Sheryl Sandberg, plus open-source AI gene editing explained

1. 0:00 – 11:10

   Welcoming Sheryl Sandberg and remembering Dave Goldberg

   1. JCJason Calacanis0:00

      David Sacks had a last minute board meeting, so he will not be joining us.

   2. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:04

      I'll be David Sacks.

   3. JCJason Calacanis0:05

      Please do your best impression.

   4. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:07

      Can you imagine? Hi, Jason.

   5. DFDavid Friedberg0:09

      Hello, sister. How are you?

   6. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:11

      Jason, do you know what I'm about to do? I'm so excited. I'm so excited.

   7. DFDavid Friedberg0:15

      Tell me.

   8. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:16

      Do you remember Fake Chamath?

   9. DFDavid Friedberg0:18

      Of course, yes. Do we have the login?

   10. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:19

       Do you know who that is, of course, right?

   11. DFDavid Friedberg0:22

       Oh, you're gonna reveal who Fake Chamath is? (laughs)

   12. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:23

       I'm revealing.

   13. DFDavid Friedberg0:25

       Oh, wow, it's a big reveal. I mean, if we-

   14. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:27

       Nine years later.

   15. DFDavid Friedberg0:27

       I gotta get... 90 years.

   16. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:28

       I want that handle. I- I would like to get that handle and give it to someone to be... I- I hand it to you, whoever you want.

   17. DFDavid Friedberg0:34

       Well, trust me, there's a lot of people who would love to have the Fake Chamath handle.

   18. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:37

       Well, how do I get it? Do I ask the Tw- can I ask Linda at Twitter for it?

   19. JCJason Calacanis0:42

       Yeah.

   20. DFDavid Friedberg0:42

       I, you know, we might know somebody at Twitter who can reset the password.

   21. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:44

       Maybe you can help me. I'm so credible as the person who deserves that password.

   22. DFDavid Friedberg0:49

       Of all the people who've suffered spending time with Chamath, you're- you're at the top...

   23. JCJason Calacanis0:54

       (laughs)

   24. DFDavid Friedberg0:55

       ... of that list. If anybody has the right to, to mock Chamath, I mean, you've had to watch his growth over 20 years.

   25. JCJason Calacanis1:03

       (laughs)

   26. DFDavid Friedberg1:03

       You've had to suffer.

   27. CPChamath Palihapitiya1:05

       I raised him. I raised Chamath and he raised me right back.

   28. JCJason Calacanis1:10

       We're going all in.

   29. DSDavid Sacks1:11

       Let your winners ride.

   30. JCJason Calacanis1:13

       Rain Man David Sacks. I'm going all in.
2. 11:10 – 28:18

   What led Sheryl to get involved with "Screams Before Silence," reaction to sexual violence on and after 10/7

   1. DFDavid Friedberg11:10

      business. So Friedberg, why don't you kick us off?

   2. JCJason Calacanis11:12

      Well, I just want to zoom out, because I think Sheryl, um, we had, I, I believe a couple conversations after October 7th. Amongst other folks, I've heard that there's been a lot of disappointment that institutions, organizations, ideologies that have been supported by folks like yourself, or maybe you can speak, I don't wanna put words in your mouth, suddenly emerged to be something quite different when threads of antisemitism started to emerge. And folks began to deny certain things based on their ideology about the oppressor/oppressed concept being applied to Israel and Palestine. And, and maybe you can tell us a little bit about the surprise and journey that you've been through since October 7th with respect to some of the groups that you've supported that suddenly seem quite different than what maybe we all thought they were.

   3. SSSheryl Sandberg12:15

      ... prior?

   4. CPChamath Palihapitiya12:16

      Look, it's a great question 'cause I mean-

   5. SSSheryl Sandberg12:19

      And I, I, sorry, and, and that's a conversation-

   6. CPChamath Palihapitiya12:21

      It's a great question.

   7. SSSheryl Sandberg12:21

      ... Sharyl and I have been having that led to saying, "Hey, why don't you come on the show this week, and let's talk about this and, and other topics, particularly given the timing with the release of the film?"

