All-In PodcastE17: Big Tech bans Trump, ramifications for the First Amendment & the open Internet
EVERY SPOKEN WORD
150 min read · 30,235 words- 0:00 – 2:08
David Sacks intros the besties
- DSDavid Sacks
Hey, everyone. Hey, everyone.
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
Welcome to the All-In Pod.
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
Your illustrious-
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
Your illustrious moderator, Jason Calacanis has been purged.
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs) Canceled.
- DSDavid Sacks
He's been canceled. We canceled him-
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
... for his constant interruptions and-
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
... low IQ comments.
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
We decided that the minimal IQ required to be on this pod is, you know, 140, 150. He did not make the cut.
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
And so now, it is just me, Chamath, and Freeberg.
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs) He is, uh, Jason is away. He is actively implementing our jerk off to win strategy to solve the pandemic and free speech.
- NANarrator
I'm going all in. Let your winners ride. Rain Man, David Sachs. I'm going all in. And I said, we open sourced it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it. Love you Betsy. Queen of Quinoa. I'm going all in.
- JCJason Calacanis
Hey, everybody. Hey, everybody. It is an emergency podcast, episode 16. Hit number two in the, uh, rankings on the, uh, Apple iTunes podcasting store. Clearly, we hit a nerve. It's been an insane week and the dictator dictated that he was not satisfied with doing our podcast once every two weeks. And so, here we are on a Sunday, the Queen of Quinoa, Rain Man himself, David Sachs, and the dictator, chopping it up for you, the loyal, confused, angry, infuriated audience of All-In. It's-
- DSDavid Sacks
Jason, ple-
- JCJason Calacanis
... it's the craziest week of our lives.
- DSDavid Sacks
Jason, plea- please don't ascribe to the audience the characteristics that describe yourself.
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
(laughs)
- JCJason Calacanis
Okay. This has been a crazy 72 hours. Can anybody remember a s- a week that has been more crazy in their life, with the exception of, I guess, 9/11, the financial crisis? I'm trying to think of this level of crazy, uh, uh, uh,
- 2:08 – 21:09
Jason & Sacks hash it out & the besties break down reconciliation in American democracy
- JCJason Calacanis
I don't even really-
- DFDavid Friedberg
Jason, I think, I think we should start with what happened after the last All-In podcast between you and Sachs over text. We should get it all out there. We should share it publicly. And I think it would make-
- JCJason Calacanis
No. (laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
No, no, no.
- DFDavid Friedberg
No, I think-
- JCJason Calacanis
Yes.
- DFDavid Friedberg
I think, I think it's-
- JCJason Calacanis
No, we should.
- DFDavid Friedberg
I think it's worth doing. To, we, we talked about this before you joined us.
- JCJason Calacanis
Oh, shit. (laughs)
- DFDavid Friedberg
And, uh, and, and we're, Chamath and I are having an intervention. And, uh, you know, I, I, I'm gonna say something real quick. I think it's worth highlighting that one of the things that I think we have the opportunity to do as a group is to kind of elevate the conversation a bit and not frame things as being black and white, and not frame them as being one or zero, or partisan, or left or right. And everyone on this, uh, in this conversation has nuanced opinions about a lot of different topics. And when you sum up all those opinions, it doesn't define a left or right person, or Democrat or Republican. I think that's what makes us, you know, a, a compelling and interesting group to talk to. Sachs has been characterized as the Trump guy. He took offense to that. Um, and in particular, the heated conversation you guys had last time. And I do think it's worth kind of sharing that with everyone and letting you guys reconcile publicly.
- DSDavid Sacks
Yeah.
- DFDavid Friedberg
Have a, have a group hug-
- DSDavid Sacks
Yeah, yeah, yeah, uh-huh.
- DFDavid Friedberg
And, and, and re- reframe kind of how we talk about each other, and how, uh, so that we can kind of set a bit of an example on, on how to do this well.
- JCJason Calacanis
Uh, I can start or you can start, David.
- DSDavid Sacks
I'll, I'll, I'll start because-
- JCJason Calacanis
Okay.
- DSDavid Sacks
... I'm the one who had the objection.
- JCJason Calacanis
You're the aggrieved?
