Quarter-Life Capital

E4
Speaker 2
[00.00.02]
Hi everyone. Welcome to the fourth episode of the Quarter Life Capital. I'm here with Soham and Matt, and today we're talking about some really interesting topics, uh, I guess about like AI and IP laws and what that means for our society moving forward. Uh, which sounds a bit grandiose, but I think it's actually a lot of applications. Um, so I think, Soham, you share this new that, uh, Jack Dorsey, who was the founder of Twitter, who's now the CEO of block, which was used to call the square. That's a lot of things. And he basically tweeted and said that we should abolish all IP laws on Twitter. And Elon Musk tweeted, retweeted him and said, I agree. Um, so Matt, I think you have many thoughts about like IP laws and Jack Dorsey. So why don't you start there?
Speaker 1
[00.00.49]
Yeah, I mean, I think IP law in general is weird because it's kind of a situation where someone, you know, on one hand, you know, someone comes up with a thing and they should be rewarded
Speaker 2
[00.00.59]
for it. But really, ideas should be free, right? Imagine if insulin, when it was invented, if the guy had decided to patent it, um, there's so many lives that would not have been saved because of that. And I think in the age of technology today, it's, you know, if you think about ideas and, and AI, the speed of execution matters much more than the ideas itself. Ideas are cheap, but execution
Speaker 1
[00.01.23]
is what really matters. Um, and so if we abolish, I think if we were to abolish IP law, that we would really be able to accelerate the development of what we create as, as humans. So, um, and just in general, I think Jack Dorsey is a cool, you know, he's a cool, cool, cool Bitcoin that's you know, I've been trying to push that forward for years. So
Speaker 2
[00.01.42]
yeah. And I think today I read something in TechCrunch which is um Figma is trying to sue windsurf. Or maybe there's not a company for using the word dev mode. Because apparently Figma got trademark trademark the word dev mode last month in the US, and now they're sending a cease and desist letter to another startup for using the word dev mode. So in my opinion, it's ridiculous. It's crazy. On the other hand, like my company's logos are trademarked, so I guess like there's some good for trademarking, but I think it's perhaps being weaponized. The IP system. We saw New York Times suing OpenAI. Many other publishers sued and then settled and then sued again, I think. Innovation does die in these type of environments. And I think it's like, yeah, valid point about that. So so what do you think about this whole IP law? I know I do think it's important. So I work in like litigation support for like IP like a decent amount done a few cases on it. I think the part that becomes really important is I think what Matt was saying, the idea of like, what's your motivation becomes is execution. Not really the idea itself when you have no IP laws and software like we see in China, for example, that's the way it is. It's the speed of execution. That's what wins the game. But I think what ends up happening when you kind of like go into this free wild, wild west, the idea becomes like again, also China I think is a great example. When's it happening? Now is if you get big enough, you kind of have to go down three roads. You either sell to Alibaba, Baidu or Tencent, right? Like, I think only ByteDance really made it out in China outside of those big three. Anything else is because those companies kind of control the whole distribution like Tencent controls WeChat. And if you can't get inside of that, it becomes much more complicated, right. And so I think the idea is that without IP laws, if you're a smaller guy, it becomes so hard for you to be able to fight Goliath, for example, because you don't have any advantage at all. They can kind of just price you out. They can do whatever they want. They can control C, control V to every single way. You've kind of like done it. I think like one thing we've seen in like the Western side is like Amazon for example, in their marketplace, what you see is if you have a product that's like pretty easy to make, but it's selling really well, don't make the Amazon Basics version of it. And then that and then they'll just like push that forward. Right. And because they control the distribution, they control the quote unquote, it becomes so much easier for their product to be one that gets sold and you kind of get pushed all the way down. And so then when it comes to like these like disruptive technologies, we'll end up happening is the cash cows like Google, Apple, everybody. They can kind of just like force everyone out. It's a. Yeah,
Speaker 1
[00.04.27]
well, I was just curious, like, couldn't you make the argument the other way, actually, that, you know, say a large company has a patent and then like a small company who might be able to execute faster and more, you know, in a more nimble manner, could actually go and and actually compete against the large guy. And you don't have them doing that because the big guys have all the lawyers that are able to crush them and send the cease and desist. So I guess in some aspects it works both ways.
Speaker 2
[00.04.52]
But I guess the point is, in that situation, if the large player is the one that already has the IP, it becomes hard to justify the idea of like why the smaller person should be able to use
Speaker 3
[00.05.03]
exactly what somebody else did for success. I think the idea would become if you're somebody small, you're either coming in like a better way to do something right, like a better way to cut the cheese, um, to say so. In that case, I don't know how like support I would give the idea, because if I'm a big company, I become successful because of my passion. It makes sense then, like, I want to protect that idea. If you can think of something better, then you should be able to, like, beat me. But if it's the exact same process, I think that it becomes kind of a harder.
