Thriving in the AI Era: Career, Policy, and Venture Advice

Name: Anthropic's Hidden Money Network Will COLLAPSE Open AI Competition - Bill Gurley Exposes All!
Uploaded: 2026-04-23T13:01:05+00:00
Duration: 1 h 45 min 11 s
Channel: Tom Bilyeu
Description: Summary and key takeaways on Thriving in the AI Era: Career, Policy, and Venture Advice, covering Individual Strategy in the AI Era The most reliable shield
Tom Bilyeu
Apr 23, 2026
•
105 min video
•
1 min read
YouTube video ID: Yy659EQA2k4
Source: YouTube video by Tom Bilyeu — Watch original video
PDF
The most reliable shield against AI disruption is to become the most AI‑enabled version of yourself. Skepticism about AI becomes dangerous, especially for academics and older professionals who cling to legacy tools. Humans evolve with their instruments; refusing a superior technology leads to obsolescence, just as Björn Borg’s wooden‑racket comeback failed when the sport had moved to graphite. High‑agency people treat AI as jet fuel or a rocket booster that multiplies their productivity.
Philosophy of Success

Curiosity functions like a perpetual motion machine, constantly generating energy for new ideas. The “resume arms race” begins in sixth grade, pressuring students into early specialization and burning out later. Passion outweighs perseverance; without genuine fascination, perseverance turns into a grind. When work aligns with a natural fascination, it feels free, boosting performance and resilience.
Policy and Regulatory Capture

Regulatory capture occurs when incumbents write the rules that protect their market share, raise prices, and block competition. In the United States, the financial and healthcare sectors feel the heaviest impact. State‑versus‑state competition—illustrated by Austin’s zoning reforms that lowered rents for four years—creates a laboratory for better governance. Policies are often judged by intent rather than results, a mistake that obscures true effectiveness.
Future of Work and Education

The “resume arms race” forces students to declare majors before they have explored diverse interests, limiting curiosity‑driven learning. AI promises personalized education that can restore exploration and reduce burnout. Open‑source models act as powerful competitive forces, spreading ideas freely and fostering prosperity. Startups begin as “pirates,” breaking norms to disrupt, but must transition to a “navy” structure to scale sustainably.
Takeaways

Becoming the most AI‑enabled version of yourself is the strongest defense against AI‑driven disruption.
Regulatory capture lets incumbents write rules that protect their market share and raise prices, especially in finance and healthcare.
Curiosity fuels continuous innovation, while passion, not mere perseverance, makes work feel free and sustainable.
State‑level policy experiments, such as Austin’s housing reforms, demonstrate how competition can produce better outcomes.
Startups must evolve from pirate‑like disruption to navy‑like structure to achieve lasting scale.
Frequently Asked Questions

Why is being the most AI‑enabled version of yourself the best protection against AI disruption?

Because AI amplifies productivity, and the most AI‑enabled individuals can leverage it as a rocket booster, staying ahead of tools that render older skills obsolete. This approach turns AI from a threat into a personal advantage, preventing obsolescence.
How does regulatory capture affect competition in the US financial and healthcare sectors?

Incumbents use lobbying power to draft regulations that create entry barriers, raise prices, and limit new competitors. In finance and healthcare, these capture mechanisms preserve market dominance and hinder innovation, making it harder for startups to challenge established players.
Who is Tom Bilyeu on YouTube?

Tom Bilyeu is a YouTube channel that publishes videos on a range of topics. Browse more summaries from this channel below.
Does this page include the full transcript of the video?

Yes, the full transcript for this video is available on this page. Click 'Show transcript' in the sidebar to read it.
Helpful resources related to this video

If you want to practice or explore the concepts discussed in the video, these commonly used tools may help.
Grit The Power Of Passion And Perseverance Recommended
This book by Angela Duckworth explores the core theme of passion versus perseverance, which the guest identifies as the primary driver of professional success.
Amazon →
The Coddling Of The American Mind Book
This book by Jonathan Haidt is referenced in the brief regarding the 'resume arms race' and the negative impact of modern educational pressures on youth.
Amazon →
The Theory Of Economic Regulation George Stigler
This foundational text by George Stigler explains the concept of regulatory capture, a central topic of the discussion regarding how incumbents stifle competition.
Amazon →
High Quality Ergonomic Mechanical Keyboard
As the guest emphasizes becoming the 'most AI-enabled version of yourself,' high-quality hardware is essential for professionals spending long hours interacting with AI tools.
Amazon →
Links may be affiliate links. We only include resources that are genuinely relevant to the topic.
Summarize another video
Full Transcript YouTube