- DSDavid Sacks
Yeah. I mean, so, so look, I, I think that, that J Cow does an amazing job moderating the pod and it's a difficult job. Um, and, you know, the, the, the, the, so I, so I don't want to, um, you know, this is not something I'm trying to blame him for. But I do have an objection to being labeled in a certain way. I think anybody would. You know, we, we don't want to be misconstrued and, and we want to be able to characterize our own views. We don't want to be labeled in a certain way. Now, I think Jason has sort of branded me as the Trump guy because frankly it's amusing to him. Um, I think he's mainly trolling me. And, but the audience doesn't necessarily understand that. I mean, if you go back and look at my Twitter feed or my blogs, I haven't written about Trump for years. I mean, I, I haven't said anything really about it. That's not my agenda. Um, you know, and I think it, it, I, I don't have a pro-Trump agenda, but I also don't have a pro-resistance agenda. I've described my position as anti-hysteria. Sometimes that means criticizing Trump like I did in the last pod. Sometimes it means criticizing the resistance. So, I just don't like being labeled a certain way, and I think Jason and I sort of, you know, kind of resolve this. Um, you know, if I were to label my politics, just, you know, Jason calls me the conservative. I think that's more accurate, but the question is, you know, what am I conserving exactly? And I would describe myself more as like a 1960s style liberal. You know, I'm a believer in free speech, you know, ACLU style. I'm a believer in King's dream of a colorblind society. You know, if, you know, I'm against all these, you know, foreign wars and interventions. If I had been around the 1960s, I would have been protesting Vietnam. That's kind of more where I'm coming from. And I guess the reason I'm a conservative now is because the political debate has moved so far away from that. But if I'm trying to conserve anything, it's really the liberal victories of the 1960s. So, in any event, um, I, I don't think that qualifies me in any way as a, as a, as a Trumper per se. And, um, I just don't want, you know, Jason making jokes to somehow, um, have the audience get the wrong idea, because I want to be heard, and I know Trump's an extremely polarizing figure. And the second you tell somebody you're frankly pro or con Trump, the other half just doesn't even stop, doesn't even want to listen to you. Um, and so my, my views are more complicated than that.
- JCJason Calacanis
Okay.
- DFDavid Friedberg
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
(laughs)
- JCJason Calacanis
Well, thanks to everybody for tuning in to the all in podcast. (laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
(laughs)
- DFDavid Friedberg
(laughs)
- JCJason Calacanis
It's been an amazing, episode 17.
- DSDavid Sacks
(laughs)
- JCJason Calacanis
Your emergency pod thanks to our sponsors.Um, listen. Uh, I think what makes this podcast great is, uh, the diversity of opinion and the respect, uh, that we show for each other. If my breaking chops, uh, which is, as everybody knows here, uh, my superpower in life, (laughs) uh, and talk- a- along with talking, uh, has pigeonholed you into being something you're not, or if you felt I've taken a cheap shot at you in any way, uh, I apologize and it was not my intent. My intent is to keep the conversation flowing, to entertain the audience certainly, but not at anybody's expense, David, and certainly not yours, because I do consider you one of the best friends I've had in my life and one of the most supportive people in my life. And, and I think we all feel that way about each other, that we go to bat for each other and support each other. I do think that this highlights and dovetails with what we... And I've given it a lot of thought, actually. I've really spent, since the last podcast, a lot of time thinking about your position, David, uh, and where you're coming from. And then also where the people who maybe, you know, you maybe agreed with some of, uh, Trump's victories, and certainly you are a conservative. I don't know if you voted for him or not or if you're willing to say if you did. Uh, I'll put that aside for a moment. But I do think that we're all seeing in our families, in our lives, and now as a nation, what is the off-ramp here to the people who supported Trump up until this coup attempt, uh, and this ugliness, and then how do we reconcile it, right? That is... The grand reconciliation here is the thing that has me very concerned because we're a microcosm, David. You and I are, you know, u- unbelievably close friends, uh, for a very long period of time, and we struggle with, uh, I think, uh, Trump. Trump is l- as I was saying in our group chat earlier, it's like the trolley car problem. Like, people will be pulling up, how do you deal with Trump as the example of, you know, what do you do if the trolley car, you know, it's gonna kill one person or five and do you, you know, the brake's broken kind of situation. It, it's... And I think Jack and the platforms also have a difficult task. Do you leave this person up after what we saw on Wednesday? And a lot has changed-
- 21:09 – 43:01
Big Tech bans, did they give Trump an easy out? Ramifications for First Amendment
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
