E164: Zuck’s Senate apology, Elon's comp package voided, crony capitalism, Reddit IPO, drone attack

1. 0:00 – 8:24

   Bestie intros! The guys try the Apple Vision Pro

   1. JCJason Calacanis0:00

      All right, everybody. Welcome back to your favorite podcast, the All-In Podcast. It's episode 164. I'm down here in Miami. With me, again, of course, the dictator chairman himself, Chamath Palihapitiya, and the Rain Man, yeah, Burn Baby, David Sacks. Unfortunately, we had a little bit of a challenge this week. We don't know where Friedberg is. He's somewhere lost in his Apple Vision Pros, but he'll be back next week. As you guys know, I'm incredibly generous with my friends, so I sent all the besties the Apple Pro Goggles. And so these Apple Pro Goggles are amazing but, uh, Friedberg-

   2. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:39

      Wait, you did? You bought me a pair of the Apple Pro Vision Pro Goggles?

   3. JCJason Calacanis0:41

      Yeah, yeah. We talked about this already. Yeah, go... There are... You guys, actually you were using them, you just forgot. But, uh, Friedberg has been using them. Nobody can find Friedberg right now because apparently-

   4. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:51

      (laughs)

   5. JCJason Calacanis0:51

      ... he went to Uranus (laughs) . I recorded in all of these, Sacks, what's happening inside each of our Apple Goggles. The Vision Pro.

   6. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:00

      Oh, my God. Oh, my God.

   7. JCJason Calacanis1:01

      Yeah. And so... But, uh, yeah, Chamath, here they are. We actually took a picture. I had Nat take a picture of you wearing them.

   8. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:06

      Okay.

   9. JCJason Calacanis1:06

      Do you want to... Hey, Sacks, you want to see what Chamath was doing in his goggles?

   10. DSDavid Sacks1:09

       Yeah, let's see.

   11. JCJason Calacanis1:10

       I recorded it. There he is.

   12. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:12

       (laughs)

   13. DSDavid Sacks1:12

       Oh, wow.

   14. JCJason Calacanis1:12

       Yeah, look at that. See? He, he imagined that he did leg day. Look at those legs.

   15. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:17

       (laughs)

   16. DSDavid Sacks1:17

       (laughs)

   17. JCJason Calacanis1:17

       He imagined he did leg day.

   18. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:19

       Oh, my God.

   19. DSDavid Sacks1:19

       He's still reveling, he's still reveling in that, uh, thirst trap that he posted, isn't he?

   20. JCJason Calacanis1:23

       I know. But you see those legs? Uh, the Apple Vision Pro. Tim Cook-

   21. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:27

       Can I... Sorry. Can I say-

   22. DSDavid Sacks1:28

       Oh, yeah. Look at that.

   23. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:28

       Can I say-

   24. JCJason Calacanis1:29

       Yeah.

   25. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:29

       ... something funny about this? Which is that my legs are actually darker than my torso and my upper body. It's the weirdest thing. And so you have it in reverse, but it is true that my, my legs are a different shade than my, my trunk and my arms and my body.

   26. JCJason Calacanis1:43

       Okay. Well, here's Sacks. By the way, Sacks, you know, he loves his goggles. Yeah, Chamath, do you have any interest in seeing what Sacks was doing with his goggles?

   27. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:50

       Oh, my God. I can't imagine.

   28. JCJason Calacanis1:52

       There it is.

   29. DSDavid Sacks1:53

       (laughs)

   30. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:53

       (laughs)
2. 8:24 – 36:19

   Zuckerberg apologizes to parents in hearing, Section 230 under fire from child safety reforms

   1. JCJason Calacanis8:24

   2. DSDavid Sacks8:24

      (laughs)

   3. CPChamath Palihapitiya8:24

      Did you guys see this thing where they all had to testify in front of the Senate?

   4. JCJason Calacanis8:28

      Yeah. We might as well. I guess we'll just jump right to that.

   5. CPChamath Palihapitiya8:30

      It was like a public flogging.

   6. DSDavid Sacks8:32

      Yeah.

   7. JCJason Calacanis8:33

      Uh, uh, once again, a public, public flogging. We'll just jump to it real quick, since we didn't want to go too deep on that one, but-

   8. CPChamath Palihapitiya8:38

      Josh Hawley made Zuck (laughs) turn around and apologize to, to people in the audience. It was really intense.

