🎁Amazon Prime 📖Kindle Unlimited 🎧Audible Plus 🎵Amazon Music Unlimited 🌿iHerb 💰Binance
Next up is my good friend Tim Urban from wait, but why I asked him to do this as a favor
He gets a huge speaking fee. I said we have no budget
He said Jake. I think it’s 7,500 taken. I said I have no budget. I stole it all and
He has the number one talk in the history of Ted on YouTube my pal Tim Urban
I’m going all in
And instead we open sourced it to the fans
And they’ve just gone crazy with it
Love you guys
I’m going all in
He said something yesterday to Nate Silver when after about when ate one poker and he was like, you’re not
Oh, I’m gonna take away your speaking fee and I was like the fuck speaking fee
All right, so
The title of my talk is Tim talks about politics and other things that are probably a bad idea to talk about in front of
all these people
And
I want to start with why am I even writing about politics? I don’t like politics
I like writing about the science and tech in the future and procrastination and things that interest me
But as I’m thinking about the future and all this awesome stuff that we could have I started to have a bad feeling
I would think of society kind of like a giant organism
And this is how I always grew up assuming that society was like it’s like a big grown-up, but when I looked around
It looked more like a poopy pants
Six-year-old who dropped its ice cream
And I feel like this is what a lot of people are kind of getting at in these talks, you know, we’re talking about
Kind of all this crazy polarization and you know mobs and all in and to me I just look out and I see this
I see I see kind of reverting and then people are acting like they’re in middle school and like, you know
We can’t communicate and and what’s going on? So I I started putting my mind to this now. What was the problem and
The problem is very complicated and I’m not going to try to get into the whole thing today
But I think that what we can do is have a better framework to talk about the problem
I think that we are very constrained to this one-dimensional axis
It’s like a straitjacket in our conversations
You know, you hear people say the problem is, you know, the far left and the far right we need to be in the center
We need to be more moderate
What is that? The center is just a policy position, right?
The far left and far right aren’t inherently bad
The far left is just kind of radical and questioning everything and they’re experimental and the far right is just questioning
Maybe we messed up. Maybe we should go back to the way things were
I mean, there’s nothing inherently better or worse about any part of this spectrum
But we’re using these words to try to get at something else. We’d say centrist moderate
We don’t really mean in the middle of the spectrum. I think we’re talking about a different axis. I call it the ladder
So I think bringing our political discussions into two dimensions can be hugely helpful now
Sometimes you’ll see like the political compass you’ll see, you know politics in 2d, but that’s still all what you think
That’s all you know different ways to look at what you think about politics. The ladder is a how you think axis
So there’s there’s you know, there’s some nuance to it there. It’s a spectrum
But for our purposes, let’s just focus on the two kind of core ideas here
There’s high-rung political thinking and high-rung politics and low-rung politics
so the high-rungs
You can kind of divide it to high-rung progressivism and high-rung conservatism
Which I kind of think like it’s like two arguing Giants like they’re like, you know
you know that the collective efforts of high-rung progressivism conservatism are
Are kind of like lawyers in a courtroom. They’re they’re they’re heated. They don’t like each other a lot of the time
They have very different ideas of how things should go
But it’s kind of like, you know, the two lawyers in a courtroom
This is kind of a wink that goes on where they understand ultimately they’re on the same team
There are two sides of a truth kind of discovery machine, and I think this is the same thing
They don’t like each other, but they’re actually ultimately on the same team trying to figure out the roadmap
How do we move forward and the conversations in high-rung politics are complexed. They’re nuanced, you know, it’s it’s there’s different realms
There’s what is right though science and history arguing about what is that’s a that’s hard to figure out
There’s what should be right that’s that’s philosophy and ethics then there’s you know, even if they agree on those two things
How do we get there? Right? What are the right policy strategies experimentation testing?
so so there’s a lot of nuances a lot of complexity and
And one of the core defining features is if this is how you form beliefs, right?
You know you go from I don’t know some kind of process to I know high-rung politics is all about truth
They’re geared towards truth. They start here at I don’t know there’s there’s kind of an inherent humility
to this process
so I
Think of humility a little bit like trying to stay on a tightrope. It’s not easy, right? We
we are
It’s easy for your confidence, you know
You have the Dunning-Kruger thing your confidence shoots up when you look first learn something and then it goes down
After you, you know realize you don’t know as much as you know
And then sometimes you can go too low and so when you go too low
You’re in the kind of the insecure zone, right? You actually know more than you think, you know
But you but but like you’re you’re you’re just not you’re even some kind of imposter syndrome
Above the line, you know, we’re in the arrogant zone very common in politics
Obviously, you know where you you think you know more than you really actually do
So like, you know, you could even measure it like this is how much you’re full of shit
how much above like the the amount above the line you are and
In hiring politics look no one is great at staying on the tightrope. It’s very hard, but it’s
the
Culture of hiring politics is helpful because it can actually
It humbles you because people will disagree with you and it’s cool
In kind of a hiring political culture to be humble
Like if you say I don’t know or you say yeah, you know
I I haven’t thought about that issue that makes you seem smart in hiring politics, right?
It’s it’s so it’s incurred whatever the culture finds cool. We’re gonna do more of a
Core thing about hiring politics. We don’t identify with our ideas. So
I think you know
Ideas when you’re in this zone are like a machine that you built. It’s like a hypothesis, right?
You put the boxing gloves on you let your friends kick it, you know go to town
You know you throw it out there people try to argue with it, you know, the besties are big on this, right?
They love an opportunity relish opportunity to just tell the other person they’re wrong or here’s why you’re biased or here’s why you have
You know, you’re being hypocritical and this is what hiring politics is about. No one takes it personally
You’re just kicking my machine and I’m saying I bet my machine can stand up to it and they’re saying I bet it can
And if it does man, I just got more confident because I just I just realized this thing is pretty strong
If they if they break it, it doesn’t feel good. But I just got a little smarter
I just got a little bit less dumb because I learned something I was wrong about
So they’re kicking it and you know, you’re watching them box is dialectic when you watch them box together
Sometimes you play devil’s advocate you take the bat to your own idea
This is this is you know, kind of how you move up that humility tightrope to a more knowledgeable place
principles wise
One of the things that defines hiring politics is consistency. It’s not again. There’s left right center. So the principles will totally
Vary, but there’s consistency either way. So classic example Ilan talking about yesterday free speech doesn’t count to value
The you know to fight for the free speech of people who you agree with every single person in history has had that principle
That’s the yellow zone
It’s very easy to support for your principles when it’s also supporting your team
the challenge comes when it’s not when it’s people you don’t like saying things you don’t like for example or when or when it’s
Your team trying to shut down the free speech of others and you know, it’s wrong
Even though you you do hate that speech
That’s when you have to choose green zone or orange zone hiring politics is great about staying in the green zone
You will see them
Go against their own team all the time if it doesn’t conflict if it doesn’t jive with their principles
I think if you take a big step back this thing again, it gets heated
This isn’t you know, people mistake hiring politics that you know, it’s oh it’s we should be all you know
We should be you know, kind of withdrawn and and and irrational
But I think it’s actually also it can be very passionate very emotional very heated people care deeply in hiring
They can form coalitions and do marches and still and stuff like that. It’s just that they care about truth
They’re consistent with their principles. They don’t identify with their ideas
They like to argue and ultimately it’s a positive some game with a positive effect on the country
This is what drives the country forward right in the Science Academy. This is what drives
Knowledge forward right this this is what drives innovation forward is people able to disagree now
To the other thing that is lowering politics lowering politics. I have a name for it. I call it political Disney World
And I call it that because it’s a land of rainbows and unicorns and a bunch of people who will not change their mind
Under any circumstances. It’s a land of good guys and bad guys
The good guys are angels perfectly righteous
the bad guys are awful in every possible way and the good guys have good ideas and the bad guys have bad ideas and
There’s a checklist in hiring politics if someone tells me their position on guns
I have no idea what their position is on climate change or on abortion or on immigration in lowering politics
You hear one position from someone boom
I you can just look at their demeanor and I know every single position they’ve got on every single issue
The same concept in lowering politics again, no one thinks they’re in lowering politics
So people there will will think yeah, of course, I value truth, but they don’t they’re actually starting it
I know they start at the checklist item and now they say well I have to prove this is correct
So when they read an article that they put they won’t read the article
But if they read the article that disagrees with them, they’ll meet their there
They have a brick wall in their head about you know, this can’t be true. This person is biased
This is this is you know ad hominem, whatever
And when they read an article that agrees with them when they hear an opinion
There’s all that skepticism disappears and suddenly it must be true. Yes, of course
So I talked about hiring politics, it’s like the ideas are like machines, right?