Well, I think it's important to talk about what happened, um, and I'll frame this in the, in the context of Peter Thiel. He has a philosopher that he's talked a lot about, Rene Girard. And, um, you know, basically the, the Girardian philosophy is essentially that, you know, people come into conflict because they're extremely similar and, you know, they effectively want the same things and they're competing for the same sort of essentially scarce resources. And the way that you resolve that is through some sort of cathartic sacrifice, right? Meaning like there needs to be a grand crime, a grand act. And I think that we're at this point, to Friedberg's sort of earlier statement, where you got a choice which is you either throw democracy under the bus or you ac- you throw DJT under the bus. And you don't have a choice and that, and that ha- and, and sort of like ... It's not just even the United States. It's almost like sort of democracy as an institution's hand was forced, um, this past week. And so it is probably important to look at what's happened in the last few days through that lens, which is, you know, it's, it's almost like people first were shocked and then now we're in the midst of that reflexive reaction to what is a simple choice, which is you can basically forgive the guy or you can reaffirm the institution, which means to sacrifice the guy. And I think that's the thing that's happening in real time and it's going to be, I think, over the next few weeks a super messy conversation because you're gonna have a bunch of dumb decisions, you're gonna have a bunch of over-reaching, you know, you're gonna have a bunch of, um, dramatic sort of bellyaching on both sides. You know, there was this thing today where Devin Nunes was like screaming about how he had lost his 3,000 followers on Parler, 3 million followers on Parler, but he was saying it on Fox News-
- JCJason Calacanis
Yeah.
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
... (laughs) which is distribution to millions of people. (laughs) And so-
- JCJason Calacanis
Can I ask a, a question about this reality now we're all facing? Do w- 'cause the event that occurred on Wednesday, we are all still trying to process and new information is coming in. As we, you know, the ... as people get the videos and, and as we let the dust settle, the dust is settling, I'm curious, Alex, do ... How do you look at what happened on Wednesday? Do you view it as a coup? Do you v- because some of the information that's come out about they were trying to get to Pence and that they wanted to kidnap people and then you ... That dovetails with the kidnapping schemes that were going on, uh, and there were pipe bombs and a police officer was beaten to death with a pipe and his skull was crushed or something. We don't have all the details yet but-
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
Fire extinguisher. Yeah.
- JCJason Calacanis
A fire extinguisher. He's beaten to death with a fire extinguisher. Some of the videos I've seen of police being dragged, um, you know, that counteract the selfie police, you know, y- y- so many different things occurred on Wednesday. I think we all have to just think about what happened on Wednesday? How do we each feel about what happened on Wednesday? I'll, I'll go to you first, Alex.
- DSDavid Sacks
Well, I mean, I think-
- JCJason Calacanis
And not because I'm framing you as anything. Just because you haven't talked yet. (laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
Yeah, no, I mean, I already said... I, I, I already gave my thoughts in the last pod, that it was outrageous. It was a travesty. Um. It was a rally that turned into a riot, that turned into, you know, some sort of insurrection, I guess you could call it. It was a... It was a rebellion against authority. Um, I think coup is, is potentially a strong word, uh, because it, it, i- i- it wasn't... It... Nobody ever had their hands on the levers of power. I mean, the, the fate of the republic was never in question. I know there were even, you know, people tweeting about how the, uh, the, the, these, um, marauders, whatever you want to call them, almost got their hands on the, uh, electors' ballots. I mean, yeah, but we all know how they're voting. Even if they had gotten them, uh, we would just have gotten new ones. I mean, that was sort of a ceremonial thing. But look, it was, it was an absolute outrage. But I do think that there is, um, a thing happening now, uh, called threat inflation, where, you know, using language like, you know, going from riot to, uh, insurrection, to now coup, it... there is a, a, a type of inflation happening that is then used to justify the reaction by the other side to it, which is now, you know, the... basically the ending of freedom of speech, um, which is really, I think, the big thing that's happened since the last pod. It's really the... It's the reason why we are having this emergency pod, I think, is because of what's happened there. Um-
- JCJason Calacanis
I think the emergency pod was just to make sure that the pod wasn't ending (laughs) because of you not getting in a big fight. I think that was people's concern-
- DSDavid Sacks
No, I mean, look. Yeah, we'll just keep it-
- JCJason Calacanis
... was that The Beatles were breaking up. (laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
Yeah, yeah. Well, that's true. Look, uh, just keeping the pod together, you know, with, with four big egos on it, you're right, it's hard. It is like The Beatles, you know?
