You were bloated last night. What else is new?
I said not bloated. My God, you really are, though.
You look bloated.
Listen, that’s coming from you.
You started to look like Bert, and now you’re back to Ernie.
Your face is getting round again.
All I have to say is, hold on a second, guys.
I gotta get a drink. Is that okay?
You guys got a minute for me to get a drink?
Yeah, yeah. I definitely do. I definitely do. Go ahead.
Hold on a second.
You gonna get a beer?
No, no. I’m actually, you know, I’ve been working on my weight,
so I’m just gonna pick here.
I think I have the mocha latte from Supergut,
and I also have the chocolate shake.
Do you have a recommendation here for me, Friedberg?
Because I’m gonna put it in my coffee.
Is mocha on a mocha?
You can’t go wrong.
You can’t go wrong.
Thank you.
Double mocha’s a win.
Just on a completely unrelated topic,
did you happen to invest in Supergut, J. Cal?
No, no, no. I haven’t invested yet.
But use the promo code ****.
Oh, okay.
It’s been a big part of my weight loss journey.
It’s also been a big part of me and Friedberg
becoming besties and creating a unified block
for All In Summit 2023.
So I’ve got two solid votes.
I’ll be very honest with you.
If you guys give me a credible plan
where we can maintain the integrity…
I was joking.
Okay, hold on. Hold on.
I was joking.
Hold on.
Maintain credibility. Continue.
Listen to me. Listen to me. Listen to me.
If you two idiots…
I’m not involved.
Yes, you are.
You clearly are involved with this **** grift.
You’re an important vote. Hold on.
No.
Continue, Chamath. I’m writing this down.
If you two idiots…
Okay.
The two of you have to do this together
because otherwise I’m with David
and there’s absolutely…
Idiots. Got it.
You two idiots need to come up with a plan…
Plan. Got it. Idiots plan.
Where we can each make…
Make?
4 million bucks each. Net.
Then I’ll do it.
4 million. Net. Okay. Great.
Look at Jkal writing that down
as if he respects the contract.
Okay. Got this. Got this.
I signed the **** contract.
I signed the contract.
For Jkal, the negotiation begins
at the point where there’s a signed contract.
Yeah, exactly.
He’s like, okay, now I’ll negotiate with you.
All right, everybody, the show has started.
The four of us are still here.
By some miracle,
we’re still going after 107 episodes
and it’s better than ever.
Last week, we were number 12.
So, mainstream media,
we’ll see you in the top 10.
Mainstream media.
Here we go.
Twitter files, part one and part two.
We’re not on strike,
despite your oppressive conditions.
Yes.
Jkal, we’re not on strike.
My oppressive conditions
of making you show up on time.
Yeah.
If I was getting paid five bucks for this,
I’d be on strike right now.
Guys, not only are you getting five bucks,
you’re getting a bill for the production.
Okay, here we go.
By the way, how beautiful is it
that the same reporters
who couldn’t stop writing
about the oppressive working conditions
that Elon Musk was supposedly creating
because he simply wanted the employees
to go back to the office and work hard.
And if they didn’t,
he’d give them a generous
three months severance package.
Those same reporters are now on strike
because the souls burgers
are running a clickbait farm over there
with oppressive working conditions.
The intellectual dishonesty
has never been higher in the world.
Yeah.
I’m looking for intellectual honesty.
Yes.
Will the publisher of the New York Times
agree that anybody
who isn’t happy there
can have a voluntary
three months severance package?
Yeah.
Click this link.
And do you want to work hard
or do you want three months severance?
If the New York Times publisher did that,
you know what would happen?
800 of 1200 people
would take the severance.
Of course.
All right, here we go.
Twitter files have dropped.
Part one dropped
with the legendary
award-winning
highly respected journalist
Matt Taibbi.
If you don’t know who he is,
he is a left-leaning journalist
who worked at Rolling Stone
and did the best coverage,
hands down,
of the financial crisis
and the shenanigans
and he held truth to power
to that group.
This is important to note.
