Scott Galloway: AI Wasn’t Built For You. The Rich Don’t Need You Anymore!

But don't you know how? Then you go to GoFantMe.com and start your own spin-off. Your next spin-off doesn't have to be in the school or the kids. You can only start in less minutes a GoFantMe spin-off starts. Some spin-offs for themselves, for friends, for me or for an organization.

The most important thing is that the people or projects at the same time.

GoFantMe is the current spin-off platform and for things to spin together.

“The important thing is, without a friend or a friend, you have to do a lot of bad things.”

They are on their way and support you. So you can put yourself in the right way. Whether it's creative, local or life-saving. Your personal own. There is a reason why GoFantMe is of millions of people under the level of spin-offs.

GoFantMe makes many people a difference. And if people want to do so, goFantMe is more powerful. I think the greatest brand destruction in the last 18 months is the U.S. brand of broad N.A.I. So with America, Trump has been convinced that this was his defining moment of being known as President Deliberated in the Middle East.

But I think the Trump administration will be known for criminal corruption and incompetence. And then incompetence is bubbling up. And then the second greatest fall is A.I. And also Sam Alman, who's gone to the dark side. And I'm an A.I. optimist.

But here's what we feel to understand.

These tech CEOs, they do not have our best interests at heart. Scott, I often come to you to help myself for my opinions on some of the most sort of consequential issues going on in the world. And when I look at some of the quotes from the CEOs of these A.I.I. companies, I've got one here from Elon Musk, as A.I. and robots will replace all jobs.

What's in your view here? I think it's mostly bullshit. But the catastrophizing is nothing more than thinly veiled attempt to say my technology is so devastating.

“It's going to shift society and you should invest at this crazy valuation.”

And the data doesn't reflect that there's some big exogenous media coming for the employment market. But I believe it's actually going to create more jobs than it destroys. But the scary thing for me is that because of A.I. and because of these frictionless relationships that people are engaging in online, I think a lot of young people are losing the ability to endure rejection.

But I think a more important technology in terms of how it's going to change the world and what will create more shareholder value is not A.I. It's really. Guys, I've got a favor to ask before this episode begins. The algorithm, if you follow a show, deliver you the best episodes from that show very

prominently in your feed. So when we have our best episodes on this show, the most shared episodes, the most rated episodes, I would love you to know. And the simple way for you to know that is to hit that follow button. But also, it's the simple, easy, free thing that you can do to help us make this show

better. And I would be hugely grateful if you could take a minute on the app you're listening to this one right now and hit that follow button. Thank you so, so, so, so much. Scott, welcome back.

I often come to help myself for my opinions on some of the most sort of consequential issues

going on in the world because I find you always have a very interesting perspective.

“And one of the things that's been front of mind for me and I think the audience as well”

is this subject of artificial intelligence. It's moving incredibly quickly. It feels like a moving target. And I think I saw some stats the other day that said the subject of artificial intelligence is less popular as like an industry than even ice in the United States.

In part because the big CEOs of these companies are saying our jobs and our way of life is going to be fundamentally disrupted and people don't feel like they have a say in that. We didn't choose this. What's your perspective on everything that's going on? There have been a few brands that have fallen further faster in the last 18 months than two brands.

The United States brand abroad. We used to be the enforcer, the operating system to keep rogue nations in check. The US is now that rogue nation. So, the US brand abroad for the first time in history, more people feel the China's a force of good in the world than the US.

That's never happened before. So, the brand US is falling for this fastest. The second greatest fall is AI. Your view of AI is directly correlated to your wealth. The only cohort that has a positive rating of AI is people making over $200,000. Because generally speaking, wealthy people look at AI is something that's fueling their portfolios.

And wealthy people are the biggest users of AI. So they see it as a positive. They see it as innovation. They see it as the S&P going up. But if you're an average middle-class person, what you may see is that your electricity bills

have gone up. And you don't even have access to invest in these companies. And you see some statements from people, Sam Altman saying, stop complaining about energy costs. Think about the amount of energy it takes to raise a child.

So they haven't really managed the brand well. In the last 18 months, it's come from something kind of scary, but we can be optimistic

And something that's a wealth creator for the wealthiest already. The brand in the last 18 months has had tremendous erosion. When I look at some of the quotes from the CEOs of these AI companies, I've got one here from Elon that says, AI and robots will replace all jobs working will be optional. Let growing your own vegetables instead of buying them from a store.

The challenge will be fulfillment. How do you derive fulfillment and meaning in life? And Sam Altman said by the end of 2028, more of the world's intellectual capacity could reside inside data centers than outside them. And when I went through Sam's blog several times, I mean, he's talking about a fairly

dystopian future. And many of the CEOs, I mean, even Amidea Enthropic talks a lot about his bare case for AI and the job disruption that will follow.

“And so I think I'm trying to get clarity for myself, really, unlike what is the truth?”

What's marketing and what's the truth? And I want to add to another point, which is by a lot of people, and I'm already finding that our frameworks specifically for entry-level roles has quite radically changed. And so I didn't believe this stuff. A lot of people told me that, oh, Sam Altman, when these guys are doing marketing to make

their company seem powerful, but then when I noticed a change in my own behavior, when I'm

sifting through these CVs, I thought, oh, maybe things are going to change. I think it's mostly bullshit in catastrophizing and it means a fundraising. Every technology in history goes through a similar art, there's some catastrophizing, there's some job loss that increase in productivity results in additional margin, new business opportunities, and employment grows.

I don't see any reason why this would be any different. And I think that catastrophizing and talking about this massive destruction in jobs is a way of saying, or justifying the massive investments, these companies want enterprises to make in their companies. Because if you look at the amount of capital, they have committed and evaluations of these

companies. One of two things needs to happen in the next five years, at least in the US. There needs to be a trillion dollars in incremental revenue from new products from companies that have licensed AI. Saloreal does a big side license with, say, open AI.

Does it come up with new products? Like, how does it justify that investment? We're not saying a lot of AI moisturizers or cars that are built by AI. I mean, AI has said industrialized robots in Amazon, but there's not a lot where you call new AI driven or AI products.

AI plays a role in the background, but it's very hard for companies right now to point to incremental growth or revenues from AI. So in order to justify these valuations, then they have to say, all right, there's going to be massive cost savings or efficiencies. And there's some examples.

“I think meta has just announced new layoffs because of efficiencies they're getting with”

AI targeting. So one of two things needs to happen in the next three years. Either these companies' valuations need to be cut by 50 or 70%. Or you need a massive destruction in the labor market that creates tons of efficiencies

that their customers can then flow to the bottom line.

And I think what the CEOs are saying is that there's going to be massive efficiencies. I also think that you sound more interesting and it makes your technologies sound more seminal when you say it's changing the world and we don't know how to control it. And quite frankly, I find it a little bit obnoxious that some of the founders in key figures in AI catastrophize just about the time they take a secondary and piece out to

the code to Zura. That's not helpful. I'm Dr. Frank Dstein and I've created this monster, but I don't have to deal with it so I'm going to go piece out to San Tropez. That's just not very helpful.

They always talk about the peril. So what do you mean by that? So the first big fear of catastrophizing is this unprecedented job destruction. I'm talking about that for three years, but let's look at the data. The unemployment rate in the U.S. is 4.5%.

Among youth, it's 8.8%. That is slightly below the historical average. The number of new business permits are new businesses started, per capita in the United States is doubled in the last 10 years. And we hear about, well, what about meta at the announced Zura line off, think, 8 or 10,000

people yesterday, 2019 to 2025, they went from 16,000 people to 80. So even if they go back to 60,000, it takes them back to, it takes them back about 24 months. So I don't doubt that there'll be a real dip or a severe V down in certain industries customer service, probably the legal field. But I believe over the medium in the long term, it's actually going to create more jobs

into destroys. And I don't, I think some of the catastrophizing is nothing more than thinly veiled attempt

“to say my technology is so devastating that it's going to shift society and you should”

invest at this crazy valuation. Could you be wrong? Oh, 100. I'm not out of the time, Stephen. No, but what would have to be the case for you to find out that you were wrong in terms

of how you've reasoned up from the first principles of your thinking there?

Job destruction. Layoffs. So what would you have misunderstood for that to be the case? Like, what would you have misestimated for that to be the case? Ground zero for the job that was going to go away was radiologists.

grow up to be a radiologist because that job's going away.

The new job listings for radiologists in 2026 is up because what it ends up is that while scanning

“the image is important, it's a small part of the job.”

The value out of a radiologist is diagnosing the illness and then coming up with a treatment plan. And that's his important as ever. The number of coders job listings for coders year on year is up 11%. So people who understand how to use these technologies and come up with different prompts

or different means of vibe coding, that demand is gone up because now AI can be applied almost any start up where I will be wrong is if there is sustained job destruction and the new jobs created in new businesses and the employment those jobs create doesn't keep up with new jobs. And there is a scenario, you don't need 100% unemployment, like Musk is predicting,

at 20% unemployment, the French had a revolution in Walmart, Germany turned very ugly.

At 20% unemployment, especially in my youth, especially in young men, tend to get very angry

and take to the streets. So you could see a V that's so severe, even if there's a job recovery, if it hits 20% unemployment, that could cause real civil unrest. But I just look at the data, I look at the employment numbers, if you didn't know, there was this seminal technology, the very smart people were predicting a job apocalypse around

and you just looked at the data, you wouldn't know there's anything going on. The data doesn't reflect that there's some big exogenous meter, media are coming for the employment market. Is there a case that this technology, because it's built on the internet, so it has inherent rapid distribution, everyday anthropic release and model, chat security release something,

it spreads across the world, very quickly, everybody's updating their technology at

“the speed of like, unlike the industrial revolution where you have to build infrastructure”

and physical infrastructure, is there a case that, because of the speed of this technology and the proliferation of it, that it will be unlike the revolutions of the past. And that's the fear that the view is so severe and so vicious that we don't have time to recover. And even if there is more jobs on the other side, that there's too much civil unrest around

the view, but so far, the view doesn't be decelerating or diving as quickly as people had predicted, I was kind of reminiscing on the way over here. I moved here almost four years ago.

The first thing I did, I got off a plane at night, and I went to this amazing party at

Annabelle's, this Brazilian party with all these hot people everywhere and I thought, I love London. And the next morning I woke up feeling pretty hungover and my team said, "You have this podcast with this young guy." And I said, "Kansel, I'm hungover."

They said, "No, he's really up and coming, he'll like him, he's a nice kid." And I came into this little place and shorted it, she'll wherever, with all these like cool coffee houses. I had no idea who you were. And within two years, you were fucking everywhere.

And you just say, "I'm in the airport and I see your banner on your book." And then I get on the plane and the safety video has you in it. I'm like, "Make him stop." And my point is, where I'm going with this is, this place is like, I mean, it feels like the Googleplex, you're hiring like crazy.

You're one of the most technically sophisticated people I know in media. And yet you're hiring a bunch of organic things walking around and eating and going out and drinking and having kids. So you're the example. Old media is going to lose jobs.

“But you're creating how many people have you hired in the last 24 months?”

A crystal of our companies about, I'd say about 220. Okay. And those are high-paying jobs. Yeah. Those are young people probably making six figures plus.

That's a lot of employment. So is the BBC or is the Daily Mail or whatever, laying off people? Yeah. But I'm not sure the laying off people faster than you're hiring them. Yeah.

And as like, we're hiring a different type of person and AI fluency is becoming increasingly important. And the silly other thing is that there are only thing I noticed for 60 days ago. I can tell myself, I've been head of recruitment. We have a recruitment team downstairs and I own a recruitment business.

But as I go through that inbox, people that I otherwise, two months have got to go would have been, you know, jumping to hire, and now pausing because there's new technology that's been launched by these companies in America, that means there's alternative solutions. I'm not what's giving me posts. People do me to consider ways that they can upskill themselves with these technologies.

