Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
TBPN is a live tech talk show hosted by John Coogan and Jordi Hays, streaming weekdays from 11–2 PT on X and YouTube, with full episodes posted to Spotify immediately after airing.
Described by The New York Times as “Silicon Valley’s newest obsession,” TBPN has interviewed Mark Zuckerberg, Sam Altman, Mark Cuban, and Satya Nadella. Diet TBPN delivers the best moments from each episode in under 30 minutes.
You're watching TBPN.
Speaker 2:Today is Monday, 04/13/2026. We are live from the TBPN UltraDome, the temple of technology.
Speaker 1:The fortress of finance.
Speaker 2:The capital capital. Welcome to the show. Wild wild weekend, some really great white pilling stuff, some very disappointing news. We'll go through it all. We have a great show for you lined up.
Speaker 2:We have to hop work on some special projects. So bit of a shorter show, but we still have three great guests joining us. One from Critical Loop, the next from Sci Five, and then Peter Diamandis is joining to discuss everything, AI, technology, life extension. Goes all over the place. Abundance.
Speaker 2:Yeah. He's the original, the OG abundance maxer. Well, I I read a bunch of different pieces this weekend. Tried to sort of tie them together into the newsletter today, but thought we could kind of go all over the place starting with what we talked about a little bit on Friday was the Artemis two mission. It was scheduled to land at 05:07PM Pacific time, and it landed exactly at 05:07PM Pacific time, like within the exact minute.
Speaker 2:Everyone was joking like whoever's in charge of this should be in charge of Uber Eats delivery times or something like that or DoorDash delivery times because it was remarkably accurate. I think they predicted it like days or maybe since the beginning of the mission. Like everything was timed out perfectly. Did you have anything say?
Speaker 3:Yeah. Mean, you can like predict these things. Right?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Is physics. Yeah. But still, I mean
Speaker 3:We we know, you know Yeah. When the solar eclipse will be for the next ten
Speaker 4:thousand years.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Yeah. Ten thousand years. But I don't know. It still feels remarkable that there is no that there's no flexibility.
Speaker 1:Was that predicted pre takeoff?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Right? I don't know. We should we should dig into it. Or or was
Speaker 1:that like updated after after they had exited? Yeah. Because we
Speaker 2:think there'd be something about like, oh, like this engine fired a little too much or a little bit so we had to make a small adjustment. I don't know. We'll have to we'll have to figure it out. Anyway, the the reactions were really really positive. Elon Musk said, welcome home to the NASA astronauts.
Speaker 2:Welcome home, Reed, Victor, Christina, and Jeremy, the Artemis, two astronauts have splashed down at 08:07PM ET, bringing bring their historic ten day mission around the moon to an end. I watched it live, and it was it was yeah. It was a remarkable moment. I mean, haven't done this in my lifetime. We haven't done this in a in a very long time.
Speaker 2:So Reid Wiseman says, thank you, Elon Musk. The four of us glimpsed the red hues of Mars far in the distance as the sun slipped behind the moon and there was zero doubt in our minds that the creative genius of our greatest minds will have us there very soon. Let's go. And so I I really like this. This is great.
Speaker 2:No. No. No. It it it is remarkable. And this was inspiring for a few different reasons because I felt like you know people were not voicing skepticism publicly beforehand.
Speaker 2:Like, don't want to jinx it and also you don't want be negative about anything and it makes sense.
Speaker 1:But the space people we talked to off air ahead of time were extremely nervous.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Not not even just the space. There were people in every single person had a different take on like, oh, this seems risky. This is aggressive. This has moved very quickly.
Speaker 2:The government hasn't done something like this in a long time. And so, you know, can America pull this off? Like America there's been a lot of worry about the government being able to do things effectively. Like and like all government like many government projects, there had been delays and cost overruns. The country has been extremely divided.
Speaker 2:Everyone knows this. And this mission in particular required Americans from all different backgrounds and political persuasions to come together to work on a common goal. Like and we saw some of this. We we can talk about it later. But even even NASA administrator Jared Isaacman had been through his own back and forth on the way to getting confirmation.
Speaker 2:And so he was like sort of new on the job even relative to this mission which of course has been in the works for years. And so there were a lot of different things. There's also the pressure from the private space industry. You know, can the SLS work in this case? Well, everything did and it was very, very good.
Speaker 2:There were lots of things that could go wrong. Even the Apple executives seemed to be a little bit sort of nervous about this. There's a there's a post in here that we I would love
Speaker 1:to know how they test that parachute system.
Speaker 2:I think they launch it off of a plane or something. I don't know. How how do they
Speaker 1:do that? Yeah. Yeah. I know. I I'm I'm sure there's a good answer.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:You have to imagine that it's three three parachutes because it can it can probably survive with just two.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:And and there's actually two stages of parachutes. So there's one set and then these break away and then there's a new set of parachutes once the atmosphere gets thicker, I believe. But look at that. It opens up perfectly and what an inspiring image.
Speaker 5:Look at that.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Was really cool. So Jaws over at Apple said, welcome home to the Artemis two crew honored that NASA astronauts brought iPhone to space with them. Not the iPhone. Not a couple of iPhones.
Speaker 2:IPhone. This is in the official Apple brand. You don't say the iPhone, you say iPhone. But they brought iPhone to space with them. One small step for iPhone.
Speaker 2:One giant leap for space selfies. And so NASA posted this on April 4, said this view just hits different. They took a moment to look back at earth as they continued deep into space toward the moon and they showed photos, basically selfies taken with the iPhone or with iPhone, I guess, And of the then Tim Cook waited until they landed safely. Congratulations to Artemis two on a successful mission. You captured the wonders of space and our planet beautifully, taking iPhone photography to new heights and we're grateful you shared it with the world.
Speaker 2:Your work continues to inspire us all to think different. Welcome home. And so Aaron pointed out to the tune of 3,000,000 views, noticed that Apple didn't comment on the iPhone pictures from Artemis two until the crew safely landed. So, you know everyone was like you know on the edge of their seats hoping for the good outcome and that's exactly what happened. There was also it was it was it was very very high stakes but it was also in many ways America at best.
Speaker 2:Even the never ending culture war took a backseat to this. There was this interesting back and forth between Jericho Isaacman and someone who is not a fan of yes, they deleted the post, but the Artemis two crew was listening to Pink Pony Club by Chapel Roan and that didn't align with someone's politics and so they said like this is ridiculous. Why how how can they how can they listen?
Speaker 1:Because like the last five bands that have come up on the show Yeah. It sounds like Yeah. Like a made up band. Chapel Road?
Speaker 2:Oh, she's she's big. She's but Jared Isaacman was like, hey, like, let's cool it with the political rhetoric. It's not my choice in music, but the astronauts rode a controlled explosion into space on a journey farther away from Earth than any human before with everything around them trying to kill them. That's a crazy way to put it, it's true. They can listen to whatever song they want.
Speaker 2:And I thought that was a really, really, really important moment when everyone is so divided. And so the job is very much not finished. Artemis three, which aims to land on the moon in 2028, will be a much bigger challenge. And there's some extra context today in The Wall Street Journal. And we can talk about the difference between Artemis II and Artemis III and sort of where this is going.
Speaker 2:So the journal writes, Micah Maidenberg says, Artemis II is a blockbuster. Landing on the moon will be a lot harder. And so flying around the moon may end up being the easy part for NASA's Artemis program. This month, Artemis this month's Artemis two flight captivated people around the world as the agency pulled off the deepest human spaceflight ever recorded and the first crewed mission to the moon since nineteen seventies, really so so long ago. NASA and its contractors must now get through a series of sprints that would culminate in astronauts landing on the lunar surface in 2028.
Speaker 2:President Trump outlined that expectation in an executive order he signed last year. The path to the lunar surface is open, but the work ahead is greater than the work behind us, said NASA associate administrator Amit Kastria at a briefing Friday after Artemis two the Artemis two crew vehicle splashed down. So Artemis three planned for next year will focus on docking the Orion spacecraft with lunar landers in low Earth orbit, a precursor to a planned landing on the moon. Some current and former NASA spaceflight officials are skeptical that a 2028 landing will be possible given the technical and operational milestones the agency and companies involved need to overcome. Among the challenges, showing one or both of the moon landers that SpaceX and Blue Origin have been developing can safely transport astronauts and preparing new spacesuits made by Axiom Space.
Speaker 2:ULA needs to develop upper stages for NASA's SLS rocket. Space missions often take
Speaker 1:They years got to do logos all over the spacesuit. They should.
Speaker 3:Private Well companies should be able to
Speaker 1:help fund the mission by They
Speaker 2:really they really should. And there's there's another story in the journal here about that that viral video of the jar of Nutella that ended up floating on Artemis two. So I I was convinced this was like VFX or AI when we pull it up. Apparently, it's real. We can dig into a little bit of like how this actually happened.
Speaker 2:Ben Cohen has the story in the Wall Street Journal. As millions of people all over the world watched Artemis, the Artemis two lunar flyby this week, there were minutes from seeing they were minutes from seeing astronauts travel the furthest distance ever from Earth when they were suddenly captivated by another majestic sight. It floated through the spacecraft, tumbled right past an astronaut's head, and drifted across NASA's livestream leaving roughly 252,000 miles away with the same question. Wait. Was that a jar of Nutella?
Speaker 2:Back on this planet in a precipitate New Jersey conference room executives at the brand's parent company were taking their seats on Monday for their 2PM operations committee meeting oblivious to the flying object that had appeared far far away at 01:52PM. Their meeting was quickly interrupted by a message in the Microsoft Teams chat flagging that Nutella was in outer space. As it turns out, the people who spread Nutella to every corner of the earth were more surprised than anyone to see it near the moon. They only found out about the most famous jar of gooey stuff in the galaxy when they followed a link in the chat to a social media post. Dang, how much did Nutella pay for this product placement?
Speaker 2:And we saw that post and we had the same question. So Nutella says zero. They did not pay for this. This is not product placement, but it is remarkable. They didn't know their chocolate hazelnut concoction was aboard Orion.
Speaker 2:They didn't even know that the astronauts took it with them. It's still weird to me that astronauts can just bring random stuff with them, but I guess it's just a bus at the end of the day. You can put whatever you want
Speaker 1:on it. Do you remember your first time trying Nutella?
Speaker 2:Maybe. Not really. I'm not that big of Nutella guy.
Speaker 1:For me, felt like Good. The first day of the rest of my life.
Speaker 2:Really? You're big Nutella fan?
Speaker 1:Not really anymore, but as a kid, discovering that it was that it was like a peanut butter like thing that was just on an entirely different level. It was
Speaker 2:It is it is a weird
Speaker 1:It was magic.
Speaker 2:It a what is it? A condiment, technically? What is it?
Speaker 1:I don't even A spread?
Speaker 2:A spread? Is that a thing?
Speaker 6:I don't know.
Speaker 1:It's it can be a lot of things.
Speaker 2:But but it it's always it's always sort of bothered me that it sort of LARPs as chocolate. Like it looks like chocolate, but it's like hazelnut technically, which I think is like sort of a betrayal. I don't know. Sound off in the chat if you have strong opinions about Nutella. David says Nutella is like crack for kids.
Speaker 2:And Geordie is being paid by the Nutella Corporation. No, we are not sponsored by Nutella. I wish.
Speaker 1:We'd have a
Speaker 2:big So jar of it right it's a chocolate hazelnut concoction.
Speaker 1:Yeah. It has it has
Speaker 2:Yeah. Hazelnut in it but it has chocolate in it as well. So Nutella, the corporation, did not know that Nutella, the hazelnut concoction was aboard Orion. They still don't know which astronaut brought it.
Speaker 1:They want You just know that for the next mission, Red Bull will pay any price to have cans of Red Bull floating around.
Speaker 2:Somehow feel like the NASA astronauts tax records will be deeply inspected to see that they're not selling ad slots off the bat.
Speaker 3:We we need some iPads floating by with like b to b SaaS.
Speaker 6:That'd be good.
Speaker 3:Yeah. That'd be sick.
Speaker 2:Yeah. I mean, the the the even even the phone code could be monetized. There's some certain aren't there some venture capital firms that just have dates
Speaker 1:as Seven seven seven six.
Speaker 2:776. It's like that's the code that gets you thinking. I don't know. Anything can be sold I'm sure. They still don't know which astronaut brought it and like us they weren't even sure the video was real when they watched the jar hurdle across their screens at exactly the right angle for the label to spin into focus.
Speaker 2:It all looked too perfect. I couldn't have filmed it any better if I tried, said Chad Stubbs who is their chief marketing officer. What a great name for a CMO Stubbs. Of Faroe North America who owns Nutella. But once he reviewed the NASA footage and saw a levitating tub of Nutella, he knew that a marketing opportunity had landed in his lap and that he was no longer sitting in his most boring meeting of the week.
Speaker 2:It was a lot more interesting than talking about shipping details. And so from the conference room they started a Teams group to discuss the logistics of their improbable operation. They called it Nutella Mission Control. Before most Americans had never seen the original video, they posted a slow motion clip set to the iconic theme of 2001 A Space Odyssey. The tagline Nutella is out of this world.
Speaker 2:And I wonder I wonder if they could just rip that on Instagram using like the integrated music functionality or if they had to like quickly license that because getting like an official theme from a Hollywood film like 2,001 Space Odyssey is it's definitely within budget for something like this, but it's usually a back and forth with some emails. But maybe as a large marketing team, they have everything like wired up already. Anyway, for as long as humans have been leaving this world, they have been taking products along for the ride. But in this age, when every inch of the planet is sponsored, space has become the most prestigious real estate and marketing because it's the only place where marketing is banned. NASA has a strict policy against promoting or endorsing commercial products and Tyler's booing and enforces it so aggressively that not naming brands might as well be part of basic training for astronauts.