It’s not you know, you don’t get sensitive about it. You can’t kick the machine right lowering politics
It’s like a baby a very cute baby who you love so much. So people’s ideas. They’re sacred in lowering politics
And and this is why you know, you can kick a machine and no, that’s no big deal
If you kick a baby, you’re an asshole. And so on the high rungs
People can disagree if you have two axes here decency and agreement and they’re totally different, right?
You can have people that disagree with you that are awesome and vice versa
You can have people that agree with you and they’re assholes, but in lowering politics, it’s very simple people who agree with you
They’re good people people who don’t they’re assholes
So this is you know, what it comes down to is, you know, you have a high rung discussion
It kind of looks like this they’re examining things lowering discussion. It’s like fucking shit. That’s a cute baby. God
It’s such a good baby. How awful are people who don’t like the baby so awful, right?
This is very common. If you listen to a low-rung political discussion, this is essentially what’s happening
They’re sitting around and they’re talking about how right they are and how awful the people and dangerous
The people are who disagree with them and that’s just they’ll just talk about that forever and ever and ever
Principles same idea here. You actually stick with the left circle. You’ll constantly a
You know giveaway here for low-rung politics is that when when when it’s not convenient yellow circle territory
They will almost always jump over to the orange circle, you know, you’ll have again, you know
So free speech you’ll see is a perfect litmus test if you know as soon as it’s free speech people
You don’t like all those principles disappear
We can you know, how about Kovan marches? Oh, you know people are completely worked up about
Lockdown marches in right-wing states soon as its marches for racial justice all good all good
This is this is a public health crisis, right? This is that’s that’s orange material. How about all the people who are super anti?
You know immigration policies and surveillance policies and foreign policy and you know debt
Issues and then as soon as it’s the other president now that your president’s in office all those same policies stay and you’re fine with them
You know the classic example that the debt was the worst thing in the world during Obama’s presidency
and then Trump comes in office starts doing it these tax packages that are adding to it and
Suddenly, it’s no problem. So there’s endless examples here
If high-rung politics is kind of this positive some game lowering politics. I see it much more like two
screaming Giants and and and and they’re there if the high-rung kind of
Emergent property is intelligence and progress the low-rung emergent property is just strength and you know fighting for power
It’s a battle of good versus evil and the big the big goal is not, you know, not
Trying to create a more perfect Union again. They think that’s the goal. But the big goal really is beating the bad guys
It’s a zero-sum game that ultimately has a negative effect
So I know I just threw a lot at you because I wanted to kind of cover the different bases of this to give
A feel for what I’m talking about here. This is the framework that I think is very useful
I’ve been living with it now for a few years
I’ve been having conversations with it and I find that it clarifies a lot and it helps with a lot of things like
for example
If you just think it’s a horizontal axis a as I said, you know
You mistake that the far left and right must be the problem, but it’s not it’s the low rungs that are the problem
That’s actually what people are trying to say the moderate centrist, you know think that’s not what they’re actually trying to say
They’re trying to say high-rung which can expand the the the horizontal axis
There’s more than one tug-of-war going on we think if you just have one axis
Well, it’s left versus right and that is a tug-of-war both in the high and low rungs that is you know
There are fighting for what they want
But there’s a tug-of-war going on from the north and south as well
The the the progressive I think I know a lot of people in here probably are thinking I’m in that upper left guy
That’s my guess
And if that’s true, and it might be true
You you do have a tug-of-war going on against that upper right guy
You also have a tug-of-war gone going on against that lower left guy
This is the thing that I think is important to realize is when you have this that the people who are on your team
You know, they also hate Trump or whatever
They might be actually like the biggest impediment to what you care about politically. They undermine the progress of what you care about
It also can enhance kind of collaboration because if you’re in that one of those upper Giants
The other upper giant is a lot more on your ultimate team
If you take a big step back then the lower giant that wears the same color
so once you start to think this way
I think it helps to to
Kind of loosen some of the tribalism and give some nuance to our discussions and give some nuance to what we’re trying to do
Now the story I wanted to talk about here is that this is okay. This is normal by the way
This is not a problem. Every democracy in the world will have this the founders knew this would be here. The goal was not to
Suppress low rungness it was to contain it and actually, you know in the economy to harness it for progress
But in politics to contain it so it can’t totally take over they contain it by taking away the physical cudgel
You know, you can’t just conquer and become a dictator like so many low rung Giants and other countries have done
There’s there’s laws here. And and and most importantly there’s kind of a high rung immune system, which is just vigorous defenses defense
Defense against low rung infringement low rungness will try to shut down the conversations in the high rungs in the high rungs
Resist they say no fuck off. Like we
We know where you can’t enforce your echo chamber upon us. You’re allowed to have your echo chamber. That’s fine
You can’t enforce it. So this is how it’s supposed to be now
Part of the reason we’re all here continually in each talk talking about man politics is awful and things are bad
And there’s a poopy pace pants
Six year old with the ice cream falling is because of I think we’ve had some big changes to the environment
This is the kind of simple human equation. I think about you’ve got human nature is constant
The environment is what changes and that produces different behavior, right? You know the people who are really hardened during war, you know
They’re not different
Biologically than us they just were put in a very different environment and it created different kinds of people
So our environment has changed a lot and I think it’s causing a lot of problems
I think it’s causing a low-rung flare-up if you know, so here’s one way to think about it in the 60s. You’ve got
intraparty factions within the parties
You’re you have a lot of progressive Republicans and conservative Democrats and the these these factions within the parties
They hate each other right which is
Which was a source of tribalism. Some people are just so focused on the other people in their party the other factions
There’s the national parties like we have that we talk about a lot today Republicans and Democrats nationally
That was a source of tribalism and then there was this, you know
USSR and also before that Hitler like there were all these, you know
Scary foreign enemies that created this kind of macro tribalism on the national level. So you have
patriotism which is
One kind of tribalism, but it also unifies down below and the intraparty factions might actually cause the national parties to collaborate sometime
So it’s not that people were less tribal. It’s that tribalism was distributed
What’s happened is now the intraparty factions have disappeared because the conservative Democrats have all gone to the Republicans
they’re the progressive Republicans have all gone for lots of reasons we can get into some other talk, but
That’s waned. There’s still a little you still have Bernie and you know, Hillary not liking, you know, they’re people not like it
But it’s it’s much less of a thing
likewise, you still have you know, yes, so Russia, you know, but
Mostly that’s not the focus. In fact
The focus is is it’s so not here that when there’s a foreign thing now
Usually we’ll just use it as like political fodder for our national debate, you know, all the Russians are on their side
No, they’re on their side, right and it there’s no patriotism that unites anymore
What you have is one big old political divide and all the tribalism from all those things is concentrated into one place
Which is an unhealthy that’s not great. I don’t think that’s good
and
So this is one environmental change. No one’s fault
It’s just what happened then, you know, you also have a lot of things with like the electoral map you have between gerrymandering and you know
Geographic sorting you have purple counties turning, you know
Mostly red and blue now which means primaries are actually electing the farthest right and left people as opposed to you know
People who can win a general election
There’s a lot of other kind of little environmental changes, but one huge one that we talked about is the media
I think of a media. I’d like to place them on a media matrix accuracy on the y-axis and objectivity
So the you want to be is the top middle right and actually for a long time there was an incentive magnet
To be there for ABC CBS NBC, right?
