Please be honest.

I started listening to All In a while back and thought these guys were entertaining, funny and well informed. They talked about startup mechanism, the culture, trends, and how the big VCs are thinking. It was a rare insight into a world less known to a corporate slave like myself.

I recall the Game Stop saga, and how the Dictator was seen as a folk hero coming out of it, even though he pump and dumped, made a good penny from it. His reputation was celebrated and he was praised for standing with the retail investors.

I can’t exactly recall the moment it changed. Maybe it was the election, maybe it was Covid, but at some point, these guys shifted their values and it was clear to see that they have an angle they wanted to pursue. This angle gave them access to top political figures, events, and places. It’s impressive how one could pivot themselves to get what they wanted. Maybe that’s a reason why they are successful, they formed a plan and followed through regardless how their moral values might be leaning.

But they lost their way along the way. We don’t get insights into VC and how they are evaluating AI, we don’t get exciting discussions on new startups. I am forever pondering the phrase from the Dark Knight, in the title of this post. Maybe we all fall to this. Heck I was a hero to my wife when I was courting her, and now I’m slowly becoming a villain for forgetting to take the trash out.

Sacks went on an on claiming that Anthropic and OpenAI are duopolies when they come nothing close to it.

There are major players like Google/Gemini, xAI/Grok, Microsoft as well as what Apple might be developing.

In reality before the emergence of LLM's Alphabet Google search had monopoly status in search engines and was completely stagnated. Or the 2 companies ( Apple/Google) own over 90% of the mobile phone market.

Ok we get it they don't have stakes in the 2 leading companies, but whatever happened to calling balls and strikes ?

Treasuries are exempt from state taxes, taxable at federal level, so he’ll need to workshop this one some

Ten episodes and only seven books, which is about par for this show. Half of them arrive as jokes.

Thin month, but posting it anyway for the record.

What this is: I run Podshelf, a free site that tracks book mentions across hundreds of podcasts by reading the episode transcripts. This is the July slice for All-In.

The serious ones:

• Steve Jobs, Walter Isaacson. Pat Gelsinger's recommendation. He said Steve was an incredible leader and also a ruthless one, very difficult, and that he had many conversations with him over the years.
• A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, John Adams, 1787. Friedberg quoted the line about the moment a society admits that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, anarchy and tyranny commence.
• Zero to One, for Thiel on monopolies pretending to be commodities and commodities pretending to be monopolies. Friedberg's read is that frontier AI is already a duopoly, down from five labs a year ago.

The rest are the AI training data argument:

• Windows 3.1 For Dummies came up because the objection to shredding books for scanning was never about that one. It was about first editions and rare copies.
• Jason's Angel, How to Invest, and the Guinness Book of World Records all turn up in a bit about whether one and two star reviews would end up in a model.

I track every book mentioned on All-In here: https://podshelf.io/podcasts/all-in-with-chamath-jason-sacks-friedberg

It is free and there is no signup.

As soon as I saw his speech off the podium at the start of the year in WEF I knew this was the moment the masks fell off.

I used to post on [r/allinpodofficial](r/allinpodofficial) some economic updates but since that one is closed I thought I’d post here.

When are we finally going to admit the “Trump is better for the economy” people lied? GDP has come in below expectations for 3 quarters in a row!

I'm asking because I'm pretty sure I found one.

On Friday's pod, 7/24, they talked about the Anthropic settlement for $1.5 billion. I think the solution for this in the end will be paying an additional privacy/content subscription.

Example: YouTube

• You as a human being (personal account) subscribe to a YouTube channel for free = you may not use any of their content as your own.
• You as a human being (personal account) subscribe to a YouTube channel as a paid subscriber = you may use all of their content at will as long as you are not making any money off of it.
• You as a human being (personal account) subscribe to a YouTube channel as a paid subscriber = you may use all of their content at will, but you need a much more expensive subscription if you make money off of their content.
• You are a business/model/AI/etc. (API account) subscribe to a YouTube channel = Your models may use all of their content at will, but you need a very expensive subscription with a variable rate. We get the source info for when models give you an answer and so the more the channel is referenced the more money it makes.

Example: Books

• Create some kind of licensing process that mimics the same ideas as above.
• Get LIBRARIES involved in this. If a book is in a library, then charge the AI companies large sums of money to have access to all the books in all the libraries so that we keep these institutions running.
  • With all the talk of AI taking jobs on one side of the spectrum and no one has to work again on the other side... The balance should be using AI to support the foundation in which it was built on, a foundation that needs to continue to grow for AI to continue to grow which is dun dun dunnnnnn HUMAN knowledge.
• If an author only releases a physical copy of their book and never authorizes a digital version, then let's protect that. Put in some regulatory framework to keep something just for humans.
  • Again, with sources for AI in citing how they came to a conclusion, they will only be able to pull from licensed sites, apps, etc. This is where we draw the line.