Speaker 2:Unlike college athletes, they can't get paid for their name, image, and likeness. As long as they're employed by NASA, they won't be showing for Nutella.
Speaker 3:So Yeah. I'm not saying
Speaker 1:the astronauts should be able to do it independently. I'm just saying that NASA should try to try to build out a multibillion dollar You
Speaker 2:got to go straight to the top. You got to go straight to the government. Yeah. And say, hey, you know, Lockheed's showing up with some stuff. SpaceX is contributing.
Speaker 2:Axiom Space is doing the space suits. Blue Origin's doing a moon lander. Why not Nutella chipping in as well? At least at least paying for part of it.
Speaker 1:I don't know. It would just be extremely American.
Speaker 2:It would be extremely American to make the Orion capsule look like
Speaker 1:That's what I was saying.
Speaker 3:Pay per view.
Speaker 2:A NASCAR.
Speaker 1:And you got to have a pay per view.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Pay per view for sure.
Speaker 3:Like, you can watch the stream when they're
Speaker 1:just kind of hanging out traveling. Yeah. But for the anything like a landing Yeah. Splashdown, takeoff
Speaker 2:Yeah. That switch Oh, it switches pay per view mode? Yeah. I think they got to sell the windshield. They gotta sell the windshield.
Speaker 2:When you're taking photos of Earth, you
Speaker 1:gotta see
Speaker 2:Tide. You gotta see Tide across the across the windshield. It's like, oh, seeing the blue marble from this distance is amazing.
Speaker 3:Reminds me, I have some laundry.
Speaker 2:I have and I kinda have to put the camera in between the I and the d.
Speaker 1:Podcast ads over during the stream too.
Speaker 2:There is a lot of dead air. Letting
Speaker 1:you guys note in t minus thirty minutes, we'll be coming around the moon. Yep. And this segment, this moon passing is brought to you by Athletic Greens.
Speaker 2:Yep. Great. Okay. So as long as they're employed by NASA, they won't be shilling for Nutella. When one Artemis two crew member let slip in a press conference that he was bringing an iPhone to get mesmerizing photos of earth, he caught himself.
Speaker 2:He said I don't think I can actually say that as a government employee Reed Wiseman said. We have small highly powerful computing devices that will take with us with outstanding cameras. And so, yeah, what is an iPhone if not just a small highly powerful computing device with outstanding camera? While in the cosmos they also found other purposes for those powerful computing devices. One picture shared by NASA showed Jeremy Hansen with an electric shaver in one hand and his iPhone in the other because he was using it as a mirror And that wasn't even the most part amazing part of the shot.
Speaker 2:Anyone who looked closely would have spotted another another product in the corner, a container of Jif peanut butter. Now what's interesting is that the the government does have, at least with peanut butter, are you familiar with NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Tech Techniques or Technology or something? N I s t? So n I s t is like our official weights and measures. Like, they keep like the canonical, like what is the one pound?
Speaker 2:What is one gram? They they have a whole bunch of standards for all sorts of different things and then different companies can can like agree on, okay, well, we are both, you know, saving They're
Speaker 1:reinventing and defining the gram.
Speaker 2:Yeah. But all sorts of things. And one of the things that NIST like has is peanut butter, reference peanut butter. So if you are doing some sort of lab experiment and you need to say that you are testing this product when it comes into contact with peanut butter, you can go to the government and get the most stand Fish the off. Official peanut butter.
Speaker 1:The official peanut butter.
Speaker 2:Because otherwise somebody might say, well did you use Jif or did you use Skippy or did you use something else? And this way you can just say one thing. And so there is a world where the government would say, okay, don't bring Jif peanut butter, bring NIST peanut butter,
Speaker 3:but But I don't
Speaker 2:anyway, Jif got another shout out in here, although I can't see it in this image, but to find out to find out more about space oddities, this journalist at the Wall Street Journal said he called Robert Perlman who obsessively tracks them as the editor of Collect Space. He told me something curious about outer space. The deeply ordinary parts of NASA missions resonate back home as much as the extraordinary. We remember the astronauts who flew around the moon and the flying Nutella. It makes us feel closer to the humans who have never been further away.
Speaker 2:After all, most of us will never see the dark side of the moon. Disagree and I think we're going to have Peter Diamandis.
Speaker 1:Looks looks like a Coachella set.
Speaker 2:It does look like they're twisted knobs or something. What are they what are they doing there? Just Okay. Oh, they're they're checking the watches. Okay.
Speaker 1:Wrist check?
Speaker 2:Wrist
Speaker 3:check. The Artemis two
Speaker 2:there was there's been a knockout drag out fight between all the watchmakers to make sure that their watches are the ones on the wrists of the astronauts going back to the original Omega Speedmaster Moonwatch edition, that one. And was it going to be a Rolex that wound up being an Omega? That was a big moment. So in fact this particular jar of Nutella was just one of the 60,000,000 sold in America over the past year. When Nutella was invented nobody could have imagined that it would one day be in space.
Speaker 2:Nobody had ever been to space. During a postwar cocoa shortage in the nineteen forties, an Italian pastry chef named Pietro Ferrero had the genius idea to combine the scarce resource with an with an ingredient his town had in abundance.
Speaker 6:Hazel Yeah.
Speaker 2:It was engineered into a spreadable paste in the nineteen fifties and officially launched as Nutella in 1964. So they had a shortage of chocolate of cocoa and so they they were cutting it. They were cutting the brick with with hazelnuts. And it was sort of a Jevons Paradox situation where by dropping the cost of a spreadable chocolate substance consumption skyrocketed. It's good news.
Speaker 2:It's the ultimate white belt. Five years later NASA launched Apollo 11. Even then one product was already synonymous with the wonder of spaceflight. Do you know what we're talking about? Can you take a guess?
Speaker 2:What is the main product that was like famously designed for astronauts in space?
Speaker 3:Is it the ice cream?
Speaker 2:No. No. That that that's close. The freeze dried ice cream is up there.
Speaker 4:Whipped cream?
Speaker 2:No. Whipped cream? No. Tang? And no one knows You don't know the story of Tang?
Speaker 3:I think that's before our time, John.
Speaker 2:There's Tang? And then there's also you know those super bouncy balls? Those super bouncy balls? There there I don't know how apocryphal that is but there's always been this story at least when I was a kid it was introduced to me that those super bouncy balls were designed as rocket fuel or something like that and and that experiment went wrong and like this was all they could come up with.
Speaker 1:Fake news.
Speaker 2:Fake news. As an eight year old, like I was like this is lore. This is peak. This is
Speaker 6:peak
Speaker 2:lore. This is peak lore. Let's talk about Tang. Cinema. The beverage was struggling.
Speaker 2:Tang which is sort of like a Gatorade. It's like an orange juice type liquid but it comes in a powder. You mix it. It's actually the early age you want. It's early age you want.
Speaker 3:Or Element.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Or Element. The beverage was was struggling until NASA realized it could mask the metallic taste of water on board. So tap water on in space, apparently a nightmare. Got to get Aurora up there.
Speaker 2:Right. That's the next move.
Speaker 1:There we go.
Speaker 2:And every kid who wanted to be an astronaut instantly wanted the neon orange powder. I was one of them. I I remember learning about Tang and being like this is cool. A half a century later the drink that was once a flop would crack 1,000,000,000 of annual revenue. Let's go.
Speaker 2:Fifty year overnight success.
Speaker 1:That's wild.
Speaker 2:To this day brands dream about making it to space because they know the most valuable marketing is the kind that isn't really marketing and can't actually be valued. And there's been a whole there's been a whole trend on YouTube of YouTubers taking products and putting them on weather balloons and driving the and flying the weather balloons up technically past the Carmen line with a GoPro and they take the footage down. And no one really counts that but it still like gives you a little bit of the aura of space. Not the same as like a natural.
Speaker 3:Calculate how many weather balloons we would need to attach to you to take you to space.
Speaker 2:I think I think that's been done. I think Red Bull did that with
Speaker 1:With Felix?
Speaker 2:Felix Baumgartner. Is that his name?
Speaker 1:He just rode weather balloons up?
Speaker 2:Yes. Was weather balloons. That was
Speaker 1:not I thought it was like a high altitude No.
Speaker 2:No. No. The whole thing was weather balloon all the way up. When he gets to the top, he jumps out of the capsule and then he just like spins on the way down. It's one of the craziest things.
Speaker 2:That's an amazing marketing sign. I talked to the head of marketing at Red Bull who was behind that. And the numbers, like the ROI, that it might be the highest ROI marketing campaign in history. Like it was truly like remarkably affordable for what for how massive that campaign was. So speaking of similar space campaigns, for this trip the astronauts wore Omega Speedmaster X33 watches and brought cameras made by Nikon and GoPro in addition to their iPhones, which we talked about in an earlier essay that Brandon Guerrelle wrote for the newsletter, tbpn.com.
Speaker 2:While on board, Christina Koch even asked mission control
Speaker 1:extremely disappointing. Says, I would need dozens of large weather balloons.
Speaker 2:But look up the Felix Baumgartner thing because that But that
Speaker 1:could have had some type of end like a like
Speaker 2:I don't think it had a rocket on it or something but I it also might not have gone that high. Like it it may it went higher than anyone had ever done that jump but it might not have gone all the way to like the Carmen line or all the way to space. Right? But it went really high and it was very impressive. So while on board, Christina even asked Mission Control for help finding something essential.
Speaker 2:Her favorite Honest hand lotion. Honest. That's Jessica Alba's brand? Interesting.
Speaker 1:The Honest Company.
Speaker 2:Okay. Got some Honest Company organic media there. As he watched the Artemis II mission, Pearlman waited for the moment when that a random product popped up. He knew it would happen. He didn't know when or what it would be.
Speaker 2:Nutella, he told me wouldn't have been at the top of my list. As it happens, the product was at the top of his list of another type of chocolate, M and M's. In microgravity, even the men and women on NASA missions can't resist the opportunity to gobble up floating dots. Astronauts love becoming human Pac Men. On this mission, they had access to a 189 menu options, five different types of hot sauce, precisely 43 cups of coffee, and one crew preference that NASA simply calls chocolate spread.
Speaker 2:Hours after that chocolate spread bobbled through the cabin, the Artemis two crew disappeared behind the moon and briefly lost contact with society. When their signal returned, Christina's voice crackled back to Houston with a message for humanity. We will visit again, the astronaut said. We will construct science outposts. We will drive rovers.
Speaker 2:We will do radio astronomy, we will found companies, we will bolster industry, we will inspire, but ultimately we will always choose Earth. We will always choose each other. And at least one of them would choose Nutella. That's a funny story. Anyway, back to what's going to happen in Artemis three.
Speaker 2:Space missions often take years to come together as teams of engineers stitch together complex machinery and software that must be able to deliver in harsh conditions. Creating systems that keep astronauts safe adds to the pressure. NASA and its contractors have struggled with delays during Artemis program. The first Artemis mission missed several earlier launch date goals, the agency ran into problems fueling the SLS rocket for the mission before starting it in late twenty twenty two. Questions about the Orion spacecraft's heat shield contributed to delays for Artemis two with officials pushing off the expected launch date twice in 2024 alone.
Speaker 2:And I remember there was a lot of nervousness about the heat shield. And then when it came back, there was a picture Got
Speaker 1:a good idea from PRA in
Speaker 3:the chat. Artemis II, Nutella, Artemis III, GLP-one. How much would one of the GLP-one manufacturers pay to have one of them? One of the could potentially fund the whole mission.
Speaker 2:I feel like if you're don't astronauts have to be in like peak physical condition? I feel like if they're if they're not natty, it's not really it's, you know
Speaker 1:You want don't I want my astronauts to be natty. You want them optimized.
Speaker 2:I guess.
Speaker 1:There's no anti doping organization in space, John.
Speaker 2:I suppose. I suppose. But you you want you want the astronauts to be like the pinnacle of of, you know, what what humans can achieve. You know, we talk about Johnny Kim, the the the Navy SEAL turned doctor turned astronaut, you know. You want you want to see what's possible when someone just puts all of their effort for years and years towards like achieving greatness, you know.
Speaker 2:Not just clicking order online. Anyway, NASA and its contractors have struggled with delays. We talked about this. Everything starts with the premise that NASA should not do anything that's unsafe, but there's no question that we need to move faster, said Senator Jerry Moran, Chairman of a subcommittee that set funding levels for the agency. So there's these tradeoffs here.
Speaker 2:Keeping the next Artemis mission on schedule will be a major test for Jared Isaacman, former guest of the show, who's aiming to ensure the agency returns an American crew to the lunar surface before China while starting to build a permanent base there. Isaacman in February rolled out new plans to accelerate the return of US astronauts to the moon's surface. Officials said the approach resembles the Apollo program in the nineteen sixties. Officials in the nineteen sixties went a stepping stone approach built up confidence in the systems needed for constructing the historic Apollo eleven landing in 1969. Under the revised plan, Artemis three will no longer feature a landing on the moon as the agency had previously hoped.
Speaker 2:The agency also aims to move faster with the SLS rockets in part by jettisoning an upgrade to the vehicle that had been in the works. We're not going to turn every rocket into a work of art. We're going to increase launch rate. We're going to do it in a logical evolutionary way, Isaacman said in February. And this ties to his experience, you know, riding aboard SpaceX and building a company with Shift four.
Speaker 2:And you can imagine that he is pretty in favor of like iterative design. And so when you see something like Artemis two, very successful, the the the inclination should be run it back immediately and and and start adding little little tweaks constantly. So the Artemis three mission next year is supposed to help set up NASA and its contractor to attempt one or more visits to the moon in 2028, so that's Artemis four and five. NASA's inspector general said in a recent report that both SpaceX and Blue Origin have run into delays developing spacecraft for Artemis missions. Each company has been working on in space transfers of super cold propellants to power lunar flights, fueling operations that are still largely unproven.