The labor market is definitely reshaping and it might reshape faster, but I'm not sure it's going to be the apocalypse. They'll be winners and losers for example. For the last 30 or 40 years, the unemployment rate among college grads has been lower than non college grads.

It shifted this year. The unemployment rate among non college grads because of the boom and vocational work is now lower than the unemployment rate among college grads. And if you think about it, you're like, okay, well, that's bad for new college grads. But at the same time, all of these data centers need carpenters, welders, plumbers.

But yeah, the employment market's absolutely reshaping, but when I graduated from business school, a lot of it, quite frankly, is your generation spoiled. What do I mean by that? When I graduated from Berkeley in 1992, 40% of us had a job on graduation day, meaning 60% did not have a job.

I would bet the kids in my class at Stern. I bet 40% of them are starting their own business because with AI, when I graduated, there were two, there were two entrepreneurs in my class and the second person was my co-founder. We were the only business started in the hospital of business from 1992. I would bet there's going to be 30 to 50 businesses that are started on graduation day.

There's kids dropping out of their second year of business school to start businesses

because they just raised $10 million in a series A.

“Now, you have to have certain skills, a certain type of personality, a certain facility with”

technology. I'm actually quite excited about this. We're starting to see an uptick in productivity, which should result in incremental profitability. Well, some people be on the wrong side of the trade. Absolutely.

Do we need to do a better job of providing more unemployment, more retraining, Denmark spends 2% of GDP on retraining and vocational training. We spent 0.2% in the US. We're not good at retraining, we're really bad at it actually. We're not good at taking care of the people on the wrong side.

But as a global, in terms of global employment, I just don't, I think the catastrophizing is, is just fundraising.

What do you think about what Elon's doing with them, Optimus?

Because if you bring those two forces together, you've got Optimus robots, he's humanoid robots, where he says there'll be, I mean, some of the quotes that he said, I mean, it might be marketing, but he's predicting that you won't need to be a surgeon because there'll be so many Optimus robots that are more advanced than any surgeon on Earth, so Optimus robots will be doing surgery.

And if you combine intelligence with sort of physical power that comes from these robots, it does beg the question where human skills remain outside of the relational stuff and Maslow, serving Maslow's hierarchy of needs. I've asked them one of the things I contend with them, like, you're seeing in China, especially how robots are really changing production lines, and I saw this video the

“other day of, I think it was in the Indira Bangladesh, where they had the factory workers”

have cameras on their heads, so that they could film their hands because they're intent on replacing them with robots. This combination of intelligence plus robotics feels like it's two synomies at the same time. I think that's right, but let's use the surgeon as an example.

I think the robot in the context of surgery will be not a replacement, but a supplement. And that is there'll be a large class of surgeons who know how to weaponize robotics to be better surgeons and quite frankly do two surgeries a day instead of one. I think most brain surgeries take four or six hours using robotics and precision instruments a great neurosurgeon will be able to increase the productivity and the accuracy of their

surgeries. My big tech stock pick of 25 was alpha bet because it was trading at the P of 17. I just saw it as being ridiculously cheap as everyone thought I was going to put it out of business. My big tech stock pick for 26 is Amazon, because I think where robotics really hit the

rubber meets the road in terms of shareholder value is the collision of AI in industrialized robots.

And there are 400,000 industrialized robots in the US and there's a million at Amazon.

Some million Amazon is two and a half times the number of industrialized robots as the rest of the nation combined, but the notion that we're going to have someone in our house bringing our tea at robot, I don't buy that at all.

“I think that automated robotics, the collision of advanced manufacturing in China and using”

AI with robotics will yield tremendous advantage. Amazon is saying they're going to double their largest business, which is their retail business by 2032 without an incremental hire using robotics industrialized robots. And they were early, they made an acquisition 10, 15 years ago of a robotics company called Kiva, but the notion that there's going to be a robot bringing me my tea here, that's

bullshit. The scary thing for me that I want to know more about is weaponized industrialized robots as warriors, because I wonder, you know, there's just, you know, some weird places. But again, I think AI in robotics, yes, there's notion that we're going to have robots serving us our food or in our house, I don't, I don't see that.

It's interesting, because I guess one could argue that we already have robots in our houses, but they just don't move. So the quite the leap really is would you allow a robot to move through your house? Because I mean, a Hoover's a robot, a fridge is kind of like a robot, especially the smart fridge is, you one could say a TV is a robot, a smart TV, but the, the differences,

they don't move through a house, it would be allow the Hoover to move itself. And then once we allow that would be allow it to potentially bring us something. Yeah, I get it. I just don't, the stuff I've seen on actual application of these robots. Keep in mind, these individuals, the job of the CEO now is, it used to be to under promise

cheap capital so you can pull the future forward.

My understanding is three years ago, we had a million autonomous Tesla taxes on the road.

That did not happen. In 2016, Musk said, or 2017, there was going to be autonomous was two years away driving. So their job is to predict a very exciting future. Something Musk in particular is very good at saying, look over here is he stuffs a rabbit into a hat.

I mean, Tesla's an automobile company, so he's got to create a stories that justify its 155 times earnings when most automobile companies trade at 10 or 15. So it's robots, it's space, it's connectivity with AI and autonomous and robots.

“It's constantly look over here because I think it's very difficult to justify the valuations”

these raising money at. So to be clear, he is much as anybody is able to pull that vision forward. He's launched 90% of the rocket sent into space, have been by space acts. But this is a company that's trading that has $16 billion in revenue with 8 billion in profits and it's going to go out in its IPO, it's projected valuation of 90 to 110 times revenues.

When Google went public and went out at 10 times revenues and it was growing 10 times as fast. So what is this? The key attribute of an innovator right now is storytelling. And that is to make sure the promise is way ahead of the performance such that you can access cheap capital and pull the future forward.

But a lot of this stuff, I find is a lot of jazz hands. He's often known for being rolled about as timelines, but he does seem to take a magic to the world. The best product in my mind, the two products that have changed my life from a technology standpoint, most underrated product, is AirPods.

If AirPods alone, Tim Creek just stepped down where it's own product, it'd be a fortune 50 company. I think it's technology, I think it's the most profitable ubiquitous piece of jewelry in history. I just walk around with them in my ears now.

“And then the best product, I think the last few years has been starlinked.”

That's amazing. I just think it's absolute, I've done podcasts from planes. I can talk to my sons on FaceTime. That product is, you know, all airlines are flying the same tin can, same roots, same bad food, a real point of differentiation for them, and us also in maritime.

I think Starlink is the best tech product, so power to him. When I go public, is it an amazing company or is it overvalued?

The answer is yes, to be true at the same time.

What do you think of Tesla? Because for me, it's much, I don't think people in realize this world are the parts of the world. First time I got in the Tesla that I got in LA and pressed the location and took my hands off the wheel.

What I had to do is occasionally look forward, which they're removing now, and it took me three and a half hours to Joshua Tree without any intervention, and that the safety record in it is safer than if I drive myself there, it's just magic to me. And then when I watch this, the space rockets come down and be caught with the chopsticks. Incredible.

I get this is just magic. Incredible. I've got to be honest, when he says that these Optimus robots are going to be, I go to know what? He's delivered a lot of magic in the past that no one would have thought possible.

Can you even imagine 10 years ago, him saying that what people would have said if he said we're going to launch this massive sort of 70-foot skyscraper into the air, and then we're going to catch it on top sticks. Starlink. And then we're going to relaunch it again, and then we're going to catch it again.

You would have gone impossible. Edison of our generation, but you asked about Tesla. My bought a Tesla, incredible product, far superior to anything on the market. He deserves credit for inspiring the EV race, which will be good for the environment.

But the reality is that everyone's caught up.

The fastest growing out in the bill company and history is BYD. BYD. BYD is company. BYD is basically an 80% of a Tesla, some people would say 100% of a Tesla, but 40% of the price.

If there weren't, there wasn't a ridiculous tariff war right now.

“BYD, I think, would be the number one EV in the United States.”

It's eating Tesla's launch. In addition, what I think is going to have about Tesla, credit where it's due, changed the market, inspired the EV race, good for the planet. But when you look at its valuation right now, I think what you're going to see is when SpaceX goes public.

There's a lot of money in the market that wants to get some of that Musk risk. What you were talking about. This guy is incredible. I don't care how expensive it is. I want to invest behind Elon Musk.

I get it. My money is about to come out of Tesla, which people are finally figuring out. It's just a great car company that should be trading at 30 times earnings, not 150, and it's going to go into SpaceX. So I think the boost, the retail surge in SpaceX, you can see in the valuation that

it's planning to go out. It's just extraordinary. Some of that is going to come at the cost of Tesla. I think people are waking up to the fact that Tesla is a great auto company. It should be trading at about a fifth of the valuation it is now.

I'll not play what jobs do you think will be impacted by AI? I've already talked about logistics and transport.

on the way. They've green-lighted waymo, for example. I'd hate to be a truck driver.

To me, a long-haul truck driver is the first place.

Tracks can drive between 10pm and 4am, where there's no traffic on the road. I don't think it's a very good job. What's interesting about one of the things interesting about truck drivers is the biggest employer of non-high school grads in America, of non-high school graduate males. It's the biggest employer.

It's actually one of the two it's the biggest jobs by a number of people in the United States. I would think within 10 years we're going to have very few long haul truckers. Obviously, customer service, it feels like that will likely go away. Where I see job destruction in my world is that I used to, any time I got an agreement

from anybody an advertiser for a contract and employment agreement, whatever it is,

“I'd send it to my lawyer and say, can you review this?”

And because the bills, there's latency in the bills, it's probably cost them over between 400 bucks and 2000 to review every contract, right? Because I'm a narcissist and I think I signal by having a name brand law firm. And so they hire some kid at 120 or 80 to 120 bucks an hour and they charge me 4 to 500, right? Now I say to the person in charge of that project and they say, "I'm sending it, they're

a contract with you to our lawyer." I'm like, no, no, no, no, put the agreement, describe what we're looking for, ask cloud or chatGPT to pretend it's a $1,200 lawyer an hour lawyer, employment lawyer or contract lawyer and ask them to review this document, redline it and do the same thing at another LLM. And then you make those changes.

Congratulations. You are now a senior associated at a law firm. I probably spend $100 to $300,000 a year on legal fees across my organization. I think I'll cut that easily by third this year. So that's one way I see it.

But I have a podcast company, not nearly the industrial behemoth this thing is, but I keep asking everybody, how do we use AI to do this? And I find that they're getting better at it and it enhances our work, but we're still hiring. Again, I think it's a supplement.

“And if you want to protect against AI, it's pretty easy.”

I've said this for a while. AI is not going to take your job, someone who understands AI is going to take your job. So what I tell people is have a second screen.

And that is, always have a second screen open that has nothing but AI on at LLMs and anything

you get digitally, port it into your AI screen and start playing with it. Do you have that quite so interesting? Because I've heard that quite a lot that AI will take your job, someone that understands AI will take your job. And as you said it then, I thought, you know, I was thinking about different roles in my

team and my open roles that we haven't hired for. And I thought someone with AI will take your job, but they won't just take one job, they'll take five of those jobs. And so if you think about an analyst, right, we've got Molly downstairs, analyst for my investment fund.

We were well intent on hiring maybe five analysts for my second fund. Yeah. We only need Molly now because Molly's got two agents that she works with in two, two Mac minis. And she's got a set up that screens that inbound interest and also goes practically into

the market, looking for new opportunities and pulls them back into her runs into her framework, scores them for a person for the I.C., so Molly enabled by AI, she's probably taking out five jobs.

“And this is, I think, even with the law, for example, that lawyer that's using these”

models, probably doesn't need to have five junior lawyers now if they're really, really competent with anything about an executive assistant. So with the executive assistants, we might for our executives would have hired maybe probably ten EAs and total. Now you really need one that has is powered by AI to do all of travel, one that does all

of the scheduling and then one that makes people at the door. So you need three versus potentially ten. And this is kind of what I'm broadly saying, and in most roles, but not all of them. There are still some roles when I look to draw up chart where I go, actually, you know, this sales.