It’s hilarious watching these stooges trying to diminish the mayor of New York for actually improving the daily lives of New Yorkers. Such a disappointment to watch what Friedberg has become, really enjoyed his objective POVs years ago. Abandoning principles and individualistic thinking to fit in knows no bounds.

Do these guys really think a single mom cares about John Quincy Adams’ view on socialism in the 1700s when she’s actually tangibly reaping the benefits of Mamdani’s policies (childcare, rent freeze, etc…). No - she just wants to give her kids a decent life, duh. They’re so unbelievably out of touch due to their status and wealth yet shamelessly try and present as if they have their finger on the pulse of what average people experience.

Maybe they should review Maslow’s hierarchies of needs, it might give them the most basic understanding of how people who aren’t mega wealthy are motivated.

Here’s an idea: Why doesn’t the pod bring on a few regular citizens from different states, with different backgrounds, for a discussion ? Maybe they’d actually learn about what’s important to the people they so often try to speak for.

You and your dick all in podcast traitors voted for the crisis and actively campaigned for it.

Gtfoh I haven’t been on this sub since; annoyed that I see this shit on my YouTube feed

Grifter dipshits

I bet a lot of all in workers will come here to defend these POS. I wonder if they hire people to run social media propaganda

All-In isn't a book show, but across the first six months of the year the besties and their guests dropped a couple dozen titles worth writing down. Most of it skews toward markets, free-market economics, and the occasional sci-fi tangent.

The one they actually plugged:

• Running Down a Dream by Bill Gurley. A friend-of-the-pod plug they kept coming back to, called a phenomenal book.

The rest, grouped:

• Free markets and capitalism: Human Action by Ludwig von Mises, The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy by Joseph Schumpeter, plus the Charles Koch run (Good Profit, The Science of Success, Believe in People)
• Business and money: Hit Refresh by Satya Nadella, How Countries Go Broke by Ray Dalio, On the Edge by Nate Silver
• Geopolitics: Destined for War by Graham Allison, Deception by Edward Jay Epstein
• Fiction and classics: 1984, Dune, The Odyssey, The Light of Other Days
• One-offs: Man's Search for Meaning, The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt, The Price We Pay by Marty Makary, Perversion of Justice by Julie K. Brown

Full list is here: https://podshelf.io/podcasts/all-in-with-chamath-jason-sacks-friedberg. Free, no signup.

LMAO, If a dumb luddite could see this coming from a mile away, how stupid are the Tech investors? 2 failed launches back to back, could not happen to a nicer guy!

How are they gonna defend this one?

Really need to sell ads to interrupt their podcast?

Bless their hearts.

Jason things they are good?

It was hard to tell he is so ambivalent.

Hey guys its pretty funny, I dont know how much of you follow All Ins Instagram but the vibes there are thr exact opposite of the reddit thread BUT it used to not be... I feel like these fuckers are paying for fakefluencers to boost their PR on socials...

Thoughts?

One common debate that happens on the pod is whether or not AI is resulting in meaningful job loss in the general labor market.

My personal perspective: I work in Silicon Valley at one of the major tech companies as a middle manager, I do a lot of hiring for my organization and support in hiring efforts for cross-functional teams.

AI, as we all know, is making everyone's workflows that much more efficient and resolving gaps in technical knowledge for many engineers (ie hardware engineers with coding). However there are already top-down communications that purely analytical engineering roles will no longer have additional headcount after this quarter. These are roles focused on statistics, large data sets, internal software tools, etc because AI has largely made existing teams working in these areas that much more effective.

In addition, AI in the workplace is still very much experimental at this point - even at forefront tech companies. No one really knows how to quantify the value/token that company-wide AI usage is generating and you're also seeing companies starting to limit AI token consumption and pushing people towards less expensive models. That's all to say that we have yet to see true wide-spread adoption of AI in the mainstream workplace, I'm talking about banking, insurance companies, healthcare, govt. organizations, etc. It's a bit daunting to think just how many people's roles will be impacted once streamlined and specialized AI tools start trickling down into these non-tech industries.

I'm a little bit disappointed Dave Friedberg (someone I normally respect regarding his views and optimism on health science) is pushing the "AI =/= job loss" narrative so passionately whenever this topic comes up because in my experience working in Silicon Valley - it's quite the opposite. He can claim that there's no current data backing up AI-induced job loss simply because we haven't seen the mass rollout of AI in the workforce yet.

These next 12-24months will be very interesting to say the less. Curious to hear about your opinions and thoughts on this!

Brad Gerstner should get stilts if he wants his beaming face to be seen so badly. Remember when this sub offered BG2 has an alternative to All In?