The second drop
was given to Bari Weiss,
who is a right-leaning
independent journalist.
These are both independent journalists.
She previously worked
at the New York Times itself.
Now,
I think we should work backwards
from two to one.
Do you agree?
Yes, for sure.
Let’s start with the drop
that just happened last night.
Yes, so last night a drop happened.
So,
here’s what happens
in
Twitter files part two.
I’m going to give a basic summary
and then I’m going to give it to Sax
because he’s chomping at the bit.
We now have confirmation
that
what the right thought
was happening all along,
which is a secret
silencing system
built into the software
of blacklists
was tagging
right-wing
conservative voices
in the system.
And these included
people like Dan
Bongino.
Is that how you pronounce it?
Yes.
He was tagged
with being on a search blacklist.
What that means is
you’re a fan of
Dan’s
who is a
former Secret Service agent
who is now
a right-wing conservative.
Let’s just say conservative
instead of wing.
A conservative
radio host,
podcast host.
He
was not allowed to be found
in search engines
for some reason.
Charlie Kirk,
who is a conservative
commentator,
he was tagged with
do not amplify.
I guess that means
you can’t trend
into people’s feeds
even if they follow you.
And then
there were people
who were banned
from the trends
blacklist
including a Stanford
professor
Jay
Bhattacharya.
Did I get it right?
Yes, Jay Bhattacharya.
Okay, I got it right.
Doctor of Stanford
School of Medicine.
And he
was
not allowed
on the trends
blacklist
because he
had a dissenting
opinion.
A Stanford
professor had a
dissenting opinion.
A dissenting opinion on COVID
that’s turned out to be true.
And this is where
the danger comes in
because all of these
actions
were taken
without
any transparency.
And
they were taken
on one side
of the aisle
by people
inside of
essentially covertly.
No ownership
of who did it
and
they never told
the people.
They gaslit them.
They
could see
their own tweets.
They could
use the service
but they
couldn’t be seen
even by their
own fans
in many cases
here.
Sax, when you
look at that,
let’s just start with that
first piece.
The shadow banning
as it’s called
in our industry
where you can
participate in a
community
but you can’t
be seen.
Are any,
is there any
circumstance
under which
this tool
would make sense
for you to deploy
and then what’s your
general take on what
has been discovered
last night?
Okay, look.
Two part question.
Yes.
Let me start with
what’s been discovered
here.
Let me boil it down
for you.
This is an
FTX level
fraud
except that what
was stolen here
was not customer
funds.
It was not
the right of
Dan Bongino
to speak
but the right
of the public
to hear them
in the way
that they expected.
Okay?
And you had
statement after
statement by
Twitter executives
like Jack Dorsey,
like Vijay Gadi,
like, you know,
Yoel and others
saying we do not
shadow ban
and then they
also said we
certainly,
this is their
emphasis,
do not shadow
ban on the
basis of political
viewpoint.
This is exactly
what they were doing.
They, in the same
way that SBF was
using FTX
and customer
funds as a
personal piggy
bank, they
were using
Twitter as their
personal ideological
piggy bank.
They were going
in to the
tools and using
the content
moderation system,
these big brother
like tools that
were designed
to basically put
their thumb on
the scale of
American democracy
and suppress
viewpoints that
they did not
agree with and
justify
removing content
based on their
own rules.
So there are
conversations in the
Slack that Barry
Weiss exposed
where, for example,
Libs of TikTok,
they admit in the
Slack that we
can’t suppress
Libs of TikTok
based on our
hate policy.
Libs of TikTok
hasn’t violated it.
We’re going to
suppress that account
anyway.
Now, it’s important
to note what Libs of
TikTok does.
This is a great
talking point.
Libs of TikTok
finds people who
are trans,
people who are,
you know,
maybe not
LGBTQ,
and
they feature
their TikToks
and they mock
them on Twitter.
Now, this certainly
is free speech.
And the argument
from the safety
team was by
putting all of
these together,
you’re inciting
violence towards
those people.