Speaker 2
[00.05.32]
Yeah. But Amazon basically made their market share by infringing on small businesses. And I read a whole book about it actually about like how they're just copying and it's like how their teams are structured. Right. So there are all KPIs. So some teams, in order to reach KPIs, have to be ruthlessly copying and looking over the sellers marketplace data and seeing who performs the best. So that that makes me a little bit sick to hear that. So they ruthlessly infringe on other brands. And when they couldn't compete with the other brand, they lower their price by 30 or 50%, 80%, sometimes just to be the other guy to squeeze them out. Well,
Speaker 1
[00.06.07]
the other thing too is like, okay, well, if companies in China are just able to, you know, copy American companies with no problems, then but then American companies aren't able to copy each other. Well, then you have you have more, you know, innovation and execution that occurs in China than in America in the first place. So unless you can have patent law that is worldwide, then it's an uneven playing field, isn't it?
Speaker 3
[00.06.29]
And I think one of the things people have been talking about with this new, like trade war between us and China is the idea that if China goes outside the WTO. They don't have any IP protection for like any of the US companies, they can make their own Microsoft Office suite and everything else like that and just release it into the market.
Speaker 2
[00.06.44]
They probably have. Yeah. How many years ago? Right. Oh, yeah. So I think that makes sense. I personally think IP is like has become weaponized a lot in many jurisdictions. And I feel like the cost of like just getting a patent, the cost of filing a trademark has become quite high as well. I think like, and personally I feel like I've tried to file a few trademarks. I just like patents, and then you just feel like it's not really worth the time and energy because it becomes public anyways. So I feel like it's a little bit more of like the old school thinking about, oh, you know, these things are have to be trademark, have to be patented. But oftentimes it's just like an excuse for litigations to happen that costs everybody's money. And and I think that's not really a great use of resources or time. So would you say more like would you say maybe Jack Dorsey is endorsing abolishing IP laws when it comes to AI, or do you more prefer okay, just get rid of it all.
Speaker 1
[00.07.37]
Well, I think he's probably coming at it from a. A freedom and a libertarian perspective of like, hey, you know, these things that are created, you shouldn't you shouldn't have these big, you know, megalithic corporations that are able to just, you know, monopolize it with whatever patents. And then we should have free and open innovation, I think, like that's the that's the side that he's coming from because he's been he's been about he's been a big proponent of Bitcoin um, about it being freedom money. He's been a big proponent of oh, the original Twitter shouldn't have been like a company. It should have been a protocol, which is another thing that he's actually like trying to push forward. So I think he's just trying to push for freedom because as humans, as humanity, you know, like as a species, we want ideas. We like like the optimal way for humans to exist and to evolve is to cooperate. And the current version of like, you know, communism doesn't work and capitalism is, you know, the next iteration from that, and that works pretty well. But everyone's competing against each other. But the next step is cooperation, where where ideas are shared. Because if ideas are shared across people, we're able to, you know, innovate more quickly. Imagine if we're all just in silos and we don't know anything, then we're not able to innovate and grow as a species as quickly. So I think maybe that's the viewpoint that he's thinking
Speaker 2
[00.08.53]
from. So what do you think? What do you think about open source
Speaker 3
[00.08.56]
role in terms of all this? Because I'm sure Jeff and many others in tech industry, obviously they've seen a lot of open source projects in China. Open source deep Seek as well has pushed the industry forward. I think data release 4.1 for the same 4 to 5. Anyway, they release a new version of that basically use architecture of Deep Seek.
Speaker 2
[00.09.17]
Um, so what do you think about this like open source IP and just, you know.
Speaker 3
[00.09.22]
Yeah. I think, um, the conversation of open source is a closed source is a big one. I know open I was very much on one side, uh, before and has kind of changed a little bit. Um, but overall I would always be on the side of open source as well. Um, I just think that's like the right way to do it. And on the practicality basis to, um, what we're talking about with the IP laws, it seems really hard in my head to be able to understand how you can get a commercially viable product in the long run that is closed source. You know, I think like a lot of open eyes lawsuits that you're talking about, like the New York Times, one, we don't know how it's going to go with fair use and everything along those lines, but it becomes really hard for them to be able to justify their 100 million plus users when a lot of it is off the back of like, you know, like other publishers and like laws that are already in place as of
Speaker 2
[00.10.09]
now. Yeah. And I, um,
Speaker 3
[00.10.12]
I was going to say like, who's gonna trust the black box? Right? But you were gonna say, George. Yeah, I was gonna say I almost got sued for using, like, a font on my website. Oh,
Speaker 2
[00.10.21]
really? Yeah, I know this thing ever. So we had, like, a former designer who was designing, like, a website, and I was, like, from a few years ago. And then somebody emailed me and say, you're using this font, and now you're supposed to pay me X amount of money or it will sue, Suit. Right. Um. I'm not going to go too much in detail about what happened, but we'll just.