They didn’t want to seem like they were inaccurate and had to cater to the whole country which kept them somewhat close to that
There was this incentive magnet today. You have cable TV and then eventually you have, you know, talk radio and you’ve got
Then the internet and all these websites you have tribal media, which is a totally different set of incentives
You cater to one side only you it’s more bias
the
The more clicks and accuracy is just not a concern to the audiences
they end up having and then you have this feedback loop like was discussed yesterday where once you
Cater to that now you have to keep that going right? You’ve now lost a neutral audience and
And so now we have a lot of Americans super addicted to a really trashy reality show
real politicians of Washington
And then I took me a long time to make this by the way
I
Think McConnell’s my favorite anyway
so
Then you’ve got of course the big bomb drops in our environment. You’ve got
Social media. This is a real graph showing people retweet things. They agree with two people. They agree with almost entirely, right?
It’s these algorithmic bubbles. It’s insane, you know, and so if you’re one of the people that actually I follow all kinds of people
You’re very rare because and and and it didn’t again it didn’t used to be this way
John Ronson talks about you know, how it used to be a radical de-shaming like Twitter, you know, you go on and be like
Oh, I do this embarrassing thing people would be like me too and it’d be like oh
So nice and fuzzy at the very beginning and then it turned into wait a second
You know this bad guy is harassing women at work and now actually this woman has power for the first time
she can talk about on social media you can create a whole kind of
Coalition against it. He gets fired and it’s exhilarating and that’s good, right? This is speaking truth to power
Problem is now people are exhilarated and they’re saying who’s next right and you have this new source of power
Which again can be used for good but it’s gotten picked up by a lot of the low-rung
Tribes who have started to use this cudgel
That started it’s been a while now, you know creating mobs to actually enforce low-rung politics
And what happens is you end up with high-rung world very scared kind of caught off guard
The normal defenses the normal immune system is not
Doing its job and so what happens when the high-rung world gets scared
This is a very you know, it can set off a domino effect. Imagine we picture. This is the high-rung world
These are brains. This is what a bunch of high-rung people in the community think
They all think different things based on the color right now
If we draw a circle around them, this is imagining what they’re saying is the circles color
So here is the perfect high-rung community, right?
Everyone is it’s a diverse, you know thinking and they’re saying what they’re thinking and it connects together into this super brain
It’s awesome, right? But now maybe the social media cudgel maybe something else
It starts to be a little bit scary and and this one group starts to say the only opinion that’s okay
Is the orange opinion anyone who says anything other than the orange opinions an awful person?
The high-rung immune system supposed to kick in and say cool fuck off if it doesn’t say that
Everyone starts getting scared and then cowardice starts to spread and before you know it
Everyone’s just saying the orange out loud, even if they don’t agree with it
No one wants to outwardly say what they think anymore
And the problem is you can’t actually see what’s going on in the brains
You only know what people what people are thinking based on what they’re saying. So all people see is this so if you’re this guy
Who actually has one opinion and actually is full of diverse thinking around them. They don’t know that they assume it must look like this
Everyone starts to feel like I’m the only one who thinks this
I’m the only one who doesn’t like this movement or this
politician or whatever and
The group intelligence that’s so awesome about high-rung politics, it disappears
I think what we’re seeing is if what you know, why why are things so bad?
I don’t think it’s because we move to the far right and far left. I think it’s because
You have a low rung flare-up
Generated by changes of the environment and the high rungs have been caught off guard by a really rapid environment changes
And they’ve just disappeared. They’ve shrunk away and the low rungs are running, you know, buck wild
You can see this on the right. I think mostly in Washington
You see the debt ceiling, you know being used as a weapon in a way that should never happen. You see
McConnell and the Senate not putting through a Senate candidate a
Supreme Court candidate because it’s the last year totally unprecedented. That’s not the rule then four years later
They go and they do they put their own candidate. This is low-rung shit. Of course Trump with the election
I mean
Reagan’s big thing was you know
The peaceful transition of power is what makes us special and you know, Trump, of course is the exact opposite on the left
I think we see it less in Washington and much more in culture. I think wokeness is
Two things it’s a far-left ideology and it is far left
It’s you know postmodern and it’s it’s Marxist and that’s fine. You can have those things in the higher rungs the thing that makes
Wokeness low rung is the way they treat others
You can you can go and have your own but you can have your own echo chamber and do it
What the woke mantra is, you know
What a low-rung person in a liberal country supposed to say is I don’t like these ideas
So I won’t listen to them
What a what you’re not supposed to be able to say is I don’t like the idea
So no one is allowed to listen to them right with a disinvitation on campus, which has become very common, right?
It’s it’s it’s not saying I won’t go to that talk, which is a low-rung thing to say. It’s much worse
It’s saying no one on this campus is allowed to hear that talk and we see that having played out
We see James Bennett the editor of the New York Times op-ed section getting fired
Because he published an op-ed by Tom Cotton that 62% of the country agreed with
But it didn’t jive with woke
Orthodoxy you see Denise Young at Apple a black woman who’s the head of diversity who says to me diversity is not you know
It’s it’s more complicated than just about something like race when I look at a 12 blue-eyed blonde haired guys
I see I see diversity. I see different people diverse in different ways. She was fired for saying that
You can go on and on medical journals are retracting papers that have never retracted papers before because the double peer-reviewed papers
Because they get a rise on Twitter from the woke mob
So I think we’re seeing this in different ways
But to me, it’s all one big story, which is that we’re having a low-rung flare-up and these low-rung Giants are out of hand
They’re doing things
They’re not supposed to be able to be doing and they’re doing that because the immune system is failing and that’s why we all look
Like this now the good news is I do think this can change. I don’t think most people are like this
I think most people are and by the way, if you think this is all another binary divide
We are all high rung and low rung at different times. And that’s one of the big differences here
I think that if we want to get out of this and get back to here
We need two things who we need
awareness
Which is the first thing we need we need to be aware of I think this this this this axis and to think about
Not just where am I being bullied intellectually where what’s really the low-rung thing and what’s not but also where are we being low-rung?
