

27:57You know, again, I think that I would take the side in those lawsuits that furries should be allowed, but I think that probably she is being careful here because they are facing so many lawsuits about this training data. It's going to be pretty clear, Trimoff, I think, what the courts will decide here, which is whose opportunity is it to make us Sora in the world if Disney owns a massive collection of IP and somebody should be able to use that IP to make derivative works, should it be Sora or should it be Disney itself? And so I think the journalists know full well what they're doing and how the journalists have their hooks into this for a very real reason.

28:36The journalists are also content creators and now we're going to have this two sides forming journalists. I just worry that these folks are not technical enough to make this decision. And when it goes into a court, how is a judge really going to understand the nuances of this to make a call on this? Or the jury. It's going to be a big education process. Or the jury. Speaking of AI, vertical AI startups are starting to make some noise. We all know about large language models. We've talked about them here. If you listen to this program, you know about OpenAI, Google's, Gemini, previously known is barred and throbbing, clawed, all this stuff.

29:13They're general purpose. They've been trained on the open internet as we were just discussing so they can answer questions about almost anything. And yeah, sometimes it's correct, sometimes they're incorrect, but it's showing promise. There is another school of thought here that's emerging in startups, vertical AI. These companies are kind of taking a job title, a role in society and they are building vertical apps Harvey is AI for lawyers, a bridge is doing an AI note taker for doctors, saves them hours a day according to them. Tax GPT is an AI tax assistant and CRS AI for customer support at the Brett Taylor's new startup.

29:52This week, a startup called cognition, debut, a tool called Devon. They're calling it an AI software engineer that demos when viral on X. You've probably seen them all over the place and in the news. If you watch it, you can see Devon fixing bugs in real time, fine tuning an AI model, building apps, and people are speculating Devon was built on GPT -4 from OpenAI that's not confirmed. But according to the CEO, Devon was built by tweaking reasoning and long -term planning into an existing LLM. Here's how it ranks against other major models on coding benchmarks. They're building all these benchmarks to test each language model.

30:31And as you can see, it's according to this chart and according to their data, doing much better than just a generic language model. It kind of makes sense. Shmots, did you see these demos this week? I think I saw you on the group chat talking about it. And what was your take on these role -based vertical startups? Oh, I think this is so powerful. I mean, it's incredible because we're measuring this progress in like what week over week. It feels like that. Yeah, yeah. I think the point that you should take away is that the most of these very difficult and impenetrable job types for the average person, if you said to them, hey, become a developer, that's like a complicated journey, right?

31:19It's just gonna be now like a command line interface where you just kind of describe in English what you want to do and all of this stuff will just happen behind the scenes and it'll be totally automated. So that'll grow the number of people that can use these tools. At the same time, it'll make the developers I think even more valued because you're going to need people in the guts of these models and in the code that it generates because it's not always going to work perfectly. There's always going to be some kind of hallucination. Some stuff is not going to compile. Now, the demos that they did though were incredible.

31:54They were able to find errors. They were able to remediate errors in code. I mean, I just think it's really, really special. So, Q, you've been on co -pilots for the past year, talking about that. This is slightly different. We're moving from, hey, here's a co -pilot, somebody helping a developer to, hey, here's a developer working, and now they have a supervisor. So what do you think of these sort of role -based agents and how quickly we went from year one co -piloting to, okay, now they're the pilot and we're sitting in the co -pilot seat watching them fly the plane. Yeah, well, look, first of all, everyone's working on autonomous coding or working towards that.

32:33This is like one of the core most obvious use cases of LLMs because code is taxed and it can also be run through a compiler to debug it. So you can also get to, in theory, you can get to high levels of accuracy yet, although So in the example that you gave Jason this new product was only at 13%. So this is a long way to go, but the potential is clearly there. So a lot of companies are working on some variation of this idea. Devon is, I guess you call it an agent first approach. And I think that's very cool for generating new software projects, but where I think this gets much trickier and is much more difficult is when you're working in an existing code basis.

33:19And just to talk about my own book for a second, we're an investor in a company called Source Graph. They have a product called Cody and their whole approach is context first as opposed to agent first is all about getting the co -pilot to work inside of existing code basis. So different companies are coming at this from different approaches. Get up co -pilot I think is kind of more like Cody where it's all about making an existing codebase more useful, whereas Devon again is starting with I think net new codebases, but that's going to demo really well. And so that's what you're seeing is like these really cool demos.

33:52And any event, the larger picture here is that we are going to get better at better at coding autonomously, I guess you could say. And I don't know if it gets ever gets to 100 % where you don't need coders anymore, but it's going to make coders much more productive over time. you're going to get this huge multiplier effect on the ability right code. And that's really exciting for a bunch of obvious reasons. Freiburg, we've been tracking this evolution from Gmail, guess the next word, guess the next phrase, guess the next sentence to co -pilots. Now we have these role -based, agent -based solutions that start ups are pursuing.

34:33What's next? If we follow this thread, what would the next evolution here be? Well, the big push has been for this notion of AGI to replace a human. And I think what we're seeing is software that replaces a specific human doing a specific thing, like being a lawyer, being an accountant, being an art director. or if you think about the internet, when the internet, which was like networking software and the capabilities that arose from the connection of all these computers during the internet era, the innovation was everyone tried to create a business model, which was how do you take an existing vertical business and put it on the internet?

35:16I think what we're seeing in this era is everyone's taking a vertical human and creating a vertical version of a human in the AI era. And so I think like the success will probably accrue to one company that replaces one set of core human services like being a lawyer, being an accountant, you know, being an artist in whatever way, and that that ends up being the specific vertical tool that people will use to automate and scale up their ability to do that task in an automated way. Because I think that there's like a great deal of capability that emerges in the fine tuning and the unique data that certain people may have to make that one tool better than the rest.

36:03And therefore everyone will end up using this one lawyer service or this one accounting service or what have you. So I definitely think that's kind of what we're seeing. Yeah, I think it's pretty obvious where this is going. You got co -pilot assisting a developer or a lawyer than the next world writer. Then they got the next phase. is, okay, you've got a peer. So you're doing peer programming or somebody's kind of working alongside you. You're checking their work. Hey, maybe they're even checking your work seeing if you have bugs. Where this is going to be next year is there's going to be a conductor.

36:31There's going to be somebody who has a role or a piece of software has a role where you say, hey, you're a CEO of a company, you're a founder, a product manager. Here's your lawyer, here's your accountant. Here's your developers, here's your designer. And now you will coordinate those five people. Now imagine how that changes startups when you as an individual have a conductor working with you and says, you know what? I don't know if I agree with this legal advice that's coming in relation to the tax advice and maybe we should not even add this feature to the program. Let's talk to the product manager, the agent product manager, about taking that feature out so we don't have these downstream legal issues.