One of the greatest tennis players who
ever lived, retired, came back just two
years later, and got absolutely
destroyed by players with half his
talent. So, what happened? My guest
today, Bill Gurley, has the answer, and
it applies to everyone facing down AI.
Bill is one of the greatest venture
capital investors of all time. An early
backer of Uber, Zillow, and OpenTable,
he spent his career studying the exact
pattern of who wins and who gets wiped
out when a technology wave hits. He
believed that Bjornneborg, the tennis
player whose career died fast, got left
behind for the exact reason AI is going
to destroy so many careers. Bill and I
discuss the most dangerous response to
AI, how to navigate the AI
transformation well, and why some people
want AI while others fear it. Without
further ado, I bring you Bill Gurley.
Between AI and massive political
upheaval, this is a moment of profound
transition for basically everybody. As
an investor, how do you think about
identifying what the future is most
likely to hold given there's no
certainties? And how should people
position themselves for that? Well,
economically
>> when I'm talking about investment
advice, you know, it's I'm always very
careful to separate kind of an
individual from an institution, right? I
just think they're two very different
things. for an individual. I think you
have to I always say if you haven't read
a random walk down wall street by Burton
male then I really don't want to give
you advice because you need some kind of
frame rock or bedrock before you dive
in. And that book I think is the best
way to get there. Um at this point, you
know, so much of AI is already reflected
in the stock prices. So, I don't think
there's an insight you're going to have
about AI that you're going to be able to
that that that hasn't already been
accounted for. Unless you think it's
going to be less disruptive, then then
you might be able to go in and value by
some of the stuff that's been hit more
recently on concerns concerns of
disruption. Um, the the piece of advice
I would have for everyone about AI in
general is the best way to protect
yourself against AI is to be the most AI
enabled version of yourself you can
possibly be. So, everyone, no matter
what what industry you're in, no matter
what you're focused on, like you really
need to understand what it's capable of
in your field kind of on the edge. Um,
and curious people do that. Like the
curious people have already done that.
They don't need to be told to do that. I
think the most dangerous thing you could
possibly um have about AI is to be
skeptical about it and therefore to not
be learning about it. And there are
there are a lot of people in that place.
Um especially a lot of older people. I
found a lot of academics are in that
place. It's a really dangerous place to
be. Uh because this thing is is
different. It's like really important
and different. Now, I have an algorithm
that runs in my head that says people
just as a species fear change, won't
embrace it, that every technological t
change moss over a generation or two.
Um, do you have like a framework that
people can use to
>> But not everybody. My my 89year-old
father, you know, has Bluetooth uh, you
know, hearing aids and watches Tik Tok
videos on woodworking. Like, I mean, you
like them already.
>> Like, it's possible like to not be
afraid. But I agree with you, a lot of
people do. Uh especially when it um
threatens careers. That's where people
get particularly protective and take on
a bit of a victimization kind of
mindset. And it's dangerous. Like it
puts you further behind. There's a great
anecdote. Um Bu I think it was Bejorn
Borg. He retired real early in his from
an age perspective like I think it was
around 30 and he tried to make a
comeback when he was like 36 or
something. I I'll probably get in the
the specific ages wrong, but he in that
window where he was retired, the entire
industry switched to these big-headed
graphite rackets and he came back and he
tried to do his comeback with the wooden
racket. He had to get them made from a
manufacturer cuz no one sold them
anymore. Um, he got obliterated like
like the and and we evolved with our
tools. humans evolve with their tools
and if the industry moved to a bigger
better racket like you just don't have a
choice not to but I love that anecdote
because it's easy to laugh at Bujornborg
with his wooden racket but you got to
see that you know in yourself if you're
a denier of these AI tools
>> so when I look at the history of this
it's pretty brutal so you've got the
industrial revolution 8 call it one to
two generations the great
electrification Same thing the
internetification I think it the data
indicates and I'm certainly open to a
debate but the data indicates that some
of the deaths of despair that we see are
from people that were north of say 35ish
that just were never able to matter
again from a career perspective and
especially for men that's just it
damages them damages them
psychologically so profoundly that they
just spiral out and pull out of the job
market essentially entirely. So, when I
think about your dad, I worry and I'm
hoping that you have some
counterveailing insights here, I worry
that he's just wired that way.
>> Yeah.
>> Is there is there an insight you can
give to somebody that's afraid right now
that will reverse their viewpoint?
I I think it's hard to um suggest that
any idea is a a solution for
the world's problems. Like you know, oh
do this and you'll solve world hunger.
Do this and you'll solve like there are
technological shifts that happen. we as
a country went from 98%
uh agriculture to less than 2% of the
population over a very long time frame
but it happened and and it survived and
every everyone was okay. So I mean to a
certain extent it and you said this it's
always been happening. So, I don't the
one thing I know I'll tell you something
that I think is super effective, but one
thing I know that's not helpful is is
rumination. Like sitting around just
talking about it and complaining about
it doesn't solve anything. And another
thing I will tell you I'm highly
skeptical of would be some kind of
government retraining program. Like I
just I I like I I don't have any
confidence in a government program
that's going to solve AI job
displacement. I mean I'm open-minded and
I and if maybe you could point to a
policy that worked in another country
that we're going to adopt like the best
practice, I'm open to it. We should do
it. But I'm I'm I'm somewhat skeptical.
I I do see kind of this resurgence in
open-mindness around trade schools. I
think that's kind of cool. Um, there's a
lot of anecdotes people will hear about
friends that are electricians or
plumbers or welders making over 200
grand a year and they're like, "Holy
shit." So, that's kind of cool just to
have awareness of that so that people
can know that those things are out
there. But my my the thing I wanted to
lamb with in in my book, which I'm
promoting over my shoulder here, running
down a dream. Um, people that have high
curiosity and high fascination and
probably high agency immediately see AI
as a a jet fuel as a as a rocket
booster. It's like, "Holy [ __ ] look at
all the stuff I can now do by myself
that I couldn't do before." And they're
the ones that come to you and you go,
"Man, you won't believe what I did this
weekend when I set up this claw bot. I
went off and solved all these problem."
I met a guy who does uh storage
buildings in in he he he lives in in
down by Brownsville and he was I met him
fishing. He's like you won't believe I
needed like three more sites in the city
and it just immediately made
recommendations. Explain why like I you
know I save so much time and money and
he's like ecstatically happy right about
what AI could do for him. If you're high
agency and you're curious about your
field, it immediately starts solving
problems for you. Um, but you got to be
in that place. And so the the very first
chapter of my book is called Chase Your
Curiosity. It's all about and I we
studied over a hundred people that have
kind of started on rung zero of a ladder
and gone on to wild success with no
economic advantage, no networking
advantage. And almost to a tea, they
were all continuous learners in their
life. And I don't think that you're able
to be a continuous learner unless you're
fascinated with something like. And so,
you know, one of my big themes is I want
to encourage more people to believe they
can have a career in a lot of fields
that your parents probably would tell
you not to chase because if it happens
to overlap with your fascination,
it becomes this perpetual motion
machine. Things start falling into
place.
The only way I can think to get people
on fire for that is the phrase that I
use all the time and it's not nearly as
effective as I would like is skills have
utility. And so I agree with you almost
violently. And uh what I'm trying to get
people to understand is if you get good
at something, you can do something other
people can't do. If you can out compete
them, then you can have things they
can't have. And you just trigger that
like competitiveness, that drive. Um
you've raised three kids. Have you found
a better way to get people on that path
to fascination?
>> Um, by the way, there's one other thing
that I want to throw on top of what you
said. People notice fascination. If
you're fascinated with something, you
come to the table with a lot of positive
energy. When you learn new things, your
your face lights up. You love to talk
about the field and people notice that.
So, if you're in an interview, if you're
trying to close a mentor, if you're
looking for peers, like it all gets
easier and people want, people root for
it. They're like, "Oh, you're into that?
You should talk to this guy over here
cuz that's all he talks about." Like, so
you get free connection like like
opportunity comes at you when people
notice that you're that person. Does
that make sense? Totally.
>> So, you get a you get a lot of stuff for
free. Um the I think that our society
has um unfortunately we we've entered
this kind of industrialization phase of
the college journey and it's gotten way
too competitive. the schools have not
increased uh admission numbers and and
and so you you end up with a situation
where more and more it's the schools I
think both you and I went to a state
school those used to be you know 30
years ago like they were the default
like they were the safety place oh I'll
just go to state school today you know
those schools have 1400 SATs and are
hard to get into and because of that
there's this kind of mania that comes
over parents think and kids become a
part of it starting in sixth grade.
Jonathan height calls it the resume arms
race. We just start, you know, preparing
for that college application around
sixth grade and you're taking mandrin
lessons and lacrosse lessons and and
taekwond do and and you're volunteering
and like the kids are so overscheduled
and it's just a bunch. It's a pressure
cooker. We'll get right back to the show
in a second, but first, let's talk about
who's profiting from your personal
information. Someone is making money
from your data every single day. You
just don't see the transaction. Data
brokers collect your personal
information and sell it for profit. Your
address, your phone number, your email,
your social security number. Yikes. It's
bought and sold constantly without your
knowledge or consent. Scammers buy it
for identity theft. Spammers buy it for
targeted harassment. criminals buy it to
find you. And the crazy part is it's
completely legal. The solution is
Incogn. Incogn tracks down your data
across hundreds of data broker sites and
removes it automatically. You authorize
them once, they handle everything else.
They remove your data and keep it
removed with repeated requests. Plus,
with custom removals, you send them any
link where your data appears and their
team will remove it. They can't harm you
if they can't find you. Go to
incogn.com/impact
and use code impact for 60% off an
annual plan. Try it risk-free for 30
days. All right, now let's get back to
the show. Is that bad because they just
end up burning out and getting tired, or
is there some sort of creative play that
kids need to do that they're not doing?
Well, so and you know, part of my
journey in writing the book was just to
go read all the greats that have written
about this stuff and both those things
you talk about um the the the top
academicians are talking about. So
Angela Duckworth who wrote grit has said
recently if she could write it again,
she'd put passion way above perseverance
because she says perseverance without
passion is is suffering. She says it's
just a grind. And we've taught kids how
to grind. I think they come out of
college exhausted, by the way. Um
because learning about something you're
not fascinated with sucks energy.
Learning about something you're
fascinated gives you energy, right? And
so they're completely different. Um and
so yeah, that that's true. And then
other people uh from Rick Rubin to Ken
Robinson have talked about this lack of
and and there's a chapter in in Calling
of the American Mind by height called
the decline of play. So there's this
notion that by not having more free time
to just be curious and that you might
not discover what you're actually
fascinated with because you're in this
this you're on this you're on this
conveyor belt to get to this college.
You know when when I was young when you
went to college they would not allow you
to pick a major until the end of your
sophomore year. And I I don't think it
takes a genius to know why that was.
They wanted you to take all these core
classes to look around, take a few
electives, and see what you were
interested in before you commit. Today,
at many schools, you have to apply to
the major. So, you're talking to a
17-year-old saying, "What do you want to
do the rest of your life, you know, and