Because we all can do this
this is this is this is a huge part of our brain that wants to go and and identify with our ideas and and
Be hypocritical. So where am I doing it?
Where are the people around me doing it and and maybe realizing?
Okay, maybe the people that on the high rungs when I am there that disagree with me horizontally
Maybe those are my friends a lot more than the low-rung people that are voting for the same candidate and finally awareness
Without saying anything out loud is useless, right? You need awareness has to be coupled with courage
People have to start
Speaking out and actually that’s the the high-rung immune system is built of
Courage, it’s built of people actually standing up and you’ve seen this with some companies declaring. We will not
We’re not a political place. That’s courage in the face of a cudgel that’s trying to get them to be political
and so I think if you can have a little bit more awareness and a little bit more courage this kind of this low-rung flare-up
Can be I think?
Controlled and I think we can end up in a better place. Thank you
Wow
What an amazing talk to follow
The talk we had earlier I think with I don’t know if you got to witness it the Palmer lucky talk
I was trying to think of how to trash you because it was so popular
So you were gonna go low-rung? Yeah, but I mean in fact
You know that I think Palmer and I had some low-rung moments where you know, he was doing the anti-Hillary stuff
I was dunking on him for it
And then we saw an example of maybe adult high-rung behavior of like hey, let’s sit here and talk about the differences
I want to put out there just talking about the woke movement for a second
One of the major challenges I had in this event was certain people attending the event
Made some people in that group
Unwilling to come to the event
No offense Keith
In other words like Keith Sachs, you know, and then even Glenn Grunwald and Greenwald. I’m sorry and Matt Taibbi
Were triggers for certain people to not come speak. They were gonna kick the baby
They were gonna kick the baby. And so I think and then on the right
we have I think some pleasure in knowing you’re triggering the libs and
It’s exacerbated this it’s hard for me as a conference
Producer or a podcast producer to get the two sides to sit and just have a reasonable discussion at time
how do we break that logjam of
The right just loves to troll and trigger the libs and the libs are like I’m not even participating in the discussion
With this group of people that group of people, you know, the Sachs is the Keats the you know, whatever
He triggers a lot of limbs
But let’s start there and then Keith I’d love to hear you respond to this dynamic which I know you are fully aware of
Yeah, so I think that we can get there’s some clear definitions here
Not
Wanting to go to something be that that you know a high runger says, oh they disagree with me great
Let me go and that’s that’s that’s what they really want to hear because I want to learn something, right?
The low runger says fuck those evil awful people. I’m not gonna go right they storm away fine
You’re in a liberal country live and let live you these are both. Okay
What’s not okay is the low rungers
In pressuring you to kick off those speakers because otherwise they’re going to start a movement a petition a boycott of your show that’s gonna
That’s gonna end up hurting you in some way, you know
So taking out smearing you on social media and into the pressuring this to not happen at all
That’s saying no one’s allowed to go to that conference. That’s what’s not. Okay. It’s interesting. You bring this up. I shared with you that
back channel
There was there was back channel of you know, how beautiful a moment was with the high rung discussion
We just had there was also a dark moment before the event where a group of people who did not agree
Were doing what you’re saying. The woke mob was saying
We need to get other hello on the left
David Sachs time there’s just to tell me when rob boy got here. So there was literally to your point an
Intolerance level of not only are we not going to come to all in summit because sacks or this person and that person are there
We’re going to start telling other people to not go and not participate
It literally happened and I had to stop but this is a so look this conference did happen
Those people did come ideas were spread. So this is a victory for high rungness. This is yeah
So then you keep
Tell us why is it so pleasurable?
To trigger the libs David Keith. No in all seriousness, you love to debate you take all comers. No problem
You want to get in the arena?
What you’re seeing now?
How did I actually just interject on that? Sure. So I mean speaking for myself
I don’t get any pleasure in triggering libs and that’s not my objective and I don’t think it’s necessarily keys either
What you’re really doing is because we are willing to debate and we’re not afraid to have the conversation
You’re now redefining that as triggering other people. No, we’re not. We’re just want to have a conversation
Now yeah
I think it’s I think it’s really easy to tell who are the people who have good points to make and are and have
Intellectual confidence because they’re the ones willing to show up and have conversations
And I think it’s the biggest cop-out for anybody to say well
I can’t be your comfort big I see this name and this name on your agenda. How lame is that?
What and and and to be honest, you know a lot of the positions
I think you and Palmer probably disagree on the approach to Ukraine. He’s probably very pro
Supporting that and you might be a little more dovish
Yeah, so I think two points first of all a I took on this fool’s errand like ten years ago of correcting everything wrong on
the internet
It’s an insane idea
But the reason why I did it was I felt like wow someone in
Who doesn’t know any better might read something that’s wrong and they might believe it
And so at least if I start correcting it
They’ll see that there’s multiple perspectives and then they’ll have to dig in as opposed to just take this for granted
The second thing is yeah, I have no desire to trigger the libs
But I do feel like I have a platform and I don’t want to die without having used
Whatever influence I have to proselytize for ideas I believe in so if I have 300,000 followers
I feel I would be neglecting like my light like
Benefits of my life if I’m not proselytizing for the few five six seven eight nine things I care about
And so I don’t want to wake up one day and say I wish I had done X Y or Z and it could have maybe
Changed the world
Can I have Tim a question around his name is Tim
Hey, nice to Tim David free. How are you?
We actually haven’t met before
I
Do you think that over time?
Content has gotten shorter sound bites have become kind of the primary form of content
You know we used to be that we’d sit down and read books and we’d read newspapers and we’d watch these long-form news hour
Conversations and then you know things got shorter. They got faster. They got quicker and as a result
We ended up kind of debasing ourselves and ending up in this point where everything has to be reduced to that primal
instinctual reaction moment and
It gets even more significantly fueled by the feedback loops associated with social media
So the things that you see more of are the things that really do trigger that kind of primal, you know
emotional
Sense more is that a big driver. Do you think societally in terms of have we become more tribal over the last century?
