# AI ROI Crisis, Search Wars, and Market Shifts

**Podcast:** Pivot
**Published:** 2026-05-29

## Transcript

He's there.
There to perform.
Because the first Audi RS Plug-in Hybrid is powered by Dynamic Torque Control for increased power distribution.
So it's a drive experience that is heard, senseless and visible.
This is the way you stay comfortable with a lot of space in the inside and the room.
Learn more at Audi.de.
What's up y'all?
I'm Skylar Diggins, seven-time WNBA All-Star, Olympic Gold Medalist and Mom.
And I'm Cassidy Hubbard, host and reporter for nearly 20 years, covering the biggest names and stories in sports.
And mom.
And this is Am Mom, a community for athletes, game changers, and moms of all kinds.
Dropping May 14th.
Tap in with us.
You know, you could call me for free and I would probably do a better job.
You're not available.
And by the way, define free.
Hi, everyone.
This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network.
I'm Kara Swisher.
And I'm...
Where am I?
I'm Scott Galloway.
Sorry, jetline is what I am.
Scott, how is your tour going?
I've gotten reports from the Castro about you.
You were in my neighborhood.
Yes, I was.
And what is one of the most beautiful new theaters?
Isn't it?
Oh, my gosh.
Gorgeous.
Yeah, it's not new.
It's really old, and they just renovated it.
Renovated it.
Excuse me.
Yeah.
Recently renovated.
It was great.
It was sold out.
One of my, a couple of my role models were there.
David Acker, whose course I teach now, who's 88, and changed my life.
Dietz Brand Strategy at Haas, the chancellor of Berkeley who was there, who let me in with a 2.27 GPA, my sister, my niece, my nephew.
So it was a nice night, as I often do.
And talking about the AIDS crisis in the 90s, I started crying.
Oh, yeah.
You know, the Castro Theater.
straight white man with erectile dysfunction crying and the chancellor of Berkeley.
Oh, and the marching band.
My lawyer, Jesse Berg, sent me, he loves Pivot, and he said it was really fun and it was really good.
I'm sad that Louis could not go.
My son lives a block, two blocks away, essentially.
And he was working.
He's a chef.
And so he had the night, the evening dinner shift.
So he said he was sad, but he wished you well.
So how's it going?
Where are you going next?
What's your next thing?
Well, I'm here.
I'm back.
I only went up for the show.
I'm back in L.A.
And it's my favorite place to visit in the world.
I describe L.A.
as the world's most successful failed nation state.
It's kind of, I think of it as peak capitalism here.
There's more billionaires in L.A.
than anywhere else but New York.
But meanwhile, 75,000 homeless.
Yeah.
And it feels like, I would say it's a town built on delusion, but delusion and creativity can sometimes create a lot of shareholder value.
Yeah, yeah.
And I just, I absolutely love Los Angeles.
I think it's, you know what it's turning into, Kara?
What?
What is it turning into?
It's turning into San Francisco and that now everyone shitposts Los Angeles.
They do.
That's the city.
Because San Francisco looks good and it's thriving.
Yeah, San Francisco's on the rebound.
For sure.
It doesn't hurt that about, what is it, about $150 billion is about to become liquid on $4 trillion in liquid currency.
Right, yeah.
By the way, in San Francisco, rents last month, one month, one-bedroom rents up 24%.
Everyone's spending their money before they have it.
Pending luxury home sales nationally are up 4%.
In San Francisco, they're up 48%.
Oh, I know.
I've had, back in the...
First dot com thing, I had people knocking on my door to buy my house and I have people knocking on my door to buy my house again.
It's that it's that.
And I'm like, no, but it's really it's interesting because lesser priced houses, which are not lesser priced.
They're in the million, two million range aren't selling as well.
But the really above.
three to seven, eight are really going crazy.
It's a crazy market, but I'm glad Daniel's, I mean, it has been on the rebound for a while, but yeah, Los Angeles is in that same, we hate ourselves spiral, hence Spencer Pratt.
But Los Angeles is a wonderful city at the same time.
You know, it's just, you know, it's sort of west side white people that get all mad about whatever, and some of them not even in Los Angeles.
I will say, and you know it's not like a Karen, but it feels like, I used to say it's a, LA is a string of suburbs connected by freeways.
Now I would say it's a string of bubbles.
I mean, the quote-unquote right parts of LA are euphoric.
They're magical.
And you venture outside those bubbles, and you see a little too much of the real world, which is good for people.
But the homeless issue really is staggering here.
It is.
Relatively to the amount of money they spend.
You really feel, it's really interesting here, it feels like the mayoral race here, if there were a movie, it'd be Sophie's Choice, personally, that's how I would describe it.
Oh, dear.
Okay.
But it is a pretty decent facsimile of the presidential race in 24.
You have who I would describe as...
Someone who's perceived as incompetent and not that compelling, which has created room for rage, cosplaying, a political strategy, and a reality star.
I mean, this literally is Trump-Harris over again right now.
Yeah.
When you speak to people in L.A., I'm not exaggerating, reasonable people who you wouldn't think would be supporting a reality star.
And they have just had it, and they just want change and chaos, and they don't care.
Yeah, I understand that.
But it is a...
type of person, by the way, first of all.
I would not say everybody is like that.
It's shocking how many people are just, they don't even want to have a conversation.
They're just angry.
I get it.
But here's what San Francisco, I'm just giving the comparison.
We didn't reelect reality star, we elected Daniel Lloyd.
A technocrat.
A technocrat.
They should try to find like.
That's the thing.
Not on the ballot.
I know that, but it's ridiculous that this is like, it doesn't mean, you know, because something's bad, you should do something absolutely fucking ridiculous and disastrous for the city.
But, you know, they'll go through it.
If they like this guy, they get what they get.
And it's probably a lot of corruption, a lot of incompetence, a lot of just a mess and abuse of people.
Like they're going to hire, wait, they're going to go back because the old LA.
you know, the LA Police Department and, you know, that era of real brutality is really, it was real.
And so it's just, it's a wonderful city and it should be doing a lot better.
And the homeless problem is significant.
A lot of it have to do with the weather.
A lot of it has to do with a lot of things.
It's not just that.
It's that this is a place where people naturally are attracted to.
And so all kinds of people.
And so it's a really, it's a...
Anyway, so are you appearing in Los Angeles tonight?
Is that correct?
Oh, yeah.
We have Ted Sarandos as our guest tonight.
Great, great.
We've got about 30 friends from UCLA coming.
Good.
Are you sold out in Los Angeles?
No, I think we're about 90%.
We're sold out in San Francisco, in New York, about 90% in LA.
It's a big theater.
Also, I think LA, people do last minute, and there's so many distractions here.
Yeah.
Are you in the same theater, which we did sell out for Pivot?
What was it?
No, I think we're in the Wiltern.
Is that right?
Does that sound familiar?
And then I go to Vancouver Island for a speaking gig.
And then tomorrow I take the Red Eye to Miami and we're on Miami Saturday night.
Oh, that'll be fun.
You love Miami.
Yeah, I do.
Anyway, well, good.
I do love Miami.
Well, we've got a lot.
Congratulations on your tour and congratulations to Ed, Elson, too.
It's really nice.
These tours are really fun.
I'm excited for ours in the fall.
We have one in the fall, so get ready.
Rest up.
There we go.
You'll have August off so you can rest and everything else.
So first off, I have to ask you, by the way, you're doing a lot of stuff, but did you watch the Enhanced Games last weekend?
I didn't, although I got to be honest, I'm sort of here for it.
I think it's kind of, I mean, I kind of had this idea that just take, you know, holds barred and let freak shows show up.
People are doing this to themselves anyways, but I did not watch it.
Let me just say, for people who don't know, the Enhanced Games is a new sports event that allows athletes on performance-enhancing drugs and encourages them to try to break world records.
Events included swimming, track and field, weightlifting, and strongmen.
The experiment calls itself a global movement that unites humanity, of course, as a publicly traded company.
Investors include Donald Trump Jr.
and Peter Thiel.
There's also a German executive I've met many times who's really into it.
There were no...
things broken except by someone wearing a swimsuit that was barred, this special swimsuit.
I don't know.
The stock has gone down.
I'm curious if there was a fight where both of us were enhanced, who do you think would win?
You or I?
Well, you know the answer there.
Me?
Yeah, 100%.
I've never been in a fight.
Yeah, I'm not a violent person.
If someone hit me, I wouldn't know what to do.
You've never been in a fight?
Wow.
Never been in a fight in my life.
You've never been in a fight.
Let me think.
That might not be true.
No, I haven't.
No, I haven't.
Yeah.
And I, you know, I was beaten up and abused, ex-wife.
But no, I was never, never been in a fight.
I think that, I talk a lot about this, that I think that one of the cores to, I never miss a chance to virtue signal and preach, but I think one of the core principles for men as they get older is just, quite frankly, is emotional regulation.