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- DSDavid Sacks
One day it's gonna break up, but, but not, but not yet, not yet. Uh, but, but I, but I wanna t- I wanna tie in this issue with you said, uh, what you said about the off-ramp, okay? Which is, you know, what is the off-ramp from this? You look, everybody understands, I think, regardless of what side of the political spectrum you're on, that we are caught in a cycle of insane hyper-partisan warfare and tit-for-tat retaliation, and that is the thing that we need to, uh... That, that is the ledge we need to walk back from, okay? But the problem that everybody has is that they can only see the other side doing it, you know? They can't see themselves doing it. This is a two-way street. Both sides are doing it. And, um-
- JCJason Calacanis
And that's how deescalation works, is both sides-
- DSDavid Sacks
Yes, and unless, and-
- JCJason Calacanis
... have to concede something-
- DSDavid Sacks
Yes, and unless you can see when your side is doing it, we're never gonna break the cycle. Now, the thing that is happening right now, and I... What Trump did was absolutely outrageous, and I think it, it brought him to an ignominious end in American politics. He will pay for it in the history books, if not in a court of law, okay? But now what has happened is the next step in the tit-for-tat retaliation. Wha- the, the storming of the Capitol has now been used to im- implement a sweeping attack on free speech. You know, the, the Twitter employees who sent that letter to Jack, who've been demanding this for years, have finally gotten their way, and there is a widespread purge going on. And not just of Trump, not just a permanent ban on, o- on Trump and then a whole bunch of other people, you know, conservatives. There are now liberal accounts. There's an account that I wasn't even aware of called Red Scare. They're basically, you know, pretty, pretty much on the left. No one can say exactly what it was that got them banned. I guess they had Steve Bannon on their podcast. They are suddenly banned from Twitter. Nobody knows why. Um, they said-
- JCJason Calacanis
Oh, I, I subscribe to the Red Scare podcast. It's actually, uh... It's, it's called The Dirtbag Left. They're kind of like socialists, um, intelle- trying to be public intellectuals, and it's, it's oddly compelling. I'll leave it at that. Um-
- DSDavid Sacks
But they are now banned from, from Twitter. They somehow got together-
- JCJason Calacanis
L- Let's pause for a second on DJT getting banned from Twitter. This is close to 100 million followers. It's a billion dollars in value. He just had the PGA say they'll never u- do a Trump golf course again. So the ramifi- the real-world ramifications for Trump are he, his, his businesses are gonna be devastated. His platform is gone. But... And I, and I was very pro-Trump staying on Twitter. I thought it was insane to think that the President of the United States would have their Twitter handle removed. That seemed crazy to me. However-
- DSDavid Sacks
Crazy.
- JCJason Calacanis
I- i- it's a crazy concept. That being said-
- DSDavid Sacks
Crazy.
- JCJason Calacanis
... Trump knows how to dance right up to the line on the terms of service, and I think-
- DSDavid Sacks
But here's the thing, here's the thing-
- JCJason Calacanis
I think there's imminent danger, and I think what we don't know is what is concerning to me. The fact that all of these services have turned him off I believe is indicative of Wednesday was under-hyped, and that they really did intend to kidnap, uh, folks and blow off bombs, and the Proud Boys, uh, founder w- was arrested days before with, you know, selling large magazine weapons. I, I think that they wanted to kill and kidnap people, um, and perhaps even, like, hang the vice president.
- DSDavid Sacks
Honestly-
- JCJason Calacanis
I know that sounds crazy, but th- th- that's-
- 43:01 – 59:32
What laws can be written to prevent Big Tech oligarchy in the future?
- JCJason Calacanis
15th."