Speaker 2:So that is a very, very complex and new technology that we are that the entire space community is clearly working on. The in the the in space refueling is sort of critical to actually getting to the moon in a meaningful way, not just sort of ripping it up there and then figuring out how to get back and just blasting back. To set up a full lunar economy, you need to be doing tons and tons of refueling operations, which are obviously incredibly A NASA safety panel separately raised questions about how quickly SpaceX's human lander based on its Starship vehicle would be ready. A landing operation of astronauts with the Starship lander within the next few years appears daunting and to the panel probably not achievable, the group said in a report released earlier this year. The companies have key tests coming up that will inform their lunar work and vehicles.
Speaker 2:SpaceX next month plans to launch an upgraded version of its Starship rocket while Blue Origin is working towards launching a cargo lander to the moon with its New Glenn rocket. So with all of this has, the backdrop of the SpaceX IPO. And you have to imagine that even if it was incredibly cost intensive, we're in this weird dynamic with SpaceX where the CapEx requirements of something like this and and, you know, sending a rocket to the moon are probably less than Colossus five or some crazy data center. And so you could be in this interesting situation where where Elon is incentivized to to move a lot faster, probably not with humans on board but get even just a basic optimist robot up there. Get the lunar lander up there.
Speaker 2:Just continue to deliver payloads because it just shows so many more milestones. And as you go public, it's it be I think it becomes more difficult to to stay focused on this like thirty year
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Part of part of Yeah. Like the value of actually sending humans to space is entirely like, kind of marketing and just to prove that it's possible. Yeah. Like, would think that you would hope that a lot of this is Yes. Like, it's just very cool.
Speaker 1:Very inspiring. Yeah. I feel like it's important. But at the same time, you would think that NASA should just be optimizing for how how do we get as much mass as possible Yeah. Up to the, you know, whether whether it's space or the moon, etcetera, and just basically leaning a lot more into drones.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:And and going more for volume versus these sort of like high risk, high cost.
Speaker 2:Yeah. At the same time, I mean, we we'll see where the humanoid robots go, but there is no there's no current substitute for the versatility of having a human astronaut in a space suit there being able to I mean we talked to the the folks from Flyerfly and they were sort of digging up moon dust and analyzing it. Things open up when you can get a guy out there with a jackhammer. Right? You got to just get a human to be able to do so many more, like, flexible build outs and move equipment around.
Speaker 2:Like, clearly, there's current leverage that you get from having a human there, at least for the time being. Although you can do a lot with drones and robots. Well, so let's let's let's there are a few more reactions to the Artemis landing. Trung fan had post. Did that go away?
Speaker 2:What else is here? Jared Eisenman dropped out. There's little bit of a story about Jared Eisenman because he was personally on scene for the splashdown of the Artemis two crew. Eric Dowerty has a video here of them talking to the astronauts. And there's a little bit of history on him.
Speaker 2:Jared Eisenman dropped out of high school at 16 and started a company in his parents' basement with $10,000 his grandfather gave him. Tonight, he's on the deck of a navy ship waiting to welcome four astronauts home from the moon. That basement company is now shift for payments. It processes 200,000,000,000 a year in credit card transactions, about a third of all restaurant hotels and casinos in The US. Went public in 2020.
Speaker 2:He ran it
Speaker 1:in And CEO a 100 of of firearms retailers?
Speaker 2:Probably. Yeah. Yeah. He's carved that out perfectly. He also co founded Draken International which ran a fleet of over a 100 retired fighter jets whose entire job was playing the enemy in combat training for US Air Force and NATO pilots.
Speaker 2:He sold it to Blackstone for over a $100,000,000. He has over eight thousand hours in the cockpit and can fly more than a dozen types of military jets. He personally owns a MiG 29, a Russian fighter jet that tops 1,500 miles per hour, which he bought from the estate of Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen. It's the only one in private American hands. In 2009, he flew around the entire planet in a small Cessna jet in sixty one hours and fifty one minutes, a world record.
Speaker 2:I didn't realize he held the world record for what is that? Transatlantic, transcontinental? I don't know. Circling the globe. In 2021, he paid for and commanded Inspiration4, the first all civilian spaceflight, four people with no astronaut training, three days orbiting the earth, 250,000,000 raised for St.
Speaker 2:Jude's Research Hospital. Then in 2024, he went back up on Polaris Dawn and floated outside the spacecraft. I didn't realize he'd been to space twice. I thought he'd only been once. That's crazy.
Speaker 2:He ran it back, held on to by a 12 foot cable in the first spacewalk ever done by someone outside of the government space agency. That same flight reached 870 miles above earth further than ever any human had been since the Apollo crew in 1972. And so there's some more there's some more facts about Jaredizing in there. But I had a wild proposal, was to make April 10 a national holiday celebrating Artemis two. Is this the biggest achievement NASA has ever done?
Speaker 2:No. Not compared to landing on the moon, but I think it symbolizes a very important turn in in our capacity as a country to do bold and impressive things. And there are currently no federal holidays in April, and I think people would enjoy it. And it's hard to think of anything with broader support than this mission. There are so many interesting projects happening.
Speaker 2:A lot of them, even electric cars have pushed back from different people. And there's like so many things that are controversial and this was one story that I just saw continually cut through the noise and see
Speaker 1:support Yeah. Three day weekends have not been very controversial. Yeah. Yeah. Because nobody sees a three day weekend on the horizon and is, you know, slamming their No.
Speaker 1:Computer into their desk.
Speaker 2:Not at all. And so I was thinking back to the benefits of more federal holidays, more national holidays, and I was reminded of what we talked about last week regarding Alex Tabarak's piece in Marginal Revolution. So he compared improvements in productivity that came during the industrialization the Industrial Revolution to expected improvements in productivity from the AI revolution. And so if you look back between 1870 and today, the hours of work in The United States fell by about 40%. Americans used to work three thousand hours per year and now they work about eighteen hundred hours per year.
Speaker 2:And so what wound up happening? Hours fell but employment did not increase. And so we were what we literally were doing more with less because of productivity increases. And so he frames this around AI. He says, So if you think AI is going to have a tremendous effect on work, the difference between catastrophe and wonderland boils down to distribution.
Speaker 2:It's not impossible that AI renders some people unemployable but that proposition is harder to defend than the idea that AI will be broadly productive. AI is a very general purpose technology one likely to make many people more productive including many people with fewer skills. Moreover, we have more policy control over the distribution of work than over pure AI effect on work, declare an AI dividend and create some more holidays for example. And I thought April 10 would be an interesting place to start. And so it is still too early.
Speaker 2:I mean, Tyler, you were talking about like is AI causing unemployment? There's been a lot of hiring freezes, a lot of AI tool deployment, but we're not really seeing replacement yet.
Speaker 3:It seems hard, like, on a macro level to really definitively say that, like, AI is causing a huge effect on the labor market.
Speaker 2:Yeah. But The only thing
Speaker 1:that seems definitive is that companies are willing to lay off people to help fund their AI build outs, right? Yeah. And you could also argue that those people like probably were on the chopping block anyways.
Speaker 4:Yeah.
Speaker 1:But so far that's been Yeah. That's been happening.
Speaker 2:And so it is still a little early to net out all the effects of is this going to be more Jevan's Paradox type effect where the competitive dynamic is that you have humans and AI at your disposal. You have a token budget and a human capital budget and I have a human capital budget and a token budget. And in order to actually compete and win, we want to deploy both as aggressively as possible. And so the game theoretic Nash equilibrium is that we both employ a lot of people and use a lot of AI and we do both of our products get better and we continue to compete with each other. That's certainly one possible outcome.
Speaker 2:But there's also there are there are real risk of true labor replacement effects. And so taking a leap of faith here and adding federal holiday a bit ahead of the curve feels like the type of action that America needs to cool tempers during during a time of rising unrest as seen over the weekend in San Francisco, which I'm sure you all saw. There were a variety of attacks. Sam Altman posted a blog post covering a Molotov cocktail that was thrown at his house. Then there was a shooting outside.
Speaker 1:Friday morning Friday early hours.
Speaker 2:He said 03:45AM in the morning. He said thankfully it bounced off the house and no one got hurt. And I saw another article that said that the suspect is in custody. And he says and Sam goes on to sort of restate what he believes. He says working towards prosperity for everyone empowering all people advancing science and technology are moral obligations for him.
Speaker 2:AI will be the most powerful tool for expanding human capability and potential that anyone has ever seen. Demand for this tool will be essentially uncapped and people will do incredible things with it. The world deserves huge amounts of AI and we must figure out how to make it happen. And then he also says it will not all go well. The fear and anxiety about AI is justified.
Speaker 2:We are in the process of witnessing the largest change to society in a long time perhaps ever maybe bigger than the industrial revolution. And so you would expect the life and the existence of the American populace to change over that period of time. And we have a duty to make it as smooth as possible. And he says we have to get safety right which is not just about aligning a model. We urgently need a society wide response to be resilient to new threats.
Speaker 2:This includes new policy to help navigate through a difficult economic trans transition in order to get a to a much better future. AI has to be democratized. Power cannot be too concentrated. George Hautz actually had an interesting rebuttal to Sam Altman's post sort of re arguing for open source which is something that a lot of people have not been arguing for lately but it was it was sort of interesting to see him continue to push
Speaker 1:it Was it just about open source or was it about sharing research?
Speaker 2:It was it was he he was saying that you don't have a you don't have a an obligation to open source the weights of a model that cost a billion dollars to train. He's not arguing for that. Yeah. But he is saying that you should open source the tricks, the research Yeah. Basically publish the research papers again and empower a broader community.
Speaker 2:And of course there's a lot of competitive dynamics there but that is something that could potentially happen via regulation or something or happen just due to you know a a competitive dynamic. Like there are other labs out there that don't have as much compute and might realize that they have great researchers and maybe they want to open source more. There's there are a lot of different ways this could play out. So he says, I do not think it's right that a few labs, few AI labs would make the most consequential decisions about the shape of our future. And so there's been a bunch of bunch of back and forth about the attacks and what's driving them and how risky the rhetoric has been.
Speaker 2:I think in general, it's it's it's a very tough situation because the the the like you don't like you don't want to, you know, just spark more controversy and more discussion around this stuff. You mostly want to move towards more security and more more Yeah.
Speaker 1:Of course, the notable, you know, it's been shared widely at this point, but the notable one thing that was notable about Friday, the attacker from Friday is just they were sharing all of the Doom if anyone, all the AI Yeah. Doom material. They were clearly consume consuming it. Yeah. Sort of caught up in it.
Speaker 1:Yeah. And Yeah.
Speaker 2:Anjani Mithcock, formerly of Andrews and Horowitz out there with a new fund, AMP Public, said time is running out for technology leaders to show they care about public benefit above all else. Slow down your layoffs. Reinvest in reeducation. Mentor the next generation. We are all on team humanity and I think that's a good message.
Speaker 2:And so as the AI race continues to heat up in America, geopolitical dynamics have consistently acted as a binding constraint limiting the viability of proposals set forth by AI lab leaders. And so we've seen this at Davos with various lab leaders saying, well we would agree to a slowdown if we could all agree and then Bernie Sanders, the the the data center ban and all of this feels very intractable in the backdrop of in with the backdrop of geopolitical competition. If you don't have buy in from all the different countries you wind up just falling behind another country and you have the same dynamic again. And so that piece of the discussion has sort of fallen by the wayside because it's so difficult to argue if you're running a private corporation in America and you're like I want to make foreign policy now. That's a really tall order.
Speaker 2:But fortunately I think people are starting to at least investigate what the path towards some coalition between different countries might look like. And Sebastian Malabai, author of the Infinity Machine and former guest of the show published an op ed in the New York Times outlining one possible solution to The US China dynamic. And so we can go through this and try and understand Sebastian's points because he makes a he he actually went to China and talked to lab leads there to try and get their side of the story and and what they might be open to in terms of collaboration. So he says in in 2022, the Biden administration tried to arrest China's development of artificial intelligence by denying it cutting edge semiconductors. This was the CHIPS Act, which at the time I was very in favor of, but of course, the policies have all evolved and there are much more complex situations with the entire semiconductor supply chain and how fast the technology is advancing.
Speaker 2:So President Trump has relaxed that policy a bit without a clear plan to replace it. But the chip export controls have failed and so he dives into, you know, how chips are actually getting to China. China's tech sector is too sophisticated to be stopped from building powerful AI. In pursuing an impossible objective, The United States is missing an opportunity to to try for one that sounds fanciful but which after a recent reporting trip to China I believe is more realistic. America should negotiate with China on a global pact on AI safety which would impose universal limits on a technology that can do much good but in the wrong hands would do much harm.
Speaker 2:The premise of the export restrictions was that The United States would be able to successfully block China's access to powerful AI chips. The premium chipsets used in AI data centers are the size of skateboards and can't be smuggled in a simple suitcase And it's hard to put them to use without hands on support from the chipmaker's engineering teams. But Chinese developers circumvented controls by training their AI models and chips located in other countries. They were using cloud instances and neo clouds in other countries. And this is always a question of even if you stop the flow of chips into the country, you set up a holding company that allocates Yeah.
Speaker 1:This reserves is and a question the last year of like, wait, how is Singapore placing that many billions of dollars of
Speaker 2:And Malaysia was another and one that was and and even in The Middle East, there were always questions about, okay, well, if The Middle East gets chips, are they going to be able to, you know, have Chinese companies as clients remotely? And there were discussions of folks basically putting training data on hard drives and or model weights on hard drives and just flying them from one country to another. It's very, very hard to actually contain the movement of the critical pieces of the AI value chain. So so he says a Chinese model builder needs only to rent capacity on an AI data center in one of China's Southeast Asian neighbors, like you Concealing the model's Chinese origin is straightforward. Partly thanks to this loophole.