37:09And we don't even have to file taxes in this area. It's going to get really interesting next year when they have a conductor. The other way it may go, Jason, is you have a lawyer that has 50 associates working for them through the AI. So you don't replace the lawyer, you don't replace the software engineer, the software engineer levels up. And now the software engineer has 50 engineers available, 50 agents running, doing tasks for them. Because you do still need humans with domain expertise and creativity to think through architecture, to think through process, and to make sure that the AI agents are doing their job.

37:44So I think what it creates is extraordinary leverage for people and organizations, which is why generally economic productivity goes up. People don't lose jobs, they level up. In this phase, the the op -X of companies will probably be cut in half. At the limit, I think Jason is actually absolutely right. I think you find that there'll be millions of companies with one person and then a whole layer of software and conductors and agents and bots. That's the future. So you won't have these engineering people, that person should be running their own company. And so you'll just have millions and millions and millions and maybe billions of companies.

38:20And I think that that's really exciting. Not all of them will work, many of them will fail, and a few of them will be ginormous. And it'll be up to the person who can navigate and be a conductor, as you said, you know. Yeah, you think about it. That's going to be really interesting. The solo entrepreneur movement of last couple of years, there were all these kind of like independent hackers building one item like Phil Kaplan did with um distro kid he said like two or three people working on that got very big. You know I was telling you guys about that slope sap I showed you I I reached out to the founder of that and it's like hey tell me about the business like it's enough of a business to support one person or two people like there will be a lot of these apps or services one conductor and yeah it makes what half million a year three million a year whatever it's enough to support one two three people working on it but previously You know, you'd be going to the venture community, you're like, oh, what did it take a modern app company, sacks to kind of build an Android and an iOS app just, you know, five, ten years ago, if we were funding one, ten years ago, what would the footprint look like for a consumer app company?

39:26If you're going to go all the way back to like the late 90s during the dot com era, I We had, I'd say, a dozen developers and it was pretty expensive and we had to set up our own co -load. There was all this infrastructure that all got distracted away with AWS. Then you moved to the mobile air and the app stores provide, there's just a lot more developer tools, a lot more APIs. Yeah, it was well as distribution. But it's far easier to code these apps. So definitely things have gotten easier and easier. That's the trend if that's the point you're trying to make. It's certainly never been easier to get started in creating something if you're a solo developer.

40:09Yeah. That being said, I think that depending on what you're trying to do, it's still usually the case that if you're trying to do something interesting and profound, you're going to need a small team of developers and a couple million bucks to get you started. Yeah. It used to be a rule of thumb, I think. Twelve people for an app company. You got two or three working on each platform, a couple designers, testing. and design UX, you get to 10, 12 people to run a modern one. All right, everybody. Next issue, the house just asked a bill that would either ban TikTok or forces sell. We talked about this bill being proposed last week and things had moved really slowly on the TikTok band.

40:52Now they're moving really fast on Wednesday. The house passed the bill with a bipartisan vote of 352 to 65, making this one of the few subjects that members of Congress can agree on. Biden has also signaled his intent to sign the bill into law. Should it pass the Senate passing the Senate? That could be an obstacle, Democratic, Jari leader Chuck Schumer has signaled a lack of interest in the subject and said he'll review the bill with committee chairs before deciding on the path forward arguments for and against the bill have sent it around a few main points reciprocity. We talked about that here.

41:23You can't use Instagram, X or any of our domestic social networks in China. and if they won't allow us to their country, why should we give them unrestricted access to ours, stifling debate, aggressive sphere. This isn't really about national security. Their position is mainstream politicians are hoping to shut down political discourse, particularly among the youth who are mostly on TikTok, particularly pro -Palestinian and anti -Israel discourse, which seems to flourish on TikTok versus other platforms, coincidentally, Joe Biden launched a TikTok account last month, and his comments were instantly flooded with pro -Palestinian remarks, some calling him genocide, Joe.

42:08Third argument overwatched some. I think you've pointed out that the language in this law is a bit vague. It needs to be tightened up. Maybe the president could go after companies, supposedly aligned with foreign interests who aren't are esteemed, Patriot and friend Keith Roboi argued with you, sacks on this on X. And then there are guys like Trump and Vivek, who I believe are flip -flopping based on securing bags. Vivek called TikTok Digital Fentanyl and Trump issued an executive order calling for bite dance to divest TikTok in 2020. Now they're both opposing the ban. And interestingly, both Trump and Vivek have ties to the Republican Megadona Jeffrey.

42:50Yes, who is a major shareholder in bite dance with a reported $15 to $30 billion stake? He gave Vivek $5 million. Who knows what Trump's gotten, but they said they're back in love. Sacks, you had this big back and forth with Keith Roboi on X. Are you in support of the divestiture or not? I haven't been able to track exactly where you're at at this. Well, I think my take on this, and I'm going to have to revise and extend my remarks from last week, because I didn't know as much about the bill. I hadn't actually read the language yet, and now I have. And my take on this is that the bill poses significant risk of being Patriot Act 2 .0.

43:33So in other words, you know, a threat to the security of the United States is basically hyped up. Some part of it may be real, some of it may be threat inflation and then we give the intelligence community and the government new powers which can then be abused. And that's exactly what happened with the Patriot Act. They ended up spying on Americans. Now, what is the potential abuse here? This is the thing that I've debated with Keith and there's also other people who I respect a lot and Keith, by the way, is a very talented lawyer in addition to other things being a successful founder and investor and investor.

44:11And then And I saw that cigar and Jenny, who's show I was just on, thinks that the bill is just fine. So look, there are people, very legit people who disagree with me about this. But I went last night and I read this bill like four times to try and parse the language. And I've just come away concluding, there's no, the way I see it, there's no way to argue that this language isn't vague and could invite abuse. And you really have to dig into it. But let me just kind of walk you through, I think a key part of it. So first of all, this bill doesn't just ban or force the divester of TikTok. It goes after what it calls foreign adversary controlled applications.

44:55Now what is a foreign adversary? There are four countries that are defined as foreign adversaries. It's basically Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. I'm not super worried about that list of foreign adversaries growing because that does take a bunch of procedural hoops to go through it. What I am concerned about is when the bill talks about what makes a company controlled by a foreign adversary. And if you go to that language, which is then a definition, so what frequently happens with these bills is a lot of the meat is actually in the definitions. You have to look at this very carefully. It says here, the term controlled by foreign adversaries means with respect to a cover company that such company or entity is and then there's three categories.

45:39The first category is a foreign person which can also mean a foreign corporation that's domiciled in or is headquartered or has a principal place at business or is it organized under the law of foreign adversary country. So that would be like bite dance okay bite dance is a Chinese company okay then it says or it can be an entity where 20 % of the ownership group is in that foreign person category. So So that would be like, let's say you had a US company, but 20 % of the company was owned by, I don't know, Chinese VCs or by bite dance. That would also be controlled by a foreign adversary. Then you get to the provision that I think is the most problematic, which is it's a person's subject to the direction or control of a foreign person or entity.