- DSDavid Sacks
Right. Well, but, so, so part of the problem here is that there is no policy, right? The policy is public outcry. And if there's enough public outcry and there's enough pressure or letter writing from the employees, or there's enough, um, saber-rattling by the people who are gonna run the Senate Judiciary Committee next year-
- JCJason Calacanis
Or the language was so clear...
- DSDavid Sacks
It's, th- there is ... So, so three months ago, I wrote a blog post, um, about the so- the policy that I thought the social media companies should take. I said for moderation. And what I said is, there actually is a moderation policy consistent with the First Amendment that could be implemented, because the First Amendment does not protect many categories of basically dangerous speech. Uh, there's like nine major categories. It includes incitement of violence. It includes, you know, trying to, uh, you know, it, uh, uh, uh, uh, pro- uh, trying to provoke a crime. It, uh, it includes fraud. It includes defamation. There are many categories of speech that aren't protected by the First Amendment and social media companies could have said, "Listen, this is our policy, is we're gonna try and be broadly consistent with the First Amendment, but if somebody goes outside of those lines, then we'll remove it." So there was a way to your, to your point, Jason, I think there was a way to remove some of Trump's treat-, uh, tweets for incitement, consistent with the First Amendment. But that's not what they did. You know, that, that ... And, and maybe that would, i- i- instead what they did is a lifetime ban combined with rounding up, you know, twice the usual number of suspects, combined with a de-platforming, not at the account level, but at, now at the application level by Google, Apple, and Amazon. And none of this has been explained. There is no policy. What it is, is a-
- JCJason Calacanis
No. I mean there is a-
- DSDavid Sacks
... appropriation. Hold on. What it is, is an appropriation-
- JCJason Calacanis
There is a policy.
- DSDavid Sacks
... of power by oligarchs.
- JCJason Calacanis
No, no. There is a policy. The problem is, as we've just discussed, it's an interpretation that must occur. And the interpretation of Wednesday's comments on a tweet might be, okay, yeah, they're borderline, but not enough to shut his account down. And the, and these folks know how to do it. When, when Rudy Giuliani says, "I want a trial by combat," or, you know, if Trump says, "You're not gonna have a country unless you fight, and you have to fight, and we're never gonna accept these results," is that inciting or not?
- DSDavid Sacks
So, so the policy-
- JCJason Calacanis
Well, he did incite people.
- DSDavid Sacks
... the poli- the policy that, that, that I want is something broadly consistent with the First Amendment, uh, because that is-
- JCJason Calacanis
But in those, in those phrases I just told you, is the ... Are those inciting or are those on the borderline if you were making the decision?
- DSDavid Sacks
Well ... Right. So the, you know, putting my lawyer hat on for a second, there's questions of law and questions of fact, okay? And we can-
- JCJason Calacanis
Okay.
- DSDavid Sacks
... debate ... What you're describing are questions of fact. What I'm trying to say is, what, what is the law? What is the policy that we're trying to implement?
- JCJason Calacanis
Well, the law would say those were not direct incitement.
- DSDavid Sacks
No. Well, th- there is no policy. These social media companies don't have any policy. They're making it up as they go along based on the pressure they get.
- JCJason Calacanis
What would you do, David? What would you do with Trump's comments from Wednesday if they were in tweets?
- DSDavid Sacks
Yeah. I'll tell you. So first of all, I would have implemented a, a moderation policy broadly consistent with the First Amendment and then certain tweets that were inciting violence while there was rioting on the Capitol, I would've been okay taking those down. I would've taken those down. Where I think ... And I, and, and I think even doing something until the inauguration, if you think that Trump poses a threat-
- JCJason Calacanis
He does.
- DSDavid Sacks
Uh, I think, I think that's okay. I think that's okay. But-
- JCJason Calacanis
So you would've been fine-
- DSDavid Sacks
And, and I think-
- JCJason Calacanis
... with a 30-day ban or something?
- DSDavid Sacks
Well, like a 10-day ban or whatever. But a lifetime ban, that like ... On what basis, on what constitutional grounds do you justify that? And look, I know it's a private company, but my point is, this idea ... Our free speech rights got privatized, okay? The town square got digitized and centralized. We used to have thousands ... We used to have town squares where people could convene all over this country. We had a multiplicity of newspapers. All that got replaced by a handful of tech monopolists. Our free speech rights got digitized. If they take away our ability to speak, we don't have free speech rights. Who do we appeal to when we get canceled by a Google or Apple? What court can we go to?