   8. CPChamath Palihapitiya12:31

      It's a great question. I mean, if you had told me on October 6th the following is gonna happen: terrorists are gonna parachute into Israel, they are gonna kill 1,200 people, they are gonna sexually brutalize, brutalize and rape multiple women and men, I would have said, "You're crazy." Then if you would have told me that people were gonna deny, the reports were gonna start coming out, people were gonna say, "I'm a first responder. I saw naked bodies. I saw women bloodied, legs spread," but then people were gonna deny that this happened, I would have said you were crazy. And then if you had told me that what we would be doing on college campuses is not protesting sexual violence as a tool of war by the hands of Hamas, Hamas, misogynistic, homophobic terrorists who are right now holding not just Israelis, but Americans hostage, yet we would be protesting and college kids would be screaming, "We are Hamas," I would have said you were crazy. And that's hit me hard. And for me as a woman, as a very outspoken feminist, it's all hard, but the part that has hit me the hardest is the denial of the sexual violence. That has just been horrible. And so the reports were coming out in November. I wrote an op-ed. And what my op-ed said was no matter what you believe should happen in the Middle East, I believe in a two-state solution, no matter what flag you're flying, march you're going to, you can all be united on one thing, which is sexual violence should never be used as a tool of war. Then I did a video that went pretty viral. But people are denying it and they're attacking articles and attacking reports. And so I went to Israel and I sat down myself with a video crew. This was generously financed by this great philanthropist, Joey Low and his wife. And I sat down there and I asked people, "What did you see with your own eyes?" We sat down with a released hostage who told her story. And this is because people are actually denying or ignoring this. And that is a horrible place for us to be and truly shocking. Truly shocking.

   9. SSSheryl Sandberg14:48

      Let's double-click into that word denial. So, it's a very heightened moment. Everybody is taking sides, everybody's trying to interpret what they think is the right point of view, whether it's in that moment or historically in the arc of how Israel and Palestine have been in conflict. Where does that aspect of denial come from? Have you, have you spent time trying to unpack, like, how do you start to get to a place where you say, "Clearly people were killed," but then when it goes into war crimes and sexual violence, we're actually gonna stop it there because it basically pulls our cause back? So, we can't agree that that actually happened. How, how does that happen? Why is that happening?

   10. CPChamath Palihapitiya15:34

       I mean, you're framing it exactly right, Shamath. That's exactly what happened. So, I mean, you all talk about this a lot, but there's huge polarization. What does that mean? Polarization means I have a view that is so firmly entrenched that I see the world as black and white. Everything has to fit into my view and my narrative. And when it doesn't fit, I don't know what to do, so I reject it. And that's, I think, what's happening, that there is, there are people out there who believe that October 7th was resistance. I wanna be clear. I'm not that person. I do not believe that. I'm horrified by what's happening in Gaza. Every life lost is too much. I want two states living peacefully beside each other. I really want that. But let's say you think October 7th was resistance. Then all of a sudden you're like, "Wait a second, mass rape, genital mutilation of men and women, women and men, women tied to trees, naked, bloodied, legs spread, that doesn't fit your narrative." So what can you do? You can, well, think maybe the world isn't so black and white. Maybe I have to rethink my narrative. Or you can say this didn't happen. And I think it is a travesty and a tragedy that anyone could say that. And I want to be clear, Jason, you started this by saying you always have positions, you always give people room for two sides, and that's fantastic. I think there are not just two sides, multiple sides to the Middle East story, multiple sides to the history, multiple sides what should be going on. There are not two sides on this. This is sexual violence. There is one side. One side, and we are against it. And that's relatively new in the world. To take you back, quick history lesson, which you all know, but I'd love for all your viewers to know. For a long time, the history of mankind, women's bodies were part of war. You got the village, you got the gold, you got the women. And it was only 30 years ago, after the mass rapes of the DRC, Bosnia, the former Yugoslavia, that people said, "No. Rape is not a tool of war. We will prosecute it as a war crime and a crime against humanity." And the feminist groups were the ones who made that happen, the civil rights groups, the human rights groups. They've held since then, in this moment, if our politics drive us to give that up, think about what we give up, 'cause as we're doing this podcast right now, there are hostages in Gaza that we know are being sexually assaulted. There are women in Ukraine, Sudan, Ethiopia, around the world, who are being sexually assaulted right now. Right now. And we can't let that go. This is the one place we need to be united.

   11. SSSheryl Sandberg18:10

       Why are the feminist groups finding themselves aligning more with Hamas than they are with this core, what seems to be and should be a core ideology?

   12. CPChamath Palihapitiya18:22

       So, look, we can't paint them all with one brush. There are feminist groups that have spoken out on this, that have said, you know... NOW did it, the new NARAL did it, they said, "We are against this sexual violence." CARE did it. There are groups that have done it, no matter what else they're working on. A bunch of them have said to me privately, "I- I know you're right. Of course sexual violence isn't okay, and of course this happened, but I can't speak out because all my employees are gonna get upset. I can't speak out because the young people..." And that makes me really sad.

   13. NANarrator18:52

       Hmm.

   14. SSSheryl Sandberg18:52

       But explain that. What does that mean, young people will be upset?

   15. NANarrator18:55

       Yeah, what does that mean?

   16. SSSheryl Sandberg18:55

       To know that- that both things happened?