And they said
they haven’t broken
a rule, but
collectively,
they could be
in some way
targeting those
people.
Is there anything
that you can
share,
Friedberg,
to that
statement?
That they
targeted them?
By collecting
their,
let’s say,
views that are,
I’m asking this
question for discussion
purposes, I’m not
giving my opinion.
Hold on.
I want Friedberg to
answer one.
Why can’t I finish?
I’m going to go back
to you.
You spoke for two
minutes.
That’s why.
Friedberg.
You turned down
moderating today,
Sax.
You could have
turned down
moderating today.
The filibuster
continues.
Go ahead.
Then you can
both sides
this issue.
Don’t worry,
Sax.
While you’re
speaking, he’ll
drop one or two
words on you,
and then,
yeah, go ahead.
Why did
people like
Adi and
Yoel deny
that they
were engaged
in shadow
banning,
even though
that’s clearly
what they
were doing?
Because they
did not
implement
their own
policy that they
said they were
implementing.
Why?
Because they
were suppressing
accounts that
personally offended
them, that
personally they
disagreed with,
and they wanted
to deprive the
public of the
right to hear.
Okay.
Now, the way
that they’re
justifying this,
hold on, the
way that the
media is
today justifying
it is they’re
pointing to
obscure provisions
that they
did not have
the right to
use these
tools in this
way.
Okay.
Jay Bhattacharya
was not posting
spam.
He’s a Stanford
professor.
And his
view on
COVID has been
proven correct
completely.
He was opposed
to lockdowns.
That was the
great Barrington
Declaration.
And they
suppressed it.
What is the
justification for
that?
So now you
have to answer
the question then
since you are so
interested in talking.
Hold on.
I want him to
answer one question.
Then it’s going to
you, Freeberg.
Sachs, should
lives of TikTok
be able to
collect trans
people living
their life,
making TikToks,
put them into
a group feed,
mock them,
and if
those people
experience
harassment because
of it, is
that something
that Twitter
should allow?
I’m asking you
this without
giving my
opinion.
I’m curious your
opinion specifically
for the lives of
TikTok since you
opened that door
and you wanted to
bring up that
very thorny
issue.
Go.
Listen, so on
lives of TikTok,
my understanding
of that account
is that they
only take
videos that
have already
been made
public by
another account.
They’re all
public.
They’re all in
the public
domain and
then they
repost them.
What I think
these Twitter
executives have
interpreted is
that they live
in such a
bubble and
they live
with such
privilege and
entitlement
that they
think that
when their
point of view
gets criticized
or challenged
that that in
and of itself
is harassment.
That’s not.
That is public
debate and
they want to
make themselves
and their
points of view
immune to
public debate
if an
aggregate,
those people
report being
harassed and
they have
evidence of
being harassed,
what should
Twitter do?
Listen, if
somebody is
harassed, I’m
fine with
taking that
down, but
being publicly
criticized or
simply retweeted
is not
harassment,
okay?
Harassment
needs to be
targeted and
it needs to
be more than
just public
criticism or
mocked.
You don’t
consider that
targeted harassment?
Got it.
Don’t listen to me
about it.
Listen to
Twitter’s own
Slack files about
it.
They knew that
the account that
lives of TikTok
was not
violating the
rules, yet
they suppressed
it, they
suspended it
six times.
They knew
they were on
shaky ground.
They wanted to
do it anyway.
Why?
Because it’s
their point of
view.
They articulated
a vision for
the product
he wanted
Twitter to be,
but I don’t
think that’s
necessarily the
product that
they wanted to
create.
It’s not that
Twitter set out
at the time
or stated
clearly that
they were going
to be the
harbinger of
truth and
the free
speech platform
for all.
I think they
were really
clear and
they have been
in their
mind since
this is a bit
of a nothing
burger that
they were
curating and
they were
editing and
they were
editorializing
other people’s
content and
the ranking
of content
in the same
way that
many other
internet
platforms do
to create
what they
believe to be
their best
user experience
for the users
that they
want to
appeal to.