46:28The novel language here is where it says subject to the direction of. Okay. It's not just saying under the control of. It's saying subject to the direction of. In my view, that's very vague. And a creative prosecutor, a creative attorney general could try to say, well, wait a second, if Elon has a major Tesla factory in Shanghai, is he subject to the direction of the Chinese he's Communist Party because they could influence him, they could leverage him. If Donald Trump is accused on virtually a daily basis of being a Russian asset, is he subject to the direction of Vladimir Putin? David from just tweeted very recently that he said not only Trump at the entire Republican Party that works for Trump is under the direction of Russia.

47:20Yeah, that's like a partisan hack though. That's not like actual factual in a court, right? But so this would have to be proven factual in the court. Okay. Do you think or no? Well, the AG could open an investigation based on the theory that, for example, Trump owns true social and Trump is under the direction of a foreign adversary, i .e. Putin, because the mainstream media continues to normalize this idea and spread this idea on virtually a daily basis. So the point is that, look, first the AG would open an investigation. You think about the sledgehammer type of remedy here that an Elon or a Trump or a you take rumble for example, which is also accused of being a Russian agent.

48:06They could be forced to divest the company or to have an event. So it gives huge, I think, new powers to the executive branch to pursue political opponents and political enemies. whether they actually win an accord of law down the road is kind of secondary because they can vex and harass their political enemies using this power. So my point is that at a minimum, I think this language needs to get cleaned up. I think it is way too vague. And you still have the issue of whether it's a good idea or not to force the banning or divestor of TikTok. But this bill goes way beyond it. Again, it creates this novel category of foreign adversary controlled applications, which also, like I said, includes websites.

48:54And that means not just foreign companies, but domestic companies as well that are set to be under the direction of a foreign actor. So again, I don't know how anyone can look at this language and not say it's too vague. Yeah, it's easy enough to tighten it up. And if it was tightened up, you'd be in favor of the Tik Tok man, I'd take it, Zach, or divestiturize just a keep. I keep saying ban, you'd still want the Chinese government to not have control of this or by dance. I still have very mixed feelings about the idea of just the TikTok ban because look, you're talking about an app that 100 million Americans use for something like 90 minutes a day.

49:33So people obviously get a lot of value out of this. I've yet to see the hard proof that this app is under the control of the CCP. I mean, I know that allegation was made. I can understand why people don't get to it. journalists are ready. Yeah. But it's very unclear to me that they have the goods on that. And I do think that depriving Americans of the right to use this app that they clearly enjoy and love based on a threat that has yet to be proven, that makes me, I'm deeply ambivalent about that. Shmoth, if we were to look at, say, media channels, newspapers, there has been rules about far an ownership of those.

50:14Do you believe TikTok kind of falls into that as SAC said? Americans are enjoying this in a massive way. 100 million plus 90 minutes a day. The statistics are crazy. That actually I think argues for not having a foreign adversary own this or have access to it. We wouldn't allow them to own CNN, Fox, New York Times, Washington Post, etc. We have rules against that already. So are you in favor of this TikTok divestiture? Yes or no? Yeah. Okay. Freeberg. I'd like to hear and expand on that. I'll tell you, before I tell you why, I'll tell you a quick story. Two or three months ago, after Joker was sick, we started to make his own dog food, right?

51:03So to have like a super bland diet, we had the service that was sending us food and we got rid of it and and we would just make it ourselves. And part of the meal was like some raw apples and carrots that I would cut up. And I would always complain to that. I'm like, I hate peeling these apples or whatever, slicing them and taking the core out. Just said that. For the next month and a half, all I got was apple -coring utensils on TikTok. And she was like, oh, you know, we should get rid of XYZ food service. and she would just get plastered with these ads. And it was just a reminder to me that these apps are constantly listening.

51:45Now that's a benign example, but my phone is on my desk when I'm talking about some really important stuff. Again, important related to me, both personal and professional, where there's lots of money on the line. There's moments where, for certain parts of my business, like with crypto, we have like 19 layers of people that you have passwords upon passwords upon passwords to do stuff. The phone is always there. It was just a reminder to me. So I deleted TikTok. It's gone. Which sucks because I would relax with that app at night. Like, you know, I would have 15, 20 minutes where I would defund us.

52:23It's super fun. It's a great app. I have to be honest with you. I love it. But as a consumer, that was the decision I made. As a business person, what I'll say is, It is inconceivable to me that our voice signatures aren't being mapped and there isn't a massive sort of file and repository that is understanding what we are all saying. And it's then further inconceivable to me that there isn't a service that's an identifying that this is probably David Sachs and this is Jamat and this is Freiburg. And we're not really all that important, but let's take a better example. This is Elon Musk. This is the president of the United States.

53:10This is, or the waiter that works for the president who has his phone in his pocket while he's sitting inside the, you know, the, the, the residences of the White House. So I think it's happening. I think they're not the only one though. I think there's American companies that are doing it too. And so I think that we need to start somewhere until we can have our apps in a market. They shouldn't have their apps here. And I think that should be the end of it. Completely reasonable, I think. I'm going to disagree. I think a couple of points. I don't believe in the notion of like reciprocity for reciprocity sake.

53:53China blocks access to US content. Does that mean the US government should block access to international content? I think the answer is no, because this country is different than China. We have afforded ourselves freedoms and liberties that don't exist in other countries, freedom of choice, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and so on. So I don't think that the government should be restricting access to content because another country restricts access to our content. I think that we should make decisions based on what's right for the citizens, what's right for the country, what's right for national security.

54:25What about spying apps? So that's my next point. So I do think that if there is a case to be made that there is spying or data acquisition that's going on through these apps, we're not talking about rice noodles over here. You know, we're talking about spying apps. And so I think if that's true, then I would imagine that there are multiple paths to alleviate that, like move all the servers to the US and separate the entity, force a sale. I don't think that it's necessarily appropriate to say that there aren't other courses or other options available to try and prohibit what should generally be prohibited, which is spying on American citizens and capturing data that people haven't opted into being captured.

55:10I do believe that citizens and people should have the right to decide if they want to have their data used to be able to access an app. I actually am not a big believer that we should be paternalistic in the government sense and saying having the government come in and say here's an app and we have determined that it is not good for you because this data is being used in a manipulative way against you. I think that citizens should be afforded transparency and make a decision about whether or not they want to participate in that. I don't think citizens have the sophistication to understand what foreign adversaries again.