   17. CPChamath Palihapitiya18:59

       You've got to be able to hold two thoughts at the same time. Again, not my thought, but if you believe October 7th is resistant, you can still believe sexual violence happened. The fact that a group of feminists, none I'm particularly close to, have actually signed letters saying, "This didn't happen," is crazy. Absolutely crazy. I mean, look, I'm gonna read this. The UN Special Representative on sexual violence, Pramila Jayapattonage, traveled to Israel, and here is what she wrote. She said, "Witnessed- I witnessed in Israel were scenes of unspeakable violence perpetrated with shocking brutality, a catalog of the most extreme and inhumane forms of killing, torture, and other horrors, including sexual violence." That's the UN. They're not exactly a pro-Israel group.

   18. SSSheryl Sandberg19:45

       Sheryl, let me ask 'cause I- I think it's important to note some people will counter and say... Look at this article from Grayzone. Grayzone said, "Western media concocts evidence that the UN report on October 7th sex crimes failed to deliver for March 7th." They said, "Western media promoted a UN report as proof Hamas sexually assaulted Israelis, yet the report's authors admitted they couldn't locate a single victim, suggested Israeli officials staged a rape scene, and denounced inaccurate forensic interpretations." I just want to give you an opportunity to respond-

   19. CPChamath Palihapitiya20:14

       Yeah.

   20. SSSheryl Sandberg20:14

       ... to Grayzone's article, because I think a lot of folks have pointed to that article and the articles that that organization has put out as being representative of an alternative view that the sexual violence may- maybe didn't happen, as evidenced in your film. Maybe you can address it. Give you a chance to do that.

   21. CPChamath Palihapitiya20:31

       Yeah, well, the key thing you said there is, where are the... They're asking, "Where are the victims?" Well, let me tell you where the victims are. They're dead. They're dead. That is why we called this film S- sorry, Screams Before Silence. I have a story in this film. This woman, Tali, I went with her to the trailer where she hid. She was at the Nova Film Festival, she's a nurse. She hid in a trailer. I walked in with her to that trailer the first time she'd been in there, and you could see her body, like, shake. And she- we didn't- this didn't make the final cut of the film, but she picked up a black sweater, and I think she might've been wearing that sweater. I was afraid to ask her, but she was, like, shaking. She hid in that trailer for, I don't know, five, six, seven hours, and she heard... Sometimes she would hear, like, a little scream, like, "Ah," someone's pointing a gun at you and a shot. But sometimes, she would hear her scream over and over and over, "Stop, stop." And then, for, like, a long period, like, 15 minutes, and then a shot. And then when she got out of that trailer, there were naked bodies where she heard those screams. The victims are dead. Most of them are dead. There is exactly one person who is an escaped or released hostage. Her name is Omeed Sazana. She gave a video interview, you all saw it. We have the only video interview in this documentary. And she tells her story very clearly. She was held hostage for months, she was chained to a bed. And as she said it, he- her captor, forced him to do a s- commit a sexual act on her. This woman is so brave and she's told me, she's speaking out because there are still hostages there, but she is the only living witness to speak out. We think there are a few more who are in deep trauma. But there were 1,200 people killed, and at least dozens of them were sexually brutalized, assaulted.

   22. SSSheryl Sandberg22:23

       I, um-

   23. CPChamath Palihapitiya22:23

       And that is why they're not speaking out.

   24. SSSheryl Sandberg22:25

       Just as a follow-up, what is the social and political motivation of a group like Grayzone and other appointed deniers? What are they trying to accomplish by denying?

   25. CPChamath Palihapitiya22:34

       They're trying to accomplish their narrative that October 7th was justified resistance. Because even they understand that it is not-

   26. SSSheryl Sandberg22:44

       Because this taints it- because the sexual violence taints it in a way, right? As opposed to just being soldiers killing soldiers, the sexual violence aspect of it taints the valor of the resistance. Is that a fair way to summarize it?

   27. CPChamath Palihapitiya22:55

       Yes.

   28. SSSheryl Sandberg22:56

       Okay.

   29. CPChamath Palihapitiya22:56

       Even they don't believe. And it's interesting, Hamas has been proudly talking about who they killed, but even they deny the sexual violence. "That wouldn't happen, it's against our religion." The sexual violence doesn't fit the narrative. But I want to be clear-

   30. SSSheryl Sandberg23:12

       Right.
3. 28:18 – 53:03

   Paths forward, documentary decisions, involvement of women in protests

   1. CPChamath Palihapitiya28:18

   2. SSSheryl Sandberg28:18

      Sheryl, what is the response, what is the response in Israel? How do you, how do you judge what Netanyahu's doing, both in reaction to the events, but then in reaction to these specific aspects of the events? What are they doing that's different or what would you wish they were doing differently or can you just give us a sense of how people are processing e- this aspect?