Speaker 2:He says, let's see. Partly thanks to this loophole, China has rolled out a series of excellent AI models. China's ability to skirt US controls will not change even if the senate follows the house in passing a bill to restrict China's access to outside data centers, which is the next the next domino to fall in the chip ban and chip control project. China is learning how to do without cutting edge chips by stacking less powerful chips together. And Huawei, the nine ten b, nine ten c, the Huawei Ascend chips seem to be less powerful, but if they can actually manufacture them at scale, they can wind up marshaling the same or similar Yeah.
Speaker 1:Power being less of a constraint.
Speaker 2:Exactly. 3 Gorges Dam and other nuclear power plants and all sorts of different initiatives that they've done. They have a ton of solar. They have a lot of energy. So its model builders also take full advantage of a process known as distillation.
Speaker 2:Every time a US lab produces a cutting edge model Chinese rivals quickly reverse engineer its capabilities and build a copycat version. The follower has the advantage he says. American AI scientists used to say that competitors being able to fast follow would not matter. An intelligent explosion was approaching, the argument went. As AI AI systems would soon become capable enough to write upgrades to their own code, AI would create better AI.
Speaker 2:Better AI would create even better AI. Recursive self improvement would drive performance skyward. The nation that had just reached this so called singularity first would be the winner of the AI race. So more more the AI race than winning the AI future messaging. Even if the fast follower were just a few months behind the leader, three and a half years after the Biden administration ship controls AI is generating code to upgrade itself, the promised feedback loop has started.
Speaker 2:But the accelerating power of the leading models won't determine who wins the AI race. It's AI deployment that will matter. To transform economies and armies, AI must be embedded into the business processes and weapons systems. The raw power of the cutting edge models must be turned into applications, he says. The upshot is that China and The United States are roughly level in the AI contest.
Speaker 2:Top Chinese models may be a few months behind American ones, and the relative position on military applications is difficult to ascertain as much as as so much is classified. But on industrial applications, China seems to be leading. U. S. Sanctioned companies such as Huawei and Hikvision are rolling out AI systems that perform maintenance checks on high speed trains, managing mining operations, scanning water samples to assess pollution, and more.
Speaker 2:At Huawei's campus near Shenzhen, he recently took a ride in an autonomous car. A device in the passenger seat massaged my back and the steering was immaculate. Tyler, do you generally agree with most of these takes here?
Speaker 3:No.
Speaker 2:Okay. Well,
Speaker 3:yeah. To start, I think I think Chinese labs are further behind.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 3:The only reason that they're close behind is because distillation. Distillation. I also
Speaker 1:think Yeah. And he's kind of saying like, hey, saying that the chip export ban is not working. Yeah. Also But I feel like the the the them being behind is proof that it is working. And he's also saying, you know, the labs wanna get to recursive self improvement.
Speaker 1:We're starting to see early signs of that. Mhmm. And so I feel like there's some kind of inconsistency.
Speaker 3:Yeah. I mean, also just on the on the chip stuff, like we're clearly not like policing it as hard as we could. Could be policing it way harder. Right? I remember it was like super micro.
Speaker 3:We saw those Yeah. Videos where they had smuggled in the boxes and it was
Speaker 1:like extreme the hairdryer. Yeah.
Speaker 3:It's like if we really want to sell this issue, like we for sure could.
Speaker 1:Let's check-in with Super Super Micro's stock.
Speaker 2:Super up.
Speaker 1:Yeah. It's up 17% the last five
Speaker 3:Wow. Like very among like the leading labs in The US, you are seeing some kind of like takeoff. But like among them, right, it's like very much a recursive thing. Yep. The models improve the harness, which improves the next model.
Speaker 3:Like I I think Yeah. Yeah. This thing is actually true. Like you're not seeing open source labs like kind of keep up, I think,
Speaker 2:generally. Yeah. I mean it was it was very remarkable watching like deep sea not accelerate in the same way that I think a lot of people expected.
Speaker 1:Yeah. I mean,
Speaker 3:like like, when is kind of what deep sea what what people thought deep sea could be. And models are good, but Yeah. Again, like, I think most of the reason that they're good is just because of distillation. Yeah. It's clearly like they have good researchers.
Speaker 3:Right? Ting Shuwa is like a great university. Yeah. But I I think, like, generally Yeah. I think people are are too bullish currently on on Chinese AI.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Yeah. There there are too many, like, too many secrets that are still locked up in in US labs.
Speaker 3:Yeah. I mean, even if it's like, okay, at some level, like, AI, if you're super AGI pilled, it's all about the compute Yep. Which means it's all about capital. Yep. US has better capital markets.
Speaker 1:How much is it about secrets versus just raw scale? I don't know. Access to compute.
Speaker 2:It's interesting. Well, let's continue. So Malai writes in the New York Times, Fans of chip controls continue to insist that even a modest slowing of China's AI advance is worth pursuing. If China is a formidable adversary, imagine how much more formidable it might be if the chip controls were lifted. But the controls are failing to deliver the prize of a China with limited AI so it's worth considering their cost.
Speaker 2:My China trip persuaded me that the cost is too high. The Biden administration made a strategic choice to prioritize the slowing of China rather than addressing other worries. The alternative would have been to say China to to would would the alternative would have been to say to China, this would be the Biden administration to the Chinese Communist Party. You are a tech superpower. We are a tech superpower.
Speaker 2:Let's work together to make sure AI doesn't fall into the hands of rogue states and terrorists. The goal would have been an AI equivalent of the 1968 nuclear non proliferation treaty, a regime that would require all countries using AI to sign up for safeguards on it. The Biden team didn't think China would collaborate on something like that, but over a dozen conversations with AI leaders in Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Guangzhou made it clear to me that China's elite does care about AI safety. And this is something we dug into previously, Tyler, looking at the statements from AI leaders in China and the Communist Party directly. It did seem like they were not like, you know, wildly accelerationist.
Speaker 2:Was that generally
Speaker 3:take If you're comparing like the statements of actual CCP to like the government
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 3:United States government Yeah. CCP definitely looks more like pro safety Yeah. Than the US government does.
Speaker 2:Yeah. And so I mean
Speaker 3:Within groups within The US are certainly much more, you know
Speaker 2:Safety pill.
Speaker 3:Yeah, safety pill Totally. Than China's general.
Speaker 2:Totally. Yeah, but the the like the pushback against that was always that, okay, well it would like you are encouraged to be pro safety when you when you don't have the lead because you're just like slow down the fast one. Right? And so that could be the dynamic but if the rhetoric is true and if Sebastian Mallaby's reporting is true then there is an opportunity for some sort of accord that could be good if that's, you know, indeed a critical path to the good ending. And that's sort of what happens in AI twenty twenty seven.
Speaker 2:You know, the good ending is like a geopolitical sort of come to Jesus moment where everyone decides to, you know, reign things in. Is that you read on Yes.
Speaker 3:But you know, there are there's two there's two paths. Right?
Speaker 2:There's two paths. Yeah.
Speaker 3:Yeah. And It's like a choose your own
Speaker 2:adventure. Yeah. It's a choose your own adventure. But the good path requires something like this.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Yeah. There there's like
Speaker 3:a a slowdown and everyone agrees.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Yeah. So he says he visited a prominent tech company that builds and distributes an AI foundation model. So I imagine that's DeepSeek or Alibaba or or some other big Chinese company. But he says for now that model is open source meaning that users can download and modify it at will.
Speaker 2:If a user prompts the AI to conduct cyber attacks, there's nothing anyone can do to stop that person except for the fact that it might be, you know, deeper in the in the training data and in the model behavior that even though it's open source, it might not be completely turnkey but it does pose a risk. And he says the chief executive of this company made a striking admission. As AI becomes more powerful it would be crazy to continue making it open source he said. That's the exact opposite of the George position interestingly. You wouldn't open source a nuclear weapon he added.
Speaker 2:During my trip the controversy surrounding the advanced model Open Claw illustrated the rising concern for AI safety. Throngs of ordinary Chinese downloaded the digital assistant eager to experiment with capable with a capable AI agent. The enthusiasm apparently confirmed that China loves innovation more than it fears it. But researchers and industry leaders told me they were appalled. It makes your computer naked, an eminent business school professor told me.
Speaker 2:Soon after that, China's leaders firmly discouraged the use of OpenClaw in government systems and warned citizens that the agent might wreak havoc on their data. For now China's instinct to race for powerful AI overwhelms any caution. This is a rational response to a US administration that is equally determined to put speed ahead of safety. But if a US leader went to China and offered to scrap chip controls in exchange for collaboration on AI non proliferation there would at least be some chance of the proposal succeeding. This presumes that US Chinese dialogue is even possible but the West should not succumb to the self fulfilling fatalism.
Speaker 2:At times during the Cold War The United States pursued its interest by switching from coordination to from confrontation to detent. The nuclear non proliferation treaty came just six years after the Cuban Missile Crisis. Now is a good time to recall that history. And so I I thought that was I thought that was an interesting sort of contrarian take at a time when the the general consensus has been continue to continue to push forward on the chip controls, maybe go deeper in the supply chain. There's there's always been a more complex discussion.
Speaker 2:He doesn't mention Taiwan, which is is a whole other complex issue. But it was was sort of a reminder of a potential collaboration that I think is maybe worth considering. So everyone is still in the early stages of working through the situation but the reporting here just generally shows that there might be more opportunity for collaboration than many people previously thought. So I like that.
Speaker 1:Anyway, AI 2027 Yeah. Which has been shockingly accurate to date, has mid twenty twenty six China wakes up. Yeah. They say, in China, the CCP is starting to feel the AGI. Chip export controls and lack of government support have left China under resourced compared to the West by smuggling banned Taiwanese chips, buying older chips, and producing domestic chips about three years behind the China has managed to maintain about 12% of the world's AI relevant compute, but the older technology is harder to work with and supply is a constant headache.
Speaker 1:A few standouts like Deepsent do very impressive work with limited compute, but the compute deficit limits what they can achieve without government support. And they are about six months behind the best open brain models. Of course, they're using
Speaker 2:Yeah. They mash up all of these.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So you guys
Speaker 2:DeepMind plus OpenAI, and then they do DeepSeek. MSeek plus DeepSeek and stuff. It's
Speaker 1:The general secretary had long dreamed of doubling down on real world physical manufacturing and avoiding American post industrial decadence. He viewed software companies with suspicion, but hawks in the CCP warned that the growing race towards AGI can no longer be ignored, so he finally commits fully to the big AI push he had previously tried to avoid. He sets in motion the nationalization of Chinese AI research, creating an immediate information sharing mechanism for AI companies. It will again, that's like an advantage that they could, and to date it seems like they they do have, which is like there's a very real incentive to just share everything at the moment. Or not everything, but at least more than than what our labs are doing.
Speaker 1:It will escalate over the course of a year until all the best researchers merge into a deepsent led collective where they share algorithmic insights, data sense and compute resources with each other. A decentralized development zone is created at the Tiananwan Power Plant, the largest nuclear power plant in the world, to house a new mega data center for deep center along with highly secure living and office spaces to which researchers will eventually relocate. And to close it out. But China is falling behind on AI algorithms due to the to their weaker models. The Chinese intelligence agencies, among the best in the world, doubled down on their plans to steal OpenBrains weights.
Speaker 1:This is much more complex operation than their constant low level poaching of algorithmic secrets. The weights are a multi terabyte file stored on a highly secure server. Their cyber force think they can pull it off with the help of their spies perhaps only once. And again, it goes on and on and on. Mhmm.
Speaker 1:So we'll see. We'll see if they, if they wake up. I'm not I'm not at all convinced that there's going to be any type of like effective multinational collaboration especially just given what's going on Yeah. In The Middle East.
Speaker 2:Yeah. It's chaotic time. Well, if you wanna know how much your government taxes paid for across everything the US government spends, if you paid taxes in America this year? Riley Walls has launched a website for you taxwrapped.com. It's Spotify wrapped but for your taxes.
Speaker 2:You can see what the government did with your money and it's a very fun, you know, one off website a drop because even when you open it on desktop it renders like it's an iPhone app. It's very it's it's like entirely mobile first. I think that's an interesting trend is if you're doing one of these just make it work on the phone because that is the endpoint for all of these things. So you can type in exactly how much you paid whether you're a w two employee or $10.99, how much you if you have dependents or children and then it will walk you through every segment government government
Speaker 1:someone made
Speaker 2:Do want the team? That made
Speaker 1:a $100,000 in 2025.
Speaker 2:If you want the if you want the team to do it, they can actually click through it. Okay. Do it. Can you pull up taxwrapped.com? We can actually
Speaker 1:Here we go. Click Here we this. Put in a 100 k. A $100,000 a 100,000 big ones.
Speaker 2:There you go. And then do single, do w two. There we go. Then just do no children.
Speaker 1:Wow. So
Speaker 2:you pay 21,000 in taxes. $6,700 goes towards income security. And I think I I think I filled out the same one here. So you can see. Let's see.
Speaker 2:I need to
Speaker 1:So that's going to social security
Speaker 2:It really goes through everything.
Speaker 1:Housing assistance, federal employee retirement and disability. Health. 5,000 to health. So that's Medicare, health care services.
Speaker 2:I think people might be surprised that defense is so low. I've always I feel like defense has always been largest like
Speaker 1:John, this there's I would say the there are a lot of people in this country that would look at at the the $3,812 and be
Speaker 2:No. Of course. Of course.
Speaker 1:Very upset about that.