Speaker 1
[00.10.40]
Fine. Well, I find it. What's going to. What you just said is going to be hilarious in ten years, because people are going to be able to generate an entire font set, like using AI, you know, and like the idea of someone being sued for like, oh, you use my font. It's like, okay, well, whatever font. It doesn't matter if you want Times New Roman, if you want whatever, you're going to be able to generate it and you're going to make it able to customize it however you
Speaker 3
[00.11.02]
want. You know it's so anti libertarian values right. Just just for that. And I think and I think another thing is like the corporations are becoming more and more powerful in a capitalistic society. And I think corporations are now able to own all the assets or are able to literally I think President Trump pardoned the corporation a few weeks ago, which is bizarre to me. Even the corporations are so close to the person. But the fact that a corporation can get pardoned just it just blows my head. Okay, how the heck did we let that happen? Well, he well, Trump pardoned a bunch of people that donated to his campaign. It was basically a get out of jail free card.
Speaker 2
[00.11.40]
You know, Trevor Milton, I think the founder of Nikola, I think he got pardoned. Yeah,
Speaker 1
[00.11.44]
the founder of BitMEX as well. And I don't I don't see how he got one from Binance.
Speaker 2
[00.11.49]
I don't know who has. Not because he already got a jail. So probably he doesn't. They're echoing need Harden. Yeah. Because I think Trayvon Martin was serving his jail sentence when he got the part. So it was pretty wild. But you know anyways well I'll give it I'll give it to Trump, though, for pardoning Ross Holbrook, who was sentenced to 40 year, two life sentences plus 40 years for creating the Silk Road, which he never deserved. That much time. This was like the early marketplace for Bitcoin
Speaker 1
[00.12.16]
for yeah, people. It was supposed to be a libertarian marketplace where people could, you know, buy and sell, you know, different items. And, you know, obviously drugs was part of that. But, you know, he never deserved that much time in jail. And it's awesome. Now he's actually going to be at the Bitcoin Vegas conference and he's going to be speaking. So he's out of the jail cell. It's going to be his first public appearance. So it's going to
Speaker 2
[00.12.37]
be exciting. How many years has he
Speaker 3
[00.12.39]
served. He served I think he served 11 years. Yeah it's crazy. He literally he was saying stories like, hey, um, you know, my my, my, I don't know if it was his girlfriend or wife, like, used to visit him in prison. And he said, like, I used to pay like, a dollar for a hug, basically, because basically in the visiting area they would have a, um, a photo booth, right? But it was the only area that they were able to, like, hug each other because otherwise, you know, in the visiting area, you're not allowed to touch. So he's like, I used to pay a dollar for a hug, you know, every visit basically. So yeah, pretty touching
Speaker 2
[00.13.10]
the whole thing. It's a very sad, very sad story. I'm glad that's happening. Um, SBF, on the other hand, I think it's also looking for a pardon. I think I saw it on the news that he's looking for. What do you think? Well, I feel
Speaker 1
[00.13.23]
like he's the guy that should have got two life sentences plus 40 years. He was fighting Bitcoin. So he's like, oh you know Bitcoin's going to zero. Meanwhile he was short bitcoin on his balance sheet. And you know what's wild to me. The only reason that like everyone got any money back from the FTX thing was because it took them so long to to to settle the, you know, the suit involved with it that the assets went back up. You know,
Speaker 2
[00.13.48]
that's crazy.
Speaker 1
[00.13.48]
So crazy I don't know I feel like he's he kind of got what he deserved to, you know, to a certain extent. And. But what's what's bizarre in the legal system to me is that, you know, Carroll and Ellison, I think, was still very involved with the whole thing. And she snitched on SBF. So she, you know, gets off with three years and he gets 25. So the legal system is very bizarre in that manner.