they don't know. They just don't know."
Um, and it's okay that they don't know.
Um, but but there's a lot of pressure.
There's a lot of pressure. There's
pressure on parents, too. And so I do
think one one of the one of the key
ideas I had in writing the book, we I
probably read through a 100 biographies,
I only wanted to include success
stories, and there's about 10 deep
success stories in the book from fields
that were fields your parents wouldn't
recommend. Um I just didn't want there
to be a chapter on a consultant or a
banker or a doctor like these are the
fields they push people towards, you
know? I wanted I wanted to give more
permission to do these things that are
fields you might not think are possible.
Um and uh yeah, that's where a lot of
fascination lies. You know, many of the
people in the book switch from whatever
career path they're on to their hobby.
That's a common common theme. U but the
hobby is the thing you're fascinated
with.
>> Yeah. No, there's I I've certainly in my
own life gotten a ton of energy out of
the things that I'm just naturally
pursuing anyway. Um, but let me run a
counterfactual. You spent a lot of time
in China, which I think is especially
now I'm a big believer in Thusidities
trap. I think the US and China are
locked in this competition that could
get very problematic.
>> Regardless of that, I think it's
incredibly wise to look at what China
does well, to learn from their leaders,
to pay attention to all the things that
they're doing extraordinarily well. And
they've got a cultural value around this
concept of 996.
So grinding, busting ass, working from
9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. 6 days a week.
They're building extraordinary
companies. So what is it that they're
doing? Because they're hyper competitive
at like the provincial level and in a
way that we're not. So what are how are
they able to leverage that pressure
cooker to these like really awesome
results and then we're sort of like
crumbling in some way under that
pressure? Yeah, the there I by the way
I've spent a ton of time in China and
I'm pretty fascinated by it. So I could
maybe I could go do a career just
thinking about these things. Um I'll
tell you two things about China. The one
one thing that I don't think people
realize of all the places I've visited
around the world um the one place where
I find the most cultural affinity
between entrepreneurs between American
entrepreneurs and some foreign
entrepreneur is China. Like the most
like-mindedness do you and I and I judge
that not by some type of analytical
study. I judge it actually by um going
out to dinner, having a few drinks and
laughing and sharing stories and how
natural it comes and it's amazing. Uh
CO2 used to run a conference called East
Meets West where they'd bring all the
entrepreneurs in one place from both
cultures and there'd be late night poker
game. I mean it was just a blast and I I
I there's I don't know I don't know why
that's true. I don't know why there's
this like very cultural similarity um
between the two but and and as a result
they love entrepreneurism. They're
really great at it. Um the other thing I
would say and I don't know if this will
be true going forward but I think it was
true in the past. You know part of what
Ding Xiaoing was able to unlock by
bringing free enterprise to China was a
massive impact in standard of living for
the people. So marginal work effort
meant, you know, moving from eight
people living in a one room building in
a working in a rice field to, you know,
a two-bedroom apartment in the city with
a completely different life. And, you
know, I I've often thought about
marginal work effort relative to
marginal increase in standard of living
as as something that causes a harder
work environment. And
>> if you, you know, a marginal effort in
the in the US might allow you to get
Showtime and Netflix, not, you know, not
just Showtime or what, not just Netflix.
Like I, it's it's not it it takes a lot
more work in the US to to systemically
impact your quality of living. um that
could slow down in China, you know, like
like like the the
there's a point at which you're moving
from, you know, a farm to the city where
you get this huge leap. Um and they may
have already they may have already gone
through that. Um they they're very
curious. I mean, they're very smart.
They're very entrepreneurial. They're
like I think there's a misperception
that it's all uh that it's all just work
ethic. But but but to your point, um
Mike Moritz, I think famously about 10
years ago, wrote a I may have been in
the FT or something. He just wrote a
piece that said they just work harder
than we do.
>> Like flat out. And there there's an
interesting notion in that in that in
many fields, even Americans admit that
work ethic is valuable, especially when
you look at the arts. for some reason
like it's perfectly okay for the figured
skater to to to str like to toil, right?
To to work hard. Kobe Bryant like works
really hard and we're so fascinated.
They chist in the symphony. If they told
you, oh, they studied 100 hours a week,
you'd be wow, that's amazing. But when
it comes to work, we we adopt this
workaholic and oh, you can't make people
do that. So, I find that fascinating.
Now, do you have a guess as to why that
is?
>> If you went back to, you know, the 30s,
40s, 50s when we were emerging as a
country and and really dominating the
world in terms of industrial and
exporting. I think I think a lot of
people would would have had would have
viewed almost any occupation just like
the uh the figure skater, but I think
we've kind of moved past that um in a
way. Uh, and there's just more, you
know, talk of of uh, victimization and
what I mean, remember what what is it
JFK said? Ask not what you can do what
your country can do for you, but what
you can do for your country. That sounds
very foreign right now, doesn't it?
>> Yes. Yeah. So, my take on this is uh,
everybody is stuck in a frame of
reference. We can't interface with the
world the way that it really is. So, we
begin to tell oursel a story about that.
when the culture tells you a story that
the harder you work the better your life
is going to be and that gets reflected
back to you in real results like what
you were saying in China and most people
just are so ignorant to Chinese history
they don't realize in the 60s you had
people starving to death in China to
death in the tens of millions and so
this is for them this is a very recent
memory so to watch 4 to 500 million
people get pulled out of poverty because
you inject this notion of the free
market the harder you work, the smarter
you are, the better you perform. That
idea of skills have utility. Like that's
going to be the realest thing in the
world. And you remember what it was like
when it was hard. We've now raised three
or four generations that just think
success is the way that it is and that
the government just needs to tax more
and everything's going to be great. And
they I remember this all too intimately
because it wasn't but five or six years
ago that I believed inflation was just a
natural law. I didn't realize that it
was man-made. And so there's so much
confusion that people have when your
country's just been successful for so
long. Yeah.
>> You end up in a career that you don't
love.
>> Uh the marginal benefit to working hard
isn't there. You're in a K-shaped
economy. So your boss is getting rich
because he owns the company, but you're
not. And so you're like, "All right,
well, this guy's an [ __ ] He just
wants me to work hard, but why?" And so
that the thing that scares me to death
about this moment is the reason I became
successful was I grew up with I was
middle class to lower middle class. So I
didn't grow up with money. I certainly
wasn't poor, but I believed that I could
do anything I set my mind to. But my
parents made it very clear I was going
to have to work my ass off. And so I
just put my head down for effectively
15, 20 years and just worked and worked
and worked and worked and worked and
then it finally paid off.
>> Yeah.
>> But we now make fun of people who do
that because we become culturally so
divorced from that path.
>> Yeah. and and and the data on the
success rate of first generation
immigrants that come here specifically
because they believe it is the land of
opportunity which they have the mindset
that most people in the US had 30 40
years ago. Um they succeed a lot more in
the US than people that have been here
multigenerationally.
>> Yeah. But but the I mean part of part of
being able to affect change in your life
and in your career
it comes down to a belief that you can
it if you if you're convinced you can't
you won't. That's for sure. That's a
certainty.
>> So true. Bill, one thing that I find
really um fascinating to stick on that
theme about you is I can feel you're
somebody who's trying to help people. So
um you legendary investor help founders.
You write a book which we'll talk more
about the wise in a minute, but you
write a book that's effectively
self-help, but now you've also started a
um policy institute.
I know some of the punchline of the
policy institute, but if you would, why
are you starting a policy institute?
What what's the end goal? What are you
trying to address?
>> I probably would mention a great book by
Arthur Brooks called Strength to
Strength. I don't know if you've heard
of it. It's actually on the show. He's
amazing. It's the book was written for
people who are kind of finished their
first career and have a lot on their
mind and have a lot of questions about
what to do with the rest of their life.
That's really which is a spot I found
myself in. I had a incredible career in
venture capital. I loved every minute of
it. But for a variety of reasons, I
raised my hand and said, "It's time to
move off the field and let the next
generation play the game," which I did
about four years ago. And I went on a
listening tour of what to do next. And a
lot of people wanted me to do what I
think is the more natural thing. Run
your family office, do a bunch of angel
investing. And as I spent time imagining
myself in those roles for and talking to
people about it, I became convinced that
that was 100% not what I wanted to do.
Um, I've uh I've developed a pretty good
um rhythm about being able to synthesize
and communicate. So I did that in my
venture career through blogs and
eventually things like podcasts. Um I I
tested doing it outside my field with a
talk I gave at the all-in conference on
regulatory capture um which had like
four and a half million views. So if a
>> extraordinary talk by the way
>> if if I can do a talk about regulatory
capture and and and
make it that popular um maybe there's a
skill there that I should develop. And
um I'm also really enamored with the
with the notion of effective policy. So
I I have a a quote at the top of the
page on my policy institute from Milton
Freriedman that says, "One of the great
mistakes is to judge policies and
programs by their intentions rather than
their results."
>> Oh man, preach.
>> And I think we elect a lot of people
because we like what they're saying, but
no one follows up to see if they can
actually create change. And so one of
one of my sole goals will be to think
about policies that are effective. I'm
I'm enamored by the provincial
competition in China, and I wonder if
shining a brighter light on state versus
state competition could lead to some
pretty amazing and positive things for
our own country. I This is an example of
something I'm excited about. Um, the
other thing I kind of hold out as a
success, there was a there was a very
negative opinion on nuclear energy about
six years ago, not that long ago, and a
few people, Steve Pinker, the Collison
brothers, Elon Musk, there were a few
people who stuck their neck out and
said, "You guys are all wrong." Josh
Wolf at Lux Capital, they said, "This is
fascinating technology. You know, we
should be embracing it." And within a
very short time frame, the global
perspective on this shifted. And to me,
that's pretty amazing that you can use
the power of communication and
conversation to flip a bit like that.
And it's a big big flip. Huge flip. Um,
so I'm I'm going to look see if I can
find more things like that where just
highlighting things and communicating
could potentially change things. The
other the other thing is you get to you
get to go meet with and hang out with
the top academicians in the world which
gives me a ton of emotional energy like
just chasing that curiosity and these
people are quite fascinating and and so
that's another element of it. have
already been to the University of
Chicago which is the the birthplace of
the notion of regulatory capture where
Professor Stigler won the Nobel Prize
and so they have a Stigler center and
went and talked to them about different
ideas and I'm talking to some people
about maybe making a regulatory capture
index for countries as a way to to
identify policy that can push against
it.
>> That's awesome. If you don't mind, for
people that don't know exactly what it
is, can you define regulatory capture?
>> Yeah. I I mean, if you look up George
Stigler, he he's the one that in won the
Nobel Prize in 1958. But the the the the
simple concept is most regulation ends
up being written by the people that are
being regulated at least in the US and
the way our government works. And so
rather than I I have I have a phrase I
use, regulation is the friend of the
incumbent. So they use it to actually
raise prices, prevent competition, and
further in ensconce themselves in the
leadership role they're already in. Um,
and I believe in some of the the the
more regulated industries in the US,
particularly finance and healthcare,
this is a huge problem, fully locked in.
Um there's there's more potential
disruption in finance around crypto and
stable coins I think than than in in the
healthc care I mean I mean Mark Cuban's
doing his thing which I'm you know fully