   3. CPChamath Palihapitiya28:44

      I mean, look, we need peace. We need two sides and two leaders that are committed to peace, like long-term peace, and there's a lot going wrong, you know? But on this aspect, you violate... someone said it in the film, you violate a woman, you violate a country.

   4. SSSheryl Sandberg29:03

      Yeah.

   5. CPChamath Palihapitiya29:03

      There's a reason sexual violence is used as a war crime. There's a reason it was used in the DRC and Bosnia and it's being used in Ukraine today because... and I can see it in your reaction. I mean, I watch y'all-

   6. SSSheryl Sandberg29:15

      Yeah, it's to humiliate a, it's to humiliate a people, right? It's to humiliate a country, right?

   7. CPChamath Palihapitiya29:18

      You humiliate... look at, look at the three of you. Like, y'all don't cry a lot. Like, this is traumatic because you all have mothers and daughters. Like, you can feel what happens to a country, and that's why this was done. This was not an accident. This was on purpose. And unfortunately, it works. Sexual viol-

   8. JCJason Calacanis29:41

      Sheryl, I, I, I think, I think, uh, like, for us to have a path towards peace, there has to be a degree, despite the pain being felt, a degree of empathy for the other side's desires, the other side's pain, the other side's feeling that they were enacting a resistance against an oppression. How does one side embrace that aspect having gone through this? How, how do we get to a point that a people can say, "I have empathy for the resistance," after feeling this sort of pain? And this is the age-old story of war, eye for an eye, it never ends. It always goes on. What's the right path here to hear the other side, to hear the kids on campuses, to hear the...

   9. DFDavid Friedberg30:30

      ... the people in Palestine, uh, to hear the, the world saying, "We feel free Palestine," um, a- after going through this?

   10. CPChamath Palihapitiya30:41

       Well, I can tell you what I believe. I believe we need peace, I believe we need two states, I believe th- those states need to be run by peaceful leaders who want prosperity for the other side. Look, I believe we should be able to look at anyone anywhere in the world, but certainly the Palestinian people living in Gaza and say, "Any death is too much." One death is too much. No innocent lives should be killed. No women, no children, no innocent lives should be killed. But I think also as part of that path to peace, there needs to be forgiveness, but there needs to be a clear, clear articulation of what is not acceptable ever. And the sexual violence is not acceptable ever. And-

   11. DFDavid Friedberg31:25

       If you were Net- if you were Netanyahu-

   12. CPChamath Palihapitiya31:26

       Sorry?

   13. DFDavid Friedberg31:26

       ... what would you do differently?

   14. CPChamath Palihapitiya31:27

       (laughs)

   15. DFDavid Friedberg31:27

       I'm sorry for cutting you off.

   16. CPChamath Palihapitiya31:29

       No, no, I mean, (laughs) I don't have an answer to peace in the Middle East. I don't.

   17. DFDavid Friedberg31:33

       Yeah.

   18. CPChamath Palihapitiya31:33

       I mean, I wish-

   19. DFDavid Friedberg31:34

       Okay.

   20. CPChamath Palihapitiya31:34

       ... I did, but I do have a very strong view that we are not gonna get to peace when we are apologizing or denying crimes against humanity and crime... mass rape of women. Well, that is not the path to peace. The path to peace is not saying this didn't happen. The path to peace is saying this happened. No matter what side of the fence you're on, no matter what side of the world you're on, if you're the far right, the far left, anywhere in the world, we're not gonna let this happen again, and we're gonna get to peace to make sure. Denial is not gonna get us there.

   21. DFDavid Friedberg32:04

       Why has the other side captivated so much of the youth in the United States? Wh- you're very close to Harvard. Maybe tell us what's gone on at Harvard over the last few years. How did we end up in this place where so much of the youth is so sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and not as moved as you are, um, by the trauma experienced on the other side?

   22. CPChamath Palihapitiya32:25

       I mean, y'all are... I would throw that question right back to you. I know you've talked about, you know, narratives and oppressor and oppressed, and again, polarization is where you can only have one view, and you cannot tolerate anything that doesn't fit one view, and I don't know of anything that's that clear and that simple. I mean, I'll throw that right back to you. You all have been articulate on this, and I think have a lot to say.

