In conversation with Reid Hoffman & Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

I mean, it's the three issues ending censorship, and that's pretty easy to do. You can do it with a series of executive orders, ending the Ukraine War, which is complex, but I think can be done very, very quickly. And then, you know, the food issue now, it's the food, it's medicine, it's corruption, and that regulatory agencies.

Well, I've already commented on the fish. The fish is outrageous, but there are ways to eat at a materially lower price than there is here, and the access to the ultra-processed food is different there. You can't get the stuff, and when you do find that stuff, it doesn't have the same glycemic and metabolic load on your body.

And it is again, $120 billion of annual federal spend with the biggest line item going to canned soda to feed 42 million Americans. And the connection is completely direct. High sugar, high glycemic index, diabetes, and other chronic health conditions arise from that connection.

You've spoken about the issue of chronic health, which to be honest is an issue I didn't know that much about, but I think you've put it now on the political radar screen in a way that it's not going away.

everyone likes to talk about Google, I think the prime candidate is likely to be, and I'm speaking as an individual and as a venture capitalist here, is Apple with the App Store.

Apple, really good example, because they drive everything through the App Store, you're not allowed to do side loading. They want to take, what is it, the 30% piece of any sales

forcing Apple to allow, you know, a startup to do an App Store would solve the entire problem. And it seems like that's where it's going to go.

But I do think that as you kind of scale the demand, there'll be a lot of inference chips coming in. You know, I think Chamath, you're invested in one of those. Oh, yeah. And I think there's going to be a bunch of those kind of coming in and the bulk of the demand will be on the inference side. And then Nvidia will have this challenge of, do I try to keep my prices and my margin? Or do I do what why we like competition? Do I have to respond to the competitive market? And then that, I think, will play out, you know, start playing out probably in a year, two at the latest, and then kind of go. So I think it's not sustain, the pure heat is not sustainable. But I think it's, you know, Nvidia has got a very strong position. And, you know, I definitely, I would recommend people not be short on Nvidia.

I don't know what happened to the single and double M&A market, but it seems to be completely gone. Everything from Adobe and Figma to other mergers that could be happening are essentially frozen.

her theory is you got to prevent the aggregation of powers, you got to fight every acquisition of note. And the problem, of course, is that actually quells venture capital investment.

I agree that her approach has been overly broad, and has had a chilling effect on M&A.

But that company's entire value is based upon the projections of what is going to sell in the United States. And that company is pouring tens of millions of dollars into lobbying to pass this bill that will make Medicare pay for it for every American who is obese.

But when I'm there, I'm consuming Italian produce that isn't packed in plastic. I go to a local fruit store, I go to the local fish vendor, and my body changes.

By the way, what Sacks didn't address is Trump's tariff policy, which is also inflationary, almost equivalent to the food price caps. I think that they're both inflationary and they're both bad policy. That's my personal point of view.

And the European Commission has already openly censoring content, so they did not need to arrest him. They can take off whatever they want.

I mean, at the time he put in the $44 million, it was never going to be a for-profit. Now it's a for-profit. A lot of people are profiting, assuming the paper mark ends up being realized.

The 501c3 continues to control the mission and destiny and so forth. And so that question about its mission is still guiding things and you're essentially investing in that mission.

don't try to hold out for money on the training side of things, because we're going to create synthetic data, we're going to do all kinds of other things that are going to mean that no one's particular data is really going to matter. What you should be is on freshness, on brand, on other things

we're going to create synthetic data, we're going to do all kinds of other things that are going to mean that no one's particular data is really going to matter

Look, I think it's definitely a quelling impact, and it's definitely stupid, and definitely shouldn't happen.

Ultimately, I think what ends up happening is most of the stuff in the middle has a decent chance of happening. The stuff at the fringes, I think they get put up, Sacks almost has like a sacrificial lamb.

We just had one of her top economic advisors come out on, I think it was CNBC defending it, and her campaign confirmed that she supports it. So now the argument has become, well, she supports it, it is really part of the platform. She would do it if she could, but she's not going to be able to do it.

It's pretty crystal clear that their content's behind a paywall. And that's how they make money.

we can train these models, like training is like reading. And like reading things is, like when something's available to be read, and you've engaged in the right economic thing for reading it, I think that's a kind of a reasonable, fair use thing.

So it doesn't matter how many tens of billions you're spending each quarter right now. You have to get there. You have to make sure you don't miss the boat.

let's rationalize the capital to when are we expecting revenue? How do we get revenue sooner to have that as a good productive cycle? How do we be not trying to just spend like drunken sailors, which is easy to do, but to be targeting business outcomes?