You know, are you willing to sit in discomfort and do you have control over your physical and mental well-being?
Well, it's an impulse to punch, right?
It's an impulse to punch.
And men have it much more.
Well, let me think.
Saul's probably the most aggressive license.
So there's no arguing that men are more violent, but that doesn't mean women don't engage in violence.
Domestic violence rates in LGBTQ couples is about...
25% according to the National Institute for Health, and according to the CDC, anywhere from 17% to 40% of men are victims of intimate partner violence, depending on the research methodology.
There's discrepancy between whether it was a phone survey or a web survey.
And then furthermore, there's only about three shelters.
There's only three shelters across the entire U.S.
devoted to Male domestic violence, there's still a lot of shame and there's a view that it might be underreported.
Mostly women suffer from this problem, Scott.
Yeah, but it's true.
There's an assumption.
Yes, I get it.
There's no arguing that men are violent, but that doesn't mean women don't engage in violence either.
It didn't say that, but the comparison is most violence is committed by men in general.
in general, murders, blah, blah, everything.
Every statistic is largely, it's not really, it's just, I do think it's a function of gender.
I do think it's a function of impulse control and everything else, but I'm no scientist.
It's testosterone and cultural norms and all sorts of stuff.
Yep, yep, yep, and this manliness.
There was a really great cover of The Atlantic recently about the sort of the man-hating groups.
And they're always back.
They're always like, they're back.
I'm like, they're always there in some weird way.
Speaking of men, there's a construction cruiser building the UFC fighting cage on the South Lawn of the White House in preparation for the night of mixed martial arts, celebrating the 250th anniversary of the U.S.
independence.
Over 4,000 spectators plan to watch from inside the arena.
Kind of looks like a roller coaster.
And there's all this complaining by Joe Rogan and others about...
gnats and bugs and outside and a lot of some of the champions aren't coming because it's they don't usually do it outside and it creates if you're going for world you know these are actual competitors if you're going for titles it's not a good thing to fight outside apparently weigh-ins will be held at the Lincoln Memorial which is I don't know what to say about that but okay fine fine fine I just don't know what to say.
It feels clownish, but whatever, he's the president.
I don't know what to say.
I'm not going to get overly angry about it, but it seems ridiculous.
I don't know how you feel.
I was invited.
I said no.
I don't enjoy that stuff, and I don't need to be.
You know, I think it's disingenuous for me to show up and break bread or party with someone who I'm constantly critical of.
The event itself is brilliant.
You think?
Oh, gosh.
There's just an entire generation of young men and quite frankly, a lot of women, their mothers and their sisters who in America, and this will trigger some people, still vote for who they perceive will be most beneficial for their husbands and their sons.
And young men are doing really, really poorly.
And if you think about government, Government in the United States, largely speaking, has been feminized if you look at the events.
The events are basically like the queen was merchandising and throwing them.
Government events are very feminine, for lack of a better word.
Wait a minute.
Come on, Scott.
Today, you're very anti-woman today.
I'm not curious.
I'm not being anti-woman.
I don't think feminine's a bad thing.
I'm just calling it as it is.
I understand, but what do you mean government things are feminine?
Oh, go to anything at the White House.
It feels like it's been designed.
Oh, 100%.
They're very, they're very.
proper, gentle.
They're very feminine.
And by the way, that is a wonderful thing.
Well, men can be proper and gentle.
I don't think that men can't be proper.
Yes, men can demonstrate wonderful feminine attributes.
Even like metal giving is a feminine activity?
I wouldn't describe metal giving, but the events- There's a lot of metal giving at the White House.
Government events and ceremonies tend to be very what people would consider, I think, somewhat more- Well, they're not a UFC fight.
They're not a competition.
No, but the UFC fight is way down the list.
Even like comedy, the White House dinner comes the closest to sort of something stepping out of what is seen as overly planned, nurturing, appropriate.
Yeah, I think the events are very kind of very feminine.
And what are these guys doing?
They're throwing a UFC fight.
And it's kind of, you're going to have, they're going to have huge viewership.
It says to Trump, reaffirms his view of one of the reasons he won the election, and that is like, I'm a man's man.
I see men.
I appreciate, for lack of a better term, masculinity.
Unfortunately, it's a fucked up, weird, reformative, dominant form of masculinity.
But it's a brilliant marketing strategy.
It's smart.
I'm not – I think it sometimes works.
Like, let me give an example.
This attempt to turn James Tallarico, like Stephen Miller, who is literally the most weak-looking person you've ever seen, is calling – you know, he and others are calling because they're terrified of Tallarico.
So they're pulling out the anti-trans stuff immediately, saying the first trans senator, he doesn't know how to eat barbecue.
Is that a Ted Cruz?
Another, like – someone I could easily beat in a fight.
The tofu barbecue, the idea of soy boy.
I mean, this is not manly in any way.
This is like this.
I don't and I don't think it works as much anymore with people.
It's it's deeply insulting.
It might work in Texas.
I hate to say it.
I think the Tallarico people should take this very seriously because Kamala Harris didn't with the trans stuff that worked really well in the election.
And it might work in Texas.
But they're trying to, you know, paint him as.
gay, I think that's what they're, where's the girlfriend?
Trans, he's a soy boy.
You know, this is all, and what I think about, it's so grotesque because I'm like, these are all men over 50 or whatever.
I mean, Stephen Miller looks over 50 even though he's younger.
But this is this like name-calling, bullying bullshit that is not part of being a man, any men I know that I think are decent men.
It's fine if people want to do this.
When I was a kid, I went to fights with my grandfather and went to wrestling matches.
He was a promoter and he loved it.
So I see the entertainment and everything else in it.
But the soy boy trans thing that they're pushing on Tallarico is so...
It's so ugly and toxic.
And unfortunately, it does work at some point.
I don't know if you think it'll work in Texas, but it might.
It certainly could.
Yeah, I think there's a fairly large distinction between a sanctioned sport where it's a lot of men in top physical shape.
I don't like it.
I don't enjoy watching it.
But I think that that is a legitimate sport.
It's a huge sport.
It's, I think, arguably one of the most successful sports of the last several decades.
It's a well-run sport.
creates a lot of economic value for many of the fighters.
So I think you can, I think in a bipartisan way, you can say that the UFC serves a purpose and is successful.
The ugliness around Tallarico is not only that one, it's not true, but two, to assume that loving an accusation that someone is gay or trans is supposed to be negative.
It trains young people or people that if you call someone that, it, it.
Your opponent doesn't call you something unless they're trying to say to the world, that's a negative.
Right.
Absolutely.
No, no.
A hundred percent.
And I hope at some point people regurgitate on things like that and say, quite frankly, it's, you know, someone we used to call in college, you used to call people fags.
To say this, to be gay is to be bad.
It's an insult.
Yep.
I got it.
At some point, some people, someone says.
Yeah, and, or what?
It's like people online call me a Zionist, and I respond, proud Zionist.
I mean, I just...
At some point, people are going to realize going after people's sexual orientation just says more about you than it says about them.
It does.
But it's a tactic.
They're trying to drum that in, in that race.
And unfortunately, it might work in Texas.
Well, and it's an indictment on Texas that these people have done the research and decided that it works.
Yeah.
Yes, absolutely.
So I hope he responds.
I will say this.
I'm not sure what the response is.
In defense.
I'm not gay.
In defense of James Tallarico, he and I follow many of the same people on Instagram.
And it's not the leaders, Kara.
Yes, I know.
It's some scorching hot young ladies who make their living with a webcam.
They did it.
They also tried to do it to Andy Beshear.
They obviously, Beto, everything.
You know, to me, it's at the end misogynistic.
And speaking of that, the Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation.
Of course.
This all leads to the same thing.
The Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into E.
Jean Carroll, the former magazine writer who won two civil lawsuits against Trump, totaling, you know.
close to $90 million in payments tied to sexual abuse and defamation.
The DOG probe is reportedly focused on whether Carroll committed perjury in testimony.
Typical, this is what they're doing, whether it's to Letitia James or whoever they're trying to go at.
Specifically, Carroll's saying she hadn't received outside funding for illegal bills.
Her lawyers later said Reid Hoffman had contributed.
This is the latest in a series of DOG probes targeting Trump's opponents and critics like James Comey, Letitia James, and others, though none of these investigations have led to convictions.
In fact, they get laughed out of court.
I spoke to E.
Jean Carroll for an episode of On in July 2025.
She talked about the threats she's received and why she has no fear.
Let's listen.
It's stupid to be afraid.
Why live your life that way?
I've been here 81 years, and I'm not going to waste the last of it worrying about that guy in marmalade-colored makeup.
It makes no sense.
So that's what I'm going to do.
So what do you think about this?
Talk about misogyny and getting, you know, she's won the cases against him and he's trying not to pay them and he's doing everything possible to try not to pay them.