   23. DFDavid Friedberg32:49

       Well, I mean, this... uh, you said it earlier, Sharyl, this tolerance for ambiguity, this ability, the cognitive dissonance to be able to hold in your head that the people of Gaza are suffering. Perhaps, I guess, the other side would say, you know, they would, they would start down this whataboutism. It's not my position, but what about what Netanyahu is doing? What about aid to people suffering in Gaza? You've addressed that. You don't believe anybody should suffer. But I just wanna talk a little bit about this conspiracy theory that it didn't happen. Also in the documentary, the savagery, you chose not to show the graphic photos that, uh, you saw and that you're clearly traumatized by, and, uh, a lot of us New Yorkers had a similar experience with 9/11 and, and watching that up close. It is what terrorists do. Terrorists do these things to cause massive trauma, to make it impossible to de-escalate. That is the sadism. That is the, the pure evil of, of, of this brand of terrorism, is to make it impossible for the good people of the world to unwind or, or de-escalate. And, and it's... I think part of the process is accepting what happened and, and coming to some truth. And, and the truth can be there are people dying unnecessarily in Gaza, there are people starving in Gaza, there are children who are not getting food and water. All of those can be true, and this horrific sexual, uh, sadism and violence that occurred is also true. You... And I... In, in the documentary-

   24. CPChamath Palihapitiya34:22

       Wait, that was awesome. I couldn't have said that better my- that, that was exactly right, Jason. That is exactly the point and the path. Sorry. Please continue. That was perfect.

   25. DFDavid Friedberg34:30

       No, I, I mean, I, I'm, I'm trying to make sense of this. I, I... and I, and I come to it with humility, you know. Uh, you know, this podcast, you know, hits a certain notes with people and, "Oh, how can people in Silicon Valley or whatever discuss these topics?" Listen, we're all discussing them. We're all trying to make sense of, of a very confusing world. But you made two choices in the documentary. One was to leave yourself out of it largely. Your role in the documentary is, you know, to hug people and, and to cry alongside them and to witness this stuff. You talk for, I think, 90 seconds in the whole documentary. I think this was a... an important decision you made. And then you made a decision, which I'm not sure if I agree with, which is to not show the photos. I am of the belief that people should see what happened on 9/11 as a New Yorker who witnessed it and my brothers in the fire department, and I had PTSD from it. I think people have to see these things. You chose not to out of respect for the family. She put a note at the end. Explain this choice, 'cause I know you must have struggled with it, and there are photos that you've seen of women with their breasts cut off. I hate... I, I, I don't want to say these things. I know it's very traumatic, but I believe people have to understand what's in these photos that you saw. Nails in women's private parts, breasts that have been cut off. This is undeniable. If you want to deny the rapes happened or whatever, you cannot deny the photos that you saw. You chose not to put them in. I understand that decision, respect for the family. Is there not a... T- take us into that decision, uh, because maybe there's a... maybe you need to... And the, and the, and the woman who, who chose to do the interview with you, she's so brave. She said, "I had to do this because I wanted to combat the denialism." And, uh, I don't know who The Gray Zone is, you know, the, the... and I don't know why people are giving it a ton of attention, but they, you know, they are considered... The first line of the Wikipedia page is it's a fringe website, so just l- leave it at that. I don't know if it is or if it isn't, but that, that's the first line on the Wikipedia page. Is there not a case to be made for making a second version of the documentary that shows exactly these things, so people can stop denying it? 'Cause then they... you would have to come to the place that these...

   26. SSSheryl Sandberg36:36

       ... that, that the people w- who are one-sided created fake images?

   27. CPChamath Palihapitiya36:41

       Well, that's what-

   28. SSSheryl Sandberg36:42

       Is, is that, is that where we're, we're getting to in this conspiracy thea- filled world, that the dozens of people you interviewed are part of a grand conspiracy and the photos are doctored? So just talk about that decision. You, you must have had an important meeting, uh, about that.

   29. CPChamath Palihapitiya36:59

       Look, we didn't really have a choice. I agree with you. I think the world seeing this would probably be necessary at some point. I do think the deniers will deny. They'll say, "Oh, you can doctor any photo." So you're gonna have to believe the person who took them anyway. We didn't have that choice. These photos are held by people who have taken a vow as part of their work as first responders of processing and getting bodies ready for burial that they won't show them. Uh, it also, you know, we've made this freely available on YouTube, so anyone can watch it, no firewalls. You know, anyone can watch this thing if you're over 18. Y- y- it wouldn't meet YouTube's standards, so that would be taken down. I mean, we, we can't show them right now for those two reasons.

   30. SSSheryl Sandberg37:46

       Mm-hmm.
4. 53:03 – 59:45

   Post-interview debrief

   1. SSSheryl Sandberg53:03

   2. CPChamath Palihapitiya53:03

      Thank you.

   3. DFDavid Friedberg53:03

      Wow. I need to take a deep breath here, Chamath Freeburg. This was, um, super emotional for me.

   4. SSSheryl Sandberg53:09

      Yeah. Intense, huh?

   5. DFDavid Friedberg53:10

      Uh-

   6. SSSheryl Sandberg53:10

      Man.