Speaker 2
[00.14.10]
Yeah. But but maybe I think the argument is that how they've done it now, maybe they wouldn't have gotten that many years of sentences. I think she's also got many. I forgot how long he got, but he got out four months, right. Um, so, Matt, what do you think about, like, the, the the whole crypto like regime after basically Trump has been inaugurated. Um, and also like after, you know, CC, SBF and some other people have gone to jail and maybe some of them came out. What do you think the state of the industry is now? Well, I think it's really interesting talking about like the lending market in particular, because there was a significant amount of leverage that was involved around the 2021, 2022 area. Um, you know, there was the likes of BlockFi, that was, you know, people were taking out, you know, loans and then the Bitcoin that was deposited on there was being lent out to other people that was being lent out to other people, other companies, and they were all levered up on all these things. And when Terra Luna came and collapsed it, you know, the entire thing went to went to zero, in essence. And I think that wiped out a lot of the leverage that existed at that time. And I was looking at a recent post on X, uh, that was showing like the amount of leverage and the amount of lending that's going on in the market. It's a fraction of what it was back then. So is there a lot of leverage that still exists in the market? Yes. Has a lot of it in terms of lending been been taken out? Yes. That's true. And I think that, you know, that provides an opportunity really for, um, you know, it means that there's kind of an untapped market there in terms of actually being able to build out, you know, Bitcoin backed loans in a manner that is more decentralized and more self custodial. Um, which I think is how it always should have been. I remember having um. I remember I got an email from like when we were building Bitcoin back loans, things back in the day. I got an email from from Zach, who was the CEO of BlockFi, and he was like, you know, DeFi is never going to take off. You know, sci fi is the only way forward. And then, of course, we know, like what happened to BlockFi. So I just, you know, nothing against him. But I think it's just funny looking at that and realizing, you know, actually, I think that it is, you know, building tools that, you know, can't be destroyed or can't be, you know, stolen from, I think is, you
Speaker 1
[00.16.17]
know, the way forward in the very long
Speaker 2
[00.16.19]
term. Right. And so what do you think about the state of the industry is because I personally, I feel like especially since last year, um, it has become a lot more mainstream. I think people are talking about it not just in a speculative way, but also for like an asset that you can get that's going to appreciate long term value and not short term. And we're seeing more of that. So what's your view about the whole industry now. Yeah I think we're finally getting to a point where roads are starting to get paved. I think it's been such a long time where you've had like an administration that really was just against it and kind of just wanted as little people involved as possible. I think we finally got to a point where you can actually just like, use these assets. Um, you know, like we're talking about David Sachs a while ago, like at the top of the white House. Now they talk about the idea of digital asset a stockpile, they started creating definitions. You have collectibles, you have securities, and you have property, right? And so now you're starting to actually understand what is the difference. You know, we used to say crypto and everything kind of fell under that one bucket. Now like the Trump coin for example that's a collectible right. Like you're not really going to be using that as an investment. Um, Bitcoin is probably more like a property. Ethereum is probably like a security. We're starting to now see like this little like specifics for it. Um, the idea is that not what I was talking about in the last episode, that now you can have Mark to market for like your digital assets as well. I think that's going to be an incredibly nice way for companies to actually do want to invest in this, to be able to actually show off their assets. And then lastly, now banks in the US are finally able to like hold on to crypto. They weren't able to like, um, use that beforehand. So what we're talking about about loans and like bitcoin backed loans, a lot of this stuff, you know, like traditional finance already has like a we might not they might not be trusting in terms of like historic historically, but they're one of the largest players in everything. So it becomes important for them to be able to play in this space as well. And now they can finally start doing that. So I think that's the one key I'd give, like this new administration. It's been exciting to finally see this industry start growing. I have two predictions. Number
Speaker 1
[00.18.21]
one. Solana is going to flip Ethereum
Speaker 2
[00.18.25]
okay. And number two, uh, within the next like ten years, you're going to be able to go to your bank and you're going to have a fiat balance. You're going to have a Bitcoin balance. Okay, that sounds really exciting. But the challenge would be that USD is actually basically competing product as of Bitcoin. Or do you think that's a competing product or do you think Bitcoin is more like gold which is not competing with USD historically? Yeah, I guess technically you already can kind of do that with the ETF like, but I think it's going to be more of a like Bitcoin account. And I don't know what countries are going to have it. I mean maybe you can already do this in El Salvador. That's a good question. Maybe you can go to the bank and you can get,
Speaker 1
[00.19.03]
you know, have a Bitcoin account and a and a, you know, a USD account. That's a good question. Um, but I think it does compete. That's what Larry Fink said, right. Yeah. You know, the US dollar is losing its reserve status and the
Speaker 2
[00.19.16]
most and it's at risk to bitcoin.