supportive of but it's it's hard it is
so enscconced so locked in.
>> We'll get back to the show in just a
second but first let's talk about AI
slop. Most AI video tools produce
content that's painfully obvious it was
made by AI. The pacing is off. The
visuals don't quite match your brand,
the message gets lost. You end up with
something that feels generic, awkward,
and forgettable. The exact opposite of
what your brand needs. That's why I am
very excited about Agent Opus by
OpusClip. Agent Opus turns your audio or
scripts into short promo videos that
actually look and feel like your brand.
You control the script. You upload your
product images, logos, or characters.
And it produces coherent publish ready
videos, not random AI content, but
videos with consistent messaging,
matching visuals, captions, and even
background music that fits your precise
style. Whether you're promoting a
product, building a personal brand, or
scaling content across platforms, Agent
Opus keeps everything on brand from
start to finish. We're really excited
about this tool and you're going to be
seeing it in future videos. Check it out
at agentopus at agent.opus.pro/explorer.
And now let's get back to the show.
>> One story that you have from your own
experience that I think would really
help people get this is tropos.
>> Yeah.
>> Um, walk us through that because this
this one made me want to chew glass.
>> Yeah. So, a long time ago, like maybe 20
years ago, I invested in a company that
uh used um mesh mesh radio technology to
allow and and open spectrum to allow
basically using Wi-Fi outside and like
covering entire downtown areas of a
city. And we found many mayors all over
the country that were excited about this
and wanted to as a public good offer
free data connectivity in their downtown
areas, if you will. And I I often tried
to equate it to, you know, if a city
early on built a port, that would make
sense because industry moved in and out
by boat. And then if they built the
train station, that makes sense. Oh, no
one said, "Oh, a city shouldn't be in
the train business, right? Cuz that's
how who else is going to build it?" And
then the highways and cities are in the
highway business, right? So when
industry moved online, it would make
sense that a city might want to
differentiate itself by having more
connectivity and more options for that.
But what we what we ran into is um there
are many I mean first of all the the the
telecom space is probably equal to
healthcare and finance in terms of
regulatory capture. maybe it leads it.
Um but many um of these whether it's
AT&T and Verizon or Comcast, they have
lobbyists out the yin-yang. Like they
have so many lobbyists and and at a
state level and they were able to pass
laws that said cities can't compete with
them even though they're getting their
poll rights from the the cities
themselves. And
>> how do they justify that? Like do they
even try or is this just But you you'd
be surprised. They get a lot of free
enterprise Republicans agreeing with
them because they of the notion that
they use the mindset that the
government's bad at industry. The
government shouldn't be in industry,
right? But but I I I think that's
ridicul like I think a this goes back to
maybe city versus city or state versus
state competition. And if a state if if
a city wants to offer free connectivity
for all of its citizens, I certainly
think they should be able to to if if
the citizens are behind it and they have
the the the money, why not, right? But
but that's but I do I I do think that's
the thing they were able to leverage to
pass these laws is conservative people
believing that they were keeping the
government out of things they shouldn't
be in. That's that was the mind the the
the mindset they used to pay. Anyway,
they passed these laws everywhere all
over the country. Um the thing that
really killed us was we we um the the
mayor of Philadelphia became excited
about doing this and it put it on the
front page of the paper and the the the
government in the city of Philadelphia
in the state of Pennsylvania was just
full of excom people. like they they
were just like they they were everywhere
and they just crushed us. We I I think I
said in the talk we were like a sixth
grader playing against Michael Jordan
from try trying to compete in in in the
back rooms of of of
you know policy.
>> Do you have a sense of what goes on in
those back rooms? So I know Michael
Jordan dribbles the ball well. He reads
the court. He understands body language.
What does a uh person formerly at
Comcast
>> I I have to look up his name. I I used
it in the talk. There was a gentleman
who was the head of the the head of
lobbying at Comcast where I think New
York Times or the Post someone did an
article where they said this is the most
important executive at Comcast. And he
had been working for the mayor before he
went into that role. the mayor went on
to be the the the governor of the state,
you know, and when he left that role,
Biden made him ambassador to Canada. So,
he was in and out of those. And that
article said he did like three or four
dinners at his house for the Obama
campaign. And so he was just he was
right in the center of all of it in a
way that this startup in Silicon Valley
had no ch like we didn't have any of
those relationships, right?
>> And so just just woven into the fabric
of it all. There's a huge irony when I
gave that talk, you know, and I spent 25
years in Silicon Valley. It was titled
2851.
And I I used that title cuz I had a
punchline at the end where I said the
reason Silicon Valley works so well is
cuz it's so far [ __ ] away from
Washington DC. And that was the distance
in miles. But since I gave that talk,
I'd say Silicon Valley has gotten more
like rooted in Washington DC than it
ever has
>> than it ever has before. So there's a
certain irony to that.
>> Do you read regulatory capture as
corruption? I think it can be both sides
of the coin. I mean, you can look at
what the crypto world did in getting
Trump elected and you can look at stable
coins and you could say, you know, I can
move money via stable coin right now in
seconds for pennies uh anywhere around
the globe. And you can't do that through
a bank. You can't do that through a
traditional financial institution. They
don't do it for that price. They delay
it and they charge you way more money.
And you could say, well, they're trying
to change things. Like now, if they were
to change things and win, I suspect over
time they would start doing the exact
same things, you know, once they had
those relationships. So I I'm I'm and
and the the other big thing that's
that's causing this right now is is
venture capitalists have got in into
military equipment which is nothing I
know anything about. But rest assured
without relationships they wouldn't have
been able to do that because the
McDonald Douglases of the world would
have would have used regulatory capture
to cut them off. Um, so it was probably
imperative that they have those
relationships to bring disruption to
those fields and to fight back against
it. Um, but if they have it long enough,
they'll certainly use it against the
next guy. And by the way, this is I
think this is playing out in real time
in AI. I mean there are many people
including David Saxs that think Daario
and the team at Anthropic there's
Anthropic's lobbying the only company
that has lobbyed as much as Anthropic
early in its life was was FTX and SPF
like he also lobbied heavily but they
have people on the ground in every state
they're the ones pushing for
statebystate regulation and at the end
of that talk I gave I said I was worried
that the AI People were begging for
regulation to pull up the ladder. We'll
we'll see what happens. Like I'm I'm
more fearful that that's their motive
than anything else.
>> Yeah. All right. You stop shy of saying
yes or no for that matter to its uh
corruption. So I have a growing thesis.
>> Oh. Oh. I I'm sure they don't view it as
corruption. Um although you know to the
extent that you're you know Yeah. I
don't think they I don't think any of
them think it's corruption. I think
they're just playing the game on the
field. But but the problem is, you know,
I I was really enamored. I'm I'm kind of
excited about stable coins because I've
just been so pissed off at the US
financial system for not embracing uh
what I would call instant digital
transfer. So, every one of the seven
other largest countries in the globe um
had the government fixed instant digital
transfer a long time ago. In the UK,
it's called faster payments. You can go
straight to Wikipedia and read about UK
faster payments. They put it in 20 years
ago and you can move money instantly for
almost nothing. And in the US, you know,
AC is three-day settlement. What the
hell are we doing? It's 2026 and in
China and Australia and recently there's
something in uh Argentina called I think
bricks they they just pushed this
through like six years ago. So here's a
country that everyone would admit is
behind us from an innovation standpoint
who just did this thing that the UK did
20 years ago and you can go look at it
and we still can't get we still can't do
it because the banks fight it. You know,
there's a program called Fed Now that's
supposed to do this that's on the
slowest role you can possibly imagine.
And I would when when when they would
talk about Fed Now in front of the
financial committee, I would turn on
what is it C-SPAN or whatever. And I
would watch and I would see the
congressmen and senators that would
would be anti- Fed now. And I would
immediately go on to that website that
list who their donors are, and you'd see
large banks. Boom, boom, boom, boom,
boom. You know, and so the problem the
problem is I mean I I'm a big believer
that uh Citizens United was a bad thing.
Like these super PACs like anything that
allows more influence and there's
another crazy thing that I learned in
the tropo situation is your senator and
your congressman, the minute they get on
committees, they start raising money
outside of your geographic area. That
should just be I think it should be
illegal, but it should certainly just
send off an immediate alarm. Like like
we live in a day and age of blockchain.
Like if you raise money from a campaign
contribution from someone in California
and you're a Tennessee congressman, like
that should just be instantly like what
the hell are you doing? Like that's not
your constituency, right? It's not like
you know. So I I and there may be things
to do there like to create more
awareness of those things, you know.
>> Okay. So you're somebody that thinks
through how we start untangling some of
these things. One of the things that I
found really interesting that you
mentioned earlier is what they do in
China to create competition. The um
analogous situation here would be
interstate competition.
>> Yeah. Do you think that's a potential
solve where it's like, yeah, if you want
to do stupid decisions, you go do your
stupid no free Wi-Fi for you decision,
but we're going to do free Wi-Fi. Yeah.
>> Is that a way that we could start?
>> I think it can be. I think it can be.
And I um I've recently become aware of a
professor at Harvard, Thomas Kaine, who
I'm just learning about who's trying to
analyze different policies in K through
12 and amplify the ones that are working
better. That's something I'm excited
about with the policy institute. People
have asked me, a lot of people have
asked me about the proposal in
California for a uh a wealth tax. And
I'm my opinion on it is okay, they can
try it. Like like let's see what
happens. Like like let's run a bunch of
experiments. I'm I've been told and I'm
still learning on this that James
Madison thought about this in the
Federalist Papers that he said people
can move. We have a federalist system
where there's there's federal laws and
state laws. Let's run a bunch of
experiments and see what works. And I
think people mig migrating is a is a
great pointer to people are migrating
towards probably towards good policy,
right? Like I'm I'm sitting in Austin.
This is super hard for a lot of people
to understand and we should talk about
it as loud as we possibly can. One of
the fastest growing cities in the
nation. Rents have fallen for four
years. That's good policy. Like half
half of the country is up in arms
because they say they have a housing
crisis and housing's too expensive.
Just come look at what's happening right
here. Just study it. Like like it's it's
solvable. Like and it's all a bunch of
nimi like build policy that they push
through. Like they actually changed the
policy and that led to more building and
that led to rents falling like like
zoning policy, building policy. Like it
is it's happening. It's like really
happening. You can see it. There's a
solution to this problem. And the states
that have the problem and cry about it
don't do what Austin's doing. They do a
lot of other things. That's bad policy.
And this is Yes, I think state versus
state competition is a super interesting
construct. Um, and I think I think I can
do a good job of of hopefully working
with others and academicians of finding
good policy and finding bad policy and
shining a light on both. We can just
make it positive. I'm fine with that.
Austin has a solution to to housing
prices. Positive. Everyone should study
it.
>> Now, by the way, Houston's done
something really similar in
homelessness. Um, and there are articles
you can go find on that. Houston's had a
number of policies and they've reduced
their homeless population by twothirds.
Go study that. Go talk about that.
>> Now, given that we have big winds like
that, whether it's housing or
homelessness, and yet they don't
metriculate out to the other states, uh,
is that politicians suck at creating uh,
financial models? Is it that uh they're
just too good at storytelling? Like, is
it that they get federal dollars and so
they can paper over problems? Like, why