A lot of the sales we do from a media perspective are take someone for lunch, wine and wine, cool relationships, pitch the deck, those kinds of things seem to be completely untouched. But let's continue down that path. You know, I don't need five miles and you'd want, yeah. That creates additional EBITDA and margin, creates more profitable, diary of a CEO, empire,

means you can raise more money and then you go buy more podcasts or invest in them who hire more peachy. So, and it creates a faster cycle of money and new ideas. And when we were walking in here, you're talking about acquiring podcasting and you're getting into CPG and you're getting into different forms of media and you're driving growth

and innovation. Well, some people be on the wrong end of it. My mom was a secretary. She started as a typist, typist went away. She oversaw that the secretary of a typist pool at a law school downtown, and I worked in

the mail room in high school. But my mom realized that the hard part of her job was interacting with a senior level

executive, and she became an executive assistant, and she never made a lot of money, but

she made good money, realizing that typing was the easy part of her job. The hard part was managing some dude's life, right? So, accounting should go away, but what you're seeing is there's actually more accounts

wealth management and tax optimization, which keeps getting more and more complicated.

So, yeah, do you have an oneness to update your skills to understand, I mean, when I first

moved in New York, and they hired an assistant for me and she came in and said, oh, I don't use computers. No, my, what you can't work here. So it's like, to say, you're not going to learn AI, at least the basics on how to use it, it's like being in 1998 and saying, well, I don't use PCs.

So I don't, yeah, you got to update your skills, the cycle times decreasing, a lot of people find themselves on the wrong side of the trade. I've have to force myself to use AI, I don't, you know, the part of your brain around

“understanding new technologies begins to die, right?”

I can no longer perceive a calendar, I can't tell you what I have next for some reason. I used to be able to do fantat, I could do a Scotsman accent, even like no one's business a few years ago. That part of my brain is died, and when I try to do an accent, it sounds like a dead

language that twin speak to each other and it offends everybody.

There's parts you're brain that die, and the part that where you can understand new technologies or at least have the will to learn them starts to go away as you get older. I have to force myself to play with these new technologies. Everyone who wants to make more money or wants to hold on to their job should have the same bonus to learn these new skills.

On the individual level, there's people listening now that want to make sure that they have the skills that kids have the skills of a future, right? What are some of those important skills? You've got kids. What do you say to that?

I get outside all the time. What is the skill? So, the honest answer is, I have a view, but nobody knows.

You guys 10 years ago in private schools, the biggest incremental investments in curriculum

were two things, computer science and Mandarin. How's that worked out? Like, thank God, my kid knows Mandarin, I mean, said nobody right now, but they thought it was going to be computer science. And you could argue that hasn't worked out as well as everyone thought.

I would say that the enduring skill is storytelling, and that is that your ability to look at data, create a narrative arc, and then communicate that story in a compelling way via all the different mediums, whether it's podcasting.

“I think you have to write well to be a great storyteller, but if you think about the most”

successful people in the world, at the end of the day, they're usually storytellers. The great CEOs, I read Jeff Bezos, 1997, "Letter to Shareholders," where he focused on those three principles, and I'm like, "Take my money." Right? I see even a guy like Alex Carp at Palantir, walking around doing a live earnings call on

his phone, it's very compelling. In Jensen Huang, you know, when he does these giant Buffet-like stadiums where he gets up to me, he's like a rock star at that story telling. The analogy is, I think, in a great equalization among the product, reverse engineering, creative parody of my manufacturer products, I think most technology or technology is

going to converge and we're seeing that convergence in AI models. So I think the point of differentiation is relationships, right? Do I want to work with this person? Do I know about their kids? Do I like them?

At the end of the day, I have three different law firms pitching me business, three different investment banks, three different CRM companies, who do I have the best relationship with, and who do I want to work with? So storytelling, it sounds very passive, but the ability to establish strong relationships with other sentient banks.

I still believe that everything reverse engineers to biology, I think it's a certain fundamental understanding of the sciences. Those seem to be pretty enduring, you know, my oldest that you want to be a marine, my biologist, I'm like, "Who are you kidding? You got seasick."

I mean, at 18, you want them to be smart, good people, aggressive support them, becoming their own person, which I've had trouble with, I want them to be mini-meas, and then helping

“them find something they're great at, but telling your kid, "No, you need to go into”

this because this is where the future is going." No, we don't know. We know the basics, I would want my kid to be able to write well, to be able to look someone in the eye, to be competitive, you know, I encourage them to play sports, to do chores, which they do none of, but other than that, I don't know, what do you think

are going to be the skills of the future? I think it's really difficult to know. I think what you said about relationships is really important. You said storytelling, and I think storytelling is a proxy of sales and persuasion, and whether that's persuading an investor to believe in you or people to come and work for you or customers

to come and buy off things. So, I think storytelling in sales is going to be a enduring skill. The skill that is the biggest threat that people are young people are losing, especially young men. And this is a skill, and it's hugely underrated, is the ability to endure rejection.

And because of AI and because of these frictionless relationships that people are engaging in online, I think a lot of young people, especially young men, are losing the perseverance, endurance, willingness to hear no, whether it's expressing friendship, whether it's applying for a job or not qualified for, whether it's approaching someone in expressing romantic interest. I think a lot of young people, especially young men, think they can have a frictionless relationship

So I think that skill, when I mentor young men, the first skill I try to re-incorporate back into their life is what I call no. And that is, I need you to go out, I need you to go, put yourself in the agency of strangers, whether it's a church group of sports league, a riding class, and I want you to make an overture, an expression of friendship.

Hey, do you want to grab the arsenal game or watch come with miles and watch it? And then, mostly these kids, when you ask them what they want, they just want two things, the men I mentor, they want to move out of the parents house, and they want to go from. And so once we do the friend approach, then I say, okay, find someone you may be potentially interested in, ask them out for coffee, and this is the goal.

The goal is no, because what's going to happen is you might get a no, probably going to get a no, and then I'm going to call you the next day, and I'm going to say, are you okay?

And the answer is going to be yes.

Is he or she okay? The person who said no. Yeah, they're fine.

“Because, and I'm, I'm boasting out, the secret to my success is rejection.”

I ran for sophomore junior and senior class president of my high school. I lost all three times and based on my track record, I decided to run for senior body or student body president where I went on to get this lose. Never bothered me. I mean, I'm mourned and I moved on.

Every entrepreneur, how many knows have you gotten? Oh, fucking out. And we'll say that in anybody. I mean, so the, any person you look at and think that person has made more money than I would have thought, or any person who's hanging out with someone much higher character

and hotter than them has one thing in common, either a very rich parents or more likely. They're, they're comfortable with no. So, and unfortunately, I think young people, especially young men, are becoming less and less resilient to no. Apply for jobs.

You're not qualified for apply to graduate programs. You shouldn't get into approach people who you perceive as being cooler and hotter in you and express friendship and romantic interest. That is the key. Much above your way class, get out of big spoon and get ready to eat shit.

“That is the only thing that is common across all great entrepreneurs who are self-made”

is they have the ability to mourn and move on. I've been thinking about this a lot lately. It was inspired by listening to Adam Neumitt on that podcast a couple of weeks ago. He did one with Rick Ruby and I think it was. And then he tells the story of sitting in the back of the cap with Massa, who's the owner

of Softbank.

Then he was going to ask him to give him $300 million and Massa tends to him and says,

"You're just not ambitious enough," and he says, "By the time that 23-minute cab drive had finished, Massa had offered him 4 billion and he had signed a little napkin thing that Massa had in the back of the cab." And that story and other stories like it have been inspired have made me realize that some of the game in life and success is what I now call selling yourself long.

And most of us go through our lives selling ourselves short. I think it hard because we don't see ourselves on an exponential curve. We see ourselves as a fixed date. This is who I am. This is what I'm worth.

But you've almost got to factor in your own exponential improvement. But if you take you from 21 to now, how are your intelligence and wisdom and connections have all compounded?

“But you would have sold yourself at the value of you at 21 years old?”

So I'm not actually now think in every season of my life I've sold myself short. When I was 18 years old, I sold 20% of my company for $5,000. And then I thought that was, I can believe that I was celebrating in my room at the time I was stealing Chicago town pizzas to feed myself. And then a couple of years later, I sold another 30% of my company for $300,000.

And I thought I'd hit the Euro Millions at a company ran up and was on the stock market for many hundreds and millions, many years later. I thought, "God, I've sold myself short my whole life." So I assume I'm doing the same now. And if I assume that, how would I say, what would I say, what what opportunities would

I go for? I think that, for me, that I should apply to everybody. I think it's self-fulfilling. Yeah, there's something about imagining where you want to be in five years, outrageously in the reverse engineering back.

But at that moment you took that to an okay, you really needed it. And that was, so it's a function of your opportunity set and what's actually the market says to you, I think pricing is a signal, I struggle with pricing, and what I tell whenever we're writing a proposal or whatever I get back and I'm like, okay, increase the pricing 30 or 50 percent more.

Because pricing is a signal, and you can always take the price down.

And the client, the person will always come back and ask for the price down. But I mean, quite frankly, in this is success, I think men are better at imagining and unrealistic self and women are more measured. And I think that's one of the things that has held back women as entrepreneurs and the fact that not as much capital has been available to them, because the people allocating capital

and white dudes from Stanford are Harvard, 40 percent of these sees are from two schools. I think it was Charlie Munger who said, someone who has a crazy vision of their own potential that's stupid and obnoxious, his attitude was never better against that person, because occasionally they're right. And so for, we talked about Musk, for a guy to think, I'm going to raise so much money and

command technology that I can be responsible for 90 percent of launches and control 70 percent

That's pretty arrogant.

So yeah, I agree with you, and you know, let me put it this way, if you're going to

air air to the upside, because the market will bring you back on its own. Yeah. That's such a sad moment has been in all the news lately, in part because of this article that the New Yorker did to him, which is their Ronin Farrow and Andrew Morance, which was this article, and then he responded with this blog post here two years ago, I thought

that sound had a really good brand, because he was out in Congress, he was saying, this you know, he was asking for regulation it seemed, it is turned unbelievably quickly, unbelievably fast.

“Well, we said this before, he's a proxy for all of AI, I think the greatest brand destruction”

other than the US, so it'll last 18 months has been AI, and also Sam Alman. But we keep falling into this trap over and over, and that is something happened through the '70s, '80s and '90s, and that is America, it's here as used to be athletes, government officials, and actors. And then there was a dramatic decline in attendance, religious institutions, but people still

have really big questions and want sort of an authority or a God-like figure. The closest thing we have to religion is technology. Most people don't understand it, it has a mystical feel to it. I have no idea how my phone works, I can ask it, anything, and it comes back with a relatively authoritative answer that I trust, somewhere I was talking or praying.

Well, like most of the time when we're on AI, we're kind of praying, we're sending a question into the echo to a being thinking it's smarter than us, and it's going to come back with an epithetic-loving correct answer. So the new Jesus Christ was born in the '90s and that was Steve Jobs, and he was taken from a early, like Jesus Christ, the idolatry of innovators is absolutely not crazy.

It's the new Jesus Christ, if you will, are these textyos.

And here's what we failed to understand.

They do not have our best interests at heart. They are not concerned with our emotional well-being, they are not going to comfort us when we're older. They are there, and they play a key component in capitalism to do anything that is required to get their earnings up one cent per share every day.

And they will make incremental decisions that justify the harming and self-harm of teen girls, Michelle Sandberg, the weaponization of our platforms to make the courseening of our discourse, Mark Zuckerberg, I mean, the radicalization of young men, the people running YouTube, they we keep thinking that the newest tech CEO is going to save us. That this guy here, Sam Alman, was the gay son we all wanted, but super nice, super friendly,

“much voices, well, Senator, I'm worried about that as well, right?”