Yeah, I mean, I think environmental changes are just it’s like they will produce behavioral changes and
It can be sometimes a feedback loop where you have shorter content more emotional, you know
Kind of triggering content like you said, you know, there’s there’s almost like pheromones
Evolutionarily it wins. Yeah. Well and all you know on Twitter actually, there’s a phenomenon where actually
But virality dumbs down information because
nuanced information doesn’t hit as hard totally and so it’s when you have it’s if you it’s it’s kind of like
It’s like evolution where you see, you know that the tweet that ends up super viral
It’s it’s you know survived a hundred other competing tweets to get there and the ones that are rising to the top
It’s a mechanism. There’s a mechanism right now. That is that is pushing
It’s kind of forming a magnet down in political Disney World that is pulling us down and I one of the questions I you know
Have for Elon is like what what’s how can that somehow be?
you know what one idea that a friend and I were kicking around is like some kind of almost like
you
Know Wikipedia managed to somehow stay
Somewhat, you know nuanced and neutral in a way and and could there be some kind of like giant 10,000 pool, you know of moderators
That actually kind of put you know, rank things by can maybe high rung and low rung
And and the algorithm doesn’t necessarily suppress the lower and stuff
It just doesn’t push it which right now the algorithm in is you’re talking about like moderation editorialization almost
Yeah, at least like to give it like a credit rating on maybe a high-low scale
I kind of view this as like a muting effect
It’s like an institutionalization of these social networks where everyone talks about them being free to run as a network
Without kind of a central system of control, but sometimes that central system of control has an important role in playing
moderation muting
Editorialization that I’ll kind of avoid some of the adverse consequences. It’s definitely optimizing downwards right now. What do you think Keith? Yeah
Should Elon buy Twitter and then yeah, I started to disagree
I mean I grew up in the 70s and 80s and soundbite, you know was the term of art for like 30-second commercials
And that’s how we debated politics was 30-second commercials
I don’t know any evidence that suggests that tweets today in politics are worse than the 30-second commercials
I grew up with and if you think about polarization, I also watched used to watch Europe European politics in the 70s and 80s
Yeah, the most extreme ends of politics you’ll ever see we don’t have any of those extremes in the United States still today
Yeah, so I don’t think there’s I think a lot of people like make arguments without evidence that things have changed and I actually start
With like first principles like wait, where’s the evidence like people talk about this information?
There’s no evidence that the American voter in 2016 have less information or less accurate information than 1888 or 1894
1910 in fact the opposite is true by most by most serious studies
Yeah, this is all kind of made up in my mind
Yes, Elon should buy Twitter to save the world, but it’s not gonna be a good financial investment
What how does it save the world do you think well we need a free speech platform where people can debate ideas and
The left wing of Twitter the employee base has completely suppressed ideas. For example, my husband
I happen to know this wrote an article in foreign policy magazine like the most prestigious
Publication in the entire planet for foreign policy debate about the CCP
Twitter refused for years to allow them to advertise that article published in foreign policy magazine
So there’s clearly someone at Twitter suppressing content
That’s critical of the CCP and we tried appealing to everybody and they wouldn’t change this
So there’s either Chinese spies there or a left-wing culture that you know suppresses debate. This is foreign policy magazine
We can’t get any more prestigious than that
It’s absurd let alone the fact that I have 300,000 followers and do not have a blue check
I must have the largest follower of anybody who doesn’t have a blue check and it’s all because I’ve used unacceptable that that seems really
Pretty ridiculous considering many other VCS who are meaningfully less credentialed, of course experience
There’s obvious and I have you know insiders at Twitter have sent me screenshots of various things
There’s no doubt that it’s a left-wing monoculture
That’s suppressing ideas and someone needs to fix that either the government needs to fix it
Which is worse than Elon fixing it, but the government if the US Congress is turned over
There’s gonna be a lot of subpoenas flying over to Twitter because there are absolutely foreign governments influencing that some of those decisions at Twitter
Well, I mean it was in fact proven that there were Saudis
inside of Twitter
Saudi national yes the best tweet retort ever by you. Yeah. I wish I would be that good
Yeah, I mean what was it tweet?
Well, you know the the Saudi Prince was complaining and he said that please explain freedom of speech and how that works in your country
Oh, right. Yeah, I mean
to the press
should
Can you explain cancel culture in your framework? Yeah, so
I like to use a couple terms here. There’s there’s social bullying which is no one
If you disagree you can’t be my friend
And again, that’s okay, right? I don’t think you’re an awesome person if you act like that, but you’re allowed to
Then there’s what I would call idea supremacy
Which is you know, it’s kind of
It’s it’s it’s like like I’ve been saying, you know, no one is allowed to
Say this thing whether you’re my friend or not
And and and you know, if you want to run something on your own property, you can make all the speech rules
But cancel culture is specifically going into places that are supposed to be high rung
You know what? You know what it says on top of Harvard College Veritas, right Veritas
Which is which is them that is that is them putting their stake down on the ground and saying we are a high rung place
They’re not say using those words
But that is what they’re saying
We are a place that cares about truth that cares about diversity of ideas
they’re right that cares about openness and inquiry and curiosity and all of this and
So cancel culture it goes into places like that Google, you know, you know started off and they had their all hands meetings
It was all about you know, and every idea is good criticize the leadership likes, you know, you know, right?
So these things were specifically higher up right that they were founded on these things cancel culture goes into those places and says
Our preferred echo chamber now those rules apply to everyone here and it’s a power
You know
You’re not a lot of things want to do that, right?
A lot of you know
I’m sure the pro-lifers would like to go into campuses and say no one can have a pro-choice position
They don’t have the power cancel culture is a product of a group
That’s not supposed to have the power to do that having the power to do that
And I think that comes from the fear of social media. It comes from this hyper charged
Tribalism in the environment we live in right now and a lot of things
So one of the solutions to many things in life is moving to Miami and I’m serious about
One of the most stark things when we moved to Miami 17 months ago was in Miami you hot
It’s incredibly refreshing because everybody has a different position. There’s literally no environment socially politically
Culturally business wise where you won’t run into people who voted for Biden or for Trump
Like you cannot go to a dinner of eight people and have people have the same views
You cannot work in a company where people have don’t haven’t voted or didn’t abuse and if you try to caricature people
You’re gonna be wrong all the time
Even I catch myself like assuming this person of this demographic is going to be liberal and they’re not and so here people learn to
Both be polite
Like sort of like when you’re growing up you were taught like you don’t debate religion in front of people at dinner
People are polite
But also they have to engage and it’s incredibly refreshing because people learn to partake in arguments and it would be impossible to live in
Miami successfully unless you do this every day
And so I think this is a model for America like many things in Miami, but keep over time doesn’t that transform?
So like isn’t there a concentration of ideas of memetics that ultimately kind of rule the juice and you know
This whole thing kind of eventually
You end up with with you know, two pole two poles two camps
I mean, isn’t this how all society start the great debate the great conversation?
This is a microcosm of what just happens with human behavior over time
Because if you understand ideas and one of the benefits for me was I grew up in like the most woke environments ever
I spent years at Stanford and then Harvard like pretty well places and all my professors and political science were super liberal
But I was conservative the whole time and every one of my you know essays if you read my final exams
they’re all conservative because I had to learn to master all the liberal arguments and find the weaknesses and the data points and be
Able to marshal evidence and that’s a healthy thing
So when you encounter people who have different views like for example, you know, there’s controversial laws in Florida
Don’t say gay quote-unquote, you know changes in abortion policy here people here will talk about them politely and debate them
And that’s good for everybody
Like I bet you for example, like, you know, if you read the media or you read Twitter
You think this abortion law change in Florida is radical?
It’s actually more permissive than any European country
But nobody knows that France actually only allows abortion up to 14 weeks. Germany is like 16. So we’re 20 here
So we’re more liberal than Europe, but nobody talks about that on Twitter that way
But if you live in Florida, you would actually know that by the way, the campus is you just described. They’re not here anymore
You the amount of testimonials from students saying if I disagree with the professor on my exam, I will get a bad grade
Even worse again, this is there when there’s encroachment by a low-rung giant and there’s no pushback. It will keep going
So they’ve gone to some crazy places. Here’s an example in Berkeley right now and and UCLA and about 20 other schools
if you
Want to apply to be a chemistry professor
The first thing that you do is you have to fill out a diversity statement and there and it’s called that sounds nice a diversity
But it’s actually you have to basically prove that you have a proven track record of social justice activism of the world variety
Not not more MLK style social justice very specific social justice in this and if you are not a proven
Activist that has the right political. It’s more than even a political litmus test
You have to actually be an activist to get it to even be seen by the chemistry department
They won’t even show the chemistry. So there’s stories like that
You’re just like oh my god, but that’s what happens when the immune system is failing this the things will continue
So what is the what is the antidote to that if we for those of us that can’t move to Miami?