doesn't that competition work in America
in the way that it does in China?
>> Some of it comes back to that quote,
Milton Freeman quote I had. I think
people elect politicians based on what
they think their intentions are versus
what they're actually capable of doing.
Um,
>> you think we can change that? Can we get
to pay attention?
>> I don't know. I'm going to try. you
know, I think shining a light on these
policies that work and um is is worth a
go. like like you know the similar to
the nuclear thing that I mentioned. I I
think if we talk about it more and
people that are good at communicating
can highlight it more like no one should
be able to have a discussion in a city
that has a problem with housing prices
and not be able to respond to a question
about well what are they doing in Austin
like that just shouldn't happen. Um, it
may take it may take people like you,
Tom. I mean, the the it it's it's
not clear to me, and I don't want to
like go deep into this, but it's not
clear to me that the mainstream media is
as
um interested in uncovering this stuff
as they used to be. Like, and they used
to be quite interested in it, you know.
Although although to be fair on the
Austin Rent thing, you'll find plenty of
articles. Like if you just go do a
search, there are plenty of people
talking about it. But I think you can
get more people talking about it like
like we are right now. Like I think it's
possible.
>> Yeah, it's interesting. When I do when I
cover stories like this, they will um
they'll be a base hit. It's rare that it
really um goes viral. If I want
something to go viral, it both has to be
I have to get incredibly emotional about
it. uh which that may speak to just what
people want from me and not necessarily
something global.
>> Um and it needs to be something that
triggers their emotion as well. And I
think that's a big part of the problem.
So, while I think yes, it's good to
shine a light on it and all of that, but
as somebody who spent the last, call it
10 plus years mastering the algorithms,
which is basically mastering human
emotion, um, you go down a path that I
think people will recognize in the way
that social media distorts behavior far
more than it does something positive.
So, I worry about that. On the policy
side, I just keep coming back to um you
know this about me, my audience
certainly knows this about me, but I
spent now almost 25 years as an active
entrepreneur being able to pay people
salaries by my ability to generate
things that are profitable. And you it
forces you to focus on uh cause and
effect, what actually works, what's
profitable, cut what's not, focus on
what is. And we don't have that feedback
loop. Certainly in the US I think
because of central banking the ability
to run deficits and money print and if
we don't get rid of that I I think you
run in Ray Dallio's big debt cycle and
there's no way around it and the empire
will collapse in roughly 250 years and
it just is what it is.
>> Do you see a way out of that loop or uh
are we trapped here?
>> Yeah, you're channeling David
Friedberg's in in the same mindset. I
look, I don't um I guess if I felt that
way entirely, I would probably just go
fishing for the rest of my life and and
wouldn't wouldn't be talking to you
right now. Like like like what's the
point of it? Like I don't I don't want
to roll around in it if it's if it's
inevitable. Um and so I'm going to go
tilt against it, you know? Maybe.
>> But is it tilting? Are you just holding
on to like a feeling that maybe it's
possible or can you anchor on something
that's like no no I've seen this thing
that tells me that we've got a shot.
>> Yeah. I mean like on this state stuff,
you know, it's not just like so
certainly Governor Abbott is very much
about moving red tape out of the way
here in Texas and as a result, you know,
Elon moved all his companies here and
there's a lot of positive momentum um
around data centers and other things
coming to the state of Texas,
semiconductor factories, like all kind
of stuff. And that's been true in
Arizona. But I would also say like if
you look at Pennsylvania, Shapiro um the
the highway went down and they got it
working again in like 12 days and he did
it by moving red tape out of the way
>> and and then it's celebrated. And if if
a if a if a politician is going to stand
up and tell you, "Hooray, look what I
did. I got government out of the way." I
think that's kind of funny, but why get
them out of the way just for an
emergency? Let's get them out of the way
for everything.
>> And so, you know, look, there's the part
part of why I love studying China, both
the provincial competition, but also how
fast they're building things, Dan Wong's
book, Break Neck. Um, people need to be
aware of what's possible, you know, and
it costs 4x400%
more to build a a a fision nuclear
plant, 70-year-old technology in the US
than it does in South Korea or China.
Get in touch with that. Get in touch
with that. Like, and every politician,
that should scare the living hell out of
them that that's true. And they should
want to know why it's true. And and you
know, to me, why wouldn't you put a
government task force together to go
figure that out? Like, I think the NRC
is all structured poorly. The Navy has
tons of insight. They've they've used
nuclear technology forever with no
incident whatsoever. Like, let's go
solve that problem nationally and figure
out what the hell's wrong. Like, I like
or let's just pay South Korea to build
one here and tell us what's wrong. Like,
like, let's go figure it out.
>> I love that. Um I I'm optimistic by
nature almost to a fault. Um and I look
at say AI which I think is is as it's
going to be as profoundly transformative
as people say it's already wildly
impacted my business increased
profitability increased topline revenue.
I mean it's really been extraordinary
even at my size. When you look out at
that uh Americans are terrified the
Chinese are not. Do you have a sense of
like what's going on there? What either
what thing do we understand that the
Chinese should be afraid of or what do
they understand that should make us more
optimistic?
>> One thing that happened on a recent trip
there, I was having lunch with a venture
capitalist, a Chinese venture
capitalist, and he said, you know, one
thing that fascinates me, he says, every
Chinese entrepreneur reads everything
they can about American entrepreneurism.
So there's podcasts, there's blog posts,
there's articles, there's interviews,
they listen to 100% of it. Like every
Chinese entrepreneur knows what Elon
Musk is thinking, knows what Anthropic
is thinking, knows all this stuff. He
goes, there's zero in the other
direction.
>> There's no there's no American
entrepreneur that wakes up saying, "Boy,
I wonder what Leun
Xiai is thinking tomorrow." even though
some of that content's out there. And so
that's pretty pretty eye opening just
that notion right that that they're
learning from us and we're not learning
from them. Um it's not a good fact.
>> For sure. Now, do you have a sense of
what their take is on AI that keeps them
so optimistic?
>> Yes. Well, this is an interesting thing.
So, so the polling is I'm going to guess
at the numbers. You may have read it in
more deeply, but the like 70% of
Americans are worried about AI and that
number in China is like 20. And part of
the problem is the dumerism is loudest
at the at at at the biggest AI companies
in America. And I I I fear it's because
they want this regulatory capture. It is
it is one of the most if it's not
regulatory capture, I don't know what it
is. Like I've never seen an entrepreneur
stand up and say, "I'm making this
incredible technology." And by the way,
my employees are doing secondary
transaction and stuffing billions of
dollars in our pockets, but it's really
scary and it's going to kill us all.
I've never seen this. I've never seen it
before.
>> My only explanation is they want
regulatory capture, but I I don't know.
Um but it's having a lot of perverse
effects including what you're talking
about sentiment um for the whole
country. Um, yeah. And by the way, if we
put a whole bunch of policy on top of
our AI systems, I think we're going to I
think what may happen, if you look at
what happened with the internet, there
was a global market that the American
companies served and there was a ring
fence around China and the Chinese
internet companies ended up serving that
um because China kept out Google and and
uh Facebook and those types of
companies. I think what could happen
with AI is we could build a fence around
ourselves and China could end up serving
the rest of the world.
>> I think that's already
almost fatacle in EVs and solar panels.
>> Damn.
>> Uh but it it could be true with AI
technology as well. Now, is that because
they're outperforming us on um the solar
panels and EVs or because we've done
something from a regulatory perspective
that just makes the hurdle too big?
>> Both. I mean, Elon Cheeky Pint podcast
said that he thinks
American energy problem could be solved
with solar panels and a huge section of
Nevada. Like but but but he said the
math won't work with American source
solar panels and that we won't do it
because we won't put the Chinese panels
there.
>> Do me a favor really fast because people
aren't going to understand what that
means. Tell the story of the COVID test
and the difference. I think it was
Germany versus here. Yeah. I I was I
didn't hear that. I was a gasast. I was
clutching my pearls hearing you tell
this story. This is wild.
>> Yeah. So, so there were two types of
COVID tests during COVID. One was the
PCR test. That's the one that took 24
hours and um and was more painful and
you couldn't do it at home. You had to
go although that was probably a fallacy,
too. I think the marginal cost of a PCR
test was below $2 and the average price
that was recompensated by the government
was over $100. So, I've heard all these
stories. This is kind of I I'll do it
quick. I've heard all these stories of
people that opened up PCR testing
facilities, made $15 million, and
retired. Like, God,
>> but but that was PCR. There was a much
cheaper test, which was the one that you
can still buy at CVS and take home and
and and you know, do yourself. Um, the
saliva test. And that one, um, that
technology was like 40 years old. And in
Germany, they approved 85 vendors and
the marginal cost was about a dollar.
Um, like you could buy a test for a
dollar. Here in the US, they the the the
team at the FDA that that regulated
this, the guy that regulated it, and I
had him in the talk, you can go watch
it, had worked at these two companies
before, and they were the only two that
got a license to do it in the US. So, we
only had two manufacturers and they
charged like $12 a test, so 10x higher.
And the US government even when they
finally got behind those tests, bought
them from them. So, they used taxpayer
money. And and and I I went I had well
the the list is online, but I had it in
the presentation of the 85 vendors
Germany approved. And so it was a non it
was a trivial commoditized technology
that the government helped protect two
vendors selling at god-awful high prices
when it could have been super helpful to
everyone to have for a dollar a piece.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. This is crazy to watch this play
out in the energy markets. uh to see
that in in the guise of we're going to
help you. To your point, they like what
people are saying, but nobody ever stops
to check to see what's actually
happening. Uh which spirals me out of
control when we look at education. I
don't even have kids and I'm mortified
that we spend more per student than
basically anywhere else in the world and
we're middle of the pack in terms of
results and everybody's cry is to spend
more money. And I'm just like this is
wild. And then if you look at KIP
schools to the point about do these
experiments, you've got Kip schools in
the same building as some of these
government schools and the Kip schools
are turnurning out kids that are like
often times you'll have brother and
sister separated. One of them goes to
the KIP school, one of them's in the
public school. So they're in the same
household. Yeah.
>> And the one that's in the Kip school
crushes it and the one that's in the uh
public school does not. So, it's like
everything that you could do to make it
a natural test where there's a placebo
control. Yes. You've done. And and we
still cannot get people to do like
school vouchers so that parents can vote
with their feet. Like this kind of thing
literally spirals me out of control.
>> Well, but it's happening like like like
um I had mentioned this professor at
Harvard Kane. He's he's studying this.
Um, school vouchers have been passed in
in Texas and that's the state-by-state
experiment. So, it's playing out here.
So, um, like stay tuned. I'm going to
I'm going to go tilt against this also.
>> Oh, that one, man. I really hope you
tilt hard. Uh, as
>> again somebody that doesn't have kids,
but nonetheless, I become obsessed.
>> It's a huge problem.
>> Yeah. With, you know, making sure that
we are educating the life out of our
kids. Again, this goes back to partly
because I don't have kids, I want to pay
something forward to the next
generation. Uh, and then partly because
I'm so um focused on Thusidity's trap
and how to be the ones that don't end up
in open conflict, which doesn't happen
nearly as often as conflict, but um
getting us up to snuff, getting us
excited to be Americans, getting us
excited to compete and, you know, really
wanting the best and the brightest uh
and to see that meritocratic push to get
people
>> to really like do something great. And
that's certainly what it felt like to me
in the 80s was like America was the
hotbed of like we could do anything like
>> you Joe Lemon's tilting at some cool
ideas as well with alpha schools. So
we'll see those play out as well.
They're going to expand that pretty