And I’ll
give you an
example.
A guy
named
Tony
Stoppelman
went to
D.C.
and he
complained about
how Google
was using
his content
and he
wasn’t being
ranked high
enough as
Google’s own
content that
was being
shoved in
the wrong
place.
And there
was a guy
who ran
kind of,
he was the
spokesperson
for
Google.
And
I think
the work
gets to
the point
that they
said there’s
so much
stuff that
we know
is the
best content
and the
best form
of content
for the
user
experience
that they
ranked it
all the
way at
the top
and they
called it
the one
box.
They’re not a
free speech,
they’re not the
internet,
they’re a
product.
And the
product managers
and the
people that
run that
product team
ultimately
made some
editorial decisions
that said
this is the
content we
do want to
show and
this is the
content we
don’t want to
show.
And they
certainly did
wrap up,
you know,
a bunch of
people saw
that and
clearly he
stepped in and
said I want
to make a
product that
is a
different product
than what is
being created
today.
So none of
this feels to
me like these
guys were
the guardians
of the
internet and
they came
along and
they were
distrustful.
They did
exactly what
a lot of
other companies
have done
and exactly
those were
in-app features
and in-app
services.
This was not
about taking
someone’s tweet and
changing it and
people may feel
shamed and they
may feel,
you know,
upset about the
fact that they
were deranked
or they were
kind of quote
shadow banned
but ultimately
that’s the
product they
chose to make
and people have
the choice and
the option of
going elsewhere
and I don’t
agree with it
and it’s not
a good
thing.
I think
moderation is
incredibly
difficult and
typically what
happens is
early on in a
company’s
life cycle,
you want to
see the
free market
do its
job.
Chamath,
you worked
at Facebook.
Facebook seems
to have done,
I would say,
an excellent
job with
content moderation.
I think in
large part,
correct me if
I’m wrong,
it’s a
company’s
life cycle
and I’m
going to
guess that
Twitter and
YouTube were
very similar
to what we
did at
Facebook and
it’s very
similar to
probably what
TikTok had
to do in
the early
days,
which is
you have
this massive
tidal wave
of usage
and so
you’re always
on a little
bit of a
hamster wheel
and you
don’t
recognize the
people that
are at
because I’m
not sure
that there
are these
super nefarious
actors per
se.
I do
think that
they were
conflicted.
I do
think that
they made
some very
corrupting
decisions but
I don’t
think that
they were
these evil
actors.
I think
that they
didn’t have
an opportunity
to take a
step back
and reset and
I think that
that’s true
for all of
these companies
and so
you’re just
seeing it out
in the light
what’s
happening at
Twitter but
don’t for a
second think
that any
other company
behaved any
differently.
Google,
Facebook,
Twitter,
ByteDance and
TikTok,
they’re all
the same.
This is
summarized
really elegantly
in this
Jay Bhattacharya
tweet.
So,
please,
Nick,
just throw it
up here so
that we can
just talk
about this.
This is
why I
think that
this issue
is important.
Critically.
This is a
perfect tweet.
Still trying
to process
my emotions
on learning
that Twitter
blacklisted
policies like
school closures
and a
generation of
children were
hurt.
Now,
just think about
that in a
nutshell.
What was
Jay Bhattacharya
to do?
Maybe he
was supposed
to go on
TikTok and
try to
sound the
alarm bells
through a
TikTok.
Maybe he
was supposed
to go on
YouTube and
create a
video.
Maybe he
was supposed
to go on
Twitter and
create a
video.
A lot of
these
companies had
similar policies.
In this
example,
it was the
CDC and
governmental
organizations
directing
information
and rules
reaching out
to all of
these companies.
We’re
just seeing
an insight
into Twitter.
The
implication of
suppressing
information like
this is
that in
not being
able to
spark the
debate,
you have
this
building up
of errors
in the
system.
And then
who gets
hurt?
In this
example,
which is
true,
you couldn’t
even talk
about school
closures and
masking up
front and
early in
the system.