Well, everybody can we welcome we welcome you
Yeah, the antidote is leadership because what happens is in each one of these stories, you know
James Bennett getting fired from New York Times, right? You read the story in detail
you know McNeil is another example for the New York Times for a whole long story, but
In each story there you the leadership often because leadership is you know
Most people are not insane like this almost every this is again with the orange circles almost everyone
Actually thinks this is insane these firings and that’s what’s scary is they’re happening
Anyway, so in each of these stories you see a moment when the leadership first says well, you know here we do agree
even though I hate his views to
you know, we value a diversity of a viewpoint and
Then there’s a huge pushback and there’s a moment of truth
Are they gonna stand up for the Veritas and for the for the core values?
Are they gonna or are they going to seed the culture to the mob and what the cancel culture is is
these moments of truth the leadership
choosing cowardice and
The actual cudgel of social media doesn’t actually hit the person
It’s the leader
actually going and actually firing them the leaders the one who ends up actually being standing up to the mob as opposed to letting
The mob rule you yes, which is which is the hard thing in a lot of these very hard to do you think about we
We see it at all these companies in Silicon Valley. Well, we see it when we do the podcast
We had a moment and we were discussing the don’t say gay slash
parents choice
Bill which you look at the framing of that. It’s completely
Hilarious that like we framed it as those two things either
You’re like you don’t want parents to be able to parent their kids or you hate gay people
It’s like really is that what we’re talking about here?
And we looked at it and a couple of besties were having a conversation
I won’t say who and we were trying to get educated on it and I’m like
should
People be able to talk about their gay parents in first grade second grade third grade. Of course, you’re a parent. You’re gay
I’m assuming you don’t want people to be able to tell you you can’t be talked about at school and that was like and
Gender assignment and what gender you choose and now we’re sitting there going I don’t actually know enough about this
Should you introduce that you can be one of 40 genders at six years old or 12 years old?
When should sex education start? I actually don’t know. I we would learned at 15. Should it be 12?
I don’t know and we’re we were like, is this a discussion we can have on the podcast?
without us actually
Consulting with some people who know more than us and discussing it and I’ve written about three or four tweets about the the trans
swimmer and
I have feelings on it, but I’m like should I actually
Tweet that I find it’s profoundly unfair that this person gets to win every single
Women’s meet and I kind of feel bad for the women who now can the best they can do a second place is am I?
Gonna get canceled for that because that was my initial
response to it and I don’t actually know my position because I don’t know that other person’s story who’s a
trans woman and
Maybe she does deserve to be in that. I don’t know if anybody has an answer for that
So I’m curious, you know from the besties themselves, you know, what what are your thoughts on?
Are tackling some of those things and and not getting canceled or the low back these things happen on every dimension every day
Which is you have more questions than answers. I think Tim you wrote it in the slide
It’s kind of like you’re navigating between high conviction and you know high knowledge
But that’s a path and that path happens because you can talk to other people and you can ask questions and you can figure out
Where you are today, you can figure out where you could be tomorrow
That’s what’s not allowed anymore right on any on any dimension. It’s not any one specific issue
It’s on so many topics, right?
And the thing with that is that it gets people very afraid and then when you are afraid I think to your point
What happens is you take the most simplest reductive point of view that can be the most acceptable on any topic?
Whatever and this is what causes this snowball
Literally, I’m scared to talk about the trans issue because I feel like I don’t know enough
I also don’t want to hurt anybody’s feelings
I would feel terrible if I did hurt his feelings
So the reason you want to talk about it is because the social costs of even taking the risk of having that conversation
Outweighed any potential benefit. It’s just the conversation gets so hot
but I want to I want to go back to what Tim said that the moment of truth is when the leader of the
Organization has the choice of whether to fire the person who the mobs going after it seems self-evident that the leader shouldn’t
basically join the mob and
inflict mob justice on this
poor employee
but they do anyway and the question is why and I would argue that
The reason why is because they’re afraid of the New York Times hippies. That’s it. That’s what it comes down to
They’re afraid that the woke mob will come after them next and we’ve seen it before when Brian Armstrong
Implemented his policy of no politics the workplace at coinbase who then retaliated against him
He got a New York Times hippies
That was they are the enforcement wing of the woke mob when Elon said that he would restore free speech to Twitter
What was the response the New York Times wrote an article basically trying to?
Identify him with the apartheid regime in South Africa
Even though he was a kid the headline of the article didn’t even match up
With the body of the article the body of the article had one of the stories about him as a child
It was also a historical account of you know
A bunch of oppressive things that happened in South Africa and in it when he was a child, right?
He was so the body of the story had nothing but anecdotes about how he even as a young
Adolescent basically rejected apartheid and yet the headline the story was basically painting him with this brush
So basically calling him a racist no and and it came from his dad and they have a super complicated relationship
And so it was like the it was like the one person where you couldn’t have necessarily
Guaranteed what would have come out of Errol’s mouth and it was still so supportive of Elon. Yeah, right
So if we’re gonna overcome this problem, I think we have to have this recognition
That you know that these
Prestige outlets like the New York Times who for some reason have so much credibility in our culture
They have the power or they used to have the power to basically destroy people’s careers
we have to realize that these are just
Places that have been hijacked by radicals and like their stories are meaningless. They’re completely biased
We have to stop investing them with the cultural power to like destroy people
It’s that simple happens is there’s a lag time now do Fox News
They don’t here’s the difference
They don’t have the cultural power to destroy anyone and who have they destroyed named somebody that like what woke mob have they engineered?
Mike the pillow guy
I’m not saying they wouldn’t if they could I’m just saying that they can’t because they don’t have that kind of cultural power
Before we Tim you were gonna say something
I was gonna say when an institution like this gets what happens is a
Mob like this that they don’t build anything, you know, they don’t create what they do is they appropriate they hijack
Something they take its existing good reputation, which is real power, which is a lot of power and they spend it down
It’s not constructive. It’s destructive. Yeah
Yes, but they’ll actually go in like it’s like they like they take over and they and they spend the reputation down
But in the lag time between when the reputation catches up it can do a ton of damage
So again, I would say that you know a lot
I’m scared about what’s going on in like Ivy League institutions that they have so much
Credibility, but in a lot of really bad things have kind of happened there and it’s a yeah
Can I suggest we pivot to tech and investing while we’re here?
Keith and I were talking backstage and I was like what investments have you made?