These guys would sleep at their cousin for a nickel. That's their job, their job is to increase earnings, they're not here to save us. We're supposed to elect people who put in guardrails for them. So everyone is saying our asking me, can we trust Sam Alman? I might know, and we shouldn't have to.

We should have regulators putting in guardrails on AI, we should be testing these things. Government agencies should be testing these things. We should be ensuring that these technologies are not used to surveil Americans, right? We would still have cartoons, like characters on cigarettes, marketing to 12-year-olds. If we hadn't put in place regulation, and that tobacco executives would claim that they weren't

marketing to young people. Ford would still be pouring mercury into the river if we didn't have an EPA in regulation. So Sam is doing exactly what he's supposed to be doing. The latest hero that's going to save us is Dario Amote. We've decided he's the good guy now.

“The villain's journey in tech is the same.”

Some compelling person, we think, is a wonderful guy, and it's almost always a guy.

Occasionally a woman, you know, we need to do better gender balance that was Sheryl Samburg in the workplace, and then we find out that they are doing their job and that is doing anything they can legally to increase shareholder value regardless of whether it prevents a tragedy the commons are not, and then we get angry at them. The journey from Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader gets shorter and shorter, but they all follow

the same path. And then 18 months later, we realize that they would too, we'll do, we'll say and do whatever they can to try and to land opposite regulation, and that sometimes when we don't have a government with a lack of domain expertise, with a lack of insight, with people who are cross between the land of the dead and the golden girls and don't understand these technologies,

and when these technologies are allowed to run just free with no regulation, they do bad things. So Samolman is the latest person we've discovered as Darth Vader, who's gone to the dark side. It happens with all of them because they're doing their job.

We as citizens aren't doing our job, and that is we're not putting in place elected officials to regulate these companies. So yeah, can we trust Samolman? No, but we shouldn't need to trust him.

these companies. Do you see this old school he wrote in response to being having a Molotov cocktail throw in his house? I read this article without reading it. So there's been death threats on his life, and let me be clear, there's absolutely no justification

whatsoever for this, and it needs to be, I don't even like it when people yell at J. Advance when he's skiing with his family, but we don't want to be that nation, or we don't in the West, we have a surgery. If you're operating with the confines of the law, which Sam is, he deserves a living piece.

It is sad. Whereas in the US now, there's no more people working in private security than there

are cops, really, because there's always going to be a number of people who are likely,

I don't know about the perpetrator here, who are mentally ill, and who will find an excuse, essentially the make-up usually of these perpetrators or these criminal actors, is there usually young men looking to restore their social capital through what they perceive as a historic act of violence against a famous person. This has gone on for a long time.

He's now famous. I don't think it's fair. I've seen some people try to equate AI's dangers as if there's acts of violence, or somehow justified, they're not. There's no justification for a healthcare executive being executed in the streets.

There's no justification for violence against Sam, or attempted violence against Sam in his family.

“I think it's young men with a lack of opportunity, mental illness, and unfortunately access”

to firearms everywhere. It's always happened, I don't make the connection that somehow it's more justified.

I think famous people, one in three presidents has been shot at.

Crazy isn't it? So the more famous you get, quite frankly, the more personal risk there is, because someone is going to decide that taking you out for whatever reason is going to restore their social capital. Actually, if you look at assassination attempts and violence, it's actually gone down,

but these stories are cinematic and very interesting, and they get a lot of attention. But I think it's a shame we live in a society where, especially in the West, where they have to endure that kind of risk. One of the really most lovely moments I've seen on it is, I don't know if it was the Danish and the Norwegian Prime Minister who stepped down, they applaud it, and he got on a bike

and road home. I thought, "You can't do that in the US." Obama's kids still have secret service protection. So there's definitely something, I frankly blame it on big tech that tries to convince people that this person is their enemy and this person is evil.

Seems not evil. I don't know him personally. I sat next to him at this party I went to, but he's doing his job, quite frankly, we're not doing ours. Do you think he's a nihilist?

I don't really know the definition of the word nihilist, but I guess it's someone who believes that life is essentially meaningless.

“I think there's a nihilist vein running through big tech where a lot of them have”

go bags. They have a plan for, if shit gets real, if there's a zombie apocalypse, so there's a revolution or there's a massive pandemic. They have definitive plans and they've spent tens of millions of dollars. They meet their pilots at Oakland Airport.

They get on on their Gulfstrom 650. They fly to New Zealand to Auckland and they have a bunker built out. Is this true? Oh, there's a lot of them. Really?

There's a lot of go plans amongst the wealthy. And sometimes it's not a dramatic, sometimes it's just a home, nuclear attacks, cyber attack, revolution. But I would say amongst billionaires, I would bet, conservatively, one in three, have some sort of go plan.

And that's an Isleist. And also, I, to a certain extent, I think wanting to be an interplanetary species is a little bit nihileist. Also, if they're saying that being the future, people aren't going to have jobs and those report it.

And there's this AGI, the super intelligence, which is going to be smarter than everybody. And even if there was a 1% chance, a 1% chance that these doom of predictions around the AGI could come true, I would, I would stop. A 1% chance of humanity sort of self-employing or destroying itself wouldn't a rational person stop.

Well, okay, you're up and high, man.

It's going to take 3 million American deaths to invade Japan, Japan will not surrender.

And you're, you're being charged just splitting the atom. There was much more than a 1% chance that our ability to split the atom and then show we would use it against a civilian population, we result in the end of the world, should he have stopped at element of it. So a lot of scientists, nuclear scientists killed themselves, they committed suicide because

they were convinced once we'd split the atom and use it against civilians, it was the end of the world. It was just a matter of time before we all, all these nuclear devices.

“So I don't, I think you came moving forward, that nihilism where nihilism impacts these”

people. Let me go back to the go back. I talked to one of these people. He outlined this plan for me, right? He's a beginner, yeah, outlined this plan.

His plan be, it thinks get really ugly, right? And my view is, okay, boss, let's play this out, something happens, there's an event, it's too dangerous to stay here. You meet your pilots to the airport, I mean, shit really gets real, people scaring for food, people become feral.

what do you think's going to happen? You don't think the people in New Zealand are going to be like, let's go take the rich guy's shit. Like, it strikes me that these are such misallicated efforts in capital, that if you're really focused on your own future, whether you're wealthy or not wealthy, that your resources

and your talent should be allocated towards trying to make this place a little bit more habitable, not trying to colonize Mars, not having to go back, and this is part of the problem with a point one person. There are 900 billionaires in United States, and I would imagine 300 of them give money, they were responsible for 20% of all political donations, and that 20% numbers misleading,

because they can be more strategic. So unions are big givers, but they just give money to whoever's pro union. So it's not that strategic. Billionaires can allocate capital to a specific issue, really ramp it up, so they have a disproportionate amount of control over our elected population.

“The problem is the point one percent are not invested in the health of America, why?”

They don't have to put up with TSA lines, if I'd private. They don't have to put up with shitty health care. They have concierge medicine and access to the best medicine in the world. They don't have to put up with 40% of third graders can't read or write.

Their kids go to amazing schools that spend on average $75,000 a year on their kid versus

15,000 at a public school, $10,000 at a public school in a long America. They don't need police, they have dormant and security, where I live in so-how there's no homeless, as far as I can tell, there's no crime, there's no cops, there's cameras everywhere and dormant everywhere. My point is they are no longer invested in the well-being of America.

They've totally dissociated from the investments required to make America a better place, because they're sequestered from it. They're no longer invested in the well-being of America, and what I find strange about this nihilism is that these individuals think that they are no longer as invested in the well-being or the safety of the world.

I think that's very unhealthy. These are some of the most concerning conversations I've had. One of the things that happens when you have a podcast and interesting people come on and you start

hanging around with more interesting people and more powerful people is you get a world,

you get little peaks into a new world, but you didn't know existed. You kind of get to see behind certain curtains, and I remember having a particular conversation in London at a kitchen table where someone was describing one of these AICOs to me, and basically making the case that they believe there's a roughly 10% chance.

“I think they said seven, if I'm not misunderstanding, percent chance that it will result”

in the end of the world, some sort of catastrophic event, but they really didn't care because they think that being the person that summoned this new intelligence amongst us was probably more consequential than whatever happens. And if I wasn't privy to, again, hearing this second hand from someone, I know who knows this person extremely well.

I know he knows him extremely well because they hang out, him telling me that I wouldn't have believed this. I would have thought that's nonsense. I would have thought to myself, they must be kind because they have kids, but actually now I very much believe what you're saying about this nihilism where I don't actually

believe they give a fuck. I actually don't believe some of them give a fuck. I actually think some of them are playing a game, and they're playing a video game with our futures. Or they, the incentives like in the United States, when I was growing up, my dad's boss had

a slightly bigger house and he drove a Cadillac and we drove a Gran Turino, but we were members of the same country club and his house was a five-minute drive away. And maybe my dad's boss got to fly business class and we flew coach. The Delta in having money, having a deal, you know, having a middle class life and an upper class was like this.

Now the Delta is this. This is a good air transportation. Flying on spirit airlines is a humiliating dangerous experience.

United Airlines, economy economy economy plus business class, first class, oh wait, that's

not enough. Let's go to private. There's charter, there's fractional, there's a session citation, there's a bombardier, 300, there's a global 650, now there's a new G7, the Delta in your life in your health care. My mom was very sick when I was very young.

“And when I think about how humiliating it was for the two of us, having heard to endure cancer”

when we were under an insured, it was a devastating traumatic humiliating experience. Now if I need, I take Lunester when I travel because I have trouble sleeping, I have a medical conscious company, they get me to the drug delivered within two hours to my house. I have NAD treatments, they arrange for someone to come to my house when it's convenient for me and do it in my living room.

I can text my doctor, I have a medical kit with all these things in it, if I'm abroad,

kit, they can tell me exactly what to do. That health care I am receiving right now, I have my blood taken every three months, they send it to some bond layer in Norway with PhDs who can tell me that I have less than a 0.7% chance of any cancers as evidenced by a lack of whatever it is antibodies, the cancer cells.

That health care now for the point for the 1% is dramatic and it's all the same thing. The bottom 99% of Western societies are essentially being optimized and monetized to make the life of the 1% just unbelievable.

The life you can lead in the 1% is so dramatic and so incredible.

Rotor selection set of mates, your kids have better health care, better educational opportunities, you have influence, people want to know you, so the incentives to not be rich but to be very rich are so incredible and the way you get very rich is through stock options, typically

“in technology, that I think the incentives are so great that people will make incremental”

decisions and ignore the fact that, oh, one and eight team girls who are self-harming in the UK side Instagram is a reason for that. Well let's find research that maybe creates some doubts because once I become a billionaire I'll be a better person and they're getting so much criticism and so much shit posting and it's so competitive and there's fewer and fewer winners that become much bigger, right?

It used to be five companies, one, and got hundreds of millions of dollars at one company wins and gets tens of billions. So you can see how incrementally this path to Darth Vader is pretty tempting. So I think they just get caught up in, they get caught up in this competition and they lose all side.

Also, my co-host on the Pivot podcast said something that was illuminating a may during COVID. I was walking down the street with my sister and a homeless person kind of stirred. There was a lot of homeless people because they took the homeless shelters turned out everybody

“and she jumped out of her skin and I said, well, that was a bit of an overreaction.”

He's not going to hurt us and she said, you know, you're 62 and 90. Easy for you to say, if you don't say to women walk around in a constant state of fear and that fear is rational and it really struck me and then Cara said, these guys don't

understand anything about victimization because they've never been victims.

They're traditionally white males who have grown up in upper-income households and they've never really understood what it's like to be a victim. So they don't put in place to safeguard it's so competitive that it's just easier for them to give money, some strategic money to keep people and ensure that they're not regulated so that they can get to be billionaires because all the incentives are do whatever is required

to win. Sam Laltman isn't going to be remembered for being a good or a bad guy. He's going to be remembered for the guy who either was the number one AI company or blue it.