Speaker 1
[00.19.18]
And I mean he's loving it because he's making that point to 5% off the Blackrock ETF. So yeah I
Speaker 3
[00.19.24]
think the one thing we always talk about is the US dollar. Like you know, which is the most pristine like liquid commodity there is right. I think it becomes important to talk about like the rupee, the yen, like a lot of other currencies, the peso that you don't have as much trust in the government or the government doesn't have as much, I guess, like legs around the world to be able to actually control their supply to a certain extent. You know, like I think the point is, it becomes important to realize that Bitcoin isn't just only competing with the US dollar. There's other like currencies out there that just aren't as well kept, which is true. I think it's replacing. It's just like how US oil is being used in Iran and other Venezuela and other places. The biggest risks to
Speaker 1
[00.20.06]
Bitcoin is governments
Speaker 3
[00.20.07]
being fiscally responsible.
Speaker 2
[00.20.10]
That's that's interesting. Yeah I think now let's talk about another topic, which is basically OpenAI's new GPT 4.1 model. But I think more importantly is that they are phasing out GPT 4.5, I think merely a month after it's introduced, because potentially it's been very expensive to run. So I don't know how much you know, but can you bring us up to speed?
Speaker 3
[00.20.31]
Well, I just saw everyone like complaining because they're like, what, Jack? GPT they're replacing 4.5 with 4.1 with their downgrading it. What's happening? Uh, I don't honestly, I don't know much about it. I assume that
Speaker 2
[00.20.42]
it's going to.
Speaker 1
[00.20.43]
Be a more maybe, like maybe it's a model that is more efficient, um, but still retain some of the properties. Um, I don't know if you guys know.
Speaker 2
[00.20.52]
I think 4.1 is actually higher than 4.50, is it? Supposedly they're just very bad at naming things. Oh they're horrible. I think 4.5 like literally rounds like energy crazy. I don't have an exact stats about how much energy it generates, but I think on the API pricing, it's basically $80 for, uh, a million tokens or something, $80 for a million tokens, and GPT four for, oh is about $10 or like $8 or
Speaker 1
[00.21.19]
even less. I wonder if OpenAI has like periods of time, like, for example, like the Pacific is pretty big, the Pacific Ocean is pretty big. So if it was, you know, the middle of the night for most people and it's daytime for Hawaii, right? Then there's a good proportion of people that are, you know, offline during those periods of time. Is there much less usage of ChatGPT, you know, maybe they should be buy some Bitcoin miners. They could, you know, they could mined bitcoin when the usage of their GPUs is lower. And then that kind of equals it out.
Speaker 3
[00.21.52]
Just an idea. Yeah.
Speaker 2
[00.21.53]
So what do you think about, like, the cost of running AI in general?
Speaker 3
[00.21.56]
Yeah. I think that's the one thing that needs to be figured out, is the idea of getting that closer and closer to zero, like the and it becomes hard because I think the technology itself is so like limited. Like your GPUs literally melt, you know, like the more you use it and stuff like that, like it becomes really hard for you to be able to continuously like, expand when your actual hardware for itself has an expiry date, almost it with like enough usage. And so I think the point is that as as this AI keeps going, the cost will start going down. But I think that is the right place to figure out. Like we've seen Nvidia just with the GPUs that we currently have, how big of a lead they have in the entire market? I think right under the second most valuable company on the planet. And so the idea is that I think that right there is what's going to become the most sought after goal for a lot of companies. And I think we'll be able to finally see something where next 2 to 3 years, these costs are going significantly down. Because I think one thing I've heard you say a couple times, it's a race to the bottom right when it comes to these AI languages.
Speaker 1
[00.22.59]
Well, I feel like also. Like, if the cost keeps going down, then eventually we're just going to have, you know, these LM models all on our own devices, right. Like, um, and that that's actually so cool. Like for self sovereignty. Right. Like then, you know, you have privacy built in. You're able to ask, imagine if you had ChatGPT for one or whatever they're calling it. I guess it was for. Oh, so now it's for one that's so bad naming. Imagine if you had that, like on your own computer and then like, you're not worried about privacy and all this stuff. Um, eventually your computer is, like, powerful enough. You can run your own Bitcoin node. So you got your bitcoin node, you got your got your Lem model, you know, whatever else you want to run. Like eventually we have that or so do you guys think we get to that point with AI. Or do you think it's always going to be like, you know, this huge cluster, like the most powerful model is all always like, you know, in the cloud or accessing some
Speaker 3
[00.23.46]
service. I think it has to be in the cloud. I think I was listening to Sam talk about this a little while ago. I think I was on one of the Ted talks, and he was saying that right now what they have access to is 100 million plus people, just like prompting everything, whatever, kind of like insights. You have stuff like that and becomes so hard to be able to like, argue that a close like on your own, like personal laptop model will be as powerful as something that driven by the amount of data that you have, the amount of neural networks you can start keep building. Maybe gets to a point where we just can't get to the next stage of AI and they equal out, but I think cloud will always take a lead on something like that.