dramatically and license the technology
more broadly.
>> Oh, let's go.
>> Yeah.
>> What do you think is going to be the
role of AI in education?
>> Well, so if you listen to him, this is
Alpha School Joe Limont who's done I
think he did uh Patrick Oanessy and then
recently Shane Parish. I haven't
listened to that second one, but you can
go listen to him talk about it. Um, they
they use AI for the rote learning in
sciences and math and and and
talk a lot about pacing. So, he he says
in any given classroom, the kids are all
over the map in terms of how far along
they are, but the teachers forced to
teach a curriculum that's that's fixed.
And th all those kids should be on
different pacing and different cuz
they're all at different spots. And one
of the problems that happens in our
system is if a kid's not properly taught
math in kindergarten or first grade or
second grade, they get to third grade
and they're they don't have the things
they need to listen to that. So they got
no chance. Like they need to they need
to go back and catch up. And so one of
the thing he's optimistic about is more
personalized learning where everyone can
kind of come along at their own pace. Um
which which we'll see. I don't I don't
have any way to know if that will work
at large, you know, and I don't have any
way of knowing if every single child in
every position in the socioeconomic
ladder can engage with AI in that way.
Let's go let's go test and find out.
You've talked about when you're
investing, you're always trying to do
pattern recognition. Do you see any
patterns in AI that map to other
technologies that give us some clue
where this is going?
>> I mean, the one that's obvious that that
doesn't need much discussion is like
venture capitalists see these waves and
they know they're they're disruptive and
so they get behind them. And in in that
way, AI is the same as the internet and
the computer and all these other things.
I think the venture capitalists have
properly identified that this is going
to change things and it already has in
certain fields. I've talked to lawyers
that have you know substantially reduced
the number of parallegals that work for
them you know as an example. So it's
already happening. The um number of
doctors that are now leaning on AI for
second opinions is like 70% of the
field. So like this is this is already
happening. So, so um I it's harder to
think about it in terms of business
models and winners and losers. It it you
know venture capitalists will talk about
stacks and different places in the
stack. So, Nvidia's you know at the
bottom of the stack and some application
companies at the top and all these
people are in the middle. There's
hosting companies and there's model
providers. There does appear to have
been a move recently by OpenAI and
Enthropic to embrace direct customer
connectivity you know and anthrop so one
business model they could have which
they have had in the past is we'll sell
the token machine to a third party and
that third party will turn it into a
application. So think you know Anthropic
powering cursor that people then used
for programming. More recently
anthropics launched their own competitor
to cursor. So that this move to say I
want to be directly connected to the
customer is a sign I think it's a pretty
strong sign that there was fear that
being a model provider solely
um was was as protectable as they wanted
it to be
>> cuz people were switching out the model
sometimes with open source from China
and things like that. Um, but if you
have the customer lock in and contract,
then you don't have to worry about that
as much. So, that's one thing we're
seeing.
>> Do you think AI is a bubble?
>> Well, that that's a that's a very
interesting question. The there's a I'
I've said this before, but there's a
wonderful book by Carla Perez where she
she says that only real waves cause
bubbles. So when the questions asked,
there's this notion of, well, if it's a
bubble, then AI is not real, right?
>> And you get into this argument. No, what
happens is when there are real waves,
people get rich quick. That's already
happening here. These huge secondaries
at at these AI companies. So people are
stuffing billions of dollars in their
pocket. When people get rich quick, it
attracts interlopers and charlatans. And
you know, and this, by the way, this was
true in the gold rush. Like this isn't a
new concept. Like if people are getting
rich quick, everyone rushes in and
that's what creates bubbles. So yes, I'm
seeing actions and activity that look
speculative and and that probably is
over risk-seeking. And when will that
correct? I don't know. It's a very big
wave. There's real customers buying real
products. There's people taking massive
bets, the biggest bets ever taken in the
venture capital world. And it may be
that that some form of correction
doesn't happen until uh 5 years from
now, but there will be one day cuz the
spec the speculative part is showing up.
>> And how do you think about investing
through something like this for the
average retail investor? Like
>> I think it's tough, man. Like at this
point, like the odds that you're going
to have some kind of insight around some
AI company when they're raising money at
the highest prices they ever have, like
I think it'd be foolhardy. And by the
way, if you just had the index, you're
pretty well exposed. Nvidia got so big
as a percentage of the index. Like if
you just had an S&P index, you have a
pretty strong Nvidia position. like and
you certainly have Microsoft and Google
like you're doing well like that that
that that
back to Burton male like that generic
advice would have served you fine for
the AI way.
>> Now do you think that AI is going to
have the kind of job disruption that
we're expecting? We we're on the back
right now of a bunch of layoffs, but
you've got Mark Andre who's saying no no
this is not because of AI. this is them
just using a PR excuse to rightsize
their organizations and other people
saying no no this is AI.
>> Yeah, I think both are true. I mean I
think I think anyone that does a layoff
today is going to write it in the oh
we're just being smart like why wouldn't
you? like it's just such an easy take
and I think Square was the one that kind
of kicked this off and plenty of people
pointed out that on a employee revenue
dollar per employee basis they were like
three or 4x many of their peers so
highlighting the fact that they needed
to get fit you know regardless of
whether you know AI might help or not.
And so I think you're going to see some
of both. Um,
yeah. I I I go back to what I said
earlier. Whether you're a company or an
individual, if you're worried about AI
disruption, become the most AI enabled
version of yourself you can possibly be.
If there are 30, let's just pick
something. Let's say there's 30
parallegals at a law firm and you're of
the 30, you're the one that knows most
about how to use AI to do what a
parallegal does. What are the odds you
get fired? I think it's very low.
>> Yeah, for sure.
>> They're going to want to keep you around
to run the AI tools.
>> Yeah, I I try to get people to see that
same thing is yes, it's entirely
possible that the jobs market as we
understand it now becomes um very
different in the future, but you want to
be the last man standing. And so if
you're the most efficient because you
are leveraging AI, you're going to be in
a really good spot. Now, I do think
there's one question around AI. When
when I talk about what I see in the
future, I at least in my own mind have
to be very careful to delineate between
um AI as it stands now, which is a
phenomenal tool, but it doesn't have
good taste unto itself. It will
routinely make things up. And so you
have to know how to catch it when it's,
you know, getting into a problem. you
have to know which answer is better than
the other. But then there's where it
could possibly, it's not there yet, but
it could possibly get to the point where
it becomes recursively self-learning and
actually becomes super intelligent. Do
you have any um mental model for whether
this is likely to become more
intelligent than humans?
>> I'm not bought in yet to the notion that
that will happen. Um I I I'm one of
these big believers in that phrase uh
what is it? Strong opinions loosely
held. So my strong opinion right now is
that's not going to happen. I know that
it's that that certain people believe
that it will and I know other people
that that are skeptics on that. um
regardless like you have to know what
it's capable of at the edge of your
field, you know, and and the only way
you're going to do that is by playing
with it. I I've met many mostly
academicians for some reason who are
skeptics and they got it to fail once
and that's the memory they locked in
their brain and then they quit testing
it. And I I said, "Well, when did you do
that?" And I said, "Have you tried that
experiment across four versions of the
same AI bot?" Because you can do that
now. You can go back and use the older
versions. And if if it's getting better,
you should be aware of that. Like, does
it still make that mistake or not
anymore? And if it's not anymore, then
you can't sit around and tell me that it
doesn't work because of this thing you
did. They're definitely getting better.
>> And so, like knowing what's possible.
certain fields are going to be more
deterministic than others. Um, I'm not
saying to do it 100 like I'm not saying
rely on everything it says 100% of the
time, but it it can turbocharge what you
do. And if you listen to different
people explaining, especially like small
business people, talk to go out in your
community and talk to small business
people that have figured out that how
this can help them and listen to the
list of things they have it doing for
them. It'll blow you away.
>> Yeah, it's wild. when you look at the
way that we could do AI that would be
better for humanity, do you think open
source or traditional um proprietary
companies?
>> I'm I'm a big believer in open source
for almost any technology. I I'm
probably out on a on some kind of uh
wild edge of the curve where I I
actually think the patent system may be
a waste of time and interesting
>> just get in the way. And part of it
comes from being exposed to open source
and how wonderful it is. But there's
this great book by Matt Ridley called
the rational optimist. And he says most
uh progress and I love that word
progress in in the world has come from
when ideas have sex. That's the phrase
he uses. And the the easy example to
imagine is you go back to an agrarian
society and and a farmer walks into
market and tells another farmer how he
can double his crop output by doing this
technique. That transfer cost nothing.
That idea went through and then that
other farmer goes home and his whole
community prosperity improves. So the
teaching each other things that the
other person knew is a free gift to
increase prosperity. And to me, patents
just get in the way of that. Um and and
the argument that someone would use
against me making that argument is, oh
well, what's the incentive to succeed?
But there are there is a litany of
academicians that have developed new
ideas without ever being paid for them.
like like there's no proof. I I don't
think there's any proof whatsoever that
progress would stop if there wasn't an
immediate economic lock in. You know,
this may relate to regulatory capture of
like a 17-year window. And um open
source is just another incredible uh
data point against that argument in that
people contribute tons of time and ideas
to these projects with no immediate
economic gain. Um and and these
technologies become building blocks for
other entrepreneurs because they're
free. Like it's just so like any
entrepreneurial endeavor, if there's an
open source alternative, they'll tilt
towards it. Um because it just makes
their job easier and cheaper.
>> Do you have a sense of why China is
going open source? Is it just for the
reasons that you said or do they see a
way to leverage
>> the previous five-year plan? I think
that's the 14th 5-year plan specifically
mentioned open source and I think what
happened is
>> for 20 years they are accused by the
West of being IP thieves like flat out
like just straight up called that. And
so if you're in that place where you're
accused of that and you see Linux and
you see MySQL, this looks like a pretty
good solution to your problem, right?
like like the world has said this
stuff's free and so they got behind
these programs and in a big way um on a
global scale they got I mean and this
started 20 years ago and so I think it's
a it's a pretty good foil to the
accusation of being a IP thief if you if
you embrace this idea that that IP
should be free
>> um and and and in AI I in particular
there there's a situation there where
there's probably 10 deep pocketed
players who are all competing and open
source has become part of the
competitive requirement and that's super
powerful because they can all co-learn
from one another.
>> It's wildly powerful. It's very
interesting at the aggregate level, but
I really just don't understand what is
the thing that they use to build a moat
to make sure that they're
>> but so my firm benchmark has has has had
liquidity events on over 10 open source
companies like you you come up with ways
to do it. It's just more competitive.
There's a notion in economics called
pure competition. You can also go find
the Wikipedia page on that. And in pure
competition, marginal revenue equals
marginal cost. And that's what drives
the most prosperity for everyone in the
e for all the consumers that are out
there because you end up with the lowest
price product. And that's pure
competition. If you things like patents
and and lock in and regulatory capture,
these things prevent us from getting
towards pure competition. And so you end
up with products that are priced too
high. You end up with margins that are
ridiculously high. Um, so I think it's