55:41We only have four so they were named there for a reason are doing with our data and I don't think that they should have to be forced to choose. I think that, you know, this is not dissimilar to how the FDA says, you're not qualified to decide whether this drug is good. We will tell you. And people are okay with that because you are saying, this is part of the government infrastructure that's full of experts who know the totality of a subject. And so the problem is in order for anybody to make a reasonable decision, you'd have to share so much as to just completely blow up a bunch of national security, which is not going to happen.

56:12Well, look, I think we can have audit rights and we can have rights to protect our citizens. I think that that's appropriate. I'll also say my final point on this, I think that whether it's intentional or not, this sort of action leads to inevitable cronism and regulatory capture. Who does this benefit? If TikTok gets banned in the US, it's going to benefit meta. It's going to benefit Instagram. It's going to benefit a few other social networks. It's going to benefit Elon at Twitter. There's a few folks that are going to benefit pretty significantly if TikTok is banned because all those users are going to migrate.

56:45I will also say, by the way, that many thousands of people make their living on TikTok like it or not, it's a big income stream for a lot of people in the US and a really important part of their livelihood. And just to be clear here, this is not about banning TikTok. This is about divestiture. Then, if it's not divested, then it gets banned. So if you just think from first principles here, why wouldn't they divest it? Why would the CCP keep this? the reason is this is a incredibly powerful tool under no circumstances would the Chinese government ever allow us to have this kind of reach into their populace and if you want to judge a person you can just look at their behavior.

57:23Citizens in China live either in a complete police state where everything they do is tracked, every transaction, facial recognition, every step they take, every purchase they make is tracked or you're in a literal concentration Kim. That's how the people of China live today. We are their adversary. They have noted that we're their adversary. Under what circumstances would you think they would treat us any differently than they treat their own citizens? It is absolutely insane that anybody would take the side of the CCP on this. You are asking them to divest. You're not asking them to shut it down.

58:01That is a partisan sort of angle on this. And there is a lot of partisanship going on on the edges on this. But what we have to realize, they would never allow us to do this to their citizens. And how they treat their citizens is obvious. As an example, we've tried, you know, we tried to export sugar via McDonald's and Coke. And actually they have domestic brands that they were able to support and prop up. So they have more control of that too. So even even even our downstream attempts to actually send products that theoretically over long periods of time aren't necessarily beneficial. They've they're smart enough to actually blunt.

58:35Yeah, and they don't let their kids play video games or use TikTok. Well, even video games, they saw video games are bad. It's not like they're like, oh, Activision, come on in, the doors are open. They're like, you can use it an hour. No, I think it's like three hours a week and certain kids, and then the weekends and certain kids are totally bent. They have an ability to make strategic decisions that benefit their population. And I think that we have never attempted to. I'm not saying that this law is gonna be great, But you'd have to be extremely naive to assume that there is nothing bad going on here with this app.

59:06It doesn't mean that there's nothing bad going on with all the other apps. I am assuming that all these apps have foreign actors that have infiltrated them. I think that's the right posture to have. I don't have Instagram on my phone. I don't have Facebook on my phone. I don't have TikTok anymore on my phone. The only thing that's left is X. And at some point, if those apps can prove that there's a chain of custody, so for example, one thing that I thought of you could do is you could put some kind of like, I tar regulations around this so that only U .S. citizens could work on these apps. Any app that is ambiantly observing you, I think the overwhelming majority of people, it's very benign implications.

59:49But the whole point is that if you have 300 million people that are being observed, you're going to get also the 1 ,000 or 10 ,000 that are super important and you're going to catch stuff that you're not allowed to know. And that's not ready doing this. Pull up the article Nick. TikTok has already admitted to and been caught with their hand in the cookie jar spying on journalists. We know that they're doing this already and we know they're track record for spying on their own people. This is the no -brainer of no -brainer decisions just to invest. And if they won't invest, it tells you everything you need to know.

1:00:27This is super valuable to them and that algorithm is so valuable that they know they can program the US citizenry. I think the other problem is I'm not sure that the people with the technical sophistication will have the time to then actually go and audit the code base to really know that there aren't any easter eggs in here and there aren't real backdoors. And they won't lose. So this is my point. I think divestiture should not be allowed. I actually just think unfortunately this app should just be shut down and The people will migrate to Instagram and the people will migrate to YouTube and new products and or new products and the thing there is that at least these are American controlled and are there data leaks happening in those apps?

1:01:07Probably But it's at least not so brazenly obvious Sacks your thoughts. I'm a little confused here. Are you guys saying that the Chinese government uses TikTok to spy on the own population? Or they ban it because they think it's harmful? No, they ban TikTok there because it's harmful. No, they complete control over TikTok. Yes. And they control that. In their country, they use camera sacks and you know this full well on every single corner with facial recognition and every one of their phones is tracked. You know this full well, Sacks. They are spying on that podcast. Do they allow TikTok or not?

1:01:41No, they have band Tic -Tac. They have a different version called Damien. They have a different version. And in that version, they're all women. And they doien push math. Doien's algorithms are very different. They push educational content. So basically, on the bite dance board, what happened with this whole thing is the CEO and the founder had to step down effectively. They brought in effectively new management. And in that, the CCP is a board director and has what's called the golden vote. So they effectively decide. And so what you saw were the algorithms moreover time from pure entertainment to things that pushed a lot of educational content.

1:02:22They also then imposed broadly speaking limits on content that they didn't like. They would only allow in other apps experiences where they also have a board seat now and a golden vote, as Jason said, games can only be played in certain apps for certain amounts of time. So they've made their own decisions about what's good for their own population. The flavor of the app that's here, my biggest point is that again, you have to pick the lesser evil. I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that all these apps are infiltrated. But this one is more brazen because it is really the only one that's completely and obviously foreign control.

1:03:03And I don't think that if you try to divest it, You will get any assurance that that code is reliable. And so you'd have to build the whole thing from scratch all over again. For what is worth, the company has said that they're going to move all of their hosting in the US to Oracle data centers in the US. David, you and I know what that means. I could you imagine a migration like that? Who is going to look at every single endpoint, every single line of code? That is a joke that's meant to alay people who are not technical. Right. Yep. Yeah. 100 percent of agree with them. All right. It seems like we're, I don't know if we're 2v2 here, but look, are you, you know, not been sex with the language is corrected?

1:03:42Are you ban or divest or what? I'm ambivalent about it because I'm open to the idea of banning the foreign app in this way. But the reason why I'm a little bit ambivalent about it is because A, I think that what they're doing has to be proven as opposed to just a bunch of hand waving over it. And when you start talking about what's happening to the Uighurs, it's a concentration camps, and the spine that has nothing to do with this particular app, and in fact, you've revealed this app doesn't even function in China. I think this is a lot of hand waving going on, not a lot of hard proof. And I don't think that one little story in the New York Times, I would consider hard proof.