Speaker 2:Of course. Of course. But but the the the size of the US military, the size of the defense budget has always been so big. It's felt like the number one expenditure category, but it is in fact not next to Social Security and Medicare and health care services. But the military is significant obviously.
Speaker 2:And Riley on the next slide puts up
Speaker 1:Pull it up again.
Speaker 2:About the the government deficit. You're gonna want
Speaker 3:to So
Speaker 2:the government spent more than it made last year, 7,000,000,000,000 spent, 5,500,000,000,000.0 in revenue.
Speaker 1:The government's strategy is literally we're going to burn money for a while but we're going to
Speaker 3:make it up with scale.
Speaker 2:Basically. And maybe inflation. Who knows? It's a tricky situation. So the deficit was 1,500,000,000,000.0 last year.
Speaker 2:And that overspending, it goes on the national credit card which has been racking up debt since 2001. It's now about to cross $40,000,000,000,000 which is about 114,000 per person. That is not something to be fist bumping about.
Speaker 3:I I think I was I was listening to Tyler Cowen this weekend and he said, I think it was him. He was like Yeah. Well, you know, if you're actually if you're really AGI pilled, right, the deficit should be way bigger. Yes. Right?
Speaker 3:Yes. There's like all these sorts of things. Yeah. I think it's actually
Speaker 2:We were riffing on that with Dylan Patel the first time he came on. We were saying like, yeah, like
Speaker 3:So it's not a black pill.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Yeah. You know, government spending went up like extremely IGI pilled position. If GDP starts growing significantly, sort of the opposite of this treaty scenario which is certainly what I hope happens. But yeah, George Hotts also posted some other blog post last night about this idea of making everyone a billionaire, creating a $1,000,000,000 bill and printing 300 something, 360,000,000 of them, giving everyone one.
Speaker 2:Everyone is a billion. Everyone's a billionaire then. And he's making jokes about like, obviously, that wouldn't work and but the but the impact would be to destroy the dollar and go back to the gold standard, which is something he's a fan of these days. Anyway, the person who pays a $100,000, who makes a $100,000 is paying almost $3,000 in interest payments on the debt, $430 on transportation, $350 on government operations, $260 in natural resources. There's some on agriculture, $76 goes towards researching agriculture.
Speaker 2:There's international affairs. And space flight and research science is $71 out of that $100,000 a year paycheck. It's an interesting project and we're big fans of Riley Walls over here. So go check it out. There are a bunch of other posts in the timeline before we bring in our first guest What did did
Speaker 1:Tyler Cowen talk about how we're growing like half a point?
Speaker 3:Oh, the GDP number? He I'm sure he he linked to it. I gotta ask him if that's good.
Speaker 2:It it could be better. Could be better. Well, let's let's move over to something else in the timeline. Andrew Reid has a funny post here. Wow.
Speaker 2:12,000 likes. It's like Apple built little ejection seats for your AirPods when you drop your case on the ground. That is like extremely real. Right? Jordy wouldn't know anything about that.
Speaker 2:He's not an AirPod enjoyer. But when the AirPods hit the ground, they truly explode everywhere.
Speaker 1:I got to experience that before I was enlightened.
Speaker 2:You were enlightened?
Speaker 1:I went wired.
Speaker 2:Yeah. People really do go flying. People really this really resonated with people. 12,000 people liking this.
Speaker 1:Lulu says this is the real reason they're called AirPods.
Speaker 2:Yeah. They get they get some air. Clouseau Investments is joking about, uh-oh, physical delivery of crude.
Speaker 1:Dear client, this notice is to inform you that your that your account carried an open long position in WTI crude oil futures. As a result, pursuant to NYMEX rule 200.01, a physical delivery obligation has been designed to your account. So get ready to receive 2,000 barrels
Speaker 2:in Cushing, Oklahoma. This is an April fools
Speaker 1:Meet me at Tank Farm 7 Bay 14.
Speaker 2:No. This is so this is an April fool's joke. This is not real. But I believe this has happened in the past. Think didn't oil go negative at some point during COVID?
Speaker 2:Yeah. There was something that was going on there with the potential risk that certain traders would have to take delivery that created this weird economic incentive because there's a cost to take delivery. And if you're not set up for it, you could be in a weird position. But it is it is a very, very bizarre situation and never been a crazier time to be an oil trader. I'm sure the commodity markets are are absolutely wild these days.
Speaker 2:There's an interesting narrative violation. After decades of slumping sales, vinyl records are making a comeback. And so we can pull up this chart. Vinyl, of course, was booming in the seventies and the eighties and then fell off precipitously from 1984 until 1990 when, of course, the cassette tape and the compact disc, the CD, took off like a rocket. And so cassettes had their moment in the late '80s and early '90s.
Speaker 2:The CD dominated the '90s and 2000s. Then quickly digital downloads start spiking in the 2005, 2010 period followed by the massive rise of streaming, which has come to dominate nearly every category. But vinyl is making a comeback and for 2025 generated $1,000,000,000 of revenue for US recorded music revenues, which is more than CDs, more than three times as much as CDs and more more than Yeah. Digital
Speaker 1:That is insane.
Speaker 2:People aren't paying for 99¢ a song anymore. You will
Speaker 3:own nothing and be happy.
Speaker 2:Except vinyl. You will own a lot of vinyl. And I think you'll be very happy with it. I think that there's a chance. I mean we've been joking about you know pressing the show onto vinyl and the new acquired FM homepage is all vinyl themed.
Speaker 2:Vinyl has this because it's like the first stored music medium. It's the oldest so it will stick around maybe the longest whereas CDs and cassettes just don't have it's like if you're going to go retro just go full retro and go with Vinyl instead of going half retro and saying, oh, we're doing a CD.
Speaker 1:Just throw a CD on.
Speaker 2:And Set this the doesn't quite do it. It doesn't quite do it. Eight eight track was really short. Eight track in the precursor to the cassette tape sort of big in the late seventies and then fell off.
Speaker 1:Did you ever have a cassette era?
Speaker 2:I had a cassette era. I would get books on
Speaker 3:So funny. You were
Speaker 2:Literally on tape.
Speaker 1:You were using cassettes because it was the normal thing to do, I imagine. Yeah. Right?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Basically.
Speaker 1:I was using them sort of ironically.
Speaker 2:No. I remember I had a I had a Star Wars book that was on tape and I would put it in the tape and I would listen to it. Book on tape was great.
Speaker 3:Was hard. Yeah.
Speaker 2:And and I I was never It
Speaker 1:was the most satisfying medium. Like throwing a Yeah. Throwing a cassette Yeah. Into a car.
Speaker 2:Yeah. And I remember I had to do a lot of reading over the summer for school and audiobooks have always been easier for me to process. So you go and you find the cassette version of it, the audiobook version of it and you listen to that and then you you know, you retain way more if I'm an auditory learner. It was a good time.
Speaker 6:Well
Speaker 1:It's so insane to me that vinyl is more than 10% of
Speaker 2:That is crazy.
Speaker 1:Streaming revenue.
Speaker 2:I really yeah. The vinyl is really big.
Speaker 1:Who's there's gotta be like a vinyl billionaire.
Speaker 2:Power law. I mean certainly collectors but I don't know. I I think there is something special about even if you just like even if you don't have a record player, you might say I want to support that artist so I'm going to buy the highest tier. Like I I believe the Taylor Swift drops come like they she also sells vinyl and you you get it and you don't necessarily listen to it but you have it as like a memento and it's almost like an artifact that you put on your desk or in your house or you might frame it. You might not really Yeah.
Speaker 2:Many awesome. Us some Yeah. We have we have a Metallica vinyl. We still got to get a record player. But anyway, without further ado, we have our first guest in the waiting room.
Speaker 2:Follow Ramamurthy from Critical Loop, the CEO, working to accelerate grid access using autonomous control, storage, and flexible generation for industrial and mission critical power needs. How are you?
Speaker 4:I'm doing fantastic. Great to talk to
Speaker 1:you guys.
Speaker 2:Thanks so much for taking the time to hop on. Since this is your first time on the show, would you mind kicking it off with introduction on yourself and the company?
Speaker 4:Yeah. Of myself, I I'm an engineer by training and I founded this company A few years ago. I worked at SpaceX for twelve years before that. Overnight success.
Speaker 2:So much soundboard. Sorry.
Speaker 3:I'll stop
Speaker 1:and let you talk. We're just having we're we're having fun.
Speaker 2:SpaceX for twelve years. What what decade was that exactly? Is that
Speaker 4:two That was like from prior to sending the first Dragon capsule to the space station Wow. Through flying human spaceflight.
Speaker 2:Wow.
Speaker 4:I kind of left efforts to make Falcon nine suitable to fly humans.
Speaker 2:That's amazing.
Speaker 4:And then decided to turn my attention to the electricity grid because I think it's that important, you know?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Wait. Yeah. Unpack said the grid. What what what was the term that you used?
Speaker 4:Yeah. Just the electricity grid. Oh, sure. Pretty important to Yeah. Even take manufacturing.
Speaker 2:Mhmm.
Speaker 4:I mean, everybody talks about data centers. Right? But let's take just the, you know, the power that you and I use, the power that's required to manufacture. Mhmm. All that stuff needs a reliable source of cost effective power.
Speaker 4:Mhmm. And right now, kind of the condition that people have is, like, you know, companies are going to the utility and waiting for multiple years to get the power they need. Mhmm. And so we decided to start this company with this vision of how can you get the power that you need quicker. Right?
Speaker 4:Like, how can you better utilize you know, the crazy thing is
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 4:Since you guys seem to like stats Yeah. The grid is pretty underutilized as we as we look at it. Right? It's like less than 50% utilized. Sorry.
Speaker 2:Give us the stat. You have to wait for the stat and then you play at some point.
Speaker 4:I got I got over
Speaker 1:You said it was underutilized. I got I got kind of excited.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Mean,
Speaker 4:it's always exciting to find something underutilized and figure out how to make more, you know, better utilized. And the way to do that is to throw energy storage at the edge Sure. The close it's close to where, you know, the industrial customer is consuming. Sure. Sometimes some generation as well.
Speaker 4:Right? So, basically, we can take this, like, multi year wait time and instead make that, you know, months and maybe even sort of days. Right? So that that's kind of what Cripple is about.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 3:So May yeah. Maybe let let's
Speaker 1:I get the general idea. But is it you're saying putting storage at the edge so that you can take power during off peak times
Speaker 2:Mhmm. And
Speaker 1:store it to kind of like smooth out demand? Is that is that generally Yeah.
Speaker 3:The approach?
Speaker 4:Yeah. Exactly. So when you look at the history of grid infrastructure, right, it's always built historically to the worst possible condition. Like Mhmm. The hottest day of the year when everybody's going full blast on ACs, also running their peak AI training loads, etcetera.
Speaker 4:Right? Like, it's designed for the peak. And so the paradigm that we're trying to work towards is like, you know, what if you could, you know, what if instead of overbuilding the grid to support that peak Mhmm. What if you could take some of the storage and some generation at the edge and offset, like, basically, the upgrades you would have otherwise made for millions of dollars. Right?
Speaker 4:For a fewer million dollars. So Yeah. So so so basically, yeah. Exactly as Jordy said, like, you know, you're using, you know, you're switching to more local sources of power. You're either storing or generating power more locally.
Speaker 4:And and to do that requires, you know, pretty sophisticated orchestration to do that seamlessly. And that's what Triple Loop's about.
Speaker 2:So do do you see this as, like, the do you wanna jump straight to, like, the gigawatt mega projects? Or is there actually more opportunity with, like, smaller scale? Like, I I remember seeing, like wasn't Colossus two originally like a washing machine factory or something like that? Like there's a lot of industrial like buildings that make things and they draw a lot of power and they probably only operate nine to five or maybe they have a night shift. But for something like that they could put a battery installation, be absorbing power from the grid when usage is low and then deploying that during peak hours without straining the grid.
Speaker 2:Is that the general thesis?
Speaker 4:Yeah. That's the general concept. There's a massive middle here, right, as you point out. Right? And, you know, a lot of our referrals come from of customers come from commercial real estate.
Speaker 4:Right?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Where
Speaker 4:people are signing up to a facility, then they're going to throw some machines there to do some cool stuff.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 4:And then all of a sudden, it's like, oh, wow. We have to wait five years for the power? That's that's a that's a problem. And and so by then deploying this energy storage at the edge and this orchestration layer that Cripple Loop has created
Speaker 2:Sure.
Speaker 4:You have this ability to, like, identify, when there's capacity on the grid, use power from the grid. When there's not capacity, store that in batteries, use generation, you know, cut you know, traverse that gap. And and so, like, you know, our customers range from, you know, everything from, like, ports, airports, critical infrastructure, logistics hubs.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 4:It's the whole range. And I mean, that's not to say we won't one day take on some of these gigawatt things because it's the same operating system, if you will. Right?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Totally. Talk about the technologies that are actually, like augmenting power generation on-site because I you you always hear the story about like the hospital has a one megawatt diesel generator or on-site or something in case there's a blackout. And it feels like we're moving more towards battery banks. But what are you actually seeing in terms of various technologies that are going through scale up on the manufacturing side becoming more economical?
Speaker 2:We've talked to a lot of nuclear founders who are sort of saying, hey, in 2030, you'll be able to have a one megawatt nuclear reactor. That seems farther out. But what what are you where is demand right now?
Speaker 4:Yeah. So I think your most efficient source of generation is always going to be sort of the centralized one. And the challenge has to do with, like, how you distribute it. Mhmm. And so that's why battery capacity is like, you know, the cost of batteries generally coming down, and the power conversion technology advancing more.