And this is the latest Perry using the Justice Department to carry out his toxic, misogynistic efforts.
I think it comes down to this.
So one, if she did say something that wasn't true under oath, that's real.
And they're claiming that she didn't acknowledge that she was getting help with her legal bills.
I don't know to the extent, though, in a case like that, that is grounds for revisiting a case when it doesn't have anything to do with the actual crime she's accusing the president of.
What is consistent here is the weaponization of the DOJ to go after his political enemies.
So this is just another example of the fact that we don't have a government that's meant to protect the people.
It's now there to protect the president.
And I think E.
Jean Carroll...
I mean, I thought, okay, E.
Jean Carroll is ending the presidency because he was – I mean, just to keep in mind, folks, this was a jury of his peers who heard a ton of evidence.
And they said, well, it was in liberal New York.
Well, okay, New York, if you had nine jurors, five are probably Democrats, but four are Republicans.
And to mature a conviction, all nine have to agree.
So this was a – you know, this was – there's a reason that when someone is – usually convicted of a crime, the public used to come together and say, this person is guilty and should be disqualified.
Every time this stuff happened, we kept thinking, that's it, it's over, and it wasn't.
But I do think it's important to have a legal scholar to say, in most cases with this type of infraction, if in fact she, and she did, she did not acknowledge that she was having her legal bills paid for.
Well, it depends on when she was paid.
They're going to have to investigate that.
But still, they're just grabbing at straws here, is what they're doing.
That's what they're trying to do, to find some way to impugn her.
And so he doesn't have to pay that money.
It's all the same.
It's all about money.
I don't even think it's about the money.
I think it's about overturning a conviction of a perceived enemy and going after her.
The guy's made billions of dollars illegally on crypto.
I think it's...
He still doesn't want to pay.
He's a cheap bastard.
He still doesn't want to pay.
I'm personally, I'm surprised they did this.
I would have thought they would...
I think this just brings it up again.
I would have thought they would want it to fade into the distance.
He doesn't care.
He doesn't care.
Anyway, E.
Jean, we hope this goes away, but it's such a fucking Nuisance.
It's such a ridiculous Nuisance.
Anyway, let's go on a quick break.
We come back.
Pope Leo's warning about AI.
I'm very excited to talk about this.
In the new Paramount-Original-Serie Dutton Ranch by the producers of Yellowstone, verlieren Beth Rip and Carter their hometown in Montana.
But they don't give up.
In Rio Paloma they want a new start.
Full of risks, hope and hard decisions.
Erlebe your Yellowstone-Strengths in a completely new story.
Ab the 15th May, exclusively on Paramount Plus stream.
Support for the show comes from ZBiotics.
ZBiotics pre-alcohol probiotic drink is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic.
It was invented by PhD scientists to tackle rough mornings after drinking.
Here's how it works.
When you drink, alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut.
It's a buildup of this byproduct, not dehydration.
That's to blame for rough days after drinking.
Pre-alcohol produces an enzyme to break this byproduct down.
Just remember to make pre-alcohol your first drink of the night.
Drink responsibly and you'll feel your best tomorrow.
So I have been using Z-Biotics even before they were an advertiser.
If I know I'm going to drink...
I took a Z-biotic and I found that on average, it takes away about a third of the yuck the next morning, if you will.
So for me, that's absolutely worth it.
May is packed with back-to-back reasons to be out.
Don't let a rough morning after keep you on the sidelines.
Drink pre-alcohol to stay ahead of it and make the most of every Saturday this month.
Go to zbiotics.com slash pivot to learn more and get 15% off your first order when you use pivot at checkout.
Zbiotics is backed with 100% money back guarantee.
So if you're unsatisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money.
No questions asked.
Remember to head to zbiotics.com slash pivot and use the code pivot at checkout for 15% off.
Support for the show comes from Odoo.
There's an endless supply of software out there that promises to streamline your workflow.
That may be true for a specific aspect of your business, but if you need one app for accounting, one for inventory management, and another for sales, how streamlined can your workflow actually be if you have to be the middleman between them?
Odoo says they're the answer you're looking for.
The only business software you'll ever need.
Odoo can be your one-stop shop for CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR, and more.
Plus, it's super customizable and easy to use out of the box.
And the best part?
They say not only can they replace multiple applications, but they say they'll do it for a fraction of the cost.
Whether you're just starting out or already well on your way to scaling, Odoo wants to help you put the clutter aside such that you can do what you set out to do when you started your company.
Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you?
Try Odoo for free at odoo.com.
That's odoo, odoo.com.
Scott, we're back, and we're going to start off with our next topic with a question from a listener.
Hi, Kara and Scott.
My name's Bridget, and I'm calling from Oakland.
I'm asking as a Catholic Buddhist pivotarian, I was so delighted to hear that Pope Bob, also known as Pope Leo XIV, delivered his first encyclical, which was about AI, and he was speaking truth to power from a place of power, which is pretty rare.
Have either of you read it?
And if so, what do you think?
Do you think it can move the needle towards putting guardrails up for this juggernaut that's really careening off the road already?
Or maybe even rein in those dickheads who are mindlessly amping it up for their own self-serving profits.
Thanks for all the humor and wisdom you've provided over the years, and keep it up.
Haha.
Yep, I just set Prof.
G up for a dick joke.
I love Bridget.
I love our listeners.
I'm pivotarian.
Let's start a religion.
That would be so good.
Thank you, Bridget.
That was a great question.
We love your sassiness.
That's the kind of listeners we love.
So to catch people up, Pope Leo released his first encyclical this week, a 4,200-word letter to all about AI titled Magnificent Humanity.
Magnificent, I can't say it in Latin, but it's Magnificent Humanity.
The Pope acknowledged that artificial intelligence can be a valuable tool.
He did not trash it, but also warned the AI race could become a new Tower of Babel.
He shared some strong words about what needs to happen.
happen next.
Let's listen to him himself talk about it.
Artificial intelligence needs to be disarmed.
The word is strong, I know, but deliberately chosen because this moment needs words capable of attracting attention, awakening consciences, and indicating paths forward for humanity.
Some of the specific things the Pope is calling for, government regulation of private companies driving AI development seems normal, protecting children from violent sexual or fake information generated by AI, excellent suggestion, safeguards to make sure humans are responsible for all decisions tied to the use of weapons, again, a great thing.
He also didn't shy away from talking about people at the helm of AI.
That was really the focus is who's running it.
In the abstract, technology in and of itself is not a solution to humanity's problems, just it is not inherently evil.
In practice, however, technology is never neutral because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate, and use it.
Some big tech folks are on board here.
Anthropoc co-founder Christopher Ola.
joined the Pope at the Vatican as the encyclical was presented, but reactions from D.C.
and Silicon Valley have been mixed.
Vice President J.D.
Vance called the Pope's warning profound.
That was interesting.
But Interior Secretary Doug Burgum told Fox News, I didn't know what tech editorializing was part of the role of being a Pope.
Well, it is, Doug.
It's certainly not part of your role as Interior Secretary.
David Sachs wrote, the Pope rightly warns that A, I must serve human dignity, not become a tool of domination or exclusion.
someone who dominates and excludes, which is a nice thing to hear.
But it goes on.
If we hand, of course he goes on.
If we hand the government sweeping power over AI development in the name of safety, how do we prevent it from being used to censor, surveil, or control citizens?
Honestly, this guy is so hypocritical.
Anyway, what did you think of the take?
And I think he's been listening to Pivot.
A lot of stuff we talked about for years.
I love Bill being on this team, but thoughts on this?
Well, we talk a lot about the actions of the administration and different things that have just been really bad for brand U.S., whether it was the insurrection or cutting off USA.
There's just been so many.
poor decisions that have really hurt our brand.
I actually think the best thing or one of the best things that's happened for the U.S.
brand, you know, to a certain extent, AI and just the economic boom out here and the fact that we've been the most seminal technology in a long time in terms of shared creation and what might have an impact on the world.
It's just owned and dominated by the U.S.
That's very good for our brand.
And I think it's been great for our brand is Pope Leo.
He's just incredibly articulate.
He comes across as measured, brave, connects real world issues with spiritual issues and issues of dignity.
And he's American.
He went to Villanova.
Yeah, that voice.
Yeah.
He's got such a Chicago accent.
He could be wanting to go, the Bears.
Yeah, right.
Yeah.
But his comments, if you were just to distill his comments, they were really powerful.
He believes that AI should serve humanity, not replace it.
The biggest danger is the concentration of power.
He's clearly talking a lot about income inequality.
And he's...
You're skeptical of a small number of companies controlling the infrastructure of intelligence.
When he wants, he thinks AI could amplify inequality and create, you talked about a new oligarchy where private firms wield enormous influence over truth, labor, and governments.
I would argue that, you know, the cat's already out of the bag there.