- JCJason Calacanis
There is none.
- DSDavid Sacks
Right.
- JCJason Calacanis
You have to create it
- DFDavid Friedberg
I, I, I ...
- 59:32 – 1:09:42
Why Big Tech acted in unison against Trump: internal & external pressure, pending Democratic administration
- DFDavid Friedberg
I, I don't think that the leadership at Big Tech want to be in this position. Um, you know, I think it's easy to blame the individuals, Zuck, uh, Jack, Susan, um, Sundar, whomever. Um, you know, I worked at Google when it was a small... When it was a private company. Um, you know, Chamath knows... worked with Zuck. I think we've all had experience with these individuals. And I think one thing, having spent time with all of them, I can tell you, is that, um, I believe that all of them want information to be freely available and accessible. Um, and that's a really core principle. And the challenge that they're facing is that there is, um, you know, as we talked about, this social pressure to move away from that core principle, because there is always an argument to be made. Um, and there is no universal or unifying kind of court of law that says this is the way things should, um, should be done by law. And as a result, the pressure is what changes the behavior. Um, and that pressure will change, the tides will shift. And, um, and it's a very kind of ugly circumstance, but, you know, I think characterizing the individuals as being in charge of this, Sacks, or...
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
... you know, trying to, um, to handcuff- to- to- to make them feel like they should be handcuffed in some way, um, is, uh, you know, is- is a- is a bit of a mischaracterization and we saw that even, um, in- in the Congressional hearings last July. Uh, just what an absolute joke it was to see Congress try and question these folks because the answers they have, I think, were reasonable and rational. And as we all know as technologists, like, Congress doesn't understand this stuff. The biggest observation to me is that l- the law hasn't kept up with the internet. And, um, you know, if you look at how the- the DMCA was written, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, shortly after it was written, YouTube, uh, with all this user-generated content, saw a lot of copyright content show up. And they would get a take-down notice, which is the legal process by which you remove copyright content, and then as soon as they took it down, someone else would post the same content, and then someone else would post the same content. And then suddenly, you know, Viacom sued Google because they were like, "Look, our copyrighted content is being continuously displayed on your site, on your platform," and that's because the mechanism defined in the DMCA did not keep up with the law. The biggest issue I- I think is- is- is a legal one which is, you know, how do we create laws and how do we create a- a private industry meets government court, uh, body, uh, governing principles that, you know, allows these organizations-
- JCJason Calacanis
Arbitrations-
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
... to operate?
- DSDavid Sacks
No- no- no-
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
Can I say something-
- DSDavid Sacks
... apply... Well, just one sentence. I mean, apply First Amendment obligations to these, um, monopolists. That's what my blog post was about.
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
I'll- I'll tell you where this could go in a bad direction is if you look at... If you think about what social media has become, I would put it on the top of the list that includes other critical national resources that any country has. So for example, if you look at, uh, in Bolivia. You know, as it turns out, Bolivia has incredible access to lithium, right?
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs)
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
Uh, and lithium is like an incredible-
- JCJason Calacanis
Wait- wait- wait, we all knew that. We want to medicate Trump with lithium? Is that what you're saying?
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
No, lithium the-
- JCJason Calacanis
(laughs) I'm joking.
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
... the- the- the- the input into- into lithium-ion batteries. Um, but it also turns out that at every step along the way, Bolivia's basically nationalized every single private investment of a lithium mine. Um, in countries all around the world, there's, you know, numerous examples of this privatization turning into nationalization when something becomes important enough. And-
- JCJason Calacanis
Norway.
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
... part of, I think, what we're struggling with here is, you know, there's gonna be this crazy push-pull in- in- in social media. What do you think happens if, you know, uh, India actually says, "Hey, you know what? Hmm, you're gonna have to nationalize the rails of WhatsApp or the rails of Facebook if you wanna be in my country." Why- why is that so inconceivable?
- DSDavid Sacks
Well- well, yeah, I- I- I think you're right that that's- that- that is a second order- th- that is a second order consequence of censorship that nobody even thinks about. You have the leaders of many countries across the world using Twitter as a- as a channel. Do you think they are now gonna wanna rely on that given that Twitter can censor them at any time? They're gonna hand that lever of national power to Jack Dorsey? No way. They're gonna look at this, I mean, the-
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
Not even Jack Dorsey, David. Somebody in like the bowels of the user, you know, user- user access group. Some-
- DSDavid Sacks
Right.