   9. JCJason Calacanis8:44

      Yeah. So this is, the name of this hearing was Big Tech and Online Child Sexual Exploitation Crisis. Zuckerberg, he was questioned, along with the CEO of TikTok, Discord, X, and Snap. But obviously, this is all around kids' online safety and also Section 230, which I think the senators are... This is one of the few bipartisan moments, I think.

   10. CPChamath Palihapitiya9:08

       They're honing in on it.

   11. JCJason Calacanis9:09

       Yeah. They, they realized this is kind of like a winning-

   12. CPChamath Palihapitiya9:11

       They're gonna take a run at this.

   13. JCJason Calacanis9:13

       They're taking a run at it, for sure. They realize it's a winning ticket. But let, let's just play the clip, and then I'll get your thoughts, Sax and, and Chamath.

   14. SHSen. Josh Hawley9:19

       Let me ask you this. There's families of victims here today. Have you apologized to the victims?

   15. MZMark Zuckerberg9:24

       I-

   16. SHSen. Josh Hawley9:25

       Would you like to do so now?

   17. MZMark Zuckerberg9:27

       Well-

   18. SHSen. Josh Hawley9:27

       They're here. You're on national television. Would you like now to apologize to the victims who have been harmed by your product? Show him the pictures. (audience clapping) Would you like to apologize for what you've done to these good people?

   19. MZMark Zuckerberg9:40

       I, I, I, I'm sorry for everything that you have all gone through. It's terrible. No one should have to go through the things that your families have, have suffered. And this is why we invest so much and are going to continue doing industry-leading efforts to, uh, to make sure that no one has to go through the types of things that your families have had to suffer.

   20. JCJason Calacanis10:01

       Sax, um, what a powerful moment. And for Zuckerberg to get up and actually face the parents, he turned around, he faced his parents. This is a very dramatic moment, and he apologized. Ned, Ned, do you, do you respect him for, for doing that? And, and do you think that was, like, a, uh, powerful moment as well? And, and where does this all wind up?

   21. DSDavid Sacks10:18

       This was a kangaroo court. I mean, this was basically all theatrics. This is basically a bipartisan moral panic, where all of these senators are basically grandstanding. And these are the same types of accusations that we've been hearing for years. Remember, this goes back to the whole Frances Haugen claims, where she says that Facebook wasn't doing enough to prevent various kinds of online harms. And I think that we're gonna regret where this all leads, because where it's gonna lead if they do repeal Section 230 is towards greater censorship. All these companies are gonna spend even more resources restricting what we can say and hear online, which is not the right direction. Listen, do some harms occur online? Yes. Do I believe that Facebook is taking substantial measures to stop them? Yes. I mean, but edge cases are always gonna get through. When you're operating at that kind of scale, there are, are gonna be these edge cases of kids who got harassed or content that shouldn't have getting through. It's just part of the fact that the internet operates at gigantic scale. And these harms have always been out there. I think that these companies do their best to try and stop 'em, but they're always gonna get through. And you can't make every aspect of our society perfectly safe and harm-free. Somehow, we have this expectation that we can eliminate 100% of every harm that occurs, and I do think that these online companies have been unfairly picked on in a sense. I mean, if you're gonna talk about these types of harms, why aren't you targeting the music industry for all their incendiary lyrics that basically encourage all sorts of violent or sexist behavior? Why don't you target the advertising industry for creating unrealistic body image expectations? Why don't you target the Kardashians for setting unrealistic expectations around image? And you could go on down the list. I mean, why don't you target Hollywood for releasing a show like Euphoria, which is a hit? It seems to me that the problem in our culture is not coming from the edge cases; it's coming from...... the mainstream entertainment that is fully allowed and is popular and is our hit shows and hit records and hit products. I mean, that's where the toxic pollution is coming from in our culture. So to turn around and now blame the online companies for creating all of this, I think, is just... And I think basically they're being scapegoated. I mean, again, this is a moral panic.

   22. JCJason Calacanis12:40

       Chamath, do you think it's a moral panic or... You know, there have been statistics and studies done about what is viral on social media, the algorithms targeting users, the addictive nature of it. You spoke earlier about the addictive nature of just gamification on watches. Social media is a little bit different than music and some of these other things, because they have these algorithms to increase watch time and engagement. So I think that's what the other side would say. Wh- where do you say... Where do you say, Chamath? Where do you stand on this?