If you
had scientists
who could
do that,
those are
all factual
things we can
measure today.
So I think the
important thing to
take away from
all of this is
we’ve got
confirmatory
evidence that
whether they’re,
you know,
these folks
under a
tidal wave
of pressure
made some
really bad
decisions.
And the
implications are
pretty broad
reaching.
And now I
do think
governments have
the ability
to do
what they
want.
I think that
that is
too naive of
an expectation
for how
important these
three companies
literally are
to how
Americans
consume and
process information
to make decisions.
Incredibly well
said.
Sach, your
reaction to
your besties?
I largely agree
with what
Chamath said,
but let’s
go back to
what
Freiburg
said.
They
didn’t
follow along
what was
happening.
This was
just content
moderation.
They had the
right to do
this.
You’re making a
big deal over
nothing.
No, that’s
not true.
Go back and
look at the
media coverage
starting in
2018.
Article after
article said
that this
idea of
shadow banning
was a
right-wing
idea.
I don’t
think it’s
true with
SBF.
It might
be true
with
Jack.
Furthermore,
you had
people
again
tweeting
and
repeatedly
stating
we do
not
shadow
ban
on the
basis of
political
viewpoint.
These
people were
denying
what
they
were
saying.
This
was not
known a
long time
ago.
It was
disputed by
you.
And now
finally it’s
proven.
And you’re
trying to
say it’s
not a
big deal.
It is a
big deal.
It’s a
violation of
the public
trust.
And if
you were
so proud
of your
opinion
about
the public’s
access to
knowledge,
to opinions,
to free
speech,
this has got to
be a good
change.
This has come to
light.
It’s going to
get resolved.
Do you think
there’s
penalty
s for
the people
that work
there?
What’s the
anger?
You won.
I think we
got extremely
lucky that
Elon Musk
is the
only
billionaire
who has
that level
of means,
who actually
cared enough
to take on
this battle.
I think he
deserves praise
for that.
But, I
mean, unless
Elon can buy
every single
tech company,
which he
clearly can’t,
I think you
guys are
right.
This is
happening to
a lot of
other tech
companies.
We’re
going to
put a very
fine point
on a comment
that Elon
actually tweeted
out.
And, Nick,
if you could
find that,
please, that’s
a very good
tweet, where
he said,
going forward,
you will be
able to
see if
you were
shadow
banned,
you were
able to
see if
you were
de-boosted,
why, and
be able to
appeal.
I think
these social
media companies
should be
subject to
it.
And the
reason is
because it
ties a lot
of these
concepts together
and says,
look, you
can build
a service,
you’re a
private company,
make as
much money
as you
want, but
we’re going
to have
some
connective
tissue
back to
the
user.
And by
the way,
the companies,
the companies
will love it
because I think
it’s super
hard for you
to be in
these companies
and they
probably are
like, take
this responsibility
off my plate.
It’s very
simple.
This is a,
there’s really
four problems
that occurred
here.
Number one,
there was
no transparency.
The people
who were
shadow
officers
had a
fair
judgment
or not.
In the
cases we’ve
seen so
far from
Bari Weiss’s
reporting in
the Twitter
files part,
it’s very
clear that
these were
not
justifiable.
Number two,
these were
not evenly
enforced.
It’s very
clear that
one side,
because we
don’t have
one example
of a person
who was
shadow
banning,
was
not
doing
what
they
were
supposed
to be
doing.
It’s very
clear what
happened
here.
Because
these all
occurred with
a group
of people
working at
Twitter,
which is
96 or
97%
left
leaning.
The statistics
are infuriating.
And this is a
discussion that
myself,
Saxe,
and
Elon have
had many
times about
this moderation.
And I’m not
speaking out of
school now
because he’s
now very
public with
his position
and his
position he
came to
on his
own.
It’s not
like this
is Saxe
and I
coming up
with this
position.
It’s
not like
this is
the
right
wing
moderators
who
were
acting
covertly
and
without any
transparency.