One of the more controversial things or interesting things I should say is you said AI is not neutral, that the algorithms.
encode the values of the creators, not some sort of neutral view on different views of humanity, which I'm not sure.
I actually think in a weird way why social media has polarized us.
I think that because I think AI is different.
I do think from a viewpoint and ideology standpoint, it's more moderating.
And sometimes it comes across as quite politically correct, I think.
He also talked about job displacement being a real moral issue.
Autonomous weapons terrify him.
He called for it to be disarmed and worried about weapon systems operating beyond meaningful human control.
And then he talked about human connection, the thing I love, you know, like the softer stuff, human connection mattering more than synthetic intimacy.
And then, and this is the thing, I think, if you were going to try and translate this into some sort of legislation, and we're not focused enough on this, is that children.
are the most vulnerable.
And I was just thinking about, you know, think about when you learned to write and how difficult it was.
Like, I know you were on your school newspaper, is that right?
Yeah, Claire's doing it right.
Yeah, I was, but Claire's doing it right now.
It's really interesting to watch.
I got, in my senior year of high school, I got a C in English.
I had a real difficult time writing.
Yeah.
And I went through that pain.
I went through that friction.
And if I had just had AI, like...
write my papers, I never would have made those connections.
I never would have gone through the friction of making those connections.
And so, and I think the really...
You're a very good writer, actually.
I got seasoned English.
Happily surprised on the upside with your writing.
Well, because I did the work, right?
And I think the question is, if you have, if kids have AI, do they ever do the work and make the connections?
As a matter of fact, in my first year at UCLA, I was failing English 1, and I said, what happens if you fail English 1?
Because it was a core class, you had to take it, it was a requisite.
They say, well, you have to take English as a second language, despite the fact that I didn't speak a second language.
Wow.
Yeah, that was pretty big.
I got my act together.
Yeah, the friction.
You're right.
The friction is what made you a better writer, to struggle with it, to figure it out yourself.
And this is the problem and the threat of technology across all of our youth, and that is...
Why venture outside and go through the pecking order and the bullying order and figuring out your place and trying to find or join a gang, if you will, of friends when you think you can have a reasonable facsimile of friendship on Reddit or Discord?
Why take risks, go through the expense, humiliation, enduring rejection of trying to find a romantic relationship when you think you can replace it with synthetic lifelike character AIs or porn?
So the defrictioning of life.
And AI kind of takes it to a new level, especially with academia or academics.
It teaches young people to never develop the key skills they have to really be successful in life and enjoy life.
Yeah, absolutely.
I think most important part is this.
I do think who's making it matters.
And he was very clear about that in terms of he was saying, like, for example, it's not the morality of AI.
It's the morals of the people who make it.
And I think he was talking about it being.
a very small group of people who were very interested in money, really.
And I thought it was very, one of the things, he was named Pope Leo because of the last pope.
to do something like this was over manufacturing and the mechanization of things.
And he's, it was very selected to pick this topic.
He very carefully didn't insult technology, but he really clearly insulted its creators or said, we need to do better.
And I think being the conscience, saying Doug Burgum is such a moron.
I mean, of course he's the conscience of, you know, that J.D.
Vance acknowledged that, I think.
He's the conscience of the world, of his world.
And it's...
well beyond Catholics, let me say.
And I think it's really important for leaders like this to step up and suggest it.
And I do think it does have an impact because people are talking about it and they are talking about the issues he brought up, including these safeguards around weaponry, protecting children.
And this is already in the air with people.
And the fact that the Pope doesn't stand up without any.
And then had some tech people there.
I thought it was, he's such a savvy person.
I'm excited to see what else he takes on.
And, you know, of course, the stupid Trump people call him the woke pope.
But honestly, he's just, it's called conscience.
It's not woke, it's conscience.
But he did say, just to wrap up, when you were talking about automation and the last time technology appeared to be sort of a threat.
The Industrial Revolution mechanized labor.
And what he's saying is that AI risks mechanizing judgment and creativity and intimacy and even meaning itself.
And the way I would interpret his comments was less catastrophizing around AI will kill us.
But AI could potentially make us less human.
while concentrating extraordinary wealth and power in the hands of a few firms and states.
I just think, I think this guy distills right to the core of the issues.
He is very...
Smart.
He is very impressive.
He is not afraid.
I mean, as smart as he is, he clearly had very smart people working on these.
The people I've met at the Vatican have been amazing.
But I love that he called it magnificent humanity.
And by the way, I love that he made cliff notes for people.
He made a little chart, which is really good.
It's an excellent chart.
I love a chart and I love a cliff note.
Anyway, there's lots more AI to get to.
A lot of little stories, but important.
Installs for DuckDuckGo jumped 30% after Google announced its first overhaul in 24 years.
Many people are disturbed.
this.
Google changes include a shift to AI with bigger, more interactive search box that lets users ask longer questions and upload photographs.
It's a significant change for search.
I have not used Google search in a long time in a weird way.
I definitely use it for some things, but I tend to use, I use all kinds of search services, but it's not only through Google is all I'm saying.
It used to be only through Google.
And I like the simple box.
I feel lucky box.
I've always thought it was fine, but I see why they're doing it.
At the same time, a lot of people are like, now they're never going to link to anything.
but what they want to link to.
But they've just sort of ended it for most people using Google to get to, say, media websites or whatever you're looking for.
So that seems to be a shift.
I think it's a smart, bold move.
I think they've been accused.
When you risk what is arguably or do any twix, the temptation around what is the most profitable, largest toll booth in history, when you risk, you know, there's just probably so much momentum to, like, guys, don't fuck with it.
Like, don't change anything.
So I think it's actually a pretty bold move.
And I do find when I do Google search, those AI overviews are actually quite helpful.
They've gotten better.
They were bad, and now they're good.
You said that.
You said you like them.
I do.
So it's, I think it's the right thing.
They have to respond.
They have to push back.
The reason why Alphabet was such an incredible buy trading at 17 times earnings last year was the market believes that OpenAI.
And AI queries were an existential threat to search, that it was going to become the new search.
And what we're saying is they're both growing like crazy.
But I find that I do oftentimes go to Claude instead of Google.
Yeah, exactly.
And Google just never gives me what I want anymore.
It's useless in some ways.
But when I look for, like, how do you boil an egg?
I don't do that.
You know, how many minutes for a jammy egg?
I'll go to Google, right?
But now, actually, I might go to Claude.
You're right.
I might.
to that.
So they kind of have to.
You're right.
I know people are bothered, but they have to change.
You're absolutely right.
Next up, President Trump abruptly postponed signing an executive order on AI after a former AI czar.
David Sachs reportedly voiced concerns it could prove too onerous for the industry.
He got back.
He had lost power, then he got it back, I guess.
The order would have granted the government oversight on a new AI models before they released to the public.
Very temporary oversight, by the way.
And some of it was voluntary.
AI companies have also been told that Trump was not happy that many of their chief executives could not attend the signing.
That's probably more to the point.
Being invited just 24 hours prior.
I don't think this order will resurface.
There was a brief attempt by certain people within the Trump administration who were more interested in safety issues.
And David, you know, got in there.
And so did Zuckerberg and someone else.
I can't remember who was a third person who got in there and convinced him otherwise.
Elon, it was Elon.
This was, I thought it was a good idea.
The order would have required AI labs to share frontier models with the government 90 days before public release for security review.
That seems like a very important and basic first step for any of this.
I mean, something that really struck me was the founders of this technology, the people that know more about it than any in the world, are saying that this technology is potentially more liberating.
than nuclear fusion and potentially more dangerous.
So here's a technology that the people who understand it the best are saying is potentially more dangerous than nuclear weapons.
We didn't let Oppenheimer start a company and start selling bombs to China.
That's a good comparison.
That's actually a very good thing.
Well, I think there's a really decent rational argument that if in fact you have something that is potentially more dangerous than any weapon in history, wouldn't you want the government controlling it?
Yes, we want it to be part of the decision making.
We're not only not controlling it, it's not only done under the auspices of the Department of Defense, cooperating with the private sector or Lawrence Livermore Labs or what have you.
We have people trying to go public and to have lawyers and lobbyists.
many of whom stepped in here to say, you know, we all talk about the need for regulation.
We've been to this movie before.
We talk about, we show up and stand next to the Pope and say, and cosplay Sheryl Sandberg, we need to do better.
We need to regulate.
We are open to regulation.
And then, oh, no, get on the phone.
Tell him no.
Tell him to stop.
Tell him his big bet on AI, 93% of GDP growth is now from AI, CapEx.
Can't do anything to get in the way.
And if you slow our runners down, the free games, anabolic steroid pumped up Chinese models are going to come for us and beat us.
And there's no truth to that.
And if they did this correctly and they had standards, government review might actually make the industry better and make them less prone.
Regulation at this point would be a feature, not a bug in terms of capitalism and these companies' ability to know how to develop, what they can, what they can't do, what they need to check.