Speaker 4:And you have this ability to store and dispatch battery power, like AC or DC eventually, right, to serve whatever machines that are at the site. And so that also allows you to save money on the generation, like, you know, imagine, like, doing a bunch of fuel drops. If you can you can avoid that, you you might use the battery. So, I mean, we we also I mean, the cool thing about our systems is that, you know, we run sites where there's, like, propane generation and batteries. Sure.
Speaker 4:That allows you to under I mean, generators are in super high demand. Right? And because of centers and whatnot. This a lot what our technology allows is, like, you can use, like, more commonly available generators and use the batteries to do the peak power. So I mean, reactors, I mean, I'm a huge fan of SMRs too.
Speaker 4:And like, one day we're gonna, you know, make all of these things work together. And like, you know, who owns the management of the grid at the edge? That's kind of what we're excited about.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Matthew in the chat is talking about how you're placing the cells on on semi trucks as well, so they're they're mobile. Is that is that
Speaker 4:Yeah. That that that's a yeah. So when you look at this general problem, right, it's dynamic in nature. Right? Like a big logistics facility moves in.
Speaker 4:All of a sudden, they're like, we're gonna add robotics to this site. Right? To and then but that problem might change as time progresses, where the utility pulls out a transformer eventually. Right? Mhmm.
Speaker 4:And so you can think of, like, the maximum return on investment way to run this business is, like, you you're able to physically relocate these assets, batteries or generation to new sites over the life of of these assets. And that's kind of this modular and relocatable approach is kind of fundamental to how we think about it.
Speaker 2:What did you do to earn the NASA exceptional public service medal?
Speaker 4:That's a this is the first time someone's asked me this question. But, yeah, I I certified Falcon nine for human spaceflight. So I made it suit by astronauts, I was the chief engineer for the first flight of Bob and Doug, the astronauts who launched space.
Speaker 2:That's amazing. I love it. Thank you.
Speaker 3:What was your what was your reaction to
Speaker 1:the to the Artemis two Yeah. Mission?
Speaker 4:Oh, yeah. I I was excited, man. Like, I mean, funnily enough, I worked on that project too in 2007 at my first job in college. Yeah. So I worked on the Orion capsule.
Speaker 4:So it's a long coming. It's a long time coming and I was excited to see it. And I'm really hopeful that lots more cool things will fly in space in the next year or so.
Speaker 1:Why did you
Speaker 2:did put Nutella? Why did you put so much Nutella on Why
Speaker 1:did why why not continue on on your your space journey? You just kind of seem like you you you be on the potentially path to going to space.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 4:Oh, well, you know, I I enjoy a good challenge. So to me, the next most complex machine or or, you know, maybe even more complicated machine than a rocket was the electricity grid. And then how do you fix this thing
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 4:Which is like, you know, there's so many regulatory aspects and, like, you know, industrial and utility clashing. And, like, how do you make this machine work? And to me, that's fundamental. That that's not to say that I won't be interested in space again. I call it my hobby now.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Tell us about the round. No one hit the gong. How much did you raise?
Speaker 4:So we closed the $26,000,000 round.
Speaker 2:From who?
Speaker 4:Yeah. So Conifer Infrastructure Partners in Hanover led led the round. They're really seasoned operators in in the realm of energy, and we're super excited to partner with them.
Speaker 2:That's amazing. Well, congratulations. It's great to meet you. Great to meet you. Thank you
Speaker 1:so much for Yeah. Very your interesting career. Yeah. Excited to follow the company.
Speaker 2:And very important work.
Speaker 4:Cheers, guys. Talk to
Speaker 2:you. Goodbye. Up next, we have the chief architect from SciFi announcing a massive fundraising to scale RISC vCPUs and AI intellectual property.
Speaker 1:We have some time. Yes. Oh.
Speaker 2:I think our next guest is in the waiting room. Let's bring him in. How are you doing?
Speaker 6:Hi. Doing okay.
Speaker 1:Can you
Speaker 6:hear me fine?
Speaker 2:Yeah. We can hear you fine. Thanks so much for taking the time. Since this the first time on the show, I'd love an introduction on yourself and the company.
Speaker 6:So, yeah, I'm Krste Asanoviich. So I was a professor at UC Berkeley. We developed RISC V, which is an open standard instruction set. Yeah. We then a couple of my graduate students, we set up a company, SciFi, to commercialize RISC V.
Speaker 6:Okay. And we just completed our series g round to go work on data center CPUs.
Speaker 2:That's amazing. How long have you been actually working on the company? I mean, series g, it seems like there's been a whole sequence of events. Can you take me through a few of the mile milestones that unlocked growth and sort of where the company is today?
Speaker 6:Yeah. So we founded the company in 2015. So it's been almost eleven years now. Wow.
Speaker 5:Overnight success.
Speaker 6:When we first started the company, we thought we'd be doing custom silicon, but then when we started talking to customers, you know, get out there and into the trenches and talk to customers, they all wanted RISC V IP, like designs they could use in their own silicon. Yeah. And so we pivoted a little at that point, started making IP for them. And, you know, RISC V ecosystem has grown over that ten year period. And so initially, a lot of our designs were smaller, lower end embedded processes.
Speaker 6:And then we sort of, over the years, you know, going through the various rounds of funding as we grew the product portfolio, we added more higher end processes and processes specialized for doing AI kind of tasks as well, what we call our charges line. And then this last funding round really signals we're getting back to very high performance CPUs that sit next to GPUs and data centers. Yeah. So That's the
Speaker 2:Like, help me understand if I have this correct. You know, AI is very GPU intensive, but the GPUs need to be filled with data that needs to be processed through a CPU. If you're doing some sort of reinforcement learning environment, you might need to spin up a piece of software and that requires a CPU. And so even though we are in a GPU crunch, we are also in a CPU crunch. And so more and more companies and hyperscalers are developing their own CPUs and GPU companies like NVIDIA are also doing this where they have a CPU that is designed to work directly with the GPU to make sure that the workloads are as efficient as possible.
Speaker 2:And so you're able to license your intellectual property to make those CPUs more efficient, more effective. Is that roughly correct?
Speaker 6:Yeah. That's roughly correct. So one way to think about it is AI, the last few years has been focused on building those models, getting that working. Yeah. Now they're being applied at massive scale.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 6:And you know, if you have an AI coder, it needs to if it's going 30 times faster than a human, you need to compile stuff 30 times faster. So it's putting that load on the regular compute. Yeah. You know, and that's that can be the bottleneck. Not the GPU side, it's the, you know, getting the work done on the CPU side as well.
Speaker 6:It could be the bottleneck.
Speaker 2:So what so if you're not doing it sounds like you're not fabbing chips yourself. You're No. So the RAIS seems very significant. It's large. Is this mostly to hire talented researchers to advance the designs?
Speaker 2:Like what is the use of funds?
Speaker 6:Yeah. So the very high performance processes take a significant engineering investment. Know, very large teams working for a long time. You're working at the very edge of high performance core design, very, we're working at, you uppermost tier there. And so it's very expensive to, you know, lead the talent.
Speaker 6:You need a lot of work, a lot of modeling, a lot of development. So it's quite a labor intensive process to get those designs. And then this is why an IP company makes sense. A lot of companies are focused on the more system aspects. They just wanna have a very high performance CPU you can drop in.
Speaker 6:Yeah. You know, for example, like, you may design an an airplane, but you get the engines from Rolls Royce.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 6:Similar kind of model here. Like, you wanna design a high performance system, but you wanna get your CPUs from a good source like like SiFive.
Speaker 2:So those CPU companies that will actually go and once they license your technology, go and produce the chips with some fab, are you forward deploying folks into their organization? Is there some sort of do they just come to you and they just want, like, a design document and then they're all good? Or how collaborative is that process?
Speaker 6:No. So that's part of this, you know, some of the folks involved in the financing are some of these lead customers as well and partners. They view it as a collaborative development. We have to work way ahead of time to figure out, like, I'll use the airplane analogy, like, you have the right kind of engine for the kinds of planes you wanna build? You don't just, you know, put in the catalog and say, pick one of these three we built previously.
Speaker 6:We have to understand where the customers are going, what their needs are. And one of the benefits of SiFive technology, we make our cores quite customizable. Mhmm. So for different customers, we can adapt and configure it to their needs, to their workloads. And so we have to work with them ahead of time to understand what they're gonna try to do and so we can plan our products appropriately.
Speaker 2:How is how are the design trade offs changing around custom CPUs and just custom silicon in general? Is it is it just all about performance versus, you know, like flops per watt, like or or price to produce the actual chips? Like, what are the key levers that companies are most interested in pulling these days?
Speaker 6:And how is it Well, know, if you look at the overall picture, just classic business ROI. Like, if I make this silicon, am I gonna make more money by saving on, you know, cost of ownership, power, whatever those other things are? And also, can I offer a capability that brings me customers? Yeah. That's gonna increase my top line.
Speaker 6:So it's just a classic business decision of buy versus build. And what you'll see is the big companies will be buying some chips, they'll be designing their own chips. Yeah. Depends on the application and domain. In each case, they're making their own, you know, ROI judgment on what's the right thing to do, bio build.
Speaker 2:How do you think about depreciation or just the lifetime of a chip? There was a big discussion over, will GPUs burn out over six years? And at the same time, a lot of people have computers that have one CPU that they've been using happily for twenty years. And I'm wondering if you're seeing a trend or a change in the lifetime of CPUs that are going to be used for AI workloads in data centers running very aggressively, probably twenty fourseven for years. Are we seeing these chips burn out faster?
Speaker 2:Or is that sort of surmountable hurdle?
Speaker 6:Well, there is a there's one technical problem, which is the chips are literally burning out faster just because if there's finer geometries, you know, wires move and melt. And and so we're dealing with aging failures like we have them before. But at the business side of things, I think companies trading off a bunch of things. One is it's hard to get new silicon. You see all the shortages.
Speaker 6:The fabs can only make so much silicon. AI is sucking up all the capacity in terms of new production. But the incentive to build new silicon is that I have a limited power budget. So if I wanna do more, I can't just get more power from PG and E or whoever. I need to go make more efficient systems.
Speaker 6:So sometimes I'll swap out those racks for a new rack that's two x, three x more power efficient. I can do more with the same power budget. So there's sort of capability cap on some of these companies. They just, you know, need to replace the silicon if they wanna grow their capabilities.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Zooming out, do you think that the tech community, the AI community is doing a good job of using all different process nodes effectively? There's been so much focus on the leading edge TSMC, two nanometer, three nanometer, the really advanced nodes. There is a lot of lagging edge capacity out there, at least it felt like there was. I don't know if there's do you think that there's low hanging fruit there that we might see the AI industry or the tech community start figuring out a way to get more out of in the future?
Speaker 6:Well, think for the large data centers, probably not. I think, again, these power constraints could be you want the most advanced technology. However, as AI gets pushed out and permeates all these applications down the real world, I think those trailing nodes will be used for, you know, intelligent doorbells, you know, robots. There's lots of places where, you know, they're good enough. And also, there's some applications where you're interfacing with higher voltages, you're working with non volatile memories that are not available in advanced nodes.
Speaker 6:And so those older technologies definitely have a place, but probably more in the edge AI space.
Speaker 2:Us about
Speaker 1:the you go. Tell us about the round.
Speaker 2:How much did you raise?
Speaker 6:So we raised 400,000,000. Who
Speaker 1:who who participated?
Speaker 6:Lead was Atreides was the was the lead. We had some other, you know, notable names, including NVIDIA participated in the in the funding. Yeah.
Speaker 2:Very cool. Well, thank you so much for taking the time to come and explain it to us. We appreciate you, and good meeting you. We'll talk to you soon.
Speaker 6:Talk to soon.
Speaker 2:Goodbye. Bye bye. Up next, we have Peter Diamandis. He is the founder and executive chairman of XPRIZE. He's an entrepreneur, a futurist, and he's known for incentivizing breakthrough technologies.
Speaker 2:We're very excited to be joined by Peter Diamandis. How are you, Peter?
Speaker 1:What's going on?
Speaker 5:Guys, a long time coming.
Speaker 2:Long time coming. Thank you so much for taking the time to come chat with us. Everyone's very excited. Lots of applause. Lots of applause.
Speaker 2:I would love I would love to start with just your your your temperature check on on how technology is progressing, how you're feeling. I I saw you in the fabulous AI doc. I think you did a great job of articulating some of your view of how technology is progressing over the next few years. But when someone comes to you and they and they, you know, they see things moving so quickly, they might have some anxiety, what are you returning to? What are the ground truths that you start with?
Speaker 2:Really
Speaker 5:important point. I mean, first of all, it is overwhelming. I mean, I spend at least half my week trying to understand what's going on.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 5:You know, basically trying to interpret it and project where things are going and teach about it in my moonshots podcast, whatever I'm doing. Yeah. And I think one of the questions is if you're in a state of fear or overwhelm, that's the worst place to be facing the future from. Mhmm. And it's really, you know, your ability to feel like AI and all this technology is happening for you instead of to you.
Speaker 5:Yeah. It's the difference between success and failure today. So I think one of the things I've spoken about and I've written about is the coming age of abundance
Speaker 2:Mhmm.
Speaker 5:Where every single human on the planet has access to all the food, water, energy, healthcare, education that they want. And I think we're most definitely heading that way at a rapid speed. And the question is, we have got to reinvent society, which has been very different and has been you know, our current society is based on the industrial revolution and not the AI revolution. So there's going be a lot of rewiring Yeah. The social contract, how people, you know, get purpose in their life.
Speaker 5:And it's gonna be a bumpy road for the next, you know, two to six years. Yeah. But on the backside of that, it's gonna be extraordinary.
Speaker 2:Yeah. I agree. I I I do enjoy your podcast. I was wondering, it feels like you go way back with Elon Musk. How did you first meet?