Speaker 1
[00.24.25]
I guess it just means that the models we have today, like eventually we'll be on the personal computer or your personal phone, but the best of the time will always be, you know, in the cloud or
Speaker 2
[00.24.36]
accessing some service. I do feel like I'm more comfortable with having a license, so I actually have tried to apply intelligence, like the other day on my messages on my desktop. And by the way, I have no idea. Like I have no idea how it works and I do not like the results. But basically what happened is that I type some people say, okay, here's somebody responding to this, and I was trying it out. And then it prompted ChatGPT on device. And then ChatGPT answered the query and then generated it on to my blog. And personally, I'm like, I'm not really too comfortable with it. Right. Because like what? Do you share this. Share with I regarding this. Right. Like how much of it is on the box, which I'm assuming not really. That's not on the device. Right. Something easy. It's on device. But we saw Microsoft was using like a Pi series. Um, FX series. I think that's like the model that you can run on your phone can run on tablets. It doesn't require any extra internet. And I believe that was value that's so much valuable for humanity as a whole. By having those models and having those models having new memories and, and having like more capabilities. I think it's already happening with Alibaba and pushing new models on mobile phone. I think meta is doing probably the same thing OpenAI is doing. Um, for for me, I think maybe that's the one that will be open sourcing, uh, in the coming days. But I do think how valuable it is is because I personally I do love the most cutting edge models. And I get it. I have to use it on the cloud. I would get it. The data there is not very secure. Um, but I would much more prefer something on my device.
Speaker 1
[00.26.17]
Matt. Yeah, I completely agree. Well I think. And then didn't Zuckerberg also announced like so llama for I guess it was and it was you were able to run it on your own like local GPU which was like huge. Yeah. It's like it's awesome. It's crazy to see like Facebook, meta, Facebook be the ones that are pushing forward on like open source, like they're the ones that create a, you know, React Native and react back in the day. There's a great, you know, framework for development of like, you know, web and mobile apps and now like pushing for AI like, you know, it got leaked and now they're continually trying to push for open source, which I think is like awesome to see. And so like, I mean, that just allows for so much more experimentation. Right. You're behind when you go and use, you know, um, you know, they're censoring certain things. You can't ask at certain things. Um, but with Lama before, I mean, you, I guess you can kind of try to figure out how to jailbreak it, and they can't update it in order to fix that hash. And so that, you know, that just becomes interesting for cool use cases that people can do. Um, because oftentimes, like some people can't do certain things like ChatGPT just because it doesn't align with their, you know, whatever their rules and policies are. And, and oftentimes those things aren't even malicious, but you're just not allowed to do. And so that allows for more freedom with lama for maybe it's also bad for other things. But I think at the end of the day, you need freedom.
Speaker 2
[00.27.36]
Totally agree. Speaking of. Okay, let's move on to the next topic. So obviously tariff has been a huge theme. I think we've covered a few episodes ago, but I do want to talk about a little bit about Netflix, which we talk about as well. So Netflix is aiming to join the 1 Trillion Club by 2030. And why I'm saying this now is because we're entering a very volatile market. Time timing for all the tech stocks. However, Netflix has been really stable and even grown compared to the S&P 500, which has dropped by more than 10 to 20% over the past couple of weeks. So they're aiming to sign up more users in overseas markets, and they're aiming to push aggressively to be worth $1 trillion. So so I what are your thoughts about Netflix goals? And because I think entertainment does play a role in the future of AI. I think more people will consume entertainment they already have. So what are your thoughts about Netflix and Netflix in general? Yeah, no. In terms of getting to $1 trillion, I could see something along those lines. I think they have a good tailwinds on the idea that one, just with the amount of like, language, um, that they haven't been able to tackle because of the fact just. The limitations of like human labor to be able to do something like that. Now the AI, if you can have real time for every language, every show. I think that changes a lot in terms of like how many people can use Netflix. Um, they already have the data in terms of how to price it for different regions, how it works out. And so you're just kind of like opening up much bigger markets overall. I think that's the first. And I think the second part that I think is much bigger as well, is this idea. I remember seeing a stat that right now on the TV, the thing that people use the most is YouTube and Netflix is number two, right? Oh that's
Speaker 3
[00.29.25]
me. Yeah, exactly. And I watch YouTube on like, my TV too. And I think the reason why is because you have like creators that are able to go on and like create something. Right. And so now is the cost of creation goes to zero. And we're talking about the last episode. Like animation is already becoming a lot easier. So that starts going to zero when you have a huge cash cow like Netflix, that every month they're getting all this revenue that's basically free for them, right? They have a couple of server costs and employee costs. That's it. Um, and so that right there, I think is the bridge for them to be able to start creating so much more content that they, that other people really won't be able to keep up. Um, and when I say other people, I mean, like other streaming platforms like Apple, who has so many other things to focus on. Amazon, who has so many other things to focus on. Netflix is bread and butter will always be streaming.