How would
you feel
if Matt
O
reporting
on,
you know,
all the
Russian
coordination
with Trump’s
campaign did
this?
Or Ezra
Klein with
whatever topics
he covers
and you will
very quickly
find yourself
infuriated.
And you should
then intellectually
as we say on
this program,
Steel Manning,
if you argue the
other side,
it’s infuriating
for either side
to experience
this.
And that is
what the 230
change needs
to be,
Chamath.
You’re
exactly
correct.
If you
make an
action,
it should
be
clear
to you
which
department
may be
maybe not
the person
so they
they get
personally
attacked.
And then
what the
resolution to
it is,
this has
been banned
because it’s
targeted
harassment.
This can
be resolved
in this
way.
Then
everybody’s
behavior
would steer
and that’s
why I’m infuriated
about it.
I think you
have to take it
one step
further to
really do
justice to
why this
should be
important to
everybody.
And I do
think this
school example,
it really
matters to
me.
Like we
have,
like I
don’t know
now,
we know
what the
counterfactual
is,
which,
like,
what if
Jay Bhattacharya,
who’s,
I mean,
like,
you can’t be,
you know,
have a higher
sort of role in
society in
terms of,
you know,
population
credentials.
I mean,
imagine if,
you know,
there was a
platform where
he could
have actually
said this
and that,
you know,
people would
have clamored
and said,
you know what,
why does he
think that?
Or maybe let’s
convene,
you know,
an actual
group of
20 or
30 scientists
and the
fact that
this one
version of
thinking about
things was
deemed so
heterodoxical,
it is just
such a good
example.
They shut down
an important
conversation.
You know that
the decision
was so
wrong and
the damage
was so
bad.
I mean,
this is
a bullet
example that
cleans through
all of this
other stuff
because,
you know,
I don’t
really care if
Rachel Maddow
has reclined,
who the
hell cares?
This is
important stuff
because it
affects everybody
irrespective of
your political
persuasion and
what editorial
you want to
read.
Chamath,
what if the
investigation
said fight
the real
enemy,
she ripped up
a picture of
the Pope
because of
the scandals
there.
She was
excommunicated,
she was
canceled at
that time,
one of the
first people
to be canceled
because she
spoke truth
to power.
What if
somebody,
an investigative
journalist at
the New York
Times,
the Boston
Globes are
in the movie
The Post,
which is
about the
revelations
about the
Catholic
Church,
or you go
back to
All the
President’s
Men.
What the
media
prized,
and what
they congratulated
themselves on,
was first of
all,
transparency,
and exposing
the lies of
powerful people.
Well,
that is
exactly what
has happened
here.
The media
is treating
Twitter policy
and suppressing
one side of
the debate
has been
exposed,
and the media
is treating it
with a yawn,
like there’s
nothing to see
here.
Why?
Because they
were complicit
in this,
they were
complicit
in suppressing
the views
of people
like Jay
Bhattacharya,
they were
complicit
in choosing
the views
of many
people,
and they
are
in
danger
of
being
destroyed.
They
are
in
danger
of
being
destroyed.
They
are
completely
at risk
from being
destroyed.
They
are
at risk
from being
destroyed.
And
they
are
completely
at risk
of being
destroyed.
They
are
completely
at risk
from being
destroyed.
And
they
are
completely
at risk
from being
destroyed."
But
this
is the
narrative
people
speaking
to.
People
corporations
and they don’t
get rewarded
for telling
the truth.
Oh no,
they’re going
for Pulitzers.
Trust me,
they are.
And what they
need to do is
stop thinking
short term
and think
long term.
Anytime
there’s a
conspiracy
theory,
you must
give it
some
validity
and say,
is there
any truth
here?
Because it
is the truth.
And
it’s
a
lie.
So
if you
are
a
good
person
and
you
are
a
good
person
and
you
are
a
good
person
and
you
are
a
good
person
for
years
and
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
and
if
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
and
if
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
and
if
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
and
if
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
and
if
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for
a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good
person
for a
very
long
time
then
I
believe
you
are
a
good