Speaker 2:What have you learned from him? I'm very interested about that relationship because you've done so many interviews with him over the times like how do you think he's changed as a leader? What have you learned from him? Yeah. What What's that journey been like?
Speaker 5:Yeah. So we met in 2000. I was running a top secret private robot mission to the moon called Blastoff.
Speaker 2:That's cool.
Speaker 5:And it was it was fun. It was with Idealab and Bill Gross, our CEO. I'd hired a team out of NASA. We had bought two launch vehicles. We were building robots to go and land privately on the moon, do the first pay per view back then.
Speaker 2:No way. No way. You're kidding me. Pay per view.
Speaker 1:Okay. So I don't know if you caught earlier, but we were talking about this. I was saying, like, I think there's a world where NASA could make certain parts of the mission pay per view. Of course, you can release the replay Yeah. If you wanna watch live.
Speaker 2:It's so thrilling. Pay up. I love that.
Speaker 5:Yeah. It was it was funny because my biggest cost was not the rockets. We bought a a Taurus. We bought a Denepper from Russia
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 5:For these vehicles. Our biggest cost back then was Akamai. Was the cost of distributing the signals to all the users out. Anyway, it was it was under wraps. And then hits, you know, the sort of the dot com apocalypse in April 2001, and I'm introduced to Elon as someone who might fund our private moon mission.
Speaker 5:Just sold he just sold PayPal to eBay. And he didn't do that, ended up joining our board at XPRIZE and was part of that adventure for our first private space flight. But I met Elon just when he was deciding what he was going to do next after after PayPal, and it was, you know, energy in the world and rockets. Mhmm. And, you know, he's extraordinary, one of most brilliant people on the planet.
Speaker 5:And he went from basically reading college and graduate textbooks in aerospace to building now the dominant mechanism by which humanity gets into space forever, it looks like. And what I've seen continuously is he actually implements everything he says he's going to do. May not be in the time frame he says he's going to do it, but ultimately he's consistently deliberate on all of his visions. And a lot of people get it wrong. I think the fact that he's he's in it for the money or he's in it for domination.
Speaker 1:Sure.
Speaker 5:I think consistently what he's done, he's just looking to solve problems Yeah. And try and accelerate man is potential Yeah. Going
Speaker 2:I was sort of grappling with that his post about the mass driver on the moon. And I was working backwards with a couple AI models trying to understand like what is a reasonable time frame on this. We talked to a lot of investors who are very pro Elon and I mean Elon didn't give a time frame but everyone was saying like okay this is ten, twenty, thirty years out. That's really far. And and I and I was processing and I was like yeah maybe it is but I still think that there's a benefit to having a leader in technology that is actually talking about something twenty years away or thirty years away.
Speaker 2:And I was
Speaker 5:I mean, the idea of mass drivers of the moon goes back to the eighties. There was a guy named Gerard k O'Neil at Princeton University who had the Space Studies Institute. And he actually built the first fast drivers on Earth Right. Demonstrating the ability to accelerate to lunar escape velocity. And it was always thought that we're
Speaker 1:going What was driving at what was he driving at the time? Just rocks, basically?
Speaker 5:Yeah. No. It was basically just a carrier, just a a shuttle, a carrier that would Sure. Accelerate in the vacuum of the moon Yeah. To a lunar escape velocity.
Speaker 5:But the His original idea was we're going to mine the moon for nickel and iron and oxygen and silicates, and build solar power satellites in Earth orbit. The idea was we build satellites in orbit that that gather the sun's energy and emit down to Earth. I'm not sure it made full sense because, you know, solar was demonetizing at a very rapid rate, but the idea of building data centers on the moon, or at least the components for it, launching it to Earth orbit could make sense. But, of course, that's that's next after doing it from from the ground.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 5:So, I mean, Elon's, you know, terawatt in Earth orbit based upon ground based future Starlink satellites, It's an insane number of satellites. It's like, you know, I think it's a lot it's a Starship launch every hour to get that capability up there, which if it if you think about airplane operations Yeah. That's nothing. But for rocket operations today, it's two point you know, it's a launch every two point three days on on on Falcon.
Speaker 2:Yeah. That I mean, that ramp was unbelievable to watch. You've seen the the the the time lapse of Falcon launches from Florida and it starts with just one and then it doubles and you can see the exponential growth. And so it doesn't seem that crazy, especially with the new landing infrastructure where you catch it and immediately put it on another one. Like, yeah, it's going to be years.
Speaker 2:It's going to take a lot of work and a lot of effort, but it certainly doesn't break the laws of physics, as Elon likes to say.
Speaker 5:Yeah. I mean, it's the fun thing is watching the entire evolution of human of of humanity's journey into space go from government programs to private companies. Right? So in 1996, under the arch in Saint Louis, I announced a $10,000,000 prize for private spaceflight. Yeah.
Speaker 5:And this was when, you know, we just had the shuttle era that was coming to an end, and it was always government astronauts, government programs, but could we flip it to commercial? And, you know, I thought suborbital flights would be the lowest hanging fruit. And of course, Elon and Bezos have come along in this decimated, not in a bad way, but you know, way overcome suborbital flights to now get into orbit on a regular basis. And, you know, we're going to see commercial flights to the moon, you know, Apollo. You know, what we just saw with Artemis two was going around the moon and coming back to Earth.
Speaker 5:We'll see Starship offering seeps on on flights like that, eventually to the lunar surface. And it's the beginning of it's a it's the early 15 hundreds of Europe coming to America, and that's an exciting time.
Speaker 2:Well, in in that future, what do you think the role of government space exploration or scientific research is? Because when I think about the helicopter that landed on Mars, like, it's really hard to underwrite that as an investor. But I love it because now we have a new data point on how that works. And if there is some gain from that, every private space company can take whatever the learnings are and immediately start commercializing them and competing to figure out, okay, is there an economy here? Is there a business?
Speaker 5:Yeah. Well, and that is the role for government. It's going to be I mean, there's like four epic science missions that NASA has planned over the next few years, right, with nuclear powered inner solar system transporters and going to to Europa. And I think ultimately, NASA is going to be funding these these science missions. Mhmm.
Speaker 5:And when they say funding the science missions, going be giving those missions to the money to private companies to go and do that work on behalf of that, on behalf of the government.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Where else are you seeing promise? We're in this weird moment where we're seeing incredible growth in the power of artificial intelligence. But it's not curing cancer yet. It's you know, the best case scenario is that it's going to make all of our cybersecurity systems way more safe because we're to go and find all the bugs, patch every hole and we're going to navigate that system so that the white hat hackers have the tools longer than the black hat hackers before they get to them.
Speaker 2:And that is good. That's a positive externality. But that's not the same as curing cancer or abundant food. What is the next domino?
Speaker 1:We cured obesity and John's like
Speaker 2:I I I guess we did.
Speaker 3:I'm moving the goalpost. I'm moving the goalpost.
Speaker 2:But but yeah.
Speaker 5:Isn't that amazing? Because we always forget how far we've come and we just sort of like say, ah, okay, show me some other miracle please because yesterday. I I think what people don't realize, and I I wrote a paper with my moonshot made Alex Biesner Gross, who's our resident genius called Solve Everything. And I think what's really exciting, what's coming in the very near future is the fact that these AGIs and ASI systems are going to solve math. They've already effectively solved math.
Speaker 5:What comes next is physics and chemistry, biology, material sciences. And so we're about to see this extraordinary golden era of of scientific discoveries that are going to occur at a rate far beyond anything else. Right? Scientific breakthroughs, Nobel Prizes came at a rate of the number of geniuses on the planet, but we've now increased the number of genius individual equivalents by billion fold. Mhmm.
Speaker 5:And so, we're going to end up with a situation where, you know, we get room temperature superconducting, and we've got, you know, substrates that allow us to pull carbon in the atmosphere, valinate at a rate like never before, or, you know, allow us to reach much of escape velocity. So I had Kevin Will from OpenAI on stage with me at my Abundance Summit this year. Kevin used to be the chief product officer at OpenAI. He's now Yeah. Head of science at OpenAI.
Speaker 5:And what an incredible position to have
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 5:Where you're using these models to solve physics Yeah. And then all the breakthroughs that come out of there. So people talk about the revenues that are going to come from large language model, the genetic systems that the frontier labs are creating. I think what they're not talking about is the massive revenue that comes out of the breakthroughs Yeah. That these that these companies are able to create.
Speaker 5:Well, if you've solved longevity, what's that worth?
Speaker 2:Yeah. I I wanna talk about longevity, but first, you mentioned desalination. I've always been extremely interested in in water desalination because I live in California and there's always been this debate over where the Colorado River goes and what in, you know, what the opportunity in Arizona and Nevada is if California could desalinate the ocean and wouldn't need to pull so much water from the more central parts of America, you could wind up with more green areas and more farmland potentially in desert areas. But I'm wondering is desalination is material it science problem, a physics problem, a science problem? Or is it permitting or marshaling the resources or just economics?
Speaker 2:Like what do you think is interesting because that feels like such an amazing technology if we can unlock it any reasonable I amount of
Speaker 5:think it's all of those in some degree. You know, I run I don't run. I'm I'm now the executive chairman of the XPRIZE. Yeah. Amazing.
Speaker 5:Well, I'm sorry, runs XPRIZE. And we've launched about $600,000,000 in large scale incentive prizes. They've driven about 30,000,000,000 in r and d. And the largest prize we have going on right now is a desalination XPRIZE. It's funded out of Abu Dhabi Wow.
Speaker 5:By the president of Abu Dhabi. Yeah. And it's asking basically to increase the energy efficiency of desalination. It's also asking one of the challenges with desalination is when you pull water out and put the saline back, it's got an impact on the environment. Yeah.
Speaker 5:So you have people to, you know, to ameliorate that impact. And so we're going to see additional breakthroughs. It's going to be material science. It's going to be energy and physics that are driving that. Yeah.
Speaker 5:But the other thing that's going on is the idea of atmospheric capture of water. Right? There's quadrillions of liters of water in the atmosphere. We call it rain when it falls on us. Yeah.
Speaker 5:But there's technologies now coming online at scale that for the majority of all countries on the planet, you can extract water from the atmosphere. So I I think the water issue Yeah. We saw by desal, by atmospheric capture, by actually AI looking at efficiency of water utilization, because we overuse it in some places and not in others. And then it's going to be recycling of of water. So, you know, as I wrote in my first book, Abundance, the Future is Better Than You Think, back in 2012, technology takes whatever was scarce and makes it abundant.
Speaker 5:Mhmm. Right? We talk about water wars and water scarcity. There's plenty of water on the planet. The challenge is, you know, 97% is salt, 2% is ice, and we fight over, no less than 1% of the water in the in the freshwater.
Speaker 2:Wow. What what do you think needs to change around the narrative of of energy? Does does it do different new energy projects have a narrative problem? Because it feels like nuclear where the technology has been around for so long. We're close to breakthroughs here.
Speaker 2:We talk to founders all the time that are building in nuclear. But it feels like there's still some nervousness and anxiety about actually rolling that out. Solar's a whole different a whole different question. But how have you grappled with the trade offs between the the technology, the government, and and just popular responses to the idea of a nuclear renaissance?
Speaker 5:Yeah. So, you know, so energy first is the single innermost loop. It's the most important thing we've got going on. Yeah. You know, we've seen chips as the gating factor for a lot of AI.
Speaker 5:It's no longer chips. Yeah. It's now strictly energy, which is why, you know, Elon's looking at
Speaker 2:Space.
Speaker 5:Data centers in orbit. Yeah. But in the near term, I think, you know, this is not investment advice, but I'm investing more in energy companies than I am in AI companies these days, because how fundamental it is. Nuclear, you know, the challenges were stuck in the nuclear paradigm from thirty years ago with gen one and gen two fission plants
Speaker 2:Sure.
Speaker 5:Which were not safe. And we saw Fukushima, we saw 3 Mile Island, we saw all these these disasters. But the new generation plants are in fact safe.
Speaker 2:Mhmm.
Speaker 5:And, you know, they're coming, small modular reactors are coming, fusion is coming, and we need everything. We need all of them. But at this point, you know, I'm fond of saying, I would put a nuclear supply power source in my backyard.
Speaker 2:I love it.
Speaker 5:They're they're safe enough.
Speaker 2:Right?
Speaker 5:And so, I mean, there's also communities need to understand this, that there's a direct correlation between the amount of energy you have in your community and the GDP of your community, the health of your community, the intelligence and education levels of your community. Energy scales all of these things. Mhmm. And so you should want access to the most energy you can possibly have in your country, in your city, in your
Speaker 2:Mhmm. How do you think about the aesthetics of of technology and the impact of aesthetics because it feels like Elon has been very very deliberate in the way he designs the cyber cab and the way he announces these and the future should look like the future. It certainly looks futuristic. Maybe there's a little cyberpunk edge there sometimes but we were talking about this with data centers that you know there's a lot of things around power but that's solvable. But the aesthetics is another piece so you know people are more likely to drive by a cell phone tower that's dressed up like a tree and not think about it as opposed to if they just see something that's very machinic.
Speaker 2:And I'm wondering how you process that as does that need to be more of a first class consideration for technologists if they're working on mega projects?
Speaker 5:So first off, I think one of the things that's interesting is we're going to start to repurpose the energy plants already there, right, to the coal plant. Yeah. The coal plant already has got, you know, permitting to some degree. It's got all of the supply chain coming into it as the power lines coming out of it. So what you're going to probably see is the coal plant was, you know, used to have a coal fired boiler.