Speaker 1
[00.30.14]
Yeah, that's a good point. Like even, you know, comparison comparing Netflix versus, you know, Disney+ versus Amazon Prime. Like Disney. Disney is still also focused. They have theme parks, you know down in Florida. They got to deal with that. And so Netflix is the only one of the only ones that is like solely focused on that one thing. Um, I also think they have a good reach in like the worldwide market. They did a great job with Squid Games. They're focusing on creating their own content. They're limiting the amount of content that they're licensing from other folks, which means that their licensing fees are minimal. And so I think that's really smart. And so if they can continue to tap into creating great content and doing that worldwide for worldwide audience like they were able to do with Squid Games, um, then I think they're in a really good, good spot. And I mean, the obvious thing is that, you know, software and content, you know, are not affected by tariffs at the end of the day. So that's
Speaker 2
[00.31.05]
great. Yeah, that's great. And I think Netflix has also tried to introduce games gaming in Netflix I have not personally played it but I saw it has GTA San Andreas. It has some like snake games which are pretty cool. I think Spotify is also like getting it. They were getting into the podcast space many years ago, and at a time I was like, I use Apple Podcasts, I will never use Spotify to listen to podcasts. That's ridiculous. And now you know, we know. We all know what happened. So I guess the point is that consumer behaviors always change. And in an entertainment space, I guess changes are more are coming. Right. And personally I'm really bullish on the entertainment industry as a whole because that's where I see the future is going to be, where people have more time to spend on entertainment. And where are they going to go? Netflix, YouTube and all the others. Right. So so what's your take on the future of entertainment industry in general? Yeah. And
Speaker 1
[00.31.56]
I think it kind of stays the same. We talked about this 1 or 2 episodes ago too. I really do think the idea is as the cost for creation of content becomes easier and cheaper. The idea of like video games, like movies, TV shows, everything. I think you're going to start seeing a lot more like customized, like people creating their own versions of something or um, for example, a lot of TV shows you have like maybe like 10 or 20% of fans that absolutely love whatever the ending was for a TV show, maybe not a 20 or 30% that sort of liked it, not 20 or 30% that kind of hated it. And you have the passionate ones that absolutely despise the ending, right? And I think when you have a good enough show you
Speaker 3
[00.32.37]
with the idea of how cheap it is to create content now, you can kind of cater to all five of these fans. And I kind of like give endings that are a bit more for like fans itself. Right. And so I think like that's kind of the way we're going to is like much more customized content
Speaker 2
[00.32.50]
overall. And I think Netflix might actually do that because I saw a TikTok, um, which I don't think is true, but they said basically the second episode of Black Mirror, a new season had two different endings, and they're pushing out different endings and different people. And I was like, what the heck? That's the smartest thing I've ever heard, you know? That's amazing. It makes me want to try it and just see what ending I got, you know?
Speaker 1
[00.33.09]
So basically, we've become even more siloed and we've become even more, more lonely. I
Speaker 2
[00.33.13]
feel like that's. Kind of where it's going. Yeah, I honestly I do think there's this like one week. Wait. Right. Like where you. I was waiting for like succession. I was waiting for, like, White Lotus or whatever. And every week. Right. You get to join the Reddit groups and you talk to people about like, debating different things. I do think this has like a value for certain shows that are more like prestige, you know, that are more like, you know, anticipations, Game of Thrones, you know, many people are are they love the weight, right? Whereas I think on Netflix is like sometimes you just love to binge shows. They have so many shows, so it doesn't make sense for you to wait a little bit. But I think they did try that with Squid Game season two and season three, because I heard that's basically like one show and and they split into two seasons, essentially the second season coming the second tier. The second half comes up in June,
Speaker 3
[00.34.00]
I think. Yeah, I hate that.