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
... people- some rando VP some place is gonna stop the president or the prime minister of a country in communicating to their people. It's not possible.
- DSDavid Sacks
Exactly. Exactly. And- and- and this is the- exactly the kind of second order consequence that the people who- who, I think, engaged in this feel-good moment of censoring Trump didn't even think through.
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
Didn't even think through. This is exactly why the best solution would have been a temporary pause on these accounts to let the dust settle.
- JCJason Calacanis
Yeah.
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
But any of these completely fundamental decisions that you can't go back from, what is the technical difference between saying it's banned forever and it's banned for 10 days today? Technically it's the same decision-
- JCJason Calacanis
No technical difference. Yeah.
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
... but exactly what David said, you feed into this emotion just like the people that stormed the Capitol fed into their emotion, and then you wake up the next day with this hangover and you realize to yourself, "What the fuck did I just do?" And I think that's- that's what we're gonna have to sort out now is you cannot unscramble this fucking egg. Because e- irrespective of whatever happens in the United States, there are two to three billion monthly active users, daily active users on these products. They all report to different people, and none of those people that they report to are Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg. They are the presidents and prime ministers, dually elected individuals of these countries. And so you're not gonna allow these two private citizens to disrupt power.
- JCJason Calacanis
Uh, we- we- we have so much information we don't know about what occurred this past week. I think it's- it's all gonna get investigated. It's- it's gonna be like a 9/11 commission all over again or Ukraine, et cetera. Um, and- and I think that's why a pause would be really good to find out exactly... You know, Trump's been telling people to come to this rally, it's gonna be a hell of a show and it's gonna be incredible and you gotta be there on the 6th, it's gonna be out of control. You know, how- how- how much did they know, right? Like, that's what I really want to know is-
- CPChamath Palihapitiya
By the way, I- I- I-
- JCJason Calacanis
How much did they know about what was gonna go down and why are these people carrying zip ties and pipe bombs? You know, like this could've been a lot worse. I think that's why people are responding, uh, this way. And- and I saw something today that I thought was- Sorry about that. I'll- I'll let you pick it up- Go ahead. ... from me, Freeberg. But I saw something today that I thought was, uh, particularly interesting and- and dovetails with reconciliation, which is what the country's gotta do in 2021 and '22, is we gotta reconcile this shit because there's bigger fish to fry like, you know, China and the pandemic and global warming. Uh, one of these people at the airport who was coming home from the rally is now on the do f- do not fly list. They're taking this group of domestic terrorists, uh, is how they're putting these American citizens who got whipped up into a frenzy by Trump and Giuliani, they're calling them domestic terrorists now. Uh, some of them maybe, maybe some of them are just, you know, got caught up in the wrong mob. They're on the do not fly list. This guy couldn't get home and he's freaking out. And then, I don't know if you saw, Lindsey Graham, uh...... with 20 of, uh, the people who were going home from the rallies, chanting at him that this is never gonna end. And, an- and that seemed like a very volatile situation. And, and so, the escalation continues. Go ahead, Freeberg.
- DFDavid Friedberg
I'll tell you, like, it feels to me like this past week has been, um, uh, nothing but fuel for, for both sides, because there isn't a black and white, um, circumstance here, and there isn't a black and white, um, objective truth about, uh, you know, what took place and what motivations were, and, and what the connections were. When I was 16 years old, I went to a rave in downtown LA and-
- 1:09:42 – 1:32:46
Current Pence/Trump relationship, McCarthyism 2.0, should Big Tech be broken up?