bad for consumers to have that stuff,
but you could build businesses in pure
competition like they happen and and
there have been tons and tons [ __ ]
MongoDB huge public company around an
open source technology.
>> H So they're doing
>> you just end up selling it in different
ways. You sell support, you sell
security, you sell like
>> But do they do anything proprietary on
top of the
>> They try to Yeah. Yeah. There's a huge
continuum of what open source is. So
different people use different licensing
models and things so that they can have
add-ons and that kind of thing.
>> Yeah. Interesting. So I've thought a lot
about this primarily because as a video
game developer, I've watched one of the
more spectacular um sort of dramas play
out where you had a game being developed
that they allowed for modding. they
didn't put tight restrictions around it.
And then the modded game ended up being
more popular than the original game. And
so they spun off like a, you know,
multi-billion dollar franchise off of
this open source mod. And the people who
made the game are obviously traumatized
uh because they didn't see any of that
revenue. I don't even know if they're
still around. And so it's um it's
fascinating because one of the ways for
me to get attention for my game is to
allow people to mod it and build off of
it. Um, and at the same time, I don't
want to be a midwife to somebody going
and building something with this.
>> It's all good, man. It's all good. It's
all good. It's all Yes, it is. Like,
because one of the key reasons we've
been such a big backer of open source is
because open source has a distribution
advantage, which relates to the mod
thing you're talking about. Like, if if
people contribute to it and adopt it
organically, then you don't have to go
out. You're not you're not hiring a
salesperson to go convince someone to
use your technology. You're calling into
an account that's already using your
technology and say, "How would you like
us to help you feel more secure about
this and provide patches and help you
with problems?" And so the the it has
distribution built in like it's
>> that's interesting. You're right. It
shifts the business model. it it's maybe
less interesting in entertainment, but
uh if you're willing to do a services
model or you build something new
proprietarily on top of it, it's
interesting. I I've
>> I'm just saying it's good because it's
competition. If you believe in free
enterprise, you believe in in, you know,
capitalism and why America exists, it's
just a it's a more intense form of
competition. So, as a business person,
you don't like it because it feels more
wild and woolly, but it's actually
better for the ecosystem. Yeah. Well,
there's no doubt on that. It is just
that businesses tend to be capital
intensive. You're putting yourself
massively at risk. And so, you're trying
to think through, okay, what are the
reasonable things that I should be able
to control? Um,
>> you would have a hard time convincing me
that risk capital is in shortage in
America right now. I'm seeing the most
risk-seeking venture capital behavior
I've ever seen in my entire life.
>> Yeah, that's interesting. So, let's talk
about why because this is where I think
you and I may view I don't know. I'm
going to give you my take and I'm very
curious to know if we just look at this
very very differently. So, I believe
that the world that we see all of the
distortions all of the madness basically
come down to two things. You uh have a
central bank that allows you to deficit
spend and money print and then we have
been successful for a very long time and
that makes people think that success is
just natural. So I've explained the
success is just natural part earlier but
the um the central bank creating massive
distortions by making money cheap,
deficits possible and debt just
abundant. Um what do you think about
that? Do you think that's creating some
of the behavior you see or is it
something else? Certainly the long
period that people now call ZERP where
we had near zero interest rates which
was unprecedented in the history of the
country um led to I I think had that not
happened you would have had a correction
in venture capital maybe in private
equity as well um that I would have
called it a healthy correction but but
because of it and then because AI came
on the heels of it that correction never
happened. And so you had this prolonged
uh availability of capital that I do
think has contributed to um what I
described as the most risk-seeking, you
know, venture capital movement I've ever
seen.
>> How much do you think that risk-seeking
has to do with people understanding that
because we're in an inflationary
environment, if they don't get into an
asset somewhere, that money is just
going to be eaten away? when when it w
when it was zero, I I I've only met
Warren Buffett once in my life and and
it was at a group function. So, we all
had one question each. And I said, you
know, we've had zero interest rates from
like four years in a row and your DCF
models just don't even work. They if you
set interest rates negative, they they
literally fall apart. And and I said,
"So, how do you and I said, it just
seems to create a bunch of of uh
risk-seeking behavior." and he goes,
"You betcha." That's what he said.
>> So, so
>> yeah.
>> So, I do think we are,
>> yeah, I mean rates have come back up and
uh you know, and there's questions about
the dollar and whether other currencies
compete with it. So, it could I I would
be a I would I'm a believer that healthy
resets aren't are good, not bad. And so
I I I ironically relative to your
concern and I'm not as big of a Dalio
convinced it's all coming to an end, but
if I were, I would want corrections to
happen
>> because they get people more in touch
with the reality of it all.
>> What's the thing you anchor around that
makes you think maybe Dallio is not
reading this right? I I I wouldn't go as
far as to say like he's a very smart man
and he's thought about this a long time
and that little video he created like I
want to crawl under a rock every time I
watch it. So he's able to convince me
that it's a problem. Um and I also think
humans in general have a hard time
looking over time. Um and politicians
certainly um aren't held accountable
over time. Um there it's an area where I
think transparency can help. Like there
are states that don't have their public
pensions on their balance sheets. What's
that about? Like and and and
so anyway, I I I'd like to go study it
more. I I think um
I I don't find any
I I don't find value in the notion that
that there's no way to stop it. And it
goes back to what I said about fishing
all day. like like let's go try and
affect change to prevent that from
happening. That's I just want to tilt
towards that frame of mind.
>> Yeah. No, I hear that. The thing that I
maybe I'm tilting hardest against in my
life is the K-shaped economy. So, we've
got if you own assets, you're winning.
If you don't own assets, your life is
getting more expensive by the day. Um,
do you, as you think about the policy
initiative, do you think that there are
things that we can do from a policy
perspective to start bringing that gap
back together?
>> Well, I mean, I think I think this exact
issue you bring up was part of the um
impetus for my former podcast partner to
to launch the Invest America that became
the Trump accounts. like like I think
this was on his brain uh when he came up
with the idea and it's one of the
quickest policy wins I've ever seen in
my entire life. Like the way they push
that through and then getting private
public partnership
was was that's a policy when I've never
seen the likes of. So Michael Dell put
6.5 billion behind this and there's more
momentum around it. Um, and it's even
given me an idea like I I keep wondering
what if you could do that for teachers.
What if what if public what if
>> that's interesting
>> private donors could help create teacher
bonuses in different states in a state
versus state competition like a way to
give back that feels and and and and I
talked to Michael about it like it just
felt he's got a huge uh foundation
that's been doing charity work for 20
years and and there's a in your brain
you're like is this really affecting
anything? Is this really working? And
the notion of a direct transfer of
wealth from one party to the other feels
way more um
way more of a win in his brain
intellectually than funding a nonprofit
that may or may not affect change, you
know. So anyway, that's an example of of
of a very recent thing that has
transpired. There's a lot of ways it
could go wrong, but but it's
interesting. Everyone should go claim
their Trump account for their kids. Not
everyone has claimed them yet.
>> Millions.
>> I'm sure some people just don't know.
>> Yeah.
>> Um, okay. So, you famously backed Travis
Kalanick and Uber. Um, you were, if I'm
not mistaken, a character in Super
Pumped. Um,
one, how true was that? And then in
terms of accuracy of portraying you and
portraying events. Yeah. Yeah. Uh, and
then I'll have some follow-ups about
what what may makes since he's still
very active, what makes him such an
extraordinary entrepreneur.
>> So, one, they had Kyle Chandler play him
and he's way shorter than I am and and
uh most of the females I know in my life
say he's he's
differently attractive than I am. So,
I'll leave it at that.
They seem to be fond of him. Um and and
so I don't think he looks like me. Um
the the story missed a couple of things.
One, um I think you know Travis is an
extremely intelligent, powerful,
successful entrepreneur and um
and and multi-aceted, multi-dimensioned.
And I don't think that came across for
whatever reason. Um, and so you you
don't accomplish things at that scale
without that ability. And so and and and
a three-time entrepreneur. So he had he
had he had done two before. They weren't
as successful as he wanted to be. So he
was motivated by that. There's just a
lot of dimensions of it. Um, the early
days of the company were very
traditional
founder scrainess and I think the first
scene of the show they're in some bank
building like really nice offices.
That's just completely false. Like it
was it was traditional grimy whatever
cheapest rent you can get kind of place,
you know. So some of some of those
pieces were wrong. Now, an idea that
I've heard about entrepreneurship that
certainly I've lived and totally
understand is uh every startup begins as
pirates and ultimately has to figure out
how to become the Navy.
>> Yeah.
>> Um I'm very curious. He seemed at least
from the things that I can get publicly,
he seemed very good at the pirate phase
and maybe less good at the Navy phase
and I wonder if that's accurate. A. And
then B. Um, if you had to define for
people what that pirate phase is, what
are the things that make somebody good
at that?
>> Yeah. And and by the way, that that idea
that metaphor and meme you're talking
about was a blog post written by Reed
Hoffman specifically about Uber. So it
>> really Oh, that's funny. I've heard
about it secondhand, but didn't know
where it came from.
>> Yeah, you can go find it online. So Reed
was writing about Uber and he made he
came up with that uh construct and
>> hilarious
>> look plenty I think you can find pirate
elements in the early days of Bill Gates
and Microsoft and Steve Jobs and and and
Mark Zuckerberg like you can find
piratey things that they did you know
early on anytime you end up touching
government and and Uber in particular
was in a field where there was immense
regulation. Um that idea becomes more
poignant because you're going to get
judged at a higher level. Um you know
and we ended up in a situation where we
had like five state attorney generals
investigating us.
>> Um and so it it got very real very fast.
Um, but but I think that I think that is
a good I think it's a useful metaphor as
he wrote it. A lot of disruption comes
from breaking rules. And I don't mean
like breaking laws. I mean breaking
whatever best practice thought process
there was before. Um, and a lot of
Elon's thinking and the reason he's able
to build SpaceX and Starlink is because
he was willing to doubt that the prior
best practices were right and and
willing to to try new things and go in a
different direction. So, it's part and
parcel with being an entrepreneur that
you want to look at things differently
and and quite frankly, some of the
regulations were complete and utter
[ __ ] there. In in many of the
largest cities in the US, there was a
rule that a black car after it dropped
its customer had to return to base
before it went out again. And those laws
were written by the taxi lobby. Written
specifically by the taxi lobby. And no
mayor in their right mind would want to
get behind a podium and explain why that
law was on the books. And so we were
successful as a company, when I say we,
at Uber, in getting those laws removed
from the books. And those laws should
have been removed. Like they were they
were they were stupid and unproductive
laws that existed. And so there was I
think having come up and seen some of
that it makes you more piratey, right,
to to see those things out there. Um,
but there's a limit to it, right? And we
certainly touched many of those limits.
What's the role of aggression in a
startup CEO?
>> I think there is I would use a different
word. I would use a word that's more
like um unwaveringly determined like
like just you can't take them off of it.
It's you know in in the book we talk a
lot about fascination. they have such a
commitment to what they're doing that
that they can't sleep at night like
thinking about how what they got to do
next and how they're going to make it
better. So there's just just this this
unwavering commitment to what they're
doing. I think that's critical because
especially in this day and age with all
this venture capital available, there's
five other people that have the exact
same idea you do. I guarantee you like