1:04:22I agree with sex. Yeah. So that's number one, is I'm open to this idea, but I want to see hard proof. Number two is, I don't think you're going to get it. I think the NSA and the CIA will read in the intelligence committee and there's a subcommittee that's probably been read in, but I can guarantee you the American public will not get written on what we've mentioned set on CNBC today by the way. That, you know, he has based on his information, he believes strongly that they should divest whether it's to his group or another group. These guys have lied so many times about so many things. I mean, I just think the public has a right to know.

1:04:54Look, if 100 million Americans are going to be deprived of using an app they love, why can't we get a little bit more information? Well, they're not exactly what they're saying. What's that app is done wrong? They're saying it. They're saying it's in control. It's being controlled by a foreign advocacy. They are saying it. The bill says it. What is debatable? They're telling you. That means all that means is that the app is owned by by dance, which is, you know, here's what's unique about this bill. It's incorporated in China. Here's what's unique about this bill. It got out of committee 50 to zero.

1:05:26It was overwhelmingly approved by both sides of the House and it looks like in the Senate there may be some refinements that happened but it's going to get largely overwhelmingly approved there as well. It's a very unique moment in time where you see in today's political landscape such uniformity. And again, I'm not going to go and defend these folks, but except to say that where there's smoke, there's probably fire. And I think that in this specific narrow case, again, we're not talking about food stuffs or lumber, right? We're talking about a technological application that is observing a lot of people on a continuous 24 by 7 basis.

1:06:09I suspect this law would not have gotten out of committee 50 to zero. had they not been read in by the NSA and the CIA. And that will never see the light of day because we will never be disclosed that information. Okay, so it could have been 49 to one, David. You know what I mean? Yeah, another question. Let me just add one more time to that. I want to respond to that. If it's ideological, I could see it being 40 to 10. If it's ideological, I could be seeing it 35 to 15, 48 to two. It was 50 to zero. So what's the Patriot Act? Look, there's an old saying in Washington that the worst ideas are bipartisan.

1:06:42in. These guys were all being stampeded into this act. They brought it up and passed it with hardly any debate. I've already shown you how the language of the bill is overly broad. It's not just a TikTok ban. It says that any app or website, did you know that? Any app or website domestically that's subject to the direction of a foreigner from one of these countries. Four countries. North Korea, Russia, China. I said a foreigner from one of those countries. Yeah, I know. I'm trying to make sure I'm clear for the audience. All you got to do is make that argument. If you're an EG who wants to go after one of our domestic platforms, that's all you got to do to bring them under your thumb.

1:07:22What would be the proper route if a US platform was in fact compromised by the Chinese, North Koreans, or Iran? What would be the proper path in your mind? Wouldn't that concern you? If an app is sharing US data in a way that it shouldn't, then why wouldn't it be possible? Yeah, which is what this is saying right the AG's would go. It's not it's not even it's banning TikTok. Okay subject to maybe investor happens, but there's a lot of people who think that the six months they're giving for this is not going to work and the Chinese government may not go for the idea of allowing TikTok to be bought by an American company because they may not like the president that creates.

1:08:00So again, I think you're answering your own question. I think you're making a very important and good point, which is there's so much body of business the slot here. And there's so many state AGs who would want to make their bones. And you see the state AGs trying to build their credibility going after Facebook for sexual exploitation and all of this stuff. They're to your point, David. There is such a body of lawsuits and law and precedent that TikTok could have been prosecuted and under. It's very odd and rare that there's been a complete detente where this thing came on from up above and everybody he just got on board.

1:08:36And all I'm saying is in these very rare and unique instances where somebody shelved their own personal political aspirations. There's probably more that we don't know. My alarm bells go off when DC acts with this kind of unanimity because the only time they ever do that when they've become a unit party is when the national security state wants some new power. I agree with you. This is how we got into the last more. It's good to be vigilant. Almost unanimous. This is how we got into the Patriot Act. I'm not saying It's right. I'm not saying. It's not my idea that gives the federal government more power.

1:09:11Ends up being almost unanimous. You're absolutely right. And I'm agreeing with you. They were read in at a national security level that got them to become a uniparty on this topic. We are never going to get, and I'm just, you know, responding to fever. We are never going to get read in. We the people because of this like phony concern about, they always like classification. They don't want the public to know something. Now, by the way, the good news is? No, but by the way, give us the proof. Why can't they give us the proof? I don't think it needs to be proof. It's the potential damage here that they're saying is the problem, Saks.

1:09:42They could wake up this algorithm at any point in time and they could steer people's thinking. They have already steered it. Your party has talked incessantly about how TikTok has steered cultural issues in a certain direction. Thus, lives of TikTok, all this kind of stuff. There is ample evidence that these social networks and these videos do influence young people. So if young people are addicted to this, which they clearly are, and if young people are influenced by this, which they clearly are, there are just facts that are indisputable. The Chinese could wake this up at any time and steer political issues.

1:10:20Left, right, center, cross chaos, it is the potential harm here, SACS, that is the concern. It's not just that they're doing it now. It's that they could do it in the future. And if you were to take this and you were to put, let's say this was North Korea or Iran, would you allow North Korea or Iran to own this app in the United States? No, of course he would. I think my point would be the same, which is I want to see some proof, hold on, let me make a couple of points. Number one, I want to see some proof that this is actually spyware. That to me has been alleged. And if it's as such a slam dunk case, as you say, why is there no proof of this?

1:10:59So that's point number one. And by the way, if the phone is just saying they're passively listening to you and that's the spyware, Apple should really address that because the option to be able to do that. Right. So that's like Apple's problem. With respect to the data, supposedly being leaked to the Communist Party, again, I want to see what data we're talking about. Like what TikTok videos I like, what's important about that data? There are bundles of data that are available on the open market that they can buy it about users. I don't think that's what it is. What is it? These microphones are on 24 -7.

1:11:35These apps are allowed to passively listen in the background. No, I want to just call Apple not to allow that. I think that could be a partial solve too. What would an - Your phone should not be passively listening to you. You should have to stick in your face and talk to it if you want to activate the microphone. Well, the problem is when you download these apps, you create these settings, and so you have to try to convince 100 million people that hey, you shouldn't do that. Maybe you should only do it when you use the app in a specific way, and it kills the usability, and so people get lazy, and they're like, ah, default on.

1:12:05Look, what I'm saying here is that the way the microphone should work on Apple products is that it should be a little work. Yeah, it should. I think it's going to work that way. I don't know if that is the listening and it's like the key issue here. Well, I mean, who knows what's possible in terms of hacking and spyware? You know, those are all, you know, I think knowns. So. OK, so one by one, we're kind of knocking out all these issues. It's not possibly listening. The data that is reflecting doesn't see. We don't know. Has that happened? It's important. With respect to steering, I agree. I guess that's a theoretical problem.