   7. DFDavid Friedberg53:10

      I didn't know if I could do it, I'll be honest. I have so many emotions, Chamath, about Dave. I have so many feelings about this situation. This has been hard.

   8. SSSheryl Sandberg53:17

      When I watched the documentary, I thought the most important thing is there are these - and you said it, Jason - in the fog of war, there are things that happen that are just wholly unacceptable. I remember when I was getting older, and I was curious, why did my family not go back to Sri Lanka? And what do the Tamils, which is a small minority, Hindu minority, in the majority Buddhist population, why did they feel so out of sorts? And we were part of the Buddhist majority. And when you insert yourself into that struggle and understand where they're coming from, it's jarring because you have to really, like, re-underwrite, okay, what are we fighting for? What are they fighting for? And the most important thing that I got to is, what is allowed? Because then you would see things. And the unfortunate part of Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka's history was in the final parts of the war that ended it, there were some incredible atrocities that were committed. And, you know, the United Nations and international court system tried to find justice for the Tamil minority population in what happened in those final hours of that war. I, I don't think that they did, for, for, for the most part. But it's just to show you that these things leave deep wounds that frankly can be reopened-

   9. DFDavid Friedberg54:44

      Mm.

   10. SSSheryl Sandberg54:44

       ... in a moment. So, it's very important that I think these things are ... and I hate to say it so unemotionally, but documented.

   11. DFDavid Friedberg54:52

       Absolutely.Absolutely.

   12. SSSheryl Sandberg54:54

       For those that have— that don't even understand the Holocaust, if you go to the Holocaust Museum, if you're lucky enough to do it in Israel I would encourage you to do it, but even in Washington, you know the totality of what happened. There's, there's certain places that document these important moments in history and if, and if this is one of those moments to the Israeli people, I just encourage them, please make sure that you minimize the mis and disinformation. As complicated as that may be to do, it is incredibly important so that you can create-

   13. JCJason Calacanis55:25

       And- and- do- and doing so does not dissolve empathy for the other side's cause-

   14. SSSheryl Sandberg55:32

       No, not at all.

   15. JCJason Calacanis55:32

       ... or for the other side's motivations or objectives. Having empathy for the circumstances that happened here is the equivalent of having empathy for the plight of the Palestinian people and what they're dealing with today following October 7th. And I think that we need to recognize that both things can be true. We can have empathy for both sides.

   16. SSSheryl Sandberg55:51

       Yeah. And by the way, humans have a way of making decisions, which I think is pretty predictable, which is once you have a point of view, there are things that you believe are facts and then there's all this other stuff that you have degrees in which you believe that are essentially conjecture. The most important thing in really important debates is to move something from that gray zone into the box of facts-

   17. DFDavid Friedberg56:18

       So to speak, yeah.

   18. SSSheryl Sandberg56:19

       And that is the only way that causes people to re-underwrite their principal views. It doesn't matter what topic we're talking about. So, the more that we're able to document and actually make these things unambiguous, I think it actually has a really important role to play in how these young people view what it is that they're a part of. I'm totally pro-protesting, I'm totally in support of, you know, standing up for the things that you believe in. I'm not in support of overlooking atrocities.

   19. DFDavid Friedberg56:50

       I mean, it's- it's well said, Chamath. And, you know, the response, I- I can tell you, to, you know, this, this episode and the response I got for just tweeting, you know, "Hey, this is an important documentary to watch," is, you know, the whataboutis- aboutism, the other side, and documenting what's happening in Gaza. And, you know, we, we have this search for truth right now, which is very difficult because institutions have a lot of self-inflicted wounds. We live in an age of conspiracy theory, you know, and- and there are reports of crisis actors, you know, in Gaza creating fake deaths and fake videos. So, you- you know, now you have one side saying, "Oh, the- the people of Palestine or Hamas are... the numbers aren't correct of the number of people who died. The- the suffering's not correct. These images aren't correct." The fog of war is gonna be thick for a while here, folks, and it's gonna take us a while. And Chamath's exactly right, you gotta document this. You gotta get to some ground truth. You gotta get to some common facts so we can all objectively look at those common facts and, you know, listen, um, it's a shame David Sacks couldn't make it today, but it would have rea- he's really missed here because, you know, we have that same thing with the- the- the war in Ukraine. And w- it's very hard for us in this current media landscape where we're quoting from news sources and anonymous Twitter accounts, fake videos, it's gonna get worse with AI, it's gonna be harder and harder to find the truth. And this is where your own personal morality, ethics, and- and I- I'm not sure who brought this up during our- our talk 'cause I'm emotionally spent, I gotta be honest, um, it's a little hard for me to collect myself here, but man, you know, it, you- you have to have some basic moral principles here. Children, women, rape, sexual assault, i- i- we- we all can agree on this. You said this in... the week after October 7th, Freeberg, you had a very powerful moment on the show, that- that you don't want to have to decide between- between October 7th being horrific and children dying in Gaza being horrific. And you don't want to have to be painted with one side or the other. You want to believe, as a moral person, that all suffering needs to end and we collectively, as a species, in 2024 on this planet can work together to- to just agree that certain things should never happen, i- i- and- and to try to resolve these horrible conflicts. I'm- I'm- I'm so spent right now and it- it was just very difficult for me to watch that documentary.