“That's what he's going to remember for and right now he's blowing it appears, right?”

But people are going to look back and say, well, he didn't get public anthropic ended up being at worth more. It was kind of a disappointment financially but he was a good guy. That's not what he's going for and quite frankly that's not what our society rewards. I've heard talk to me found is they will carry the same belief but the biggest threat to

their small business is having a bad product. It's not. This threat they face is hiring the wrong person for their small team because bad hires but the handbrake on growth and rapidly infect company culture. My get it, when you're starting out you need a player's degree of company but you don't

have 40 spare hours to spend sifting through interviews so you hire fast to fill the seat but this ends up costing you even more in the long term. What any small business actually needs is a reliable and efficient way to find the right talent without stalling momentum. That's where our long term sponsor LinkedIn and LinkedIn hiring pro can help you.

The streamlines the entire hiring process from drafting a job description to short listing candidates and conducting AI-powered interviews for initial screenings. Nearly 60% of hires who've used this tool have found a candidate to interview within a week. Higher right the first time around and get started by posting your first job for free at

linkedin.com/duacy that's linkedin.com/duacy in terms and conditions apply.

Information is something I'd never really thought to check until fairly recently.

There aren't any symptoms or obvious signs for a lot of people and yet it's consistently linked to some of the most serious health outcomes that we know of but our sponsor function tests twice a year for inflammation markers alongside hormones and heart health and stress and toxins giving you a far more specific view of what's going on inside your body. I did my tests recently and I was shocked a little bit, a little bit amazed, a little bit

surprised by my results but what I really loved was having all of the information about my body in front of me. It makes it so much easier to make a more informed decision immediately about what I do in terms of exercising in terms of what I do in terms of my diet and everything else. So if you want to look into it yourself, go to functionhealth.com/duacy and use code

$365 a year which is just $1 a day. I think your assessment of AI in terms of it creating more opportunity than it destroys is accurate. I also think that in the near term and all of our lives are going to be quite different. I spend a lot of time on this podcast. We spoke into a lot of the big CEOs from AI companies and tried to pass through this and I've

never really gotten to a solid conclusion of what the future looks like. Do you have a case

for the future where this technology is the first that actually delivers on the promise of making us more human? There's talk about loneliness and there's talk algorithms going to get more return to it but I have this like thesis that potentially in a social networking said it's going to connect us and make us more human. That's kind of the narrative of all these tools but maybe this technology renders us only useful for that which humans

can do which is the relationships that you're talking about and connection and being

“out touching grass with our friends and family. Is there a utopia?”

This is social media has some real upsides. I would argue at this point meta is actually in that negative. It's I think done so much damage. But with AI, there's a lot of upsides

but really encouraging piece of data I saw is that when you spend time on social media,

it takes you to the extremes. The algorithms seem money and more Nissan adds in figuring out if you're conservative or liberal and then demonizing the other side in tickling your sensors. I'll get served a video of Ted Cruz or Victor Obama looking like an ass because that I'm a progressive and that makes me happy. And then they elevate content of some progressive of AOC calling out somebody and I start to hate the other side. What they're

finding with AI is it's actually people who spend more time on AI, it's actually moderating their views because AI is about taking the medium or the average of every piece of data. So do you know how nice AI is? Great question, Steven. No matter what you say or how stupid it is, it won't say that's a really stupid idea, Steven. And I'll say I can understand why you're asking this question. And generally speaking, because it looks for the median

of things, it looks for the average. What is the most often used seventh word after these six words are strong together? That is pushing people towards the middle. It's actually

“having a moderating effect, which I find very encouraging. I think old people in senior”

care who may be of lost family members or don't have a lot of relationships in their life, I can see AI characters playing a big role in their life. I believe if for a long time that the biggest danger of AI is not weapons. It's not income inequality. We voted for income inequality or contamination for our elections. I mean, all of these things are big issues. The biggest downside of AI in my view is loneliness. And that is, and we talk

about this a lot. AI is convincing people to kind of a reasonable tax-similar life on a screen with an algorithm. Why go through the effort of having friends with me of discord and reddit? Why go through the hassle of getting a job when you can make money on coin base or Robinhood supposedly? And why would you go through the effort of trying to have a romantic relationship when you have life like synthetic porn? And the young male brain,

I think, is especially susceptible to this. Managed 20 to 30 are spending last time outdoors and prison inmates. 42 percent of men, 18 to 24, and we talked about this in the last show,

I've never asked a woman out of person. So people are starting to believe they can have

a reasonable fact-similar life. And what they need to know is that 40 percent of the S&P are economy is trying to sequester you from the most important and rewarding thing in your life and that is your relationships. So my prediction for America is we will never be as prosperous and credible prosperity and credible economic growth and massive loneliness to pressure and anxiety and obesity. I wouldn't say it up here as well and all this war stuff that's

going on over in the Middle East. What you thought Trump was trying to do and actually what happened? Because he's talking about, "Oh no, we said it would be six weeks, it's five and half weeks, everything's going to plan when we're winning the war." And you'll get it

“seeing three things. What would actually happen in your view here? I think that he was”

talking to by some of the security advisors in Netanyahu that his legacy could be restoring or making the Middle East more peaceful and being the president that severely diminished the capacity of what has been arguably the number one source of terror in the region and maybe even around the world for a long time. That this was his defining moment as a president to go in. That they were weakened, they were hobbled and we had the military assets and the

intelligence to go in and topple the regime and he would be known as the president that liberated the Middle East. I think he bought into that over the back of Venezuela. Well, which was a classic success. Not kind of. That was arguably one of the greatest military operations in history, but it was a military operation. It wasn't a war. I mean supposedly his guards did know what happened. I'll suddenly run on the floor throwing up because there was

some sort of crazy radiation of radio waves, not a single American soldier killed, lifted

macho and that success and thought well I can do the same thing and the problem with wars is that

“the enemy has to say and what we have found since I think a lot of our leaders believe that wars”

could ultimately if you have a bigger army will result in unconditional surrender on the other side

and there really hasn't been unconditional surrender since World War II and all the enemy needs to do whether it's the Viet Cong or the Taliban or the IRGC. All they need to do is survive and they win. In addition, I would describe the war as being the operational excellence in strategic and confidence. I actually believe there was justification and some merit to the idea of the military operation that tried to take advantage of a weakened Iran where his air defenses were down

to take out the IRGC or at least maybe provide cloud cover for a revolution against the IRGC to diminish their navy, diminish their nuclear capabilities, diminish their missile launch capability. I think there was real justification for that. The problem was that strategic incompetence here, not going to not enlisting some European allies, not briefing Congress, not coordinating with Gulf allies, not recognizing the game theory around what happens if they start firing at ships

in the straight of Hormuz. It just was strategically incompetent and now we're in a situation where

we want to diminish their nuclear capacity, but the reality is if they can maintain an ability

to turn off and on the straight of Hormuz, that is probably more powerful than them having nuclear weapons. If you look at, if you look at what happens if the fertilizer or the products that create fertilizer are further sequestered, you could have a mass starvation event around the world. So we've essentially given them potentially a weapon that's more powerful than a nuclear weapon. And also, we look like, if we have a bit of a glass jaw, we go in, we lose 14 soldiers,

tragedy for them in their families. The Russians are losing a thousand people a day and they don't show any signs of giving up. We look like this giant boxer who's the most skilled and biggest boxer in the world. We go in, argument over whether we should go in or not, but now if we would draw, what incentive do the Iranians right now have to negotiate? When every day this goes on,

“they look like the little guy that stood up to the evil American Israel. I think this has been”

a disaster from a US brand standpoint, and I would argue that them blocking inbound an outbound traffic from Iranian ports is actually the way to go, but that lends itself to the argument we should have just continued with economic sanctions. But I have to own it. I thought military action was a good idea. I would argue, I thought this was a solid here, that we've been at war with Iran for 47 years. They're first act of this regime in 1979, was to take 110 Americans hostage. 70% of the

IEDs in Iraq were built in Iran. We have been at war with Iran for a long time. The question is whether or not this military action slash war was worth it. And it looks as if it was so poorly executed on a strategic level that it is really diminished our brand. And we're now in the definition of a quagmire. If we leave, we look weak, and any nation we perform military action against just says, start firing missiles at their neighbors, you know who summarized every war for the

US right now is in this war was hoaching men. When he was describing Vietnam, he said, "They will kill a lot of our people. We will kill some of theirs. They will tire. They will go home."

We killed a million people in Vietnam. We lost 58,000 and we left.

Yeah. Right. So Americans tolerance for pain and I'm not suggesting that we should go on military at misadventures. But this right now is no doubt turning out to be a giant win for the IRGC in a pretty severe loss for America. The further alienates us from our allies and shows kind of our soft tissue around our willingness to actually finish the job, the other state of the kind of perfectly summarizes this war is we broke it. Now you fix it. We're leaving the world

of much more insecure place, much more economically vulnerable. Gulf states thought that having a US military base was Kevlar and ended up just putting a giant bullseye on them. So people are going to think twice before they cooperate with our US military by hosting bases. We appear to have not thought through getting our expats out of the Gulf, protecting the Gulf states, and on bias,

“I think the Trump administration will be known for a criminal, corruption, and incompetence.”

And then a competence is bubbling up. I watched a press conference of his last night where he said this, which kind of links to what you were saying. They're delaying it because they we don't know who to deal with. They are in, you know, they know who the leader is in this country. We don't know who the leader is in a run. I just thought to know what, if I was running a run, that's exactly

If he can't negotiate, he can't do anything. So I think the Iranians potentially did the IRGC, I'll say no, we don't even know who's leading. Because then what can you do? You can't just keep bombing, that's not going to work. You also can't negotiate, so it runs the clock down. You can affect the regime change from the air. The Iranians are smart, they have distributed power. So there's no kind of head of the snake to cut off, but also a lot of this is incompetent in our part. Do you know

what we have done in the US toward diplomatic core? We've absolutely gutted it. When Vans goes to Islamabad, thinking he's going to do a deal, if you look at the history of every truth, of every deal, of every summit, 97% of the work is done before they hit the tarmac by diplomats, who go through line by line and iron out and talk to each other and negotiate. We've got it our diplomatic core. Our counterintelligence operations have been gutted. So we're kind of flying

blind without instruments, and they think that J.D. Vans going to Islamabad for a TikTok moment where he tries to look presidential and then blames it on the IRGC, it's not going to work. So

“I think a lack of investment in key areas, a lack of soft power, whether it should cut in”

USA, AID, a lack of respect for our diplomatic core and the engine room, like actually working with people and talking to them. I think this level of incompetence and arrogance is all bubbling up. And they, you're right, they don't even know who to talk to. That's good. They don't even know who, who do we negotiate with. And by the way, you've got to look at incentives. If I'm the IRGC, I'm like, well, we need to do a survive. Yeah, every day this goes on. And by the way, we're in the

middle of what I'd call the first AI meme war. And that is Trump is communicating with

truths on true social and these macho videos and memes of him is Jesus Christ, but he's been bested by kind of the Slopaganda or the AI memes of the IRGC. Have you seen these Legos memes? They understand him better than he understands them. They are outstanding. And it's a group of 18 to 25 year old probably people who look like this group. No, no, no, that's what we're involved. In terror on figuring out AI driven means highly produced, highly effective, very strong message

going right after the, you know, portrayals of at the Epstein Island. And I mean, they are doing a much better job because his Lincoln said, and it goes back to basics, he can't win a war without public support. And he can't lose a war with public support. And right now, Iran is winning what you would call the Slopaganda war. They are putting out better information and propaganda than

“us right now. And what do you have to predict this ends? Because as you said, you can't back out of”

this war as the West, Trump can't back out of it, but he also just can't keep doing it. His, the midterms are coming up, his approval ratings are, I think, an all-time low because of this war, his base is turning on him. So he can't, it's like, lose loose at this moment. Yeah, so the honest answer is I don't know because he's unpredictable. If I had to pick anything, I think there'll be a multinational force that has a vested interest in ensuring

the straight-of-form moves is open. There's so many things we've taken for granted in the last. And one of them is freedom of navigation. If Malaysia's Singapore and Indonesia decide we need money, or we need geopolitical power, we're going to close the streets of Malacar or the straight of Singapore. What if China closes off certain streets in the South China Sea,

or something like 60% of trade goes through? We have always enforced, we've gone to war,

over the basic notion of freedom of navigation, the pretty much any ship goes pretty much

“gets to go anywhere with pretty much anything on it. So I think that European nations,”

Asian nations all have a vested interest in ensuring the straight-of-form moves is open. The way to do that is by sequestering or blocking, offloading and onloading oil into a rainy imports. Because at some point, it not only shuts them off economically. I didn't know this, but within I think about 12 weeks, if you can't offload the oil and get it somewhere, it backs up, and it actually starts to damage the source well. Oh, okay. It stops up. So I think

ideally the optimistic scenario is there's a multinational force that enforces the

straight-of-form moves. He comes up with a series of objectives. If he had in his first, if he had

outlined, we're going to take out most of their navi. We're going to give the Iranian people an opportunity to overthrow the IRGC. We're going to take out the majority of the missile capability. And after 72 hours said, "This is a win and got the hell out," and coordinated with Gulf States to say, "What can we do to ensure your safety?" I think it would have been a win. But now, I don't even know what his objectives are. Can you list what his objectives are?