But a 90-day review?
I know.
I know.
What does it take?
It takes a drug a decade to get through the FDA?
Exactly.
It's ridiculous.
There's a real beef going on in the administration.
Sachs is on one side and some others are on the others.
And we'll see.
Eventually, this will happen for these companies.
I just want to...
put it off as long as they can.
And Sachs is not working for the safety of the United States or anything else.
He's working for his friends in Silicon Valley.
You know who's actually increasing AI legislation and regulation?
China.
China.
They are.
That's right.
The Beijing State Council issued a 2026 legislative work plan in May with AI governance language appealing.
And about jobs, because they know what will happen if people feel adrift in China.
That's not something that can happen.
You're absolutely right.
They're so much smarter in how they handle these things, which is really a...
pressing thing to say.
They released, they enacted binding rules on AI emotional interaction, identity disclosure, and content accountability.
Well, they read the Pope.
They read the Pope.
You know, anyway.
And we've passed zero AI legislation.
Zero.
Zero, except in the States.
And there's more to come.
There's a real anger brewing and it's something a Democratic candidate should not like kill the billionaires kind of thing or pitchforks, but there's a pitchforky.
I was just talking to Tim Miller on his podcast and he feels a pitchforky.
And that's not what you want.
You want something that makes sense.
And unfortunately, because the tech people just can't possibly accept any kind of stricture or speed limit, they're going to unfortunately get the worst outcome for themselves eventually.
But probably they'll be just fine.
Just as Lincoln said, no country can lose a war when it has public support.
No country can win a war when it doesn't have it.
If you look at what China has done with AI, and it has released a series of legislative policies and around emotional security, concentration of power, and it's made them public, the difference is the following.
The Chinese now support AI.
87% of Chinese people trust AI versus just 32% of Americans.
Because why?
Because the Chinese believe that their government has the ability to protect them against.
AI and is regulating the technology effectively.
54% of Chinese people embrace greater use of AI versus just 17% of Americans.
And 9 in 10 Chinese aged 18 to 34 said they had faith in the technology versus 4 in 10 of Americans in the same age group.
And young people particularly.
I mean, good job, David Sachs.
Everybody hates you.
So you have the populace of China.
is embracing AI and trusts it and trusts that they have a government to kind of soften the edges or reduce some of the externalities.
Whereas in the U.S., you have people driving hundreds of miles to protest a fucking data center.
Yeah, agreed.
So that, you want to talk about, we just get it so bass-ackward.
We do.
Well, it has to do with tech people being up in Trump's grill and controlling him.
That's right.
And Trump, believing that a lack of regulation, he doesn't understand the difference between...
He moved toward it, though.
Why did he move toward it?
Why was he going to...
It's really interesting.
Largely probably because they wouldn't show up to his party.
That's my guess with him because he's so ridiculous.
But in any case, we have to move on to this because this is a topic that you've talked about.
Uber's CEO says it's hard to draw a connection between the company's rising use of cloud code and the expense, especially the tokens, and innovation meant to serve.
This comes after reports the company already burnt through its entire 2026 AI coding tools budget.
This is to buy tokens in just four months.
This is one of these indications you were talking about, right?
This idea that what are we getting here for our money?
Am I paying too much for this muffler?
That kind of stuff.
can point to a positive ROI and it's starting to bubble up into a real expense.
And there's even, Nvidia is claiming they're spending more now on AI internally than they're spending on humans.
And so this is, it's going to be very interesting, Kara, because for example, Claude is about nine times more expensive than some of the Chinese open-weight LLMs.
And when the CFOs see these bills and aren't immediately able to connect it, Uber's blown through its AI budget in a few weeks or a few months, and someone's going to ask, how is this making the consumer's experience with Uber better?
And this is how the whole thing unwinds.
One, a really credible CEO says, okay, we're going to scale back our investment here until we can figure out a way to more directly attach it to some sort of consumer benefit or ROI.
And I think where if you...
go second and third order effects.
I think it goes to the following places.
Supposedly 80% of startups are hacking or using some sort of Chinese open weight LLM.
One, they use less expensive chips.
They have cheaper power.
I also think they're pricing it below market because a lot of local provinces in China have sort of their local champions that they're subsidizing.
And I think what we're going to see is the Trump administration, when they start to see companies opt for their cheaper Chinese models.
We've been to this movie before.
China stills our IP.
develops 80% of what we have and sells it back to us for 40% on the dollar.
Yeah.
Can I, I'm going to interject one of the things Mark Cuban had, when I was interviewing Dario Modi at a recent event, I said, send me a question.
And I said, I had just written his essay, Dario's essay, Machines of Loving Grace.
And he.
Mark wrote me this.
The first thing he wrote me back was, explain the token economy to everyone here.
Do you see a scenario where the high cost of tokens makes it cheaper to hire people for certain jobs?
I thought that was a great question.
I did ask that.
It was a really, he was already clocking this issue that maybe people are less expensive than this token, these tokens that costs.
And tokens are what you spend on computing, just for people who don't know.
Yeah.
Humans are less expensive.
Or can be.
I mean, Claude, I think it's Claude Code Max or Claude Max.
I've already run out of tokens.
I'm playing with this shit so often.
I had one of those prompts that says you need to upgrade to Claude Max, which is $200 a month.
What's interesting.
Do you get the benefits?
Do you get the benefits of the money you spend?
Or just you're playing with it?
At this point, it's well worth it for me.
I'm just fascinated by it.
I have discussions around.
Right, so it's a hobby.
Yeah.
And I also use it to, I use it to find data.
If I'm struggling, if I have a paragraph that just sounds clunky, I say, I say, how would you edit this or what analogies would be better?
You know, you could call me for free and I would probably do a better job.
You're not available.
And by the way, define free.
I'm just saying.
In terms of economic costs, I would say it's free.
In terms of non-economic costs, I would argue you're pretty expensive.
Anyway, we have to move on.
As Sitting Bull said, what is free, white man?
Oh, goodness sake.
But what's interesting, what I found out about Claude Max, the $200 a month thing that I'm about to upgrade to, is that it costs them, for you to use Claude Max, it costs Anthropic $5,000 a month.
to deliver that product to you.
Amazing.
Yeah, just the cost on infrastructure and power.
Once we sell more, volume, we'll make it up in volume, right?
Is that the...
Well, no, what they're hoping is the laws, one of the first economic concepts you learn...
Comes down.
...is that, and it's called, it's not Jehovah's Paradox, I forget, this guy wrote a brilliant paper on it, but I just thought he just summarized the term elasticity.
But the economic term elasticity is that as the price of something goes down, the demand for it goes up.
And everybody thought, well, as computing power goes down and becomes so cheap, chips will go out of business because you won't need as many from Intel.
And what happens is the cost of something goes down, more and more people use it.
And there's a viable argument, and I've sort of been making this argument about what I call apocalypse no, and that is all the catastrophizing around labor destruction is total bullshit, that as the costs of AI go way down, we're going to find more uses for it, and we're actually going to end up hiring more programmers or vibe coders.
Could be.
I do think the costs are going to actually go down eventually, but just not today.
All right, Scott, let's go on a quick break.
When we come back, we'll talk about Elon possibly combining SpaceX and Tesla, just as Kara Swisher predicted.
Support for the show comes from HIMSS.
If you have weight loss goals, you already know how difficult it can be.
Enter weight loss by HIMSS.
It's designed to support you not only in losing weight, but keeping it off as well.
And now HIMSS is offering access to affordable range of FDA-approved GLP-1 medications, including the Wigobi pill and the Wigobi pen.
With Wagovi at HIMSS, you can lose up to 20% or more of your body weight when combined with diet and exercise.
It can help you regulate your appetite and eat less, so success is within reach.
Plus, Wagovi is the first ever GLP-1 pill for weight loss, so there are no needles needed.
Plus, HIMSS is everything online.
You'll connect with a licensed provider who will determine if treatment is right for you.
Ready to reach your goals?
Visit HIMSS.com slash pivot to get personalized, affordable plan that gets you.
That's HIMSS.com slash pivot.
HIMSS.com slash pivot.
Weight loss by HIMSS is not available in all 50 states.
Wiggovy is a registered trademark of Nova Nordisk AS.
To get started and learn more, including important safety information, Wiggovy clinical study information and restrictions, visit himss.com.
Support for the show comes from CoreWeave.
AI isn't just a new tool.
It encompasses so much more.
It's spurring a revolution across all industries and reshaping itself to become a big part of our future together.
CoreWeave is at the center, powering some of the biggest names in AI.
As the essential cloud for AI, CoreWeave provides an AI platform that combines next-generation infrastructure, intelligent tools, and expert support.
It's powering the world's most complex AI workloads faster and more efficiently.
From medical research and diagnosis, to education, from complex visual effects from movies, to breakthroughs in science and technology.