Speaker 2
[00.34.03]
Um, the other interesting thing with Netflix was like, I just prefer to binge all at once. But the other interesting thing with Netflix was, um, Bandersnatch. I don't know if you guys remember, it was like a choose your own adventure. Yeah. And then like you could choose like, oh, do this action or this action. And it was like, yeah, I feel like it was so many like mixed reactions. And now
Speaker 1
[00.34.20]
Netflix is like, okay, well, we'll just choose the ending for you because we don't have
Speaker 3
[00.34.24]
information. And then you're talking with your friend and you're like, oh, what did you think of the ending of this show or that show? You guys realize it's
Speaker 1
[00.34.31]
different, like this is going to create so
Speaker 2
[00.34.32]
many like, you know, weird things that are going to happen. You're going to have friend groups
Speaker 1
[00.34.36]
that are like, oh, I'm only friends with the people that had this ending or, you know,
Speaker 3
[00.34.40]
but but like I personally, I got onto YouTube to see alternative endings for movies. Oh, you know, there's like this movie Get out. They have like two endings. So. So there's another ending, which I'm not gonna spoil you, but you can go on YouTube and find out, like, what's the other half like the actual ending, which is like a more tragic ending, which is why I was like, oh, shoot, it was so interesting to see those different endings. So I think it would be cool to have those different like endings for the shows. Right? And maybe that's how the entertainment will be in the future. Um,
Speaker 1
[00.35.09]
well, people will be able to generate their own stuff, right? Like imagine, you know, as an individual, introvert, like the value, you know, an individual in terms of their
Speaker 2
[00.35.16]
creativeness is able to create so much more stuff. So like imagine you describe like a movie that you want to watch, like eventually like imagine in like 20 years, you can just kind of describe a movie that like you want to watch and then like make edits to it, like there's going to be film film creators that are literally just like ChatGPT prompt
Speaker 1
[00.35.33]
engineers, right? So, like, you might think of it like the amount of content that's going to
Speaker 2
[00.35.37]
be created 20 years is going to be
Speaker 3
[00.35.39]
ridiculous. Yeah. Like I think, you know, right now already you have on Reddit and like all these other forms, these fan fictions of like multiple endings. Oh, like this person going like this full like descriptive, like scene already. Um, that's already being done today. Imagine when you can paste that exact thing and like an AI can actually spit that out as a video.
Speaker 2
[00.36.01]
Yeah, I think there's a lot of amusements like in life. And I think to end the podcast on a note, I do want to bring up another amusement that people have been wondering for like 15 years or so. Is that who's this? Who is Satoshi? In Bitcoin. And I think you have some basically assumptions or predictions. So let's hear it. And only for entertainment value. Well
Speaker 1
[00.36.22]
we were we were joking earlier about how people were saying, oh, Jack Dorsey was Satoshi or whatever. I just think that's so ridiculous. Just to start out, back in 2009, he was managing two different companies. He was managing square and he was managing Twitter. The guy didn't like the guy, did not have time to create like the Bitcoin Core protocol and like be on the Bitcoin forums
Speaker 2
[00.36.43]
and all this nonsense. Um, I heard like an interesting prediction, uh, that someone said that was like, oh, uh, you know, Satoshi, you know, just thought of so many things and so many things came together so well at the very beginning. You know, it's a non-zero chance that Satoshi is an alien. I just thought it was funny. You know, you know, maybe there's an alien race looking at us like, oh, you know, we had a blockchain, so maybe they need one too. Uh, that was just for fun. I think for me, like Hal Finney seems to be the most likely. He was a cypherpunk in the early days, and, um, he actually, uh, died from a muscle degenerative disease around 2013, which is also lines up when, um, when Satoshi, like, kind of disappeared. He said, I'm moving on to other things. Um, he's also Hal Finney was also the first person to actually go and run Bitcoin. Um, he actually tweeted on Twitter at the time, like running Bitcoin. And he was also like a marathon runner. Um, you know, before he got his muscle degenerative disease. So there's a bunch of evidence for him. Um, he's the one that I think is most likely. But there's a couple other candidates, too. Um, the one person that we absolutely know is not Satoshi is Craig Wright. Uh, he's the guy who claims to be Satoshi. And he's he's sued a bunch of core developers for, like, for slander or whatever for saying he's not Satoshi. He's gone up the company. He was down in Ecuador, and you saw him with, like, a big certificate, like the. Oh, the Ecuadorian government says that Craig Wright is Satoshi. It's
Speaker 1
[00.38.10]
complete bullshit. Um, uh, everyone is Satoshi except for Craig Wright. That's all I got to say. Okay, that's pretty fun. Yeah. And thank you guys for tuning in to the episode. Um, as always, if you love the show, um, give us a rating, give us a, like, um, um, whatever. You listen to our podcast. And also, as you always, um, follow us on Twitter. Um, I think we might actually generate a Twitter just for life capital. Um, but in the meantime, you can follow all of us. It's in the description. Um, we're thinking about, as I said, launching a community for all the young people out there who are looking to build something for themselves. Um, so stay tuned for that. Stay tuned. And also use Twitter to let us know what you're thinking and anything you want us to cover. Um, we will absolutely appreciate that. So thank you so much and talk to you next. Send memes.
Speaker 3
[00.38.56]
Okay,
Speaker 2
[00.38.57]
great. Hold on. What's that?