1:12:43but you could say that about any of these apps, and you're on a slippery slope to basically a first amendment problem, because they're not letting users get the content that they actually won. All right, I guess we'll read a distant problem. And then one final point about the reciprocity argument is if you want to make this about reciprocity, then put it in a trade bill. That's where you deal with reciprocity is you say, okay, these products from China get to play in US markets, its our products, the United States gets play in Chinese markets, you do it through a trade bill. This is not a trade bill.

1:13:17This gives a new power to the government to define foreign adversary -controlled applications or websites. Fribert, you wanted to give you a chance to answer the two questions. Are you in favor of divestiture? If it was Iran, who owned the app, would you feel different? I don't know about divestiture until to Saks's point. I haven't heard a clear point of or clear, like, he's of information about what this app uniquely does that other apps don't do that creates a threat. It's just not clear to me. So in general, I'm not in fan of, like, forcing companies to divest and forcing things to be shut down and taking away human consumer choice.

1:14:00I just don't think those are good things generally. Okay. And I'm not, to Saxx's point, I'm just not compelled that there's something here based on what I've seen. And then, like, if Iran owned TikTok, I don't care who owns it based on my prior statement. I think people should have choice to use what they want to use provided that there is no spine. If there's spine, I want to know that there's spine and how it's happening. We need to technically fix that. If someone can passively turn on a microphone on an app and listen to people in a room, you have pretty smart scientists. We've proven that it's possible.

1:14:30And then they can also, we should fix that. That should be fixed. They can also know your location. That's a bigger problem. Then you need to shut down all the iPhones. There's an Israeli software company. We all know what it's called. We all can go and license the software from them. Okay, they they will help you do this so yeah, I'm sorry guys But that's not a problem Apple needs to patch it. That's exactly right. That's all the problem I don't want a domestic app to be able to do that to me. Yeah Exactly it is happening and it hasn't been fixed and it's not that it hasn't been fixed the point is when you have a large technical Surface area you guys know this there are bugs all the time like we deal with for example So thread factors all the time into like Microsoft has dealt with these for 50 years, right?

1:15:12Every new update of Windows, every little thing has all of these little backdoors and little threads that won't cleaned up properly. So this is an ongoing lack of more problem. And the reality is that a very small technical team has and always been able to stay a few steps ahead of Apple. And many of these apps in all I'm saying is you should just not be so naive as to assume that this Apple is something that this is something Apple can fix. I think that a small talented team of hackers, whoever they work for, will always be able to find these backdores in every single new release of every single operating system, and they will be a few steps ahead.

1:15:49So if you have any way, because all the data is ready out there. So I think the point is so knowing that if you want to maybe minimize the surface area of how bad this data leaks to just the foreign actors that have infiltrated our American companies, you can ban TikTok. Okay. If you want to just open the door, do it, keep it around. Look, like I said at the beginning, I'm ambivalent about this because if you can prove to me that there's really a national security threat and that your remedy for dealing with it is narrowly tailored, then I'm potentially on board with this. But I don't believe the threat has been proven and I certainly don't think the remedy is narrowly tailored.

1:16:26In fact, it's expansive and it's going to lead to weaponization and I don't trust the government to define new new categories of foreign controlled applications and websites. I think you're probably right, which is the unfortunate part, but I do think that there's enough of these folks that have been read into something that we're not being told. And I have zero faith in that. Yeah, I'm not going to say that it's accurate or not, but I'm saying I suspect that some body of work from a three -letter agency has made its way to enough of these people under confidentiality where they've all agreed.

1:17:05The national security state has a secret reason for wanting to expand its powers. That doesn't feel much with any confidence. Again, Patriot Act 2 .0, that's where I started with this. No, I don't think this is the Patriot Act because the Patriot Act was like, I'm going to have now a broad license to probe anything I want. This is about saying this thing that is here can no longer be here. So it's not focused on TikTok. It's focused on, again, first and over and foremost, I'm saying is on a single application, which includes websites. The Patriot Act was about the government being able to go proactively wherever they wanted when they weren't allowed.

1:17:41That is not what this bill says. This bill is more reactive in saying, okay, you out out of the sandbox. And all I'm saying is you're right that that could be abused, but that's very different than the Patriot Act, which was very aggressive. All right, so there you have folks. Two people looks like agree with the divestiture. Two people have a different opinion. Well, I don't agree with the divestiture. I think it should be shut down. Okay, shut down, yeah. So shut down divestiture looks like a lot of opinions. That's good. Lots of opinions, that's good. Okay. I think we just had more debate over this than the entire US Congress did.

1:18:17Perhaps. I mean, I think that's why people listed in this program because we're literally getting into the absolute finest details and asking really propane question sex. I love. A hundred million people are soon going to be asking when TikTok gets shut down. A hundred million people who used it every day are going to be like, why did this happen? I'm going to say something about that. One of my kids and I'm not going to say who it is. We recently had them tested for ADHD. They weren't doing particularly great in school. the response by some of the folks in the school was, oh, there's meds for that, we're like nomads.

1:18:55And what we did was we took away their iPad and we completely deprived them of all these apps and video games. I cannot describe to you the magnitude of the turnaround in this kid.

1:19:13grades incredible, where they were getting 60 % and 70 % now getting 90 % totally engaged interesting charming kid that had lost a little bit and I think that there was a little bit of a days and I just want to say that in general as a parent, whether the app is banned or not who cares, might lived experience right now is that video games and these apps are horrible for kids. This is a known fact actually, to my father looked into this as well. It turns out students who used iPads and digital media many times a day, they show the exact signs of ADHD inattention and hyperactivity and impulsivity.

1:19:58So whether you think ADHD is a real diagnosis or not, it's inducing those symptoms. I'm willing to say that my child probably had a very light form of it. Maybe it was exacerbated by these video games and the iPad and these apps and, you know, they were getting all the TikTok content, but they were getting it on YouTube. Alerts. Alerts, all this. Anyways, went to zero. Not like you can have a little bit here or there, zero, and the transformation in this last month and a half, two months has been incredible. I don't know if other parents are dealing with this, but what I'll tell you is, Veebs apps are not good.

1:20:34So this whole consumer choice thing, I think my view is a little tainted because I get agitated as a responsible parent. I'm like, just get this app out of here. And I already know that I'm addicted to it and it's not good for me. I have no idea what it's doing to my kids and I just don't wanna deal with it. If you look at the correlation between all of these symptoms showing up in kids, it's basically the introduction of the iPhone. And so people are kind of reaching consensus that the iPhone and distraction ADHD, spiking, depression, all this stuff, anxiety, and kids is correlating with too much green time.