If it's AI, CoreWeave is uniquely ready to power it with purpose-built tech.
The big ideas, the wild visions, and what-ifs and why-nots.
CoreWeave is working to build what's never been built before.
CoreWeave is the essential cloud for AI.
Ready for anything, ready for AI.
To learn more about how CoreWeave powers the world's best AI, go to coreweave.com slash ready for anything.
Dell PCs with Intel Inside.
For all the moments, which you plan.
And for those, which you surprise.
If your charging device is completely back at the gate.
Or you jump between projects like a ping-pong ball.
We build PCs with long battery-suit.
So you don't have to search for a lock.
Scott, we're back with more news.
As SpaceX prepares to go public, rumors are again circulating that Elon Musk will eventually combine the company with Tesla.
Obviously.
God, I mean, we're not speaking, but I know how this guy thinks.
Musk has reportedly discussed the possibility with colleagues that two companies already share engineers and collaborate.
There's all kinds of cross stuff that a lot of sketchy cross stuff, if you recall at the time when he took over Twitter and collaborate on power and compute issues.
Also, by the way, SpaceX got a $2.29 billion contract to build a satellite communications network to connect military sensors and weapons platforms around the world.
deliver an operational prototype by the end of 2027.
So he's doing well.
He's doing well with his help of Trump, et cetera.
It's a mutual benefit society for them.
But this putting Tesla in here, it just makes complete sense is that he's, someone said it was like two, it was mortgage-backed securities, a bunch of companies that can't pay wrapped around Elon Musk and a company that's okay, which is Starlink.
So it's like a sort of a collection.
And so he's shoving this stuff all together.
It makes sense on a data point of view.
It makes sense to hide a bunch of stuff.
He already had these weird, very questionable transactions like buying Cybertrucks for SpaceX, which makes no sense except if you want to look good.
So why not just mash the whole fucking thing together and then make everybody buy it who is in an index fund, which is another thing.
So any of these comments, the contract, the merger, the NASDAQ situation?
well you did predict it but my analogy is the following um snow white is hot and the prospect of getting to marry snow white is super exciting it's no idea spacex but unfortunately to buy spacex you got to take on these seven fucking weirdos who are expensive and erotic and i mean xai which has been attached on to And SpaceX, an incredible company, is a money furnace that's playing catch-up.
It's trying to be an infrastructure provider now.
So is Meta, by the way.
But go ahead.
And SpaceX, I'm sorry, and Tesla.
I still think Tesla's a great product.
I got them one the other day.
I do think they have a fantastic car, but it's a struggling business with a multiple of 192 times forward earnings.
And Apple trades at 33 times forward in earnings.
And then if you look at Tesla's.
Just business in Europe, sales have fallen for 13 consecutive months.
Its market share in Europe has gone from 1% to 0.8%, while the EV market has expanded about 30% in 2025.
In Norway, sales are down 90%.
Netherlands down 80%.
UK down 50%.
Meanwhile, BYD registrations are up 260%.
in Europe.
And the reason why its valuation- Can I just note, I didn't say it was a bad car.
I said he didn't innovate in it.
There was another new cars and BYD keeps innovating.
Every time you see a new one, you're like, cool.
Tesla's the same, pretty much the same car for the past.
And then they deliver Cybertruck as their innovation.
So that's my beef.
Stocks are like brands and that is they're part promise and part performance.
And the promise, no one articulates a- gets more cheap capital on the promise part of that equation than Elon Musk.
He's arguably the best salesperson and communicator in the history of the public markets.
And the promise though, the performance is like so far behind the promise.
For example, these things have not, the promise has not worked out.
So robo-taxi miles, they doubled sequentially in Q1, but it's, he was saying that there would be a thousand robo-taxis on the road about five years ago.
Across all three Texas cities where robotaxis operate, Tesla has just 25 unsupervised vehicles.
I mean, none, right?
Meanwhile, their SF robotaxi service still uses a safety monitor in the front seat.
And there are five more cities on the way, but Musk's timelines famously cannot be trusted.
And then he tries to create all of these distractions.
Look over here at robots.
I'm staying in Beverly Hills in Los Angeles if I go to my deck.
I can see a Waymo.
They're everywhere in L.A., Cara.
There's actually fewer of the Tesla taxis, robo-taxis in Austin.
They've cut them back.
And then the worst car release or the worst tech product of the last year was the Cybertruck, which, by the way, is about to be bested by one of the great brands in history.
You're about to see one of the biggest brand failures in history, and that is the equivalent.
Tech has literally infected so many things, and it's infected one of the purest brands in the world.
It's infected Ferrari.
The new electric Ferrari is about to be just panned.
Yeah, it's getting panned right now.
Oh, it's going to be.
It's getting.
It's Johnny Ive.
The Johnny Ive design.
It's going to be one of the brand stories of the year.
They said it looks like a Honda, right?
It's basically, they said, Apple gave up on their Project Titan, and they slapped a...
They slapped a stallion on it.
You're going to see, oh my God, you're going to see the Ferrari Pierce.
You're going to see so many 80-year-old old men going into TikTok for the first time in their lives to shitpost this thing.
And SpaceX, get this, SpaceX accounted for nearly 20% of Cybertruck sales in Q4 2025 because he bought back a bunch of Cybertrucks.
So I think it's smart for him to do.
It's more jazz hands.
It's more pretending, attaching something to something amazing to try and...
I mean, he's very good at this and you predicted it.
But to put Elon on top of something that's very exciting around rockets, data centers in space.
Of course, rockets.
Yeah, and he is a visionary.
We need to be an interplanetary species.
And now you have to buy it with NASDAQ.
Explain to people very briefly what that is so people understand.
The index fund issue is that they've lowered the amount of time before big...
IPOs go into the index and now people are going to be forced to buy his company.
Also open AI, also Anthropik, etc.
So basically the rule was before you joined the S&P, you had to be profitable for a certain amount of quarters and you had to be in the index for at least a year.
They've waived those rules because they realized, and it makes sense, they're big, important companies.
What that means is if you invest in an ETF or an index, you automatically own these companies at those prices.
And at these prices, at these valuations, I would argue, I mean, to a certain extent, the IPO markets might be over.
And that is, the way I see it is, the reason we went public, the reason Google went public was you couldn't raise $3 or $5 billion from venture capitals and private institutions in 1997.
Now there's almost as much capital, if not more, in the private market.
So logically, you have to ask yourself, why does a company decide to go public?
And one reason it's a branding event.
Two, it creates more liquid currency potentially, but these companies have very liquid currency on the secondary markets.
They do it because I think largely speaking, and they don't want to say this out loud, once the private investors go, look, this thing's getting pretty frothy.
Most of the juice has been squeezed out of it.
Well, who is stupid enough to take the valuation even further up?
Well, okay, the last stop on the Trump train right now is the public markets.
So, typically, a company like OpenAI would have gone public when it was worth $30 or $50 billion, but the existing investors of OpenAI and Anthropics say, oh, no, no, no, no, they're still juicier.
Let's keep this to ourselves, and we'll find you capital.
And then when they start going, wow, this valuation is rich for even us, let's go see if mom and pop retail investor and people on Robinhood and people on Reddit who love Elon and people around the world who want to participate in the economy are actually willing to invest.
My prediction is these three companies, especially AI, are going to go through a pretty serious repricing, not a collapse like a 2000 collapse, but a repricing.
And then when you combine that with the fact that you now have access to private companies with different secondary markets, potentially the tokenization of small companies, it's just going to make the IPO less and less relevant because of the reporting standards.
And this is the indices trying to say, we want to make it more attractive for companies to go public and also reflect, the S&P should reflect.
I get it.
It's just that people shouldn't have this unprofitable company held up by one guy shoved down their throat.
It's like getting the U2 album.
Yeah, but you could say that.
Is P&G shoved down their throat?
It's the same thing.
It is, but it's a profitable company.
It's been a business like, let's just give it a sec.
Yeah, but the best returns have been in companies that are growing faster and not profitable.
Yes, it is.
And at the same time, let them buy it themselves then.
I mean, it just seems like a risky thing to stick in there this quickly.
That's all.
I just, I'm like, it's going to benefit the people.
It's going to benefit Elon Musk, but maybe not the pension funds of nurses.
Like, I don't know.
And I just don't think that risk is necessary.
Well, in a weird way, there's so many dynamics at play.
Well, my index fund, I don't want to own SpaceX.
I don't want it.
Not right now.
I mean, if you look at the valuation of these companies going public, it's going to be combined $4 trillion.
It's like from 1980 to 2020, the amount of money being raised just across these three companies is just...
staggering.
And what it probably will do in the short run is it'll probably take the S&P down because so much money is going to come from every corner of the earth to participate in these things.
To raise $150 million, the rest of the market feels that.
If you want to talk about, I mean, what happens, I'm fascinated by this because what happens when these three companies go public, 11,000 people in the Bay Area are overnight Imagine everyone who walks into Madison Square Garden, the place is sold out.