   20. JCJason Calacanis59:28

       Yeah.

   21. DFDavid Friedberg59:28

       I don't know where we go from here, gentlemen. I- I'm fine ending the show here-

   22. JCJason Calacanis59:31

       Well, well let's, let's just-

   23. DFDavid Friedberg59:31

       ... or taking a 10 minute break and then maybe doing one or two news stories.

   24. JCJason Calacanis59:34

       Ta- take a break, we'll come back. Let's take five to ten minutes. (music)

5. 59:45 – 1:15:22

   Science Corner: Open-source AI gene editing with OpenCRISPR-1

   1. DFDavid Friedberg59:45

      All right everybody, welcome back to the program. Yep, it's not easy to do a pivot here, but we collected ourselves, took a deep breath and you've all been asking for a science corner and so there's a really important story that Freeberg has been educating us about on the group chat. There's a startup that just open sourced an AI gene editor. Yes, you heard that right, open source gene a- editor powered by AI. It's called Profluent Bio, am I correct? Profluent, uh...

   2. JCJason Calacanis1:00:15

      Yeah, Berkeley-based startup, Profluent Bio.

   3. DFDavid Friedberg1:00:17

      Great.

   4. JCJason Calacanis1:00:18

      Have we talked about CRISPR and gene editing before on the show or no?

   5. DFDavid Friedberg1:00:21

      I think we have mentioned it. It would be good as a primer for you to just explain from first principles what is CRISPR, why it's important, and then get into this.

   6. JCJason Calacanis1:00:29

      So, there's debate around who discovered CRISPR-Cas systems first and found their application, but- but generally-

   7. SSSheryl Sandberg1:00:34

      Whose side are you on? The Jennifer Doudna side or the MIT? Is it- is it a profit ability?

   8. JCJason Calacanis1:00:40

      I'm an- I'm an open source guy, which is why I'm excited about this topic today 'cause I- I don't give a (beep) . I think things that are in nature are in nature.

   9. DFDavid Friedberg1:00:46

      What is CRISPR?

   10. JCJason Calacanis1:00:46

       And I don't think you should be able to pat- I don't think you should be able to patent stuff that you discover in nature, so.

   11. SSSheryl Sandberg1:00:50

       Okay.

   12. DFDavid Friedberg1:00:50

       Right. So let's step back for a second, Freeberg, explain what CRISPR is to somebody who's heard the term but doesn't actually know in your unique ability to explain science-

   13. JCJason Calacanis1:00:57

       Yeah, so-

   14. DFDavid Friedberg1:00:58

       ... to crisp the rest of us.