1:21:08You can do your own research folks. Maybe it correlates with prescription of SSRIs. Maybe it correlates with schools going totally woke and bananas. I call it a lot of things. COVID definitely exacerbates. COVID exacerbated it when you look at the the trend lines for sure. And the SSRIs and those kind of things being prescribed is probably as a result of these ADHD symptoms coming from screen time. And then it's probably a necessary. I think people just got a lot more prescription happy. They're just really not over prescription. They're willing to put kids on drugs for, I mean, you're talking about ADHD for young boys.

1:21:52That's kind of like this normal behavior. Yeah, no, absolutely. Kids running around outside and having energy. If I had to pick an age, I would say 16, 17, 18 years old for social media and for phones, I would say 15 or 16, with a very controlled phone. So that's just one person's opinion. All right. Florida's on the verge of banning lab -grown meat. Favorite, can you tee this up for us? Yeah, so Florida has been debating a bill in the state legislature since November. and it just passed the House and the Senate a vote of 8627 in the House, 2820 in the Senate, to prohibit the manufacturing sale, holding or distribution of cultivated meat.

1:22:32And it basically makes the sale or ownership of cultivated meat a second degree misdemeanor. This is lab -grown meat. And this bill is now on DeSantis's desk for signing. I'll highlight a little bit of the motivation and some of the technical background of my point of view on it. Do you see him eating the meat while you're talking about it? Did you see the eating of each? I'm paying attention. Unlike you guys. He's got this like flunstone size. Ham hog. We're all listening. Good. It feels like a non -issue to folks who eat meat and don't care, but I just want to point out how much of this is generally a challenge to enabling choice in new innovative technology, which we've seen a tense of this in the past.

1:23:19But what is the reason to ban lab -grown people? They love to ban sh** in Florida. The motivation is that Florida ranchers felt that the - Well, I think the guy who just has been advocating for banning TikTok this whole show is now accusing Florida of being into banning. Are you fucking boy? And it's said it loves to bitch. I'm the only person on this pod who actually freeberg is too, who are skeptical of like, does knee jerk banning everything? Ban everything. I would not ban this. I didn't say to ban everything. Where is that? Where is that? Don't label me with your J. Cal brush. That's a bad everything.

1:23:58I just definitely become an unashamed to be against government intervention in free decision -making and commerce by individual citizens. Florida ranchers felt that their livelihood was threatened. They have a billion dollar ranching business a year in Florida. Good for them. They should go ahead and compete with whatever new technology is emerging. I would say try a little role reversal. Imagine if governments and states tried to ban the use of the tractor for fear of putting agricultural cultural workers out of business, or software companies that did accounting software got banned because it could put accountants out of business, or electric heart production and use got banned because it could put traditional automotive manufacturers out of business.

1:24:40You could go down the list and you could create this position on nearly any newer emerging technology that feels threatening to an incumbent industry. And ultimately, it really only yields to regulatory capture and to a lack of choice and opportunity for new innovation and for consumers to make decisions about what they want. And the irony here is that so much of what's being consumed in the market space today, part of their rationalization is, oh, well, it's new technology. We don't know if it's good for you. We don't know if it's going to work. The truth is there are federal regulatory bodies that have oversight on this sort of thing.

1:25:1320 years ago, almost all the cheese that we ate in the United States was made from rennet. Rennet is an enzyme that converts the protein and milk into cheese. we got rennet from the stomach of calves. We would scrape it out and sell rennet and it would be used to make cheese. Then recombinant engineering where we could put, we could get bacteria or yeast cells to make proteins. This technology unlocked the opportunity to make rennet more affordably. So rather than go and slaughter calves and get the rennet out of their stomach, we engineered the bacteria or the yeast cell to make the exact same protein.

1:25:46And that is now the entirety of the rennet industry is recombinantly produced rennet. and the entirety of cheese that we all consume is made using this genetically modified yeast that makes this enzyme that converts milk into cheese. The same is true across other industries. We used to use animal fat for laundry detergent. It turned out it was a lot cheaper to make enzymes using the same process I just described instead of making animal fat. And now all of our laundry detergent is recombinant enzymes. So I think like this notion that we're gonna ban this stuff is a regulatory capture and competency moment.

1:26:18It's totally wrong. It denies consumers' choice and frankly it flies in the face of what has historically been a real economic Opportunity to bring cost down to bring you innovation to market and to try and stall that innovation is gonna leave This state or this country you're right in a real kind of challenge compared to other countries. I just think it's wrong I think it's really on this topic. You are 100 % right You're right. This is a dumb thing to legislate and it is meaningless and unimpactful and people should just decide based on and what tastes better. That's different than a listening device.

1:26:53Or cheaper or an adversary. Freeberg, is it? Is the criticism of this that it's regulatory capture or it's part of like this anti -woven kind of vibes in Florida? There's a conservative movement in Florida, which has taken hold, which I think this is key to. Now, in some ways, I would argue that conservative movement has really important sociological points of view. So in other cases, I think it denies necessary innovation, it denies necessary advancement to move industry forward versus social change. And I think the ability to kind of obfuscate the two, that oh, you know, transgenderism in schools and elementary schools is the same as the woke leftists from California making you know, lab -grown meat and they all get kind of jammed together as one big, tribal group.

1:27:42And therefore we should ban it all. What will likely end up happening here is this will find its path to federal preemption. Historically when we've seen states cry to impose these sorts of bans, the companies that are ultimately affected, the innovators that are affected, go to the federal government and they try and legislate for a bill that says this stuff is legal and should be broadly available. That federal preemption then stops states rights on having a ban in place. And so it's very likely that we'll end up seeing some legislation here over the next couple of years. If this technology is ultimately beneficial, the problem is now that Florida has done this, I guarantee you're going to see Texas, which is a huge ranching state.

1:28:18And many other states step up to do it. It creates a really bad precedent for all other disruptive kind of industries to be blocked by their local economies that believe that they're under threat. And you know, it just creates like a lot of unnecessary chaos. So, Sachs, what does Decentris' be with fake meat? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I'm always going to do it this case. But let me let me state clearly what I think which is I think it's really terrible When a bunch of incumbents in an industry get together and try to shut out the innovative solution by inventing some Unproven threat that they turn it to some sort of Right, but exactly

1:28:59I wanted to talk about this because I think the two are so similar and I Similar at all. Well, they're not Go ahead, Zach. Regulatory capture is regulatory capture, but this is a far end. That's just the term of art. We're just, you can't just, you know, fair enough. Yeah, yeah, we disagree on, yeah, that's fair enough. I think you guys have to have the intellectual honesty to say these are different issues. One is lab -grown meat versus ranchers in America. This is typical corruption and cronyism. Fine, whatever. Okay. Oh, yeah, but you don't think that the other tech companies that compete with TikTok are secretly banning together to basically gin up this bill.