I don't know what they are. They seem to keep it. We're going to be out very soon, which is why we need to continue this war. The communications here in thinking has been so sclerotic and difficult to track. I'm like, "Who's boarding what ships? Is it a ceasefire?

of the ceasefire, of course it is. That's an act of war. So we don't even know what to look for.

“You asked me how does this turn out. I think a multinational force that opens the”

straight-of-form moves. Too many people have too much vested interest in free navigation. But in such a scenario, they probably build the upturns right now in this spot. Oh, underground. They'll be building drone factories in every bunker in around right now. In a minute, you do a multinational force in the straight-of-form moves. Those drones start hitting ships. And then the big companies say, "I'm not putting my ships through there."

I think that's a fair point. Actually, not that many ships have gone down. But it's actually an insurance problem. You can be up 2 million barrels on a tanker. You've got 160 million dollar payload. Someone has to take receipt of that. Someone has bought it. So there needs to be middle men in the form of insurance. And no one wants to ensure take that kind of risk right now. So it's a lack of insurance more than it is a lack of safety from the threat. But I do think

the reality is the Iranians, I, the IRGC, I say, the bottom as you go after the money.

You don't bomb civilian infrastructure. That's a war crime. But making it very difficult for them and creating a carrot, you can have free flow of oil. If you look at the Arab spring, if you look at revolutions, they're usually a function of unemployment or economics. So if you were to inhibit their ability to export oil, that brings them to the table. Because the IRGC has been able to survive because millions of families in Iran are dependent upon the IRGC for their check. They control

the most profitable biggest parts of the economy. So if you, if you cut off their economics,

“that, I think, or threaten to, I think that brings them to the table. I think that's the most”

optimistic scenario. It's the straight-soken by multinational force. And there's a feeling of safety because it's enforced. Iran agrees to keep it open. And somehow we develop a series of objectives that we claim those boxes we've been checked. And we declare a victory and get the hell out of dodge. But every day this goes on, we see it in my opinion, it vanishes power to the IRGC. Because they just look like they're winning. I think it's clear that Trump miscalculated this situation

quite horrifically. And he's there. Just to be a logic, like, you don't have to be a genius to look at what he's saying and see the contradictions, the constant contradictions we carry every week. And the big one he's now got himself trapped in is he was handing out a six week timeline at the start of this. And we're approaching six weeks. So if you watch this press conference from yesterday, he is incredibly irritated. Because all the journalists are saying, you said six weeks,

it's six weeks. And it for the first time, there's a real measurable contradiction in what he said

at the start versus now. And so if you watch it, he's so, he's so agitated. He's calling

“the report was a disgrace. I think in this press conference yesterday, he personally insulted around”

10 journalists. He's crashing out. Yeah. And for me, that's got to go to this guy's list. But I find the most interesting thing about this, one of the most interesting thing is someone who follows the markets. If you didn't know there was a war in Iran that threatens geopolitical, I don't know, safety, world oil flows. Yeah. If you looked at the market, would you know? No. The market just hit an all-time high in the US. And again, it goes back to something very unhealthy.

And that is, there's certain elements of our economy, specifically the wealthy, that have totally disassociated from the confiliate the pump. Do you feel it? No. So 50% of consumer spending in the US is a top 10%. The top 10% don't give a shit of gases. It's six bucks a gallon. It doesn't matter. Young poor people, lower income people, it's been 22% of their household income on energy. And when energy prices are going up, it really impacts them.

So unfortunately, we began outsourced the downside of war to less wealthy nations who are very oil dependent to the Gulf, which is incurring damage here. But America is somewhat sequestered other than reputational risk and who gets elected president. We're somewhat so quiet. Again, we've outsourced the pain to military families, to people who spend a disproportionate amount of their income, lower income households on energy. But it's somewhat dangerous that the

most powerful people in the world, into a certain extent, the most powerful nation in the world,

seems to be unaffected by some of these, by some of this. We stalk certain all-time high. So this is something that I've made for you. I've realized that the diversity of audience are strivers, whether it's in business or health. We all have big goals that we want to accomplish. And one of the things I've learnt is that when you aim at the big, big, big goal, it can feel incredibly psychologically uncomfortable because it's kind of like being stood at the

foot of Mount Everest and looking upwards. The way to accomplish your goals is by breaking them down into tiny small steps. And we call this an our team the 1%. And actually this philosophy is highly responsible for much of our success here. So what we've done so that you at home can accomplish any big goal that you have. It's we've made these 1% diaries. And we've released these last year and they

some new colors and to make some minor tweaks to the diaries. So now we have a better range for you. So if you have a big goal in mind and you need a framework and a process and some motivation that I highly recommend you get one of these diaries before they all sell out once again. And you can get yours at thediary.com. And if you want the link, the link is in the description below. On this point of stocks, the average person and telling it back into what we're saying about AI,

because there's been this over-investment in artificial intelligence technology companies. You said earlier, a kid in Stanford right now or any bit, he could raise $10, $20 million for some AI idea they have. And I'm seeing it everywhere. The companies are over investing in infrastructure.

“I mean, it was crazy. I think open AI did the biggest have a fund raise was it almost $200 billion.”

Yeah. To build data centers on revenues of, I don't know if there's a $30 billion or something. Yeah. Crazyness is going on in the markets. At some point, things cracked. Oh, 100%. If you look at the greatest spams on infrastructure and they get above two or three

percent of GDP, there's almost always a crash afterwards. It happened in the railroads.

It happened in electrification. It happened in the internet. It happened in the huge telco build out of global crossing. Now, having said that, that doesn't mean those companies don't come back at some point. But there's almost always a deeper correction afterwards. I incurred, or I, I absolutely was on the wrong end of that dip in 2000. Again, in 2008, but if you look at the most valuable companies in the world, they have in a single year all of them

have had a 40 to 97 percent correction. Amazon went down 94 or 97 percent from 99 to 2001. Facebook was off 72 percent in 2022. The difference now is if those companies go down, there's such a big

“part of the market. If they sneeze, the global economy could catch a cold. So, I think the technology”

will absolutely survive. I do think it's seminal. It's breakthrough. But that doesn't mean that we're not going to incur a pretty massive correction from a stock market perspective. Also, let me catastrophize for a moment. Year generation in the majority of investors right now are under the impression that any breakthrough in technology results in a small number of companies over time that are able to use IP distribution, ability to raise capital to sequester and capture

trillions of dollars in market cap. Ecommerce, that's Amazon, eBay, Shopify, social media,

you know, whether it's, you know, obviously meta or snap or YouTube or AI. The problem is

is that what we forget is there have been seminal technologies that have not necessarily resulted in any small number of companies been able to capture shareholder value. Let me give you some examples. If someone said to you right now, for the next 36 months, you either have to do without AI or jet transportation, what would you pick? Without jet transportation, without AI. Prop plans for the next three years. Oh, no, or AI. Okay. Hands down. Jet transportation. I use AI every day. I invest

“in AI commerce. Jet transportation is much more boarded than me. I think that's skirting on the surface”

of the atmosphere at atens the speed of sound is unlocked, emotional and financial well being across the world. It's an unbelievable innovation. If you added up all the shareholder value, the losses and the gains, the profits and the losses. Right now, as we sit here now, the entire airline and jet manufacturing industry is a break even. It still has a made money. If you look at all the airlines have gone out of business, if you look at the government

subsidies of all the jet plane manufacturers, it has managed shitty business. It's a zero. PCs. I was on the board of gateway computer. I realized that's the weakest flex in the world.

I've never did what you don't know what gateway is. I feel so old. It was this company Ted Wade.

He was sort of the Michael Velvet's generation figured out a way to assemble computers. And I think South Dakota and it became this hugely valuable company. It was the second one. I was on the board. It was the second largest computer manufacturer by volume in the world. We were ahead of Apple. We got sold for $600 million from maybe $760, which is what alphabet will lose in about three trading seconds are gained today. No one's been able to capture a lot of money around PCs. People

say Apple. No one's in PCs. It was the iPhone. Vaccines. I think vaccines are the second greatest innovation in history. Only best to buy the American middle class. Millions of lives saved through vaccines. Moderna's down 90%. There's no one company that's been able to capture sequester shareholder values. So my thesis is that there's a one and three chance that AI becomes as important as vaccines. As important as jet transportation. As important as PCs. But there's no one or small

group of companies that are able to capture shareholder value. Why is that? AI put AI out of business. And that is if you look at the convergence of the technologies, all the models are converging. Yeah. The AI reverse engineers any feature. And basically they're all kind of they all started with

stakeholder that wins an AI is us. Yeah. And that is we have this and we have amazing vaccines, PCs,

transportation. But a small number of companies haven't become we're Chileans of dollars. And I wonder if the same thing might not happen with AI with openweight models out of China with basically great models that are for free. My prediction would be to go short. The AI ecosystem from a shareholder standpoint or from a stakeholder standpoint. I think it's going to be great.

“And let me back up. I think a more important technology in terms of how it's going to change”

the world is not AI. Every I say this is my technology the year. In 24 I said it was AI. 25 and 26. I've had the same technology that said this is more important than AI. Any guesses? Talk about this a lot. You would not know this technology or use it. That's a hint. OK. Testosterone. Replace, I had hurts. Do you know I'm on it? I had hurts. I gave it to them. OK, a Zempack. OK, GLP one. GLP one. GLP one too. Talk to somebody who's on GLP one and

uses AI every day and ask them which one they would give up. Yeah. I think GLP one if you look at what's really going to have an impact on people's lives and what will create more shareholder value. I think GLP one than AI. And a lot of people much smarter than me say you're full of shit AI. AI is going to change everything. I don't. I think GLP one is more important technology than AI. And my thesis is that there's a one and three chance that AI ends up being more like vaccines,

then e-commerce or social, and that is going to be impossible for a small number of companies to capture all the shareholder value, the raising money at. The other kind of what I'll put fun to speculate or catastrophize. If someone were to say the US economy crashed in the next 24 months or where valuations came down not 30% but the market dropped 40 or 50% which is happened before.