   23. CPChamath Palihapitiya13:07

       Let me just give a coda to a couple of things that Sax said. It is true that we've taken turns attacking other forms of media when they were ascending in their popularity. So in the 1990s, if you guys remember, politicians and their censorship attempts around gangster rap and-

   24. JCJason Calacanis13:24

       Yeah.

   25. CPChamath Palihapitiya13:24

       ... NWA and 2 Live Crew and certain songs.

   26. JCJason Calacanis13:28

       Al Gore's wife, right? Wh- what was her name? Tipper Gore?

   27. CPChamath Palihapitiya13:30

       Tipper Gore. Yeah.

   28. DSDavid Sacks13:30

       Tipper Gore had a whole ti- tirade against rap lyrics.

   29. CPChamath Palihapitiya13:33

       What was the NWA song, you know, " (beep) the police"?

   30. JCJason Calacanis13:36

       Yeah.
3. 36:19 – 1:08:26

   Delaware judge voids Elon's comp package, understanding Fortune 500 country club compensation

   1. DSDavid Sacks36:19

      the number one story of the week was Elon's pay package and this ruling that occurred in Delaware. Let me just tee this up here. Many of you probably know about this already, but in 2018, Tesla's board approved a performance-based compensation package for Elon.

   2. JCJason Calacanis36:35

      It was approved by 73% of shareholders. Elon and his brother, Kimbal, would have put that at 80%, but they were excluded obviously. This is lower than maybe some other support levels. According to Reuters, you typically see s- 95% for a executive compensation packet. But this one was very unique. It was all stock. There's no cash bonus, no salary. 12 tranches of stock. It was very creative in, in how this was put together because Elon got nothing if he doubled the value of Tesla, but then if he, you know, increased the value of the top line revenue and the market cap increased by $50 billion, he got 1% more of the outstanding shares, which is an amazing deal (laughs) for shareholders obviously, because the market cap on the company went up 50 billion. The initial plan was on- only worth about 2.6 billion, but since Tesla crushed it from 2018 to 2023, we'll throw up a chart here, it's one of the great runs in the history of capitalism, how revenue ha- and sales grew at this company. So, it made it the largest comp package in the history of public markets. And if you compare Tesla to Apple, the second highest increase in stock price during that same time period, Apple went up 345%. Tesla went up 800%. In 2018, a Tesla shareholder sued Elon and Tesla's board, claiming the pay package was unfair. The guy had nine shares, a full nine shares, not 10, nine, worth $2,500. His stake went 10X in those six years, so he made a fortune on that bet. And then on Tuesday, a Delaware judge voided Elon's pay package, siding with the investor. Elon can appeal it to the Delaware Supreme Court. Sax, your thoughts on this ruling? I teed it up. I think I got all the details in there.

   3. DSDavid Sacks38:16

      Yeah.

   4. JCJason Calacanis38:16

      If I missed any, please add them.

   5. DSDavid Sacks38:19

      Well, I think i- in order to reach this ruling, the judge had to find three things, and all of them had to be the case in, in her opinion. Number one, that the pay package was excessive. Number two, that the process by which they came up with the pay package was not fair, meaning it was not sufficiently adversarial enough that the directors, in her opinion, had too many ties to Elon, and didn't, again, take enough of a antagonistic role in negotiating that package. And number three, and I think most importantly, that the shareholder vote was invalid, because even if the first two had been true, the shareholders approved it, and that would have been good enough, but she said that the shareholders weren't sufficiently informed. And specifically, I think this argument hung on a few internal emails where people said that they thought that they could hit the numbers. I think that of the three legs of this, well, all three have been challenged by opponents to this verdict. I mean, number one, yes, the pay package ended up being a gargantuan amount, but you have to look at it ex-ante, not ex-post. Nobody thought Elon could hit all these numbers, uh, back at the time this package was negotiated.

   6. JCJason Calacanis39:28

      Let's be frank, it was absurd, the idea that he would 10X. It was crazy.

   7. DSDavid Sacks39:33

      There's a great clip with Andrew Ross Sorkin where they're all laughing at the idea that he's gonna hit these numbers. Remember, this was at a time when Elon was going through what was called production hell, where he was sleeping on the floor of the factory.

   8. JCJason Calacanis39:42

      Model 3. Yeah, I was there. (laughs)

   9. DSDavid Sacks39:43

      The Model 3 hadn't come out yet and nobody, nobody believed that the Model 3 was gonna be the hit that it was. In fact, all the stories were pooh-poohing that idea and basically saying that Tesla is basically screwed because they can't get the production line working correctly.