1:29:35I don't think they're secretly banning. I think that they're being overtly organizing. Yeah. It's like the ranchers. But again, that typically still always gets cut on partisan lines. And what I'm saying is this is totally different than lab -grown meat versus ranchers. I just want to say one thing. The intellectuals' discourse has a nisprogram. I can acknowledge the similarities. I think I just want to make a point here. I think the intellectual discourse on this program is second to none. I mean, we are getting into the most refined details of this issue. And you just don't hear this anywhere else.

1:30:07So I just want to give myself and the rest of the crew a pat on the back. You just want to master it. A little bit. I just want to. No, I mean, it really did get in a pretty in the weeds here. Jake, how do you agree that the Florida bill is ridiculous? And that it sets a terrible precedent? I didn't read it, but I would think that. It's exactly what we said. There's nothing special about it. I can't imagine why somebody would want to ban mock meat other than chronic capitalism of course. And my question to you is, why does this gonna taste good? Why don't you make this mock meat? Well, by the way, this bill makes no sense because the only reason they would do it is if they were afraid that the lab -grown meat was just so much cheaper and frankly so much tasteier than what they make.

1:30:49And Freeberg, you've said this many times, like we are so like orders of magnitude away from... Yeah, we're telling you that. So, but by the way, why try and stop it from competing? Let the VCs that want to throw money at it, throw money at it, let the scientists pursue it. Let the thing that's made America so successful, be successful. By the way, imagine Elon got the starship up today. You guys saw this thing, I wanted to orbit. It was incredible. Imagine if Boeing and a bunch of defense contractors got together 10 years ago and said, we gotta stop SpaceX, these guys are trying to do stuff in an unsafe way.

1:31:25They're trying. and they tried and they tried and they will keep trying. And the freedom that we afford people and businesses in the United States of America is what allows us to have our unique edge and our unique ability to create progress that you don't see anywhere else on planet earth. And this is the sort of shit that takes us back. But I just had the key word, we, us, America. America, back to the TikTok thing, that's not an us thing, that's a Chinese thing. I get the point, I'm not like, I'm not pro CCP, but yeah, I get the point. anything American God bless us let's go American exceptionalism no I saw the headlines I think CMBC reported that the rocket blew up on entry reentry I mean the I think they didn't say that did they I saw one headline where they had to put a little nag in the end of the set to there was Starlink Starlink video for like an hour it's not video was so crystal clear it was like HD of this rocket coming back down to earth it was bonkers so congrats to E Can I show you guys the most incredible tweet related to this?

1:32:26I'm just gonna send this to you Nick. Friendly reminder that Google's annual catering budget is 72 million about twice the cost of Sharshan. I mean, it is next. Today, Elon made the entire human race multi planetary. Yeah. And it costs half as much as what Google spends on food. I mean, that's incredible. It does seem like a lot of money to spend on food. I don't know. It does seem like these rockets take two or three. But each time there's a new platform, it seems to take you on exactly like two or three to nail it. And here we are again. You know, you know, that's a great store boy. Great job.

1:33:06Going back full circle, the persistence and the resilience that was needed to get this thing to happen. It's just like 20 years of step by step iterative. There's nothing about the initial kind of instantiation or concept of what SpaceX needed to walk to get here was right. Everything had to change along the way. Starlink came along, et cetera, et cetera. And here he is at the end of this period of time with this incredible craft, the largest object to ever fly in outer space. It really is like an incredible moment in human history. And it took the degree of persistence, resilience. I think Mark's what makes American entrepreneurship so powerful.

1:33:44It really is an incredible day. It was an amazing thing to watch. I don't know if you guys have ever gone to watch and watch any of the old Saturn launches on YouTube, but I think this is a new era. It's really incredible. I think this was like five or six years ago. I got cleared to basically fly and hug Raidenberg when they were doing a launch. So I was able to see it as of the thing like kind of like tried to approach Max Q. It's one of the most incredible things I've ever done. So I think we made some progress if you look at the Google news links a Lot of praise for this launch soon Yeah, looks like people are kind of getting it Yeah, just incredible.

1:34:26I mean this thing is so huge. I don't know if you've ever Been inside of one of these things, but the the stars. Yeah, I've been inside I was inside the first one they built it. It is so large the capacity of this thing is like I think you could fit like three, four, 500 human beings inside of maybe. Maybe we're not sure. Maybe we're not sure. Or often, poker night, we can stop over and see it be really. It's bonkers. And when you see it stacked, the height is like, it almost feels like you're looking at CGI in the real world. It is incredibly tall, like incredibly tall. All right, this is your favorite podcast in the world.

1:35:04Episode 170 of the All in Podcast. We never asked for this, but if you have a chance, We do the show on videos. If you're listening to audio just type in all in podcast in YouTube and you can see the four of us I don't know if that's a bonus feature or not, but we do all the graphs and the charts and everything here. All right four David Sachs the rainman David Freiberg your Sultan of science Jamal Pauli Haipatia Chairman Dictator I am the world's greatest moderator. David Sachswood. I was incredibly sure. I always go Christopher Walken whenever you do these episodes. Why do you do that? Thanks for listening to the All -in podcast.

1:35:47Wow. David Sachs, poignant points about regulatory caption, freedberg, loves, mock meets, mock for me, I'm sure everyone loves a great detail. I'll see you next time. Oh podcast. Wow. Love you boys. So good. Usually you're better impressed. That's your problem. That's your problem. I would say everyone's got their super power. You're very nasty. Nasty. Nasty. J .K. Don't run it. I'm coming on. I'm coming on. All right. Saxon by Saxopool invited me. I'm not a Oregon's better than your Trump. I gotta work on it. I turn the Trump off for three years. Give me a break. Can you do a Joe Pesci? Can you do a Joe Pesci?

1:36:36Do I have a Joe Pesci in me? I feel like you do a good Joe Pesci. I do a Joe Pesci next. I take requests. I'll do a Joe Pesci next. Sure, why not? He only does the Pesci involuntarily when he gets upset. He did the job by everybody. He got a short time. I'm running for president. You got to change the laws. I'm not a boss. You have to change it so a German can be president. Austin. Austin. Yeah. Alright, well, next time. Oh, yeah, rate and subscribe when all that other bullsh**t you want. Bye -bye, girls. Bye -bye. Well, let your winners ride. Brain man, David's side. I'm going home. And it said we open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it.

1:37:24I love you, I love you. I'm going on a beach. What? What?

1:37:33Besties are gone. Go through that. That's my dog taking a wish. You're driving. Sit. Get it off. Oh, man. My ham is the actual meat. We should all just get a room and just have one big hug. Or because they're all just like this like sexual tension that they just need to release. What? What? You're that B. What? You're a B. You're a B. B. What? We need to get merchies organized. I'm doing all this!

1:38:06I'm doing all this!