He’s like I’ve made no investments in 2022 and you guys have like how big your latest fund
5 billion 5 billion dollar latest fund and you haven’t made any investments and you know
The fund as a whole has made some investments. I haven’t let any but you have it
Yeah, I haven’t let any new investments in 2022. Yeah last year
I’d led the 13 or 14 in a year
So to go to you to go to effectively zero for half the year is like me being on vacation
Can you tell us what your point of view is? Well, I mean I tweeted in October
But you know that we were at the height of the market
I tweeted last January that we’re gonna see mm all over again. And so privately internally
I’ve been arguing this internally that this is exactly what’s gonna happen
And so, you know, my behavior should reflect my views. I believe in some consistency and harmonization
So if I believe tech stocks and tech companies aren’t worth that much
I can’t be investing until they reset and so I don’t want to spend money and invest in companies that aren’t gonna make me money
My job is to ultimately return billions of dollars to my LPs
And if I can’t do that, I shouldn’t be giving anybody any money. So when do you change your mind?
Well, there are founders who are ahead of the curve
There always are who understand where the world’s going
They actually understand the world where the world’s going better than I do
They actually teach me about where the world’s going more typically and if they have appropriate expectations, I’m happy to invest
So the last three or four investments I did make actually were all interestingly enough about 1.5 million dollar investments
Where the founder walked in and said, you know, I don’t need a lot of money. I could accomplish a lot
I can achieve it inflection moments for a very small amount of capital. That was the easiest thing ever to say
Yes at 1.5 million dollars. I don’t need to think about the macro world
I don’t need to think about where the you know
Nasdaq’s going and so the last three or four investments were all incredibly disciplined founders that I made like late last year into
Arguably into January now we have doubled down just to be clear about our conversation
We have doubled down in portfolio companies where we’ve led new rounds
But as far as a new investment from scratch, I haven’t made any new ones this year
So when you double down in a moment like this, how do you set valuation, especially if the last valuation was maybe
Felt like a top tick. If I think the founder has sort of digested where the world is then, you know
We have a dialogue about valuation
Otherwise, I actually encourage them to go shop it like I’m saying like we will give you money
But will you price it at the same mark at a discount?
No, if they have a fair market valuation from top tier firms
We’ll try to be like in that zone
But they’ll often go to the market and people will be like either pass pass pass pass pass or they will give them
You know just reality and then we’ll match that but we’ve done that a few times where we’ve encouraged founders typically we wouldn’t do this
Because my partner Brian Singerman loves to power money to companies that are working
That’s been we’ve been a high conviction fund for about a decade
So typically if we like a company will lead the next round and lead the next round
We’ve done this with ramp. For example, we’ve led like three or four rounds
But now with a valuation reset going on it’s been easier sometimes with founders
I really like to say why don’t you go talk to five?
Well, it’s just like go talk to five other people and I’ll match what they do if they’re really top-tier people
But like I want you to get like fair market feedback, you know
Not just have to rely upon my judgment car. Are we at the point in the cycle where the down rounds the warrants?
the
liquidation preferences have
Happened or are starting to be discussed definitely seen a lot of like preferences again
Explain what it is and why that’s important. Yeah, so liquidation preference basically means that
The investor is going to get their money back first
Regardless of what happens in the world and that nobody who’s a shareholder
Nobody who’s a founder is gonna get it
Nobody’s a common shareholder, which basically means founder employee is gonna get any money until
the investor gets all their money back times some multiple and that multiple is based on time and or just a hurdle it’s very scary
But it can be arbitraged by success
It’s founders sometimes can arbitrage it
Well, meaning they have asymmetric information about the future of the company if they really believe they can hit escape velocity in a short period
Of time it can be a decent gamble. I’ve seen someone like Jack Dorsey at square did this very sophisticated
CEO and he knew what he was doing and knew why he was doing it and it’s worked out pretty well actually
But it’s if you’re playing with a lot of fire
So it’s not for everybody and you should get a lot of feedback and advice before
The flat rounds are definitely happening. The new flat is the up round kind of philosophy even in some of our better
Are those senior like prep for Perry? It depends
another round
They’re all over the map
So it’s the market hasn’t shifted to the point that every new money coming in senior to all other money
That’s how much leverage and what quality investors you have on your cap table
Like sir, for example, someone tries to put a senior like preference on top of my capital
I’m gonna yell at them a lot and if they ever want a new investment that were you know
It’s from our fund. They may not want to do that. Yeah, I think that we’re a
Couple turns away. That’s what the Godfather the discount rounds
Well, some companies are gonna have to try the problem is like for example, we don’t like to do those rounds
There’s so much brain damage in the politics of that with founders require a walk us through that
Why tell us about that brain down?
so typically if I found you think there’s an efficient market of pricing right like I need this much capital and the markets gonna
float what the price of that capital is in
Private capital. It’s not really true
like so if someone comes to me and says, you know, my last round was done at 300 million, you know nine months ago and
Today it probably get priced at let’s say 120 million
I’m more likely to say no than to give them an offer at 120
because I know their prior investors and their prior employees are gonna be mad at me and furious at me and I don’t want a
lot of
Founders and people annoyed at me and so that brain damage isn’t worth it
So I’m more likely and our fund is more likely to say no then try to find whether 80 100 120 140 is the appropriate price
Which is very bad for the company in some ways because you they might need the capital you starve them of money
Yeah, no, they may be able to find somebody else
But we typically a founders fund really don’t like to do those rounds
The only way we would consider it is pretty much of everybody on the cap table called us up the founder of CEO
The board members prior investors said we really want you to do this and like we’re all collectively holding hands and want you to do
This then we seriously consider it. Do you at the end of q1?
Do you guys sit around and reset valuations and marks before you tell your LPs what these companies are worth meaning your own sense when
You sort of generate a sense of valuations. Like yeah, we do mark down actively mark. We do proactively mark down
What’s your methodology for that?
Peter’s views
We’d be open to doing that if we felt like we had an objective methodology for doing it’s very tricky
I think you can if you it later stage ones a little bit easier because you can apply multiples
There’s public comp, you know public comps and you just adjust to that
I think the earlier stage stuff
Very difficult to do objectively and it’s also not that set
You’re probably not as sensitive to it in terms of what it move how it moves a needle
But the growth stuff we try to use public comps and be like realistic
What do you think about let’s just we’ll just throw out some firms just if you had to guess
The next 18 months for some of these folks SoftBank
Vision fund one. I mean, you know, my views on SoftBank have been obvious since I did New York Times of all things interview
2016 you should reread the transcript, but I was like that strategy just does not work
Powering money into companies and hoping that money is the key asset in a key ingredient for success has been
False and in the history of technology for 50 years and so that you know
They lost 27 billion dollars again the brand subprime they used to do well in Latin America
But they got rid of the person who actually knew what he was doing. So this is a catastrophic mess
Plus it has moral issues, you know less moral issues than before but still, you know, not not the best investor tiger. I
Think they have a skill set gap if they’re going to try it from what I read publicly
They’re trying to invest in series a and series B companies the skill to be successful at investing series a and series B companies
Is very different than leading growth rounds or private or public growth rounds
I mean we look at this in our fund and we do both we have a venture fund of 1.8 billion in a growth fund
Of 3.2 billion and we have part the investment team is basically the same
most of the investment team
Maybe all the investment team is better at one or the other and if Tiger thinks that they’re going to be successful series a investors
They’re in for a very rude awakening
I know about five or ten people on the planet that are successful series a investors
It is a very different discipline than deploying capital writ large. Yeah Sequoia
I think you know Sequoia is the best run fund historically
They are really good at what they do
Obviously the world is changing around them like I think like many people crypto
You know is kind of throwing them a little monkey wrench in their model. They have to scale explain that. What do you mean?