Everyone who walked in was a 31-year-old product manager making $180,000 or $240,000 a year, good living, but some student debt, can't afford a house.
And they walk out on the worst $7 to $11 million.
What happens?
They have more kids.
They buy a new house, as evidenced by skyrocketing prices.
Upside here, you're going to see a lot of fun started.
There's also tremendous new business development.
The other thing you're going to see, which is a good thing, you are about to see the mother of all increases in philanthropic giving in the Bay Area.
One would hope.
Well, people do.
These people do start foundations.
Let me just say, if you look at the actual statistics, it's McKenzie Scott, which is an enormous graph, like a big, long bar.
All the others, including Elon Musk down here.
I'm not talking about the big ones.
I'm talking about a lot of people.
Americans are very generous philanthropic people.
Not these people.
Sorry.
I'm not talking.
There's two things here.
When you do have this kind of liquidity event, you do see a bump up in philanthropy.
Sure.
Philanthropy is almost entirely correlated now, unfortunately, to big IPOs in the stock market.
And a lot of people give stock to universities, tax advantage.
That's what I've done.
Every time I invest in a private company, I give a certain amount of it away to, you know, do either public education or teen suicide prevention.
We've got to move on, but we'll see where it goes.
But it's a really interesting time.
And I think Scott's right.
There's going to be a decline in a lot of these.
Anyway, but it's a really interesting time given all three of these are going at once.
All right, Scott, one more quick break.
We'll be back for predictions.
Hi, I'm Maria Sharapova, host of the Pretty Tough Podcast.
Each episode I sit down with high-achieving women to discuss the pursuit of excellence without apology.
This week on the show, clinical psychologist and founder Dr.
Becky Kennedy and I unpack what it really means to raise kids today.
I think parenting is the most important job in the world and the one that has the most impact on your world and the world.
It is nonstop.
Check out Pretty Tough, new episodes on Wednesdays.
You can watch it on YouTube or listen in your favorite podcast app.
In the span of a decade, Ben Shapiro built The Daily Wire into a conservative media empire.
He produced hit podcasts that bit at liberal excesses and documentaries and lectures about the founders, the genders, the gospels.
He peddled polos, hats, candles, provided a home for deplatformed conservative stars like Matt Walsh and minted stars like Candace Owens.
Let's put a pin in that.
The Daily Wire even has kids programming a judgmental puppet named Zoodles.
Zoodles.
Zoodles!
who shares Shapiro's load-bearing eyebrows.
This year, though, the empire showed signs of collapse.
The Daily Wire's YouTube videos are down from millions of views to the lo-fi figures.
Web traffic is plummeting.
And recently, Shapiro laid off 13% of his employees.
Asked by The Washington Post what had happened, Shapiro accused other conservatives of click-whoring by embracing radical Islam, theorizing about the evils of Winston Churchill, and mocking the widow of Charlie Kirk.
The kids still got it.
On Today Explained, the fall of Ben Shapiro.
Today Explained drops every weekday afternoon.
Okay, Scott, I'm going to start just very quickly.
I want to call out something that happened.
Two things.
Quickly, CBS News just named tech journalist Nick Bilton as the new executive producer of 60 Minutes.
Bilton is a longtime tech journalist and filmmaker who's never worked in traditional broadcast news.
I know Nick.
Interesting.
It'll be interesting to see what he's going to do there.
This comes on the heels of 60 Minutes correspondent Sharon Alfonsi announcing that CBS declined to renew her contract.
She's an excellent reporter.
She did great stuff on Character AI.
She's been a wonderful reporter.
The move comes six months after Alfonso's report on abuse inside Salvadoran prisons was abruptly pulled before airing a month later.
The time Alfonso called the decision political, and it certainly was in a statement.
She said she did a really, like, she just burnt the house down leaving.
Alfonso said the exit is, quote, a deliberate choice to penalize a journalist for refusing to sanitize factually accurate reporting.
She added, sends a chilling message across the entire.
newsroom.
And by the way, Sharon's not the only one.
Anderson Cooper stepping out the way he is not usually leaving a few weeks ago saying, I hope 60 Minutes remains 60 Minutes.
He also was sending sort of a shot across the bow there.
I just want to call it these two excellent journalists of 60 Minutes.
And Sharon's a badass.
I know her just met her on text, actually.
And Anderson, I think.
has done an amazing job.
So these are two really, really great journalists.
And I predict that they will do just fine, but good for them for speaking out.
And especially good, there was a student who won an award at the Emmys last night, which was named.
scholarship for Mike Wallace, and he delivered a blistering attack on supporting these two journalists and supporting others like them.
And I thought that person was incredibly, it's very hard to speak out.
Anderson and Sharon and this young student did so, and I really, you guys will do just fine.
Anderson particularly, but in general, good for you for standing up.
That's all I have to say.
I think it's a really interesting, it'll be a really interesting case study on organizational behavior and management classes in business school, and that is corporations continue to fall for the notion that if they bring in a small company they perceive as really innovative, that that small virus is going to infect the entire corpus.
And generally, almost always what you find is that the corpus rejects the virus.
It's like acquisitions work when the acquiring company has the scale and distribution or capital to help scale the small innovative company.
But to believe that the innovation is going to infect the larger corporation or corpus almost never works out.
That's an interesting story.
So let's give the free press the benefit of the doubt.
Innovative little company, subscription-based.
interesting positioning and the Ellison's thought that's the kind of mojo and juice and infection we need at this larger, somewhat encephaletic corpus called CBS or Paramount.
There's been organ rejection.
Also, what CEOs of smaller companies fail to recognize is the following.
And it's the reason why I've never been able to grow a big company to small companies.
And that is a small company is ready for our aim.
The person at the top really does get to make swift, crisp decisions.
I am the decider.
This is the way we're going.
One of our key things here is speed, which means this is not a democracy.
There's very few things that are less democratic than a small company trying to work fast or go fast because it's kind of like, what do we think?
Okay, get on it.
Ready, fire, aim.
Let's start yesterday.
In a large organization that's scaling, it's more about consensus and getting people on board and culture and you're a speedboat ramming a tanker.
And what you fail to realize is the CEO of a company like this, and what I think Barry has failed to realize, is you're Phil Jackson, the coach of the Bulls.
And that is your job, you're blessed with some unbelievable assets.
Your job is not to coach Michael Jordan.
It's to get along with him and be a resource for him.
You're not in charge.
They are.
They're the asset.
When you're Mikel Arteta and you're coaching Bukaya Saka at Arsenal, which by the way, just won the Prem League.
This is very exciting.
When you come into an organization like CBS and you do have kind of these stars that are iconic, your job is to get along with them.
And so I think— Well, let me say, 60 Minutes have been enormously successful.
That's my point.
I mean, no, but I'm just saying, like, pretending it's just because they're encephaletics and this sassy new startup is going to change things.
I think a lot of these errors are errors of incompetence, not of trying to change things and these old people won't change.
These are, like, top-level journalists that were doing a great job and had 52 years of success.
Like, you know, they're doing well.
It's not like they're not doing well, so why— I think we're speaking past each other.
I'm agreeing with you.
CBS is Michael Jordan.
Barry Weiss is Phil Jackson.
His job isn't to show up and reorganize and tell everyone how to dribble and play again.
His job, quite frankly, is to get...
The only management of CBS is the following.
Hi, nice to meet you.
How can I help?
That's it.
How can I help?
And if the answer is go away and leave us alone...
Fine.
If it's we could use more resources here, we have trouble here, or we don't think our advertisers are, how can I help?
That's it.
I love what you, I'm sorry, I misunderstood.
Let me say one of the things that happened at the Washington Post too, blaming these reporters, like when Will Lewis was like trashing the reporters, is like, it's such an easy thing to do for people who think they're innovative.
It's like, you all suck.
Some of the things need to change, but to say it's a problem of, it's a bigger secular problem that's the issue in terms of cost and everything else.
And so just telling people, just breaking things is not building things.
And that is really hard to do when you're, that's why I never want to be at a big company.
I don't know about you, but I like being a small speedboat.
And if you make mistakes, you make mistakes.
If you don't, you don't.
That's how I feel.
I don't know about you.
Oh, yeah.
And this is the reason why I've never built a billion-dollar company.
I sell companies, you know, when they, as soon as they have a CFO or someone in HR, I'm like, time to sell.
Yeah.
But having been involved with a lot of big companies, it just shocked me.
It just shocked me right away.
The first thing I thought, well, we should do this, this, and this.
And the CEOs were always, okay, they really had to think about what would be required to get buy-in to potentially change the culture, to explain, be thoughtful, to...
create the right incentive mechanisms to ensure the behavior lined up.
And I mean, you really are, there's some amazing things about a tanker, right?
It can carry whatever it is, 100 million barrels or 10 million barrels of a product.