   15. JCJason Calacanis1:01:00

       ... CRISPR-Cas, CRISPR-Cas, C-A-S...CAS proteins, C-A-S proteins, are proteins that can go in to a cell and they have what's called a guide RNA, a little piece of RNA attached to them that allows that protein to find its way to a specific point in DNA in that cell, in the nucleus of that cell. And when that protein hits that specific location, it cuts it like scissors, and so the protein finds the part of the DNA it's looking to cut, attaches itself, cuts the, the DNA, and a cut is made. And so this capability was discovered actually in bacteria, and it was an evolved system that bacteria developed to actually protect themselves from viruses. So the CRISPR-CAS complex emerged through evolution where bacteria started to figure out that they could cut up viral DNA, so they made these proteins. These proteins would attach to viral DNA and destroy the, the viruses that came into the, the, um, uh, the bacterial cells. So scientists, arguably from Harvard, from Berkeley, and from other places around the world, in the early 2010s, started to do research and identified ways that we could leverage these proteins that we were discovering in nature to do targeted DNA editing in human cells and plant cells and other cells. So rather than them just being used as a defense mechanism by bacteria, that we could harness these proteins and make them useful to go in and do specific gene editing. Now, why would we wanna do gene editing? Gene editing, if done precisely enough and efficiently enough, would allow us to go in and fix genetic diseases in humans, for example. It would allow us to take T cells and reprogram them to go and attack cancer cells back in the human body. It would allow us, in the case of agriculture, which I'm very close to and what I work on every day, to figure out ways to make specific changes to the genes of a plant to make that plant grow in higher yield or change itself to be disease-resistant or drought-resistant, or other features that might be helpful to agriculture and to humanity. So gene editing became this amazing toolkit that emerged around 2012, 2013 and just blew up on the market, and the main original foundational patents, which are now mostly held after a lot of litigation by the Broad Institute, which is, you know, there's this kind of joint patent arrangement with the Broad and MIT and Harvard, are being used in medical applications, are being used in agriculture applications. They're being used in all these different tools, but they're patented. There's royalties, there's fees, all this stuff. And in the years that followed, many other CAS proteins started to get discovered. All these different types of proteins were discovered, and the reason you wanna use different proteins is you wanna improve the efficiency, so how frequently or how good are these proteins at editing the cell, and eliminate off-target effects, meaning the protein isn't making cuts or making changes to other parts of the DNA that you don't want it to. So there's been this search underway for the last decade for new CAS proteins and developing new CAS proteins, and dozens have been discovered. People are trying to patent them. People are trying to make them, uh, do special things. They can only change one letter. All these different tools are emerging. So we went from having absolutely no ability to do gene editing just over a decade ago to suddenly having all of these different tools that could do gene editing really efficiently, really cheaply, really, really affordably, really scalably, and more precisely. So, this company, ProFluent, they actually used an AI model, what they call a protein language model, to create and train an entirely new library of CAS proteins that do not exist in nature today. So they basically took 26 terabases, so 26 trillion letters of assembled genomes and metagenomes, this is, uh, from other, uh, from various species, and start to simulate new CAS proteins that could be useful to replace the ones that are on the market today or improvements on what's in the market today. And they found one that they called OpenCRISPR1, and they made it publicly available under an open source license. So any startup, any research lab, any individual, any scientist can use this particular CAS protein to go in and make edits without having to deal with patent, and IP, and claims on who owns what that they found in nature. And this particular protein that they identified is 400 mutations away from anything that they've seen in nature. So basically, the AI model started to learn what sequence of DNA generated what structure of protein that was really good at being a gene editor, and they started to discover and iterate on building new ones, and the AI started to predict, "Hey, this would be a good gene editor. This would be-"

   16. SSSheryl Sandberg1:05:58

       Mm-hmm.

   17. JCJason Calacanis1:05:58

       ... "a good gene editor." And they came up with dozens of new gene-editing molecules that don't exist in nature today. They identified one that they then sequenced. They created it. They put it in a lab. They tested it, and it turned out to be much better than, uh, Cas9-

   18. SSSheryl Sandberg1:06:13

       So they-

   19. JCJason Calacanis1:06:13

       ... which is the main one used in the market.

   20. SSSheryl Sandberg1:06:15

       S- so they used an AI model to find a new guide RNA.

   21. JCJason Calacanis1:06:21

       To find a new CAS protein. So the guide RNA is just RNA that's like a, that's like the key. Think about... A CRISPR-CAS system has two components. One is the CAS protein. That's the giant protein that goes in and cuts DNA, and i- attached to it is what's called a guide RNA.

   22. SSSheryl Sandberg1:06:39

       I see.

   23. JCJason Calacanis1:06:39

       That guide RNA is the specific letters, and those specific letters are like a key in a lock. They go attach to a particular part of the DNA, and then that giant protein cuts in that exact spot.

   24. SSSheryl Sandberg1:06:48

       Mm-hmm.

   25. JCJason Calacanis1:06:49

       And so what they, what everyone's been working on is new proteins, and they've been trying to find new CAS proteins that aren't gonna go do off-target cutting, that aren't gonna make mistakes, that are gonna be perfect at making the exact cut you want to make. So everyone's always trying to improve the efficiency and reduce the off-target effects of these systems.And so what they did is they tried to create a new protein that doesn't exist by learning from all of these other Cas proteins that exist in nature today and identifying the three-dimensional structure of them, and allow the model to predict a Cas protein that might actually be better than anything that's found in nature today.

   26. SSSheryl Sandberg1:07:20

       So it works around every single existing patent?

   27. JCJason Calacanis1:07:24

       Well, that's gonna be tested in the courts later I'm sure, but they open-sourced it, so they- they're not claiming any IP on it, they're not making any claims on it with the patent office and they're saying, "Look, it's free and available."

   28. SSSheryl Sandberg1:07:33

       I'm on the same page as you. If this is, th- this was occurring billions of years ago, and it just took us billions of years to actually observe it occurring naturally in nature, it's absolutely ridiculous that a patent would be granted on that. Now, the implementation of that in a commercial use case, that's fine. Be able to have-

   29. DFDavid Friedberg1:07:50

       Yeah. No, this is happening, I guess, in the psychedelic space with psilocybin, MDMA-

   30. JCJason Calacanis1:07:57

       (laughs)

Episode duration: 1:15:22