there's no proprietary idea and you got
to run faster. Like you got to run
faster and better than the competition
or you're going to get eaten up. There's
huge rewards if you do it and get it
right.
>> Yeah, no doubt. Um okay, so this idea
being determined, you've talked a lot
about in your book running down a dream.
Um you mentioned it earlier with what
you were saying about Angela Duckworth.
It's got to be something that you're
super into. You've got to have the
passion in order to persevere.
>> Yeah.
>> So, you you've had this incredible
career as an investor.
>> Why is that the part of your experience
that you focused on? What is it that you
hope people will take away from this
book?
>> So, I stumbled on this idea about eight
or nine years ago. I was reading a bunch
of biographies and I noticed this
through line between these successful
people that started at the bottom and
were able to rise to the very top of
their field and I noticed they were all
doing the same thing and I wrote it down
the way I would write a blog post about
marketplace companies or something and
and it just kind of grew over time. I
got invited to talk at the university. I
gave the talk certain people saw it.
James Clear saw it and saw that talk and
like posted it on his blog post. And so
people started encouraging me to think
about it as a book. And as I got Post
Venture and read Arthur Brook's book and
started thinking about what I want to do
for the world, this book seemed like it
could impact way more people than a book
on how to be a good VC. Like I just
don't know that the world needs that
second book. Um, and so it became it it
became a passion project. It became
something that and I've been I' I've
been in communication with people that
saw that that original talk ended up on
YouTube that saw that talk.
The talk gave them the permission to
change careers and go do something they
that they're fascinated by and love
rather than what they were doing. and a
bit flipped in their head and they're
now doing this other thing and they call
me and they thank me for it. And so I
think the book certainly lives in the
self-help category, but many of those
books preach, oh, if you adopt this
frame of mind and do this every day and
have this new way of doing things,
you'll eventually be better. My my
book's more trying to create this toggle
in your brain where I say, "Stop doing
this and just go do this and then it'll
get easier for you and you'll have more
fun and you'll be more fulfilled and
you'll impact more people's lives." And
so I'm trying to I don't know how many
people I can do this for, but I'm trying
to give people permission to go do that
thing to go do that thing. What is the
thing that you think in modern America
or just modern life depending on how
globally this works that is trapping
people into let's call it the safe path?
I I I think part of it we talked about
it earlier, but I think it's this the
way that our educational institutions
have evolved and the fact that these
schools won't increase capacity leads to
this hyperfocused and and and by the
way, I also think there's just a genetic
hereditary part of your DNA that wants
you to worry about your kids economic
stability.
>> And I don't I think it's very hard to
get around. And so and certain cultures,
you know, like people talk about the
Indian culture being very pro- doctor,
like there's certain cultures that just
push kids in certain directions. And so
it it it was a lot about economic
safety. And and I started this idea in
this book before LLMs came along. So I
didn't write it as a solution to that.
But certainly there is a awareness now
that safe doesn't mean safe or safe
isn't what it used to be. And so I think
that's causing quite a bit of anxiety.
And for anyone that has anxiety about
their job, I would just beg them to give
my book a shot and see if there might be
a different path in their life than the
one they're on. If you there was a
Gallup poll done three years ago that
said 29% of people call themselves
engaged at work. I think those people
are in a good place. I don't think AI is
threatening them. But they had 59% in
this category they call quiet quitting.
They said they were ambivalent about
their job. AI is is coming after the
ambivalent. I guarantee you like like
the the the best practices that you
would learn in a physics class or an
engineering class, those are in the
model. Like the rope program, the rope
algorithm that you had to memorize and
use on the test, those are in the model.
And if you're if you're fascinated about
your field, you live in the nuance. you
live but beyond those things beyond
those programmatic
programmatic things that you're taught
to do at school because you're
constantly studying the edge and what's
possible and that's what's not in the
model. And so I think the artisans, you
know, and I think you can use that word
broadly across fields. You've met
salespeople that you would call
artisans, right? The best salesperson in
your in your company is an artisan.
There's no doubt about it. and they have
things the models don't have. But you
got to put yourself in that place. And
the only way I think you can be in that
place is if you're doing something
you're fascinated by.
>> It's very interesting how easily people
get trapped either because they, you
know, sure your parents are giving you
something, but also economic security
really does help. Uh it's a very real
thing. And then I think also a lot of
times people struggle to figure out how
to make a living doing the thing that
they love. um in the book, how do you
advise people? You tell a lot of
incredible stories. And by the way, for
anybody that's on the fence about
whether you should read it, um the way
that the stories are told is going to
give you both an intellectual
understanding and like this visceral
emotional connection to what that kind
of profound change can look like and how
successful people can be on the other
side. But how how do you advise them to
like, okay, you've got this thing you
like. How do we take that hobby and
actually make it a career?
>> I I I personally and and the the the the
intersecting people younger in their
life will be super helpful because you
have less economic realities, right?
It's if you have three kids and a
mortgage, it's a lot harder to be
flexible. But one thing I feel
profoundly about is a lot of these
fields that we worry about being places
you can't make money. You can actually
have a career and do just fine. There's
an anecdote at the back of the book
where I was at South by Southwest and
there was a panel on bedroom music or
bedroom producers. These are people that
can now produce an album from a bedroom
because all the tracks can be sent to
them digitally and like and and the room
was packed and they had a line for Q&A
and this this girl said, you know, I
really want a career in the music field,
but but my parents say you can't make
money. And one of the guys on the panel,
I I found him and his name's in the
book, but he stood up and he said, "I've
never met anyone that tried hard that
that wasn't able to have a career in
music." Like like just kind of flat out
said that. And the trying hard part it
I'm going to tell another anecdote. I
was talking to the with a per a person
that leads job placement at one of the
top universities in this country about
the book and she says, "Well, what do I
do with, you know, a poetry major?" And
I gave her two examples from the book, a
guy that writes about the Grand Canyon
and a guy in Houston that writes about
Texas horror culture. And I said, "Look
at these people. They made a career in
these fields. How's that different from
poetry?" And she goes, "But they worked
really hard." And I'm like, "Yeah,
yeah." And and and and the unlock, the
the thing that that I would tell you is
if you're fascinated by something, the
work's free. That's the thing. That's
like the key unlock here. People that
are fascinated by something, it doesn't
feel like work. Like they're just having
fun. Like, and you can see it in what
they do and how they go about it. And
they love learning about the field. And
the hardest part I would say, and we
call it the hardest part in a book, is
finding that thing. And you might have
to wander around. If you haven't found
it yet, I think that's fine. Keep
looking. You know, don't I don't know
that you can manifest it, right? You got
to find it. I don't think you can just
make yourself. And I think that's why
Duckworth had this change of heart a
little bit about grit. Like it it just
perseverance alone is not going to get
you there. You you need to it needs to
be free. You got to find that unlock.
>> Bill, on a personal level, um some
relationships end because the two people
fall out of love and sometimes a
relationship ends because somebody falls
in love with somebody new. Um you've had
one of the most successful investing
careers ever in all of human history. Um
did you fall out of love with investing
or did you fall in love with something
new?
Um, a little bit of both, I think. Um,
yeah, a little bit of both. I there,
this will sound ridiculous and but it's
true. I was watching a uh an episode
uh of the the new Letterman series where
he interviews people with the long
beard. My next guest needs my next
guest. Yeah. and he had um he had
Seinfeld on and they they both mentioned
this book Born Standing Up by Steve
Martin. Have you heard of it?
>> Oh, yes. Very.
>> So, I went and read it immediately cuz
they were both so emphatic and I tore
through it and he spent I don't know 15
years grinding to get his big break,
Steve Martin did. And then when he got
it, it went vertical. Like it just like
went and he progressed from nightclub to
arena faster probably than any comedian
had at that time. Like he just instantly
was doing big shows. And one day he was
on the stage in Vegas and he looked up
in an arena and the upper deck was empty
and he never went on stage again.
>> Wow. He never went on stage again and he
went and had an incredible career as a
as an actor and became a famous banjo
player and won some Grammys. And so
anyway,
after I read that, I was like, I'm going
to hang them up soon. Like, I'm going to
stop soon. Um, not because I couldn't
have kept doing it, but I had such an
awesome career and loved it so much I
didn't want to hang around and start
being less good at it. Does that make
sense?
>> Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah. There's a quote
that that haunts me, which is that
genius is a young man's game. And man, I
really don't want it to be true, but I
certainly get all the reasons why it
probably is true.
>> Oh, and VC is definitely a young
person's game. And I said that my whole
career and we Benchmark is famous for
bringing 27 28 year olds in as general
partners which is when I got invited in
at that age. And there it tilts to
towards youth in so many ways. They're
fascinated by the new stuff. The the age
of the new entrepreneurs much more
likely to be their age so they connect
with them. Um hustle hustle man. Venture
is a hustle job and it's harder to
hustle as you get older. It's just
harder. You have more you have more
things in your life. It's harder to
hustle. So, it bends towards youth and I
knew that and I talked about it forever.
So, those two things simultaneously made
it very easy for me. And as you can
tell, I have enthusiasm about these new
things I want to go do, you know.
>> Yeah. No, I love it, man. I'm so glad
that you're going into this new phase.
I'm super grateful that you took the
time to talk to me today. Where can
people find you, find the book?
>> Yeah, the book's everywhere you can buy
books. It's called Running Down a Dream.
If you type dream and girly gle into
Amazon or Google or anywhere, it'll come
up immediately. So, it's not hard to
find. Um, and I did some people for
whatever reason like my voice, which I
am not fully in touch with, but I did
the audio book. And so, if you if you
like my voice, you got that opportunity
as well.
>> Rightfully so. I think when uh on a book
like that, I think the author doing it
is always much better. So, I think
>> and I'm also hearing from people it's a
great graduation gift. So, I'll throw
that plug in as well.
>> For sure. Yeah. Great for that. Great
for anytime as uh it's one of the most
important decisions you're going to make
in your life.
>> No doubt.
>> That and who you end up marrying. Those
are woof huge
>> probably the one and two biggest ones
you're going to make.
>> Although this one you can change like
Well, I guess you can change the
marriage one too. We say plenty of
people bill
changing your career is is more or less
round upon. Let's say that.
>> Yeah. No doubt.
>> And less dramatic. Less dramatic.
Anyway, all right. Thank you so much.
>> Thanks for taking the time, man. I
appreciate it. Everybody, if you have
not already, be sure to subscribe. And
until next time, my friends, be
legendary. Take care. Peace. If you like
this conversation, check out this
episode to learn more.
>> America doesn't exist. There's blue
America and red America and tech America
and all these different subtribes within
it. The word American is like the word
Korean. Yo, you're saying something
here. Bology. Digital AI disrupts
Democrat jobs and physical AI disrupts
republic.
Help & FAQ
Sweden's Finance Minister Said Socialism Was Impossible — Their Economy Collapsed Proving Him Right

Tom Bilyeu
May 19, 2026
Philosophy of Success

Policy and Regulatory Capture

Future of Work and Education

Takeaways

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is being the most AI‑enabled version of yourself the best protection against AI disruption?

How does regulatory capture affect competition in the US financial and healthcare sectors?

Who is Tom Bilyeu on YouTube?

Does this page include the full transcript of the video?

Helpful resources related to this video

Share This Summary

Embed This Summary