   10. JCJason Calacanis39:56

       Yeah.

   11. DSDavid Sacks39:56

       You want to play this?

   12. NANarrator39:57

       Tesla now announcing a radical new compensation plan. It could be, perhaps, the most radical compensation plan, uh, in history. The executive will receive no guaranteed compensation of any ti- of any kind at all. He gets no salary, cash bonus, equity. Uh, he only gets equity that, that vests over time, but only if he reaches, uh, these hurdle rates, which are, dare I say, crazy.

   13. DSDavid Sacks40:19

       The only part of it that I think is really relevant is where Sorkin says that the milestones are crazy, meaning that everyone thought it was a pipe dream that the company would ever hit these numbers. Okay? So, that's point number one on, on magnitude. On the second part of the ruling about the process, it is true that like in most venture-backed startups, there's a longstanding relationship between the founder and the investors because they work collaboratively to try and make the company a success. There were emails that came out where Elon shows that, "I'm not trying to go for the maximum here." So, you know, did, did the investors go in with a hostile, antagonistic attitude that, "We're going to try and pay you the least?" No. But did Elon go in with the attitude that, "I'm going to try and take the most"? No. The e- the email showed that.

   14. JCJason Calacanis41:06

       Yes.

   15. DSDavid Sacks41:06

       What they tried to do was come up with something that they thought was fair, that would fairly reward him for outsized performance. And if he had merely increased the cu- the value of Tesla from 59 billion to 100 billion, he would have gotten nothing. Let's just keep that in mind. So, they tried to come up with something that would reward him for outsized performance and give him absolutely nothing for merely decent or good performance. The third point about the shareholder vote, I don't think that there was anything about the shareholder vote that the shareholders didn't know. I don't think that the company didn't release a f- Elon always said, "Yeah, we're gonna do this. We're gonna be one of the most valuable companies in the world." He's always been super optimistic about their ability to reach these targets. But if you looked at all the Wall Street analysts, including Sorkin there, they thought that these targets were unreachable.

   16. JCJason Calacanis41:58

       Well, also to add to that, Sax, (laughs) this had the largest short position, I believe, at that time of any company ever. People were betting with their dollars that this company was going to zero. There were a ton of people who the narrative was this, they'll never deliver the Model 3. It was two years late, right? Or something in that range. It was... They, they kept trying to get the Model 3 out. It was taking forever. So, yeah, it's, it, it's absurd. Also, in that case, Sorkin said in that same clip, "There's been a lot of speculation of Elon stepping down after the Model 3 is in production." In the judge's ruling, she said the exact opposite. "There is no reason to believe Elon will leave." Except that he was running (laughs) like two or three other companies. There w- it was actually quite possible that he would leave. He never wanted to be CEO of Tesla. People fo- forget that too. He had tried three CEOs of Tesla and he only took over Tesla...And I remember it was because he said, "Jason, this thing's gonna fail if I don't take it over." He, he tried three different CEO- E- CEOs in the beginning. People forget that fact.

   17. DSDavid Sacks42:53

       And there was scuttlebutt that he would hire somebody. I remember there was, like, rumors about Sheryl Sandberg maybe getting offered-

   18. JCJason Calacanis42:58

       Yeah.

   19. DSDavid Sacks42:58

       ... the job or something like that. I remember he was, he was going through production hell. He was sleeping on the factory floor.

   20. JCJason Calacanis43:04

       Yeah.

   21. DSDavid Sacks43:04

       And he was talking in interviews about how miserable his life was at that time. I mean-

   22. JCJason Calacanis43:07

       Can confirm.

   23. DSDavid Sacks43:08

       Yeah, exactly. So look, did he have leverage to basically say, "You know what? Let's just hire a CEO"? Yeah, absolutely.

   24. JCJason Calacanis43:15

       Okay, Chamath, any, uh, steel man you can do of the other side here? Like, as an investor, public market investor sometimes, when you saw that pay package, what did you think? And I, I, I don't know if you were a shareholder of Tesla at the time or not.