Speaker 5:You're now going to pull out coal segment of it and put in a fusion device to boil the water there instead. So you're going to maintain the same footprints, you're just going to actually replace the engine with something that's more powerful and is cleaner, I think is an important thing to realize. Mhmm. That's one of the transitions that's going to occur. And, yeah, I I think making things beautiful needs a little more attention, and you can get there.
Speaker 5:And I think one of the things that AI can do, if you ask it, is how do you beautify something that might otherwise look, you know, just hideous?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Yeah. Let's talk about longevity. Do you how big of a deal do you see GLP-1s? It feels like we've been dealing with an obesity crisis for so long.
Speaker 2:It's still really early to see a jump in life expectancy. But if there was one horse I had to bet on as a new technology that enabled life extension, would probably be GLP-1s. But how have you been processing that boom relative to other next gen solutions that might be coming down the pipe in five or ten years?
Speaker 5:Well, I spend about half of my time in AI and half my time in longevity. Right? I've written a few books there. I have a large venture fund investing in tech. I'm building companies in the space.
Speaker 5:And you're right, GLP-one by the longevity health community is considered really the very first longevity drug. Mhmm. And part of it is we know that if you are metabolically unhealthy, if you're carrying too much visceral fat, if you're carrying too much fat on your body, that shortens your life. And so GLP-1s enable you, hopefully, change your diets, your habits. But what's coming So yes, it's the first, and we're seeing generation two, generation three, generation four GLP-one drugs coming online right now, which will enable you to keep the weight off, and also maintain muscle, which is the downside of the original earlier versions of the GLP1 drugs.
Speaker 5:But what's coming on the back of that are a whole set of new longevity therapeutics. So, one of my friends, David Sinclair, not sure if you've had him on on the show.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I'd love to.
Speaker 5:Yeah, he's amazing, and you definitely must.
Speaker 2:That'd be amazing.
Speaker 5:David's one of the most, you know, one of the great geniuses in the longevity space, as is George Church. Yeah. And David has, for the first time ever, we see a age reversal technology going into human trials. It's his OSK trial that's being done by Life Biosciences, full disclosure, I'm an investor
Speaker 2:Sure.
Speaker 5:Advisor to the company. But they demonstrated that three of the four Yamanaka factors, I won't go into detail there, are able to reverse the age of cells. And they did this work first in mice, then they evolved it to primates, which were very similar to humans, and demonstrating that in the, your eyes in particular for a couple of different conditions, macular degeneration and nion disease, that you can reverse the age of your visual system. And now, this month, they're going into humans.
Speaker 2:Mhmm.
Speaker 5:So, it's the first time, and because it's an age reversal technology, while it's being tested in the eye, the concept is that it will work on all organs in the body. Mhmm. And we're heading towards a world in which, hopefully, we'll be able to take a therapy and knock back your functional age by twenty, thirty years. And another x prize, you know, the the DSL was the largest at a 119,000,000. The next largest is we call the HealthSpan x prize.
Speaker 5:It's a $101,000,000 x prize. It's a $101,000,000 because Elon had funded a $100,000,000 prize for carbon capture.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 5:And sponsor of this one wanted to be bigger than Elon.
Speaker 2:That's great. I love I love a competition like that.
Speaker 5:That's I know. It's funny. I said, okay, you toss in the extra million bucks, so we'll do that. So this is a prize asking teams to come up with a longevity therapy Yeah. That I can give to you in less than a year.
Speaker 5:It reverses your functional age by twenty years in cognition, muscle, and immune. Which means you've got the cognitive function you had twenty years earlier, you've got the muscular function, build muscle, maintain muscles, you had twenty years younger, and end function at twenty
Speaker 1:years You got John's attention now.
Speaker 2:Got it. Have Imagine if you have the mind of a nine year old.
Speaker 1:Many people have said I have the mind of a
Speaker 2:Tyler over there could be living the life of a two year old. We take him back 20 years old. But yeah, of course, like, it was more relevant. Yeah.
Speaker 5:But but So it's it's exciting. We have over 700 teams competing for this.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 5:We'll have a winner by 2030. Yeah. So there's this idea that, you know, Rick Kurzweil has been a dear friend, my mentor. I started Singularity University with him. Yeah.
Speaker 5:And he talks about something called longevity escape velocity. Yeah. He says, we're going to reach longevity escape velocity by 2033. What is that? Well, it's the idea that at some point, for every year that you're alive, science extends your life for greater than a year.
Speaker 5:And at that point, you know, where's the limitation? So David's doing amazing work in that in that area. There are others that are backed by Like Retro, that's backed by Sam Altman, and another one backed by by Brian Armstrong. Yeah. And all of these are working towards reversing aging.
Speaker 5:Slowing and stopping, but reversing aging.
Speaker 1:The thing that stands out to me about about where you're spending time is the the revenue ramps AI have been unbelievable.
Speaker 2:Mhmm.
Speaker 1:But they also have been unbelievable in the GLP one space when you look at Novo's revenue scaling to tens of billions of dollars. Yeah. Eli Lilly, tens of billions of dollars. Right? And so, yeah, it almost feels like there's there's There could be quite a quite a lot more people going after opportunities.
Speaker 5:There All of these things are I mean, the greatest wealth is your health, and when I'm in communities of, you know, ultra high wealth individuals, I say, what would you pay for an extra thirty years of health? It is like everything.
Speaker 2:Everything.
Speaker 5:Right? So, if I could just do a quick plug, book comes tomorrow. It's called We Are His God. I love it. Few A Survival Guide to the Age of Abundance.
Speaker 5:So I wrote Abundance in 2012. This is a follow on book. Yeah. And it talks about how we've seen abundance across the board in everything. We've also seen some negative elements of abundance.
Speaker 5:Too much carbon, too much microplastics, too much depression, all those But the single thing that people need more than anything else is the mindset to to intercept what's coming.
Speaker 6:Yeah.
Speaker 5:Right? Feeling like AI is happening for you, not to you. Yeah. Having the agency and agility to utilize these technologies, because we're, you know, as Elon says, about to hit a hypersonic tsunami that's gonna change everything.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Sorry. I would love to know, like, you know, looking back through the last few decades, there's been so much sci fi and like futurism that just turned out to be pretty pretty accurate. And that makes me wonder who should we be paying most attention to today, you know, futurists, authors that are writing sci fi, you know, on a on a on a go forward basis?
Speaker 5:So, let me let me rip off that one second. One of my biggest concerns is that most of Hollywood's content has been so negative about the future. Right? We've got Ex Machina, Terminator, Black Mirror, and they're just painting this, you know, negative future of killer robots and insane AIs. And if that's the future that you see, why would you ever want to live there?
Speaker 5:Right? And it's causing fear. Fear about job loss is one part, but fear about, you know, these technologies that we can't control, because that's what we see in the movies. And so, a month ago, I teamed with Mark Benioff at Salesforce, Google, Kathy Wood at ArcInvest, Rod Roddenberry, the son of the creator of Star Trek, and we launched something called the Future Vision xPrize. You'll go to futurevisionxprize.com.
Speaker 1:You got an xPrize for everything.
Speaker 5:I do. I do. And so and so what is it? We're asking teams to deliver a three minute trailer Yeah. That shows a hopeful, compelling vision of the future.
Speaker 5:Mhmm. And we're going to make the winner's movie. So, we're going to create an engine of positive storytelling. Because when I was growing up, way before you guys were born, Star Trek was basically what inspired me to do everything I've ever done. You know, I'm 28 companies in, inspired by Star Trek.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 5:And it showed this hopeful vision of the future, and so we're lacking those. Having said that, Hail Mary was pretty damn good.
Speaker 2:It was great. Yeah. Yeah. No, I know. I thought it nailed that perfectly.
Speaker 2:Last question for me. On the work of Ray Kurzweil, what do you think it feels like his predictions have held up incredibly well, incredibly well. I mean, to nail the Turing test date within a year, if not exactly to the day, basically, You can quibble on all these things, but it feels remarkably accurate. What do you think enabled him to predict and project the future so accurately?
Speaker 5:I mean, he did it by the math. He was looking at doubling rates. Yeah. He actually looked back in time to look at what was happening, and what were the doubling rates. He calls it You know, Moore's law is a certain part of it.
Speaker 5:Mhmm. It's basically integrated circuits. But he has something called the law of accelerating returns, and he applies it to everything. And so what's interesting is what is he predicting next. Right?
Speaker 5:So longevity escape velocity by 2,033 Yeah. And high bandwidth brain computer interface, BCI. Yeah. You know, being able to connect your neocortex, your 100,000,000,000 neurons of your brain to the cloud, you know, by 2035. I mean, these are extraordinary futures coming our way.
Speaker 5:It's like we're we're speed running every science fiction movie ever made.
Speaker 2:It's wild.
Speaker 1:Well This is why we need more positive Yeah. Science fiction today. Yeah.
Speaker 5:We do. Absolutely do.
Speaker 2:Well, yeah. I mean, I've always had this take that like even in the dystopian sci fi movies, they usually wind up having good endings where the humans overcome the negative potential ending and wind up victorious. And I think that's something that's really important to remember is that even if you wind up temporarily threatened by some negative sci fi scenario, you can in fact use human agency to overcome it and be inspired not by the Terminator but Sarah Connor maybe narrowly and fight back against whatever negativity whatever negative outcomes are happening because we've been through this time and time again with climate change and so many other you know, know, car accidents. And we fought through that and we invented new seat belts and new cars and new lane, you know We're still here. Things.
Speaker 2:We're still here.
Speaker 5:We're overcoming.
Speaker 2:Well, thank you so much for taking the time to come out I'd
Speaker 4:to have
Speaker 1:This Yeah. Been an honor to finally have you on and, Yeah. Come back on soon. Excited for the launch tomorrow.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Thank you. Everyone listening, go find the book. I'm sure it's available everywhere books are sold as we are gods. Thank you so much.
Speaker 2:Thank you all.
Speaker 1:Great stuff, Peter.
Speaker 3:Have a good one.
Speaker 2:Good day. Goodbye. Well, there is some some massive news out of the Cowboy State Daily. Cowboystatedaily.com says, so the Safari Club's big game trophy collection is going to hit the auction block. So if you're into collecting taxidermy UltraDome?
Speaker 2:This is very important. The Safari Club restaurants big game trophy collection that took more than fifty years to grow into a world class taxidermy display is packing up to be sold. An auction company specializing in big game animals mounts will big game animal mounts will arrive next week to pack up the massive collection that gave the Safari Club restaurant its name. The restaurant was founded in the early nineteen eighties by Jim Mills in Hot Springs State Park in Thermopolis and was a tourist hotspot and a place to go in the Bighorn Basin. Mills collection had already been growing for years before the restaurant opened and then was then shared with tens of thousands of customers over decades.
Speaker 2:We're so proud of my dad who created this Safari Lodge. The collection is the culmination of his life's passion. The inventory has not even been done yet on the extensive collection to determine how many pieces are heading to auction. The amounts range from an ordinary moose to an extraordinary specimen such as the two antelope locked in an eternal battle. Dad was able to hunt and fish and follow his passions since the nineteen sixties.
Speaker 2:The hotel and safari club represented my parents' travels over the years and sad to see the end of an era. And so if you're in the taxidermy world, you're going want to pay attention to this.
Speaker 1:This A lot of a very important story. Anything else? Attorney General Ken Paxton of the great state of Texas has launched an investigation into Lululemon over the potential presence of toxic forever chemicals in activewear. Sort of surprised that that they would call out one company
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:You think people are wrong. Because there there are thousands of companies and so, yeah, of course, Lululemon is one of the largest Yeah. Retailers. This actually
Speaker 2:an opportunity for outdoor voices? We've talked to the founder about sort of like Ty Haney about, you know, revitalizing that brand, switching things up?
Speaker 1:I don't know. I mean, try to find breathable active wear.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Without microplastics sticking But that could be a
Speaker 1:business opportunity for someone. Mean, there's plenty of brands. There's a wave of brands that are using fibers, cotton, wool, things like that. They're not as like quote unquote performant in lot of different ways, but likely healthier. But, yeah, again, it feels like it feels like somewhat unfair to launch an investigation into a single company when I think this is
Speaker 2:Also, it's unclear if there are any like broad FDA rules or broad like federal, like what are they bumping up against? Because as I as I at least to my knowledge, there's no like major rule around around microplastics, forever chemicals. Not there shouldn't be.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Like how about you launch an investigation into the company that makes the The Forever Chemicals?
Speaker 2:I'm in the Forever Chemical business and business is booming or it has been.
Speaker 1:I mean
Speaker 2:Well
Speaker 1:there there are plenty of For
Speaker 5:sure.
Speaker 1:This is a good place to end it. Yes. You want to if in Florida and you want signal to other drivers on the road that you're ready to rumble, why not get a UFC license plate?
Speaker 2:The UFC, it doesn't just go on the bottom. It actually goes before the the letters. So you can only have five letters.
Speaker 1:Is your license plate technically UFC
Speaker 2:In UFC12?
Speaker 1:It is it I don't those letters included?
Speaker 2:I would imagine you have to select an available plate that's just five characters. And you could not get a plate that's just normal but the same five characters. So those five characters have to be available. But wouldn't wouldn't absolutely Really wild
Speaker 1:really silly. As a UFC fan, I I I even if I did live in Florida, I don't I think it'd be tough to to get behind this.
Speaker 2:You'd stick to the bumper sticker.
Speaker 3:I'm there's I'm sure there's
Speaker 1:a handful of people out there that this made their this made their day and I'm and I'm happy about that.
Speaker 2:Anyway, thank you for watching TBPN today. Leave us five stars on Apple Podcasts and Spotify and we will be off tomorrow, we will be back Wednesday at 11AM Pacific. We'll see you then. Goodbye.
Speaker 1:We love you.
Speaker 5:Boeing Flashback.
Speaker 2:Goodbye.