They missed the first wave of crypto and crypto, you know
Has returned a decent amount of money for people and so I think that’s tarnished the brand a bit with crypto people specifically
But they’re working on fixing that they have a really good team
The team is aging still pretty well. One of the hardest things in venture is you age non gracefully in this job
You know by the time you’re my age
You’re probably to you’re already past your prime and you know
I kind of compare it because I went to law school with people who are u.s
Senators and I had breakfast in Miami with one of the more prominent u.s
Senators and I said I’m basically getting to the tail end of my career in tech and he said I’ll be the bottom
20% of the youngest 20% in the US Senate and so there’s a big contrast
But anyway, I think I think they’re excellent to what they do. We’re boy for Senate. Sorry. We’re boy for Senate
You might run for Senate. Oh, I’m not running for Senate. No, maybe my husband second career
Take the politics and reason
In crypto, they’re excellent
Missing the last crypto
insanity if this thing does all get torched as it seems to be and
Nobody shipping actual products that touch customers that actually saw problems in the world
Sitting out, you know that crazy
frenetic
moment might actually look astute because
you know some of these projects I
Do not see them shipping products. I think that you’re saying something that’s practically true
But I think Keith is also saying something that is practically true, which is if you’re a fund
That has that crypto deal flow at least my understanding of that playbook is you seed a project
You make sure that you get some amount of the float of tokens
You’re allowed to monetize those tokens very quickly. And so as long as you’re in the flow
There’s money to be made
There’s a lot of money to be made and I think what Keith is saying and this is where it’s a quiet may have made
An excellent decision, which is that form of money-making is not very reliable
And I think that there’s going to be a lot of questions about that. Once there’s a regulatory framework. Yes, and it might
Three points mostly I agree with that
I think first of all, it depends what you think your vision of what a venture fund does or what you do as a partner
So to me, I think I’m in the company building mode. And so people who are not building companies
I’m not really interested in making money. I’m not I’m not in a hedge fund mode
So tokens without successful products and iconic companies aren’t interesting to me, even if they return capital
We did think at founders fund though that all the alpha was in Bitcoin
So going back a decade not me
but my partners bought a lot of Bitcoin and we made a lot of money with Bitcoin because we thought the alpha was there not
In the company building a year or two ago. We started to shift and I think appropriately
I think there may be some alpha now. We’re in the end of one business founders fund meaning the right founder
It’s worth us investing the wrong founder
It’s not and so there are crypto projects and crypto companies where the founder is
Extraordinary and we would love to be the primary investor if we can and then there’s a bunch of other companies that might be successful
But that’s not our business
We are the end of one find the next Eli
Isn’t the fundamental problem that a lot of the way these crypto
Projects are designed is that you don’t have protective provisions preferred shares and the operating system that venture runs on
Nothing and they’re asking you to give them a donation of a hundred million dollars for a token that has some Panamanian
Foundation and you don’t have a board seat. I mean this seems incredibly high-risk and undisciplined
They are they are high risk, but we’re in the business of high risk in some ways like the protective provisions
I think we don’t really care that much about them at founders fund is one of the theses that you know
Peter started the fund with which is these terms are way overrated that ultimately the companies that succeed or the really the Facebook’s the
Palantir’s, you know the SpaceX is that’s where you make your money in this business and worrying about what goes wrong
Is actually words they do have boards and I actually believe in boards
But I believe in boards as being a mentor consigliere not in governance. Of course. Okay, great, but you’re not buying
Chuckie cheese, like I never give a term sheet
I never give a term sheet that has a board provision for me
The founders requires me to join the board got it
But I mean that the tokens are I think are part of the problem that I can’t get my head around
Yes, the issue with tokens a little more structural of when you have liquidity prior to success
That’s not necessarily a good incentive
Like I think success liquidity should follow success with product follow with users follow attraction not be in advance
So what happens to those teams when they get flush with a billion dollars in tokens or a hundred million in tokens?
They wind down the project haven’t shipped the product. Yeah, it has misaligned miss misaligned or bad or perverse incentives all over
Talk about you you’re mentioning in the back
in a moment like this
The people that it’s hardest for right after the entrepreneur is you said the junior partners at these organizations
Just described the dynamic now of having to run an organization where you’re trying to tell people just go to the beach for a year
Yeah
I mean
I think look the way you make sure the way you become successful in venture is you give money to a founder who turns it
Into an iconic company. That is how you get promoted, right?
That’s that’s the job. And so if you tell your colleagues like well, don’t make any investments right now
They’re thinking in the back of the mind. Well, how do I how do I become successful?
So it’s easy for me to say this is easier for Peter to say this is easier for Brian to say this
But it’s not so easy for people who want to make their career to say don’t make any investments
Now that said if you make a lot of bad investments Semel Shah has a good blog post about this
Your portfolio is your career once you make five or ten investments in venture if those aren’t good. You’re never gonna get great
I don’t know
There’s a single example of like a VC who became successful exactly where the first five or seven exactly didn’t show some signs of brilliance
It’s literally the story of the people on the stage right now
Is that we either got lucky or we were good or some combination of the early investments actually hitting?
I’m definitely worse like my first five investments three of them became public companies and stuff like
Definitely worse than I used to I mean I hit two unicorns in the first four. How does it happen?
It’s just luck. I think I do think there’s some luck to it or maybe your network network
So for me, it was easy because these were people that we worked David and I worked with at PayPal
And I was smart enough to at least you know
Follow the people that were launching companies after PayPal and give them some money
So I didn’t have to know much about venture other than just follow my former colleagues
We have to wrap and go to lunch. We’re gonna end with Sachs telling us
his most illustrative and
funny
Story about Keith Raboi. Oh my god from Stanford
You’re so many good ones some great moment with Keith. I
I don’t know
The two of you this is you could you could feel the friendship and all the memories coming through for Sachs right now
All these great I could flip it Keith and maybe since I like the work that Keith and I did at PayPal better
I guess yeah, whatever Stanford PayPal. Give us them. Give us the moment. What do you think of the best stories?
Well one good one that I think is instructive is you know, like I was kind of this opinionated person running around all the time
Probably half right half wrong and David was basically running the company at the time and
I could occasionally sabotage some projects and David had a really good way of reframing and channeling my energy
Which I think is applicable to most people
He’s like basically I don’t mind if you send me any of this feedback
But you have to send it to me
Directly not to other people and then you would like filter it if it’s like if you were like if it’s right
I’ll act on and if not, you know, etc. I’ll debate it with you, but it was actually constructive for the organization
So I felt liberalized
liberal liberalized to basically give the feedback and try to you know
Edit our course and it would be channeled in use useful, but it wasn’t distracting people
And so I think that is something like a lesson
I’ve taken with me that I actually now uses a CEO. I heard I this is what’s so crazy about this
I’ve heard this exact story from Reid Hoffman. Tell me that about you
I think it was either it was either PayPal or at LinkedIn where you would probably say
And it was just like lighting everybody and everything on
I read it like letters from the boy. I reread the emails and I’m like shit. I can’t write that well anymore
Letters from her boy a memoir. Let’s give it up. He’s her boy
Let your winners ride
Rainman David
We open source it to the fans and they’ve just gone crazy with it
I
You