   25. CPChamath Palihapitiya43:27

       In the mid teens, I started investing in public s- stocks as well as private tech companies. And I got invited to give a presentation at the Ira Sohn Conference, which is, like, the most pre- prestigious conference of public market investors. You, in May, you show up at, um, Lincoln Center, and everybody in the audience is paying, like, 10,000 bucks a ticket or something. And all the proceeds go to, uh, uh, a foundation in support of this gentleman, Ira Sohn, who passed away. But in any event, it's like Ackman, Tepper, Einhorn, and I picked Tesla. And I was a very big supporter in many ways, and still am. And I think that I knew the company, frankly, better than most people, except for him obviously. But I think that I studied this company quite deeply. When I s- And, and I'm just setting the context. When I saw the pay package, I thought, "He's making a mistake. This is unachievable." I thought the probabilities were in the low single digits, and then he did it, which just kinds of sh- shows how incredibly adept he is as a CEO and a manager and an executor. So then, you know, to go back five or six years later, after he actually does something that so massively disproportionately positively impacted investors, and then to just rescind it and unwind it, I think is really un-American and unfair. And I think it sets a very poor standard for why anybody should actually build a company governed in Delaware. It makes no sense anymore. And just to give you that example, he, he and I have both now done this, but, like, these incremental companies that I've started are in Nevada. They're in different places because I find the Delaware court slightly and increasingly unpredictable and acting with other mandates that they weren't ever given. So you had-

   26. JCJason Calacanis45:33

       What do you think that mandate is?

   27. CPChamath Palihapitiya45:35

       You had a place where there was highly predictable governance, and they had very narrow ways in which they would act and opine. And I think in a situation like this, where you had every opportunity to actually vote this thing down, and what little of the documentation that I saw about the communication back and forth doesn't seem to support this theory that he rammed it through. Nobody rams anything through over nine months, where he takes month-long breaks and he tells the GC, "This is actually more than I wanted." (laughs) Nobody does that-

   28. JCJason Calacanis46:11

       Yeah.

   29. CPChamath Palihapitiya46:11

       ... if you're ram- It's the opposite of ramming something through.

   30. JCJason Calacanis46:14

       Right.
4. 1:08:26 – 1:16:17

   Reddit reportedly targeting $5B valuation in potential March IPO

   1. JCJason Calacanis1:08:26

      see. All right, listen, I wanted to go over one more thing. We're, we're cooking with oil here, and, uh, I just wanted to talk a little bit about IPOs possibly coming back. Uh, I just interviewed, uh, Alexis Ohanian, the founder of Reddit, which according to Bloomberg, they've been advised by potential IPO investors to target a $5 billion valuation. They're gonna go public possibly in March, which is wild. That's only a couple of weeks away. In peak ZIRP, Reddit had raised at a $10 billion valuation. That was back in 2021. They were valued at 15 billion in the secondary market. That's where people, like previous employees, angel investors, et cetera, might trade their shares. And so if it goes out at five, it's gonna be between a 50% to their tear cut, and it is trading at 4.5 billion. Chamath, we talked about this a bunch, uh, the down run, IPOs, Instacart, I think, being the, uh, best example. They got out, but they've been hovering at a really low number for a long time, and people have been talking about them possibly being a takeout candidate by DoorDash or Amazon or Uber. So, your thoughts on the, the Reddit IPO news?

   2. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:09:30

      I think that if I had to price the IPO, I would be modeling two important levers in the business. The first is, what is the actual attainable revenue from my audience? And so-

   3. JCJason Calacanis1:09:46

      Mm-hmm.

   4. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:09:47

      ... what is the ARPU of the average Reddit user? And-

   5. JCJason Calacanis1:09:52

      Hmm.

   6. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:09:52

      ... you can model it as a distribution, and I think Facebook has the best data because they've been publishing it w- in their quarterly returns for a very long time now, for over a decade, which is, there is a distribution of value of a Facebook user economically, right? At the upper end, you have the folks that are on Facebook proper in America, in a certain age band, in certain states, that are probably like 30, 40, $50 ARPUs, all the way down to, in div- in developing countries, those users are worth low single digit dollars economically. And I think that people will have to very much understand what is the average Reddit user and what is the distribution of economic value that they represent? That's the first thing. And I think that that's really the thing that will determine whether it's worth five billion or 10 billion or frankly two billion. And then the second key lever, i- it will be the risk factors in the IPO, because where the shareholder lawsuits will come from, which will really dictate if, if the, how the hedge fund community buys this thing, is gonna be the potential for my ad ran against content that is deeply offensive to me, that whole construct. And I think that they are going to have to very carefully ring fence that liability to get this IPO to be successful, but also for them to execute a scaled ad revenue business.