But you are, you know, you're steering a tanker and it takes a lot of effort and a big engine room and a lot of people.
It is a different, there's so few people.
They can go from a lot of people, I would say, where are you in the alphabet?
Are you from A to D?
I'm good at A to D.
Yeah, me too.
Some people are good at coming in.
My old CEO at L2, Ken Allard, was good at kind of D to H or I.
And some people can come into a company that's gone public.
Dara Khosrowshahi is amazing.
Yes, very good example.
great from L to S.
He came into a company that was already jamming, scaling, huge infrastructure, huge brand, and said, okay, somebody needs to be the adult here.
And a lot of problems, yeah.
And also, there's some people who come into companies that are distressed who take a company from...
you know, whatever it is, T to Z, that come in and cut costs and repackage something, take it through bankruptcy and make a lot of money.
Scott, your next book is The Alphabet of Management.
The Alphabet of Business?
Yeah.
All right.
I want to hear your prediction, though.
I'm all confused and jet-lagged right now, so I thought we were doing wins and fails, so it's okay, I'm going to do wins and fails.
Go for it, yeah.
But my win is, and it just hasn't gotten enough attention, and it's just so exciting, and it's such a victory for the West, and I would argue it's actually in many ways.
While Iran has overshadowed it and inflation, people really don't understand that something incredibly wonderful is going on here.
And that is three years ago, Russia was supposed to take Kiev in a weekend.
And today, Ukraine is striking Russian military infrastructure, oil refineries, ports, bomber bases, and semiconductor plants.
Hundreds, sometimes more than a thousand kilometers inside of Russia.
Putin is...
On the run.
He is.
I told you when I told you that a couple of weeks ago that all these people said, Rush, he's in much more trouble than you realize.
But go ahead.
Just recently, they've hit the Riazan refinery, one of Russia's largest fuel plants, supplying the military, the Tuapse refinery in the Black Sea.
They're going after ships.
They're going after the Black Sea fleet.
Oil infrastructure in Perm, 700 miles from the border.
The Yazolovri refinery, 700 kilometers inside of Russia.
And even the English strategic...
Can you imagine in this country if that happened?
Geez.
If they started bombing oil fields in Texas...
Buffalo.
Buffalo.
Or our military ships in San Diego.
Can you imagine?
No, no, no.
Those Canadians.
Or North York, Virginia, building our submarines.
What if drones were hitting?
I mean, this is just...
Incredible.
And it's a function of drones.
It's a function of Delta.
That's a great win.
It's also, quite frankly, you know, we don't like to say this, Musk turning off Starlink in Russia has ceded huge advantage to the Ukrainian army.
That's always been a benefit.
No question.
But it is just, I mean, if you think about this, what are they doing?
They're producing thousands of long-range drones per month.
in 2024.
In 2025, they're doing 3,000.
They're going to be a huge technology country when this is on.
Oh, yeah.
They'll attract so much capital, assuming they get to- Yeah, I'd go there.
If I was a young person, that's exactly- Though the corruption is really quite impossible to deal with.
That's an interesting thought.
But if I was a young person, I'd go there.
But there are significant corruption problems within that government.
But there's a wonderful message being sent to the world, and that is- There's a brutal lesson for authoritarians.
Corruption scales until it collides with reality and technology and a motivated populace.
Russia built the Potemkin village version of a superpower, yachts, parades, hypersonic missiles, shirtless horse cosplay.
And the Ukrainians, meanwhile, I like that part.
The Ukrainians, meanwhile, build software, drones, and engineers.
And just some numbers here to just talk about.
How incredible this is.
You're rushing them this morning.
I'm not rushing you.
We're in almost an hour and a half.
What weirdo that you're fascinated with are you about to go interview?
I'm not.
I'm not going anywhere.
I'm going to be in my front of my thing.
What is it, the ghost of Walter Mondale?
Who's up next on with Kara Swisher?
Russia has three times the population, 10 times the economy, nuclear weapons, and one of the largest oil reserves in the world.
And Ukraine is kicking its ass.
I know.
I love it.
What does Ukraine have?
Ukraine has coders and hoodies turning Home Depot into Lockheed Martin.
I mean, these guys.
So look, increasingly, and this is a lesson for us, unfortunately, right now, the future belongs to the side that can innovate faster than the other side can lie.
Like the Archaeans with the boats and the drones.
So that's my win.
And it hasn't got enough attention.
This is so exciting for the West, for Ukraine.
Can I make one caveat?
If Putin feels cornered and scared, he might do something terrible.
Yeah, that's the fear.
You know, that to me is the biggest fear.
Unless you're going to annihilate your enemy, you've got to give him a way out.
That's what Sun Tzu.
Yeah, but I don't think he thinks that.
I think he's terrified.
But this is a victory also for the EU, who has been steadfast in their support, unlike Americans.
It's just very exciting.
Trump will back them if they win.
He'll go like, oh, I'm with the winners.
I'm with them.
I was always behind you.
I was behind them.
All right, what's your fail?
My fail is, I think the best way, Timothy Snyder summarized it perfectly.
I've been trying to figure out a way to describe what is effectively a $1.8 billion slush fund that Trump and his spokesperson Blanche have been trying to pitch.
And even some Republicans are finally blanching.
And the best way to describe it is a terrorist immunization fund.
And that is commit violence on my behalf, and I will not only legally protect you, I will pay you.
In addition to the corruption, it sends a signal to weirdos out there who are cult members that if something gets in the way of Trump, whether it's people turning out to a poll booth, whether it's people showing up to inaugurate the other guy, which I'm claiming was not fairly elected.
I want you to commit acts of violence.
I want you to engage in terrorism.
And you'll get off.
And you will not only get off, I'm going to pay you.
So this is not a slush fund.
This is not only corruption.
It's a terrorist immunization fund.
I love that word.
And that is the way, I can't take credit for it, it's Timothy Snyder, who's one I'm just obsessed with.
And I've had on the pod a couple of times, who's at the University of Toronto and talks a lot about democracy and autocracy.
He's fantastic and he's very brave.
He's the dude Heather Cox Richardson.
But this is, that's right.
But this is, imagine if a nation in the Gulf found, name your terrorist organization and said, you blow yourself up, you commit acts of violence, not only will we not prosecute you, we've set aside money for you.
Right.
Well, they kind of did that.
Well, the PLO used to do that.
The PLO used to say any suicide bomber, we're going to give their family X amount of dollars.
That's what this is.
Yeah, I agree.
Anyways, I hope the Democrats adopt that phrase.
I don't think it's going to pass.
I think the Republicans tell us the others are all very much against it.
There's a lot.
In all of these hearings, why do you support the terrorist immunization fund?
Good.
They should absolutely label it that.
That's what this is.
Right.
That's my fail.
Terrorist baking fund.
Maybe immunization.
Anyway.
All right, that's great.
Those are both great.
And you're going to have to have new ones for Monday, just so you know.
We want to hear from you.
Send us your questions about business, tech, or whatever's on your mind.
Go to nymag.com slash pivot to submit a question for the show or call 855-51-PIVOT.
Before we go, I'm taping a live interview of On With Kara Swisher at the Rebecca Film Festival on Monday, June 8th.
It is not the day.
Someone's got their nose off Murdoch's ass.
No, I'm not.
Hi, new boss.
I was booked before the deal months ago.
Anyway, instead of Walt, Hi, Daddy.
You're not invited to the special dinner with Robert De Niro, but I am.
I'll be talking to comedian, actor, and podcast pioneer Mark Maron, not Mondale.
The original gangster.
Yes, thank you.
Yeah, the originals.
He's really quite a legend.
And there's a new doc about him, and he's also a great actor and funny comedian and everything else.
He loves to trash the tech pros.
You know my favorite statement of his?
My favorite, and I use it all the time.
He's like, you realize Democrats literally annoyed America into fascism.
I love that.
Anyway, he's great.
He's really great.
Tickets are available now at thetrebeccafilm.com slash audio.
What Scott's referring to is the Murdochs, James Murdoch.
It's Rebecca.
We will see you there.
Okay, that's the show.
Thanks for listening to Pivot.
And be sure, Pivotarian, become a Pivotarian.
Be sure to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel.
We'll be back next week.
Today's show was produced by Lara Neiman, Zoe Marcus, Taylor Griffin, and Todd Wiseman.
Ernie Inertide engineered this episode.
Thanks also to Jabros, Ms.
Ferry, and Dan Jalanda, Schock, Kroes, Fox Media's executive producer podcast.
Make sure to follow Pivot on your favorite podcast platform.
Thank you for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Fox Media.
We'll be back next week for another breakdown of all things tech and business.
Pivotarian.
Pivotarian.
Have sex with the cult leader.
That's okay.
Cut off all contact with your parents.
Give us all your money.
No.
I'm into it.
Pivotarian.
Good luck in L.A.
tonight, Scott.