- DSDavid Sacks
Sachs, what do you think of this VP, you know, Pence and Trump and their relationship vis-a-vis pardons in this end game here? Because it does seem like Pence was upset, uh, obviously at what occurred, and that Trump didn't even call to check on him (laughs) what was going on. And then a number of these people, 'cause there are QAnon people there, there are, you know, I'm sure Antifa people there, but it was mainly Trump folks. Um, they wanted to capture the VP. That was, for some of them, the explicit purpose of this was to get the vice president and to hold him accountable and, you know, s- there was some speculation to, to do bodily harm to him. What are your thoughts on that? I think one of the most insane aspects of what Trump did was the way (laughs) that he denounced, uh, Pence, who has been the model of a loyal VP. I mean, certainly the other side has, uh, criticized hi- him for that, uh, for being sort of almost a toady. Uh, no one could have been more loyal than Pence w- to Trump the last four years, and Pence simply told him, "Look, I don't have the power to cancel this vote of the electors." You know? And for that fa- you know, just for speaking truth about that, Trump denounced him in front of this, this mob and, and made him a target. And that is one of the more insane aspects of what Trump did. And, uh, you know, I, uh, truck no sympathy f- for that. Um, again, this was an act of, of demagoguery and, uh, this is an ignominious end for, for Trump's presidency. Uh, but e- but in terms of like... You know, I wanna go back to, to what Freeberg just said about how he got kind of caught up in this, i- in, in that mob. I think that that was true, I think, for 90-something percent of the people who were there, is they went to this Trump rally and protest and it turned into a riot and they got caught up in it. Um, and then, in addition to that, there were, I think, hidden in that crowd, some serious agitators who were there to carry out violence and mayhem and had crazy plans. You know, hanging Mike Pence, shooting Pelosi. I mean, there really were, you know, a small number of those people. I don't know what the percentage is, probably one or 2%. It's not-
- JCJason Calacanis
What do you think-
- DSDavid Sacks
It's not, it's not the majority.
- JCJason Calacanis
Sachs, what do you-
- DSDavid Sacks
But, but, but, but-
- JCJason Calacanis
... or Chamath, what do you think will happen if they actually did shoot Pelosi or they did hang Pence?
- DSDavid Sacks
No, no, I don't, I don't-
- JCJason Calacanis
It is a possibility.
- DSDavid Sacks
But see, no, but see, that's threat inflation, what you're doing right there, Jason. It's-
- JCJason Calacanis
Exactly.
- DSDavid Sacks
What you're, what, what you're doing is-
- JCJason Calacanis
No, I think it's a actual, could have happened.
- DSDavid Sacks
It, it- Five other people died, what if one of the people who died was a senator? Yes, it, it could have happened, but here's the problem. People are acting as if everything that could have happened but didn't, actually happened, or may still happen at a later date. That, that is what I call threat inflation and it's the biggest tool the censors have for seizing power. Because it, it, it convinces people they-
- JCJason Calacanis
But you yourself said that these people had those plans, so we, we do have to think about it. I mean, the first time we tried-
- DSDavid Sacks
We have to think about it.
- JCJason Calacanis
... to blow up the World Trade Center, it didn't come down, David.
- DSDavid Sacks
But, but, but-
- JCJason Calacanis
The second time, it did come down.
- DSDavid Sacks
I, I understand, but by constantly beating the drum of this threat-
- JCJason Calacanis
We needed to inflate that threat, didn't we?
- DSDavid Sacks
But, but by constantly beating the drum of these threats, it's encouraging people- No, no, no, wait a minute, stop. ... to give up... Stop. No. We, we did not need to do anything. There was a national security apparatus who needed to do it. Their job isn't to inflate threats. Their job is to investigate apolitically, get to the bottom of shit and fix it. They fucking failed on 9/11. Okay?
- JCJason Calacanis
Yes.
- DSDavid Sacks
We know that conclusively. So talking about it and amping people up, Jason, doesn't do anything.Yeah, and- and I- I'm saying, a better example-
- JCJason Calacanis
I'm not done with amping people up. I'm saying we need to call it-
- DSDavid Sacks
A better example of...
- JCJason Calacanis
... what it was.
- DSDavid Sacks
A better e- better example of threat inflation would be the Iraq War. Remember that? We got to go-
- JCJason Calacanis
Absolutely.
- DSDavid Sacks
... stop Saddam-
- JCJason Calacanis
Yeah, bad data.
Episode duration: 1:37:46
Install uListen for AI-powered chat & search across the full episode — Get Full Transcript
Transcript of episode -3mIJvwcPrw
Get more out of YouTube videos.
High quality summaries for YouTube videos. Accurate transcripts to search & find moments. Powered by ChatGPT & Claude AI.
Add to Chrome