   7. JCJason Calacanis1:11:20

      Hmm.

   8. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:11:20

      And not spending enough time on Reddit, I don't know how bad of a problem this is. I don't think it's 4chan or 8chan as an example, but I also don't think it's Facebook and Instagram. And so it's-

   9. JCJason Calacanis1:11:32

      Yeah.

   10. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:11:32

       ... kind of somewhere in the middle. And I think that those risks are really what's gonna determine its terminal valuation.

   11. JCJason Calacanis1:11:37

       You nailed it. They, they have always been under-monetized. $800 million in revenue reportedly and 400 million monthly active users, so two bucks a user compared to (laughs) you know, 20, 30, 40 for the prime users in, uh, on Facebook's network, so it's totally under-utilized. Part of it is, it's a little bit of spicy content. Part of it is that that's the number including all the international u- users. Of course, Sax, there is this concept that Reddit has the greatest pool of data for large language models and, um, you know, a lot with something like, say, Quora, maybe YouTube amongst the great pools of data. So I think there's a play here with that. They have talked about they wanna get paid for licensing, and that if you wanna use their data for your language model, you gotta get permission. Your thoughts, Sax?

   12. DSDavid Sacks1:12:25

       Sure. I mean, that's gonna be an incremental revenue source for sure. It's hard to know exactly how valuable that is, 'cause we're still in the early innings, but, um, I mean, they can definitely do something with that data. Grok's whole competitive advantage is having exclusive access to Twitter's data, which is updated in real time basically by hundreds of millions of users, so yeah, look, that data is, is valuable. We don't know how much. I guess the numbers I saw were that they're doing about 800 million of revenue, growing about 20% a year. The $5 billion valuation seems, I think, pretty good. I mean, is it down from 10 at the peak in 2021? Sure, but everything is down since that peak. I mean, that was definitely a bubble. I mean, I can tell you, we, we bought some shares as a late stage investment, I think in 2018 at a $2 billion valuation.

   13. JCJason Calacanis1:13:10

       Okay.

   14. DSDavid Sacks1:13:10

       So, you know, at two and a half X in five years, I mean, it's not setting the world on fire, but it's not a bad outcome.

   15. JCJason Calacanis1:13:16

       Yeah.

   16. DSDavid Sacks1:13:17

       And, you know, the investment bankers will n- know how to price this to take it out and make it successful.

   17. JCJason Calacanis1:13:21

       Yeah. And if it had a, if it was a, if it becomes a billion dollars in revenue and they have a 20% profit margin, 200 million-You could, you could start doing your back of the envelope math there for a 25 EBITDA, you know, 20 times price earnings ratio. So, it, it doesn't seem outrageous. It does seem like such a valuable and under- under-monetized, uh, asset. Do you think there is a likely acquirer here if you were to think about somebody who might wanna own this? Do you think it's a Microsoft for the data, Google for the data?

   18. DSDavid Sacks1:13:49

       Yeah, I think there's probably people who would like to own this, but the problem is that... Well, two problems. One is they just can't get it through. We've talked about this before. The M&A window is even more closed than the IPO window, I would say.

   19. JCJason Calacanis1:14:02

       Yeah.

   20. DSDavid Sacks1:14:02

       And the other thing is just because of the raunchy content and all of the brand issues that come with that, it's not clear to me that, let's say, a Microsoft would wanna own that headache. You know?

   21. JCJason Calacanis1:14:14

       Yeah.

   22. DSDavid Sacks1:14:14

       They might not want to be hauled up in front of these congressional hearings that we talked about, these kangaroo courts, where it's very easy to go on Reddit and pick out, "Well, what about this post? What- what about that post?"

   23. JCJason Calacanis1:14:23

       Yeah. I see.

   24. DSDavid Sacks1:14:24

       "Why did you let that one through? Why'd you let that one through?" Well, because it's a-

   25. JCJason Calacanis1:14:27

       Yeah.

   26. DSDavid Sacks1:14:27

       ... it's a platform of user-generated content where hundreds of millions of people post, what, billions of items? And you can have the best content moderation policy in the world, there's always gonna be edge cases that get through.

   27. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:14:37

       I think that Reddit is the honeypot of, of edge cases.

   28. DSDavid Sacks1:14:40

       (laughs)

   29. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:14:40

       It is the place you go-

   30. JCJason Calacanis1:14:41

       Yeah.

Episode duration: 1:33:49