“I wouldn't think it's because if it's misadventures in the Middle East, I think there's a decent”

chance. If I were advising Xi in China and I saw America as a real adversary and said we are sick of these guys messing with us treating us so poorly. These ridiculous tariffs are very difficult to understand what they're thinking or how we deal with them. I would do what I think they're doing. And that is I would engage in modern day steel dumping. So back I think it was in the 80s to the 90s China wanted to ramp up. They wanted to consolidate the global steel markets so they began dumping

cheap steel into the US and US steel manufacturers could not compete. And the idea was price of below market consolidate the market and then you get margin power. Let's be as good Amazon at Netflix have done. They've sold you a dollar worth of goods for 80 cents until they wrapped up the market, then they started raising prices. I think China is beginning to engage in what I'll call AI dumping. And that is they're going to have a series of open-weight models. About a third

of corporations now are supposedly using Chinese lightweight open-weight models that are cheaper. If I were Xi, I would just dump cheap AI into the US market and the moment large corporations

start announcing they're not engaging these multi-million dollar sight licenses with anthropic

or open AI. They're using these inexpensive Chinese models. And the market realizes that there's no way they can justify these incredible valuations. I think the US market crashes because 40 percent of the S&P now is directly or tangentially related to this giant bet America's making on AI. The majority of GDP growth of the last two years is come from AI CapEx. If that slows down, we're immediately in recession. That's such an interesting idea that if you're sat in China

as a leader now you go to give Americans cheap AI and you'll need cap there economy. 100 percent.

“That's what I would do. It doesn't make sense, right? It makes a lot of sense.”

I've had a lot of founders get quite scared that there will be an economic crush in the next 12 or 24 months because of the over-investment in AI. And investors are going to start to realise

that the returns just aren't there for a lot of these companies that have raised at 100 million

valuation on an idea and so the market will contract. And if the market does contract, what does history tell us that the individual should do? The person listening, they're not the average person in such a market because they're going to be laid off for this investor money suddenly contracts investors go risk off. They might be laid off. Well again, so Jamie Diamond was asked what is the definition of a recession and he said something that happens every seven years. Your generation

isn't used to a recession. I was on the board of the New York Times and within like 60 days, 70 percent of our revenues went away. 2008, the credit crisis, advertisers, 78 percent of the New York Times revenue was advertising. In May we're doing x million in revenue and then you join the board and then I think I joined the board. I joined the board exactly the wrong time. I raised 600 million to become the largest share of the New York Times and

overnight it turned into 200 million. That was a learning experience for me. Anyways, just about

lost 70 percent of their out revenue and we had to go and find a Mexican billionaire to basically

cross onto bail us out. Your generation really doesn't know what a recession looks like. Everything stops. Imagine 70 percent of your subscription and advertising revenue from one month to one month to clients with with that duty of business. You'd have to consider letting people go and you'd

“have to cut costs. But here's the thing to a certain extent. It's healthy. You start developing”

all these fatty deposits and the best time to start a business is coming out of a recession. Because people are cheaper, things are cheaper, people have a new way of looking at stuff and also for your generation. People don't realize, I mean, quite frankly, if I'm a 28-year-old who's talented and doesn't have kids and dogs at, I think a recession that takes down the asset prices might not be the worst thing in the world that happens to your generation. Because when O8 crashed, when there was

the crash of O8, we let the banks fail, we both, sorry, we bailed out the banks, but we didn't bail out the economy. And I was coming into my primary commanding years. I was in my early 40s. And I was still lucky enough in talented enough to make good money. So what did I get in 2009? Amazon Apple and Netflix are 8, 10, and 12 bucks a share. Those companies have 20x. We don't let anything fail now. We bail out the markets. Where do you and your colleagues find

“value? Like, what's cheap right now? Where do you find value? And here's the thing.”

When there's two parts of your life, from a financial standpoint, there's investing, party of life, and there's harvesting. You're in the investing part of your life. There's a certain advantage to getting to invest when asset prices are low. There's nowhere for you to find value. I'm pretty comfortable saying, Apple and video aren't going to 20x from here. Where do you find value? Real estate? What Brooklyn is $3,000 a square foot?

So while you're in the investing part of your life, and you can survive a bit of a shock, I don't know if quite frankly, a good thing to happen for your generation wouldn't be a correction in asset prices, because the economy has an unbelievable maliability and resilience to reform, reshape, and come back. Recessions usually don't last longer than 18, 24, 36 months. And I think a correction in asset values would be good. But what we decided,

the leadership of my generation is decided, we'd rather pull out your credit card and artificially prop up the markets through deficit spending or bailouts. They're talking, we've to mention spirit airlines. They're talking about a $500 million government loan to spirit airlines to bail them out. That's nothing but you transferring money to me, because who owns shares in spirit? People my age. Who's trying to buy shit for cheap people your age? It should be allowed to go out of business.

It should decline in price. asset value should go down. When we bailed out every baby boomer owner of a restaurant or a small business in COVID, that just robbed opportunity from the new graduate of a culinary academy who wanted her shot to go by a restaurant for pennies on the dollar. Everyone in my generation has had those asset dips where if you were resilient and coming into your prime income earning here, she could buy assets

for a lower price. We've decided that the government is here to bail my generation out in

smooth out our assets, make sure that our assets never go down by too much. All that does is

rob opportunity from your generation. You wrote this book, the L.ulj prayer for wealth, a simple formula for success, brilliant book, and linking to what you were just saying there, where are you investing now? Like if you're a young person that's trying to defend your money or just really anybody at any age that's trying to find a place to put your money where you'll make a return. I guess there's actually two questions here, which is the investing part and they're like,

how do I set myself up just to make more money? Especially if there's going to be an economic

“collapse, things might get a little bit uncertain. I think I heard you say before that,”

less people are leaving their jobs. It's hard for entry-level people to get into new roles potentially at the moment. So in such a world where there isn't certainty, and I want to make sure that I don't go broke, I have the $10,000, let's say, and I want to make sure I increase money and potential. What's one's advice for those dual strategies? I'll tell you what I'm doing. So in the it's different, I'm at a point where I'm not looking to rich, I'm looking to not get poor,

so I just diversify like crazy. I don't put more than, I don't invest more than 3% of my net worth in anyone thing. Yeah, and I'm in diversifying out of the US market in the Latin America and

European markets, because the reality is nobody knows, the only Kevlar against the unknown,

which is everywhere, is diversification. Now, a younger person can take more risks, right? I mean, where am I doing? I'm diversifying, and I'm investing in Pokemon, because I do it with my son, and he loves it, and I think collectibles are actually the only place for those value right now. Everything to me just looks crazy over value. I look at everything and think,

It's very hard to be a stock picker. So if you're your age, you're a talented entrepreneur. You're investing in yourself. There's no ROI, like finding a business you're good at, trying to invest,

“and working your ass off. That's how you get wealthy. And this for young people in this generation,”

or you find a company that's going fast, you do well there. You get stock options. But the key

is to make sure that a certain amount of year income never comes into your hands. People your age can't

save money. If they get $100, it'll spend $105. So the key is to find every matching program or every vehicle or hack to make sure you never see the money. And from an early age, it goes into low cost index funds. Take 30% of your capital and have fun with it by the video, whatever you want. Do you think you're smarter than everyone else, and then you're going to find out you're not in the market outperforms you. But how do you get rich? The only answer I have is slowly.

And that is figure out a way to make sure that money every month is invested in low cost index funds. And in terms of trying to pick the next big thing, how Christ your guess is as good as mine. I just don't. And anyone who tells you they know doesn't know. So I know how to get your rich.

That's a good news. The bad news is the answer is slowly and it requires some discipline.

But people your age just find out a way to start saving when you're a teenager, 25 bucks a month, and in your 20s, 100 and 500, then 1000. And regardless of whether you have a platinum record, or a best selling book, or a podcast empire, you're going to be fine. But I know I can't look at a sector and say, oh, it's AI. AI is a pervalued right now. I don't know. Your job is to find something you're good at to focus, such that you can be upgraded, something which commands margin,

to show some discipline, save some money, to diversify like crazy, and then to let time take over. Because I look at you and I think, oh, I'm like Steven. I'm a young entrepreneur and then I'll look at the mirror, I'm like fuck. And I'm like, oh my god, I'm five years from death. It goes, but it happened in a blank. So take advantage of that. Because if I gave you a magic box and said, if you put, I can make a real money now. If you put $100,000 in a box, by the time you're my age,

it's going to be worth a million bucks. And imagine that that that box is like a second.

100,000 in a second, it's a million dollars. This to this feels like a second. So how much money would you put in that box? Oh, yeah. So the moment you have some capital, just think about trying to at a young age, show some discipline and put some money in that box. Because it just compound interest

“is just it's staggering the power of it. But trying to predict where you should invest other”

investing in yourself, additional skills, certifications, investing in relationships, trying to be as do as many nice kind things for other people. I think that compounds, especially when you're younger, people remember people help them when they were younger, and maybe not that powerful. Imagine you're very low. The person who gave you $5,000 bucks, do you resent the money they make? They made? No. I see you all done this weekend. Cornelister, thinking him again,

sent him a big letter for that because that person took a chance on you. Yeah, there was a tournament of kindness there. It wasn't even the $5,000 it was that a small person said, I believe in you. And that meant that I could go over to my mother who was ignoring me and saying, look, this small person believed in me. And therefore it made me believe in myself. That's really the investment they made. That's everything. And they took a chance and that probably was,

they wanted to return, but they wanted to do was help out a young man. Those people, you're opportunity to make those investments as a young person, whether it's helping someone get a job, being kind, kind of a kind word, a kind text, telling them how impressive they are, whatever it might be. That stuff, it's like investing. It compounds. And you wake up at 50. And you find those relationships are really powerful assets. So look, I don't, I don't have a silver

bullet here, save money, diversify, compound interest, invest in relationships early, those compound too. Well, the most important decisions you made that resulted in the biggest sort of wealth upside for you. And they could be any kind of decision. It's not like I invested in this, but just, I don't know, a philosophy and mentality and approach that when you look back on your career, you go, it was that, that was the biggest step change in my money. Well, my superpower is, I've gotten

shot in the face a couple times personally and professionally. And I mourn and I get up. And I go trying to raise money again and start another company. I had an e-commerce incubator. It was basically out of business six months from starting it. My e-commerce company that went public in 2002, it went through restructuring, which is a fancy work for bankruptcy in 2008. I started a video delivery company that went out of business. I mean, you know, people talk about their successes.

“I think generously, I'm sort of like three, four and two. I've had more losses than wins.”

Every time I've been rejected from a school, I had my affections were returned from a potential romantic partner. I got fired. I had a company go out of business, I had investment. I've always

whether it's be around people who care about you, exercise. You have to be able to stand in front

“of metaphorical mirror and go, I can add a lot of value to a company. I can raise money again and”

start a business if I need to. I can make someone really happy. That's been my superpower. So the seminal moment in my professional success was a willingness to say, okay, I just got shot in the face, the whole world says I'm a failure because my business, I raised a ton of money and I had to call my investors and say we're shutting down. That's humiliating. It's public failure. I'm worn and then I go out and raise more money and I try another company because only one in seven businesses

succeed. So I started nine. And I knew at some point, if you were hard enough, I mean you can't guarantee success but so much of it is out of your control. You just want to step up to the plate as many times as possible. You want to have a great swing, you want to be a shape, you want to be a good person, but a lot of it is resilience. I have a lot of really talented friends who came up through the alternative investments community, masters of the universe making one, two, three million

bucks a year, working for hedge funds and the 90s and the odds. And then they went out on their own, raised a bunch of money, hit some bombs and then close their funds or they had a business, I have friends who aren't from yours who left a good job and started a business and they

get stuck. These are people who've never known anything but success. They got into an Ivy League

school. They got a great job. Everything has been this. And then they hit a failure and they just get they lose their mojo. They just get stuck. They can't get over it. They lose the confidence

“to go out and raise more money. And that's the key. The key to success is getting shot in the face”

and then just getting up again. Unthirty is old. How do you scope? I'm 61. You're actually 61. No, I'm 1. Yeah, I'm 61. It's the testosterone therapy. No, I thought I didn't think you were 61. I appreciate that. I thought you were 62, 62 in November. If you had said to me anywhere between 49 and 61, I think I would have believed you. So I'm sorry. Let me take that out. I'm 49. What is it that you're 61? I'm 33. What is it that

I don't know as a 30 year old that I'm going to find out in the next 30 years that I should know?

What is the most important thing that I shouldn't know about the next 30 years?

Now things ever as good or as bad as it seems. You've raised a ton of money. You're on fire right now. Be humble. There's a lot of this that's now is out of your control. If there's AI

“dampening in the U.S. or the swore get out of control in the market shuts down.”

Outside. This goes away. Yeah. And it's not your fault. But nor is your success. So when things are going really well, be really humble and invest a lot in other people and realize be careful not to believe your own press. In 1999, my company was going public. I was looking at jets. I just thought I was a man. It was very kind of my ex-wife. I really thought a lot of myself. And I credited my character and my grip for my success without crediting enough to

how lucky I was that I was in the right place at the right time. So be humble when you're successful. At the same time when you fail and I failed a lot, realize a lot of that is your fault too and forgive yourself and move on. So a lot of your success and a lot of your failure is your fault. And when you look back on your life, when you look back on the biggest disappointments, in my senses, I don't know much about you. But my senses, you haven't had a lot of tragedy or real

disappointment at least professionally. It feels like it's been upward for you. When you look back on the most disappointing things that happen to you in this decade, you're not going to be disappointed about the thing that happened. You're going to be disappointed about how upset you are. So forgive yourself and realize this will pass because of the end of life, people wish state allowed themselves to be happier. They think I wish I had not beaten myself up over that breakup, over that loss of job,

over that loss of money. They're upset about how upset they were, not about what actually happened. So nothing's ever as good as bad as it seems. And to really try and embrace and I didn't

do this, embrace relationships. And that is, I got on a hamster wheel. I just never had enough money.

I was my whole identity was professional. And from like the age of 25 to 45, I don't think I established many healthy relationships. I just didn't invest in them. I was always good with friends. I was staying in contact. But I kind of woke up in my early 40s. I just decided I wanted to move to New York and not have any obligations. I got divorced. I didn't say left my friends, but I didn't have money. I was living like a caveman, just occasionally leaving for food or alcohol

actually enjoyed it. And then I realized I started reading a lot of literature on happiness and longevity. And I realized if I do this, I'll be dead of 55. Because I don't have any connection to anybody. And so I started investing in relationships, started making an effort to reinvigorate friendships, really started to think about thoughtfully about I want to be around people a lot more. I was becoming very much an introvert and isolated. I mean, and I was like a poor version of

Howard Hughes at some point. But so I would say really focused on as much as you can, relationships and investing in them in your 30s. I mean, it's super rewarding or it pays off. But more than anything,

“just forgive yourself. And become a dot? Well, look, I didn't want to have kids. So, and I think”

you can be happy without kids. I kind of got forced into it. I was with someone who I much higher character, much more attracted than me. And she decided she wanted to have kids and I said,

"I'm never going to marry again." And she's called my bluff and said, "We don't have to be married."

Something else. Anyways, so I didn't want kids. But now, and this goes back to purpose. Everyone talks about finding a purpose. And the way I approached life, which was really screwed up, is I approached it from a capitalist standpoint. I want more out of this friendship than I'm getting. I want more out of this investment than I invested. I want to pay this employee less than the value they're creating. I saw everything as a transaction that I wanted to be on the right

side of. And what I figured out is that finding your purpose is finding that thing that you can never get a real positive return on. What do I mean by that? I will never get a positive return from my

“children. They're never going to be up to me. I'm worried about me. They are costing me so much money.”

I don't care how nice the senior home is that I'm putting them in. The amount of love, concern and anxiety I feel over my boys, it would be almost impossible for them to return that. And that's the point. I finally have something where I feel like that sense of purpose. The most loyal proud Americans are veterans because there's no way American really paid them back for leaving

their families and risking their person. That's an unparalleled investment. Don't never get

that investment back. But what they get back is purpose. And I didn't realize that finding something you were so passionate about, whether it was an on-profit or saving dogs from kill shelters or getting involved in a woman's right to have bodily autonomy, where you give so much that there's just no way you'll ever really get at the kind of tangible ROI. And what I realized is when you find that, that's your purpose. And I didn't realize that. So having kids from me has given me purpose.

I enjoy it. But that's my thing now. I realized that's my job as to over-invest. It's not to measure it because I'm just not going to get that back. So for me, having kids has been my purpose. Also building something with a partner is really rewarding. It's like you travel a lot.

In every way, I don't know if this happens to you. I always get upgraded to the presidential

suite when I'm alone. And it's like it doesn't happen. If you don't have someone to share with, it doesn't happen. And the most rewarding businesses, the most rewarding things in my life, it's been when you build something with a co-founder or you build something with a partner. And when you have kids who go up and down in terms of their health and well-being and they end up being good kids, which my kids are, and you've built that with somebody,

that's immensely rewarding. It's like the most rewarding businesses I've ever had have been with co-founders, where we build something together and it pays off. It's just so rewarding. And when you don't build something with someone else, when you build it on your own, it's like getting upgraded without anyone there. It's like you did have surgery. So, what I tell any man, there's never good time to have kids. You want to be somewhat financially

stable. That was my problem. The biggest source of stress in my life was when I had kids in a OA when I went broke. That was hugely stressful. And I think you want to make sure you have a not only a partner, a community, but I didn't realize how important confidence was in a partner. Because once you have kids, it's like operating a pan's or tank division. There's a lot of

“moving parts. And you have to have a competent partner. But I think if you're economically”

somewhat secure and you have a competent partner, for me, I'm not going to tell anyone what to do, having kids has given me my purpose, hands down the most rewarding thing I will ever do. That is that is the last thing I will think about when I die. I see so much emotion in you when you talk about it. You're eyes. I'm filled with with tears as you just started talking about your boys. Yeah, because I know a lot about you because I've interviewed you a couple of times not on

average of books and so on. And I find that fascinating because I don't know what it is. I don't know where that emotion comes from. Because a lot of people sit here and talk about their kids, right? But when the minute you started mentioning them and the impact they've had on you in terms of finding helping you find your purpose, I could see the emotion in your eyes. Yeah. Well, there's

kids when they first came out under the world. You know, I felt a sense of responsibility and anxiety.

I did not like having babies. I was able to be selfish up at that point. I didn't feel this immense level of love and support that you're supposed to. I fell in love with my boys. I was just so a little slow incremental and incremental thing. And like, I mean, for me, and I think everyone's a little bit different. The reason I'm just fascinated and obsessed with my older one is he's me. I look at him. You know, the bad skinny had in his junior year, it's scrawny six foot,

one, 130 pounds the way he laughs. I'm like, when I hug him, I'm hugging me at 17 or 18. It's

“like so rewarding. And that's why I love him so much. My second is a different species than me.”

I observe him with fascination because I can't get over the fact that I made that because he is so different than me. So I'm fascinated by him in just such a different way. Right. My oldest is a pleaser. Used to come to the bedroom on a Sunday and get him bed with us and then stand up and say, let's make a plan. Let me like, where are the cameras? This is like a hall, but that's like a bag of hall march film, right? My youngest is a terrorist assessing the household for vulnerabilities

so we can strike more at our weakest. The only thing one recommendation I make to anyone who has a kid have to, because it's fascinating. The only thing I can guarantee when I meet someone with one kid, my, okay, the only thing I know about the second is it will be entirely different. If you want to believe in nature over nurture have two kids, because they just could not be more different and it's fascinating. We just haven't treated our boys but that differently. We just haven't birth order

whatever. There's something in the bad or first lady Obama, Michelle Obama said something to really struck with me. She said, they come to you. You know, I forget, I think you've had that guy on the child's psychologist guy. We think we're engineers and then we get to make the sheep. We know, we're shepherds. We get to point them in the right direction. We get to pick what food they have,

but they come to you. Oh my God, I've seen that and I like to think, I always thought that my kids

“we're going to be super into world war two movies and crossfit because that's what dad is into”

and they just want to hang out with me. No, no, no, the reason I'm up at night looking at Pokemon cards is because my kid is interested in it and what you realize is a dad is if you want to be a good dad, you have to lean into their interests. I'm not fascinated by Pokemon. It's not something I will do once my kid is out of the house, but what you realize is you have to engage in their interests and get into it and it took me a while because I was very selfish to fully embrace that. I hated

giving up my weekends. I'd like to have a fabulous brunch. We're interesting people. I'd like to go into the same parts. All that went away and I resented it for a while. And then there's a certain ease and relaxation that overwhelms who we are like, I'm not trying to be fabulous. I know what I'm doing this weekend. I'm going to some lame birthday party for four year olds and I'm taking my kid to this soccer game. And there's a certain ease about it that's relaxing and liberating,

building something with somebody, seeing the way they evolve is just fascinating. It's just fascinating. The things they start asking you and you find your purpose. So I would recommend it to anybody, but I also want to be clear. It's not one size fits all. Some people can be very happy not having kids. So many of the themes we've talked about today, especially at the end of this conversation are in your new book, notes on being a man, how to adjust the masculinity crisis,

build the mental strength and raise good songs. I've had so many of my friends, actually both

“men and women, talked to me about this book. Because I think so many of us have been looking for”

a roadmap on exactly these subjects, notes on being a man. Some of the themes are here on the back about being kind, about being a good dad and how what that means. But a lot of the stuff you say about getting out of the house and really attacking the world and who once you become in such a world. So I highly recommend anybody who is raising someone who is a father or just wants to understand what it is to be a good man in the modern world, gets this book and I'm going to link it below.

Thank you. All of you. It's been such a smash it and it's really rare that my some of my close friends will send me messages. Think about one particular friend about this book. I think it's so testament to the impact it's having on the world. So thank you for writing this. I know you took a long time to write this book because we talked about it a couple of times

when we had conversations but it is finally here. Who's it for? I write with only one objective.

I hope my sons read my stuff in 30 or 40 years and feel like they understand me and the world a little bit better. That's it and I try and I use that as a means of trying to be fearless because there's so many comments and so many, there's such a narrative out there trying to shape your views around the orthodoxy that whatever your political innings are, it's pretty easy to be intimidated into having a certain narrative. So I try to write as if no one's going to read it

to the next, not knowing who they're leaving it for. The question of the few is in one sentence.

“What is the most challenging setback you've experienced and what's the lesson you want to”

pass on to others? That's easy. My mother dying and you can never tell your parents how much

you love too much. Forgive them and my mom died slowly which is bad for her but it was good for me. Nothing went outside. What is the emotion you're experiencing? I miss my mom terribly. I'm a middle-aged man who hasn't gotten over the death of his mother. I'm out of my life.

Raise me on our own secretary salary, give me confidence. Everything.

Is there a way to, you said you're a middle-aged man who hasn't gotten over the loss of his mother? Is

“there a way to? I don't want to. I think the research for love is grief. I hope my boys feel the same”

way about me. I haven't gotten away in my life. It makes me be more bold with my emotions. Yeah, I used to see it as a problem. I went to grief counseling. Now I see it as a not a bug but as a feature. The the receipts for love are grief and anxiety and so what I would tell every young person as I I hope they have a lot of joy in the life. I also hope they have a

“decent amount of grief because how do you say people they love immensely? Amen. Thank you, Scott.”

Thank you, Steve. Good to see you. Congratulations on your virgining empire. This is Christman. This is out of control. I'm like, where are the helicopters? It's like pretty soon. I'm going to

see like a nuclear tower power plant power next to me. It's just amazing and you're like everywhere.

At one point I was on. I was at the airport with my boys and I'm staring at this like 100 foot like testimony on it. I'm like, make it. God Jesus. And with the checkout with the world's best conversion. The checkout with the world's best conversion. The legendary checkout from Shopify. On the shop on your website, there's social media and everywhere. That's music for your ears.

How do you feel about the rest of the world with Shopify? You can help to a real help. Start your test again today for one of your promo. On shoppefile.de/record.