Category: Uncategorized

  • How to Make Sure AI Doesn’t Take Your Job, Planning a Guys’ Trip, and When to Take on Debt

    AI transcript
    0:00:02 It’s the Spring Big Red Sale at Canadian Tire!
    0:00:03 Save up to 50%!
    0:00:04 What are you doing?
    0:00:05 These are the biggest deals of the season!
    0:00:06 I’m shouting it from the rooftop!
    0:00:08 You have a radio ad, you don’t need to be up there!
    0:00:12 The Spring Big Red Sale is on from April 24th to May 1st.
    0:00:13 Conditions apply. Details online.
    0:00:18 Spring is here, and you can now get almost anything you need, delivered with Uber Eats.
    0:00:19 What do we mean by almost?
    0:00:23 You can’t get a well-groomed lawn delivered, but you can get chicken parmesan delivered.
    0:00:24 Sunshine? No.
    0:00:25 Some wine? Yes.
    0:00:27 Get almost, almost anything delivered with Uber Eats.
    0:00:29 Order now. Alcohol in select markets. See app for details.
    0:00:31 Are you forgetting about that chip in your windshield?
    0:00:35 It’s time to fix it. Come to Speedy Glass before it turns into a crack.
    0:00:39 Our experts will repair your windshield in less than an hour, and it’s free if you’re insured.
    0:00:42 Book your appointment today at speedyglass.ca.
    0:00:44 Details and conditions at speedyglass.ca.
    0:00:48 Welcome to Office Hours of Prof G.
    0:00:52 This is the part of the show where we answer questions about business, big tech, entrepreneurship,
    0:00:53 and whatever else is on your mind.
    0:00:56 Today we’ve got two great listener questions lined up,
    0:00:59 and then after the break, we’ve got the Reddit hotline.
    0:01:00 Still not a fucking sponsor.
    0:01:01 Reddit.
    0:01:02 Hello, Reddit.
    0:01:03 Call me.
    0:01:07 Where we pull questions straight from Reddit, and we’ll start pulling from another platform
    0:01:10 soon if they don’t give Daddy some Benjamins.
    0:01:15 If you’d like to submit a question for next time, you can send a voice recording to officehours
    0:01:16 at prof2media.com.
    0:01:18 That’s officehours at prof2media.com.
    0:01:24 Or if you prefer to ask on Reddit, post your question on the Scott Galloway subreddit,
    0:01:27 and we just might feature you in our next episode.
    0:01:28 What a thrill!
    0:01:31 By the way, I don’t go to it because they say some people say mean things to me, and it bums
    0:01:34 me out because I like Reddit, and I’m desperate for strangers’ approval.
    0:01:35 Kind of pathetic.
    0:01:37 Kind of pathetic.
    0:01:38 But anyways, first question.
    0:01:41 Hey, Prof G.
    0:01:49 You’ve mentioned before that AI won’t necessarily take our jobs, but rather, people who know how
    0:01:55 to use AI well, but I’ve been seeing more examples lately that make me question that.
    0:02:03 For instance, Shopify’s CEO recently said that any new roles at the company need to prove they
    0:02:06 can’t be done by AI before they get approved.
    0:02:12 Basically, if AI can do it, they’re not hiring for it.
    0:02:19 So as much as I want to believe that AI isn’t taking jobs, it feels like there’s
    0:02:21 growing evidence that it actually is.
    0:02:23 What’s your take?
    0:02:25 Has your thinking evolved on this?
    0:02:28 Appreciate you taking the time.
    0:02:33 That’s an interesting question, and also, I just want to acknowledge that there’s some
    0:02:34 truth to what you’re saying.
    0:02:38 Shopify CEO Toby Luckey told employees in a memo that they need to prove that they cannot
    0:02:42 get what they want done using AI before looking to hire new employees.
    0:02:47 Shopify ended 2024 with a headcount of 8,100, down from 8,300 a year earlier.
    0:02:53 The company laid off 14% of its workforce in 2022 and laid off 20% the following year.
    0:02:56 The stock is up nearly 21% in the past year.
    0:02:57 I don’t think that’s AI.
    0:03:00 I think they probably just overhired during COVID, like most of the tech companies.
    0:03:02 No one in tech has been spared.
    0:03:06 Last year, over 150,000 employees were laid off in the technology industry alone.
    0:03:14 This year, Meta expects to have AI that can function as a mid-level engineer, which probably sent shivers
    0:03:16 down the spine of prospective employees.
    0:03:20 And I hate to admit this, but Musk sort of inspired this race.
    0:03:22 And that was the following.
    0:03:28 He basically maintained a minimum viable product on Twitter with 80% fewer employees.
    0:03:35 So essentially, the entire tech market stood up and paid attention.
    0:03:39 And then you had what was probably the seminal earnings call of the last 10 years.
    0:03:45 And that was Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg said, we increased revenues 23% while reducing our head
    0:03:45 count 20%.
    0:03:47 That’s never happened before.
    0:03:49 Think of what GLP-1 drugs do.
    0:03:52 They switch off the signal in your brain that you need to eat more.
    0:03:56 And the signal to every CEO’s brain when they’re growing is, I need to hire more.
    0:03:57 That’s just, okay, I’m growing.
    0:03:59 I need more protein in the form of human capital.
    0:04:05 Basically, AI has been osempic for the corporate world in that it’s turned off the signal that
    0:04:06 you necessarily need to hire more.
    0:04:09 And so a lot of people are saying, well, okay, what if we can do this with AI?
    0:04:14 I got to be honest here at Prop G Media, I keep asking, why don’t we have this podcast
    0:04:16 in numerous languages using AI?
    0:04:18 I’m starting to think that way.
    0:04:23 But I still hold on to the notion that what’s going to happen with every technology, whether
    0:04:29 it’s PCs or automation, there’s some short-term damage in terms of job destruction.
    0:04:34 But the auto industry, which was supposed to be wrecked by automation, had some short-term
    0:04:39 declines in employment, but we couldn’t envision heated seats or car stereos.
    0:04:43 These companies rip costs out of the basic non-value-add part of the production.
    0:04:49 Make more profits and then start investing in new models, new dealerships, basically, or
    0:04:56 more profitability, which creates cheaper capital such that they can have, I don’t know, more
    0:04:57 investment, more employees in my hiring.
    0:05:00 I just think that’s a natural cycle of business.
    0:05:08 And while AI will come in to Shopify and reduce, for example, customer services is going to
    0:05:09 get wrecked.
    0:05:10 I wouldn’t want to be in the business of customer service.
    0:05:14 I wouldn’t actually want to be in, I wouldn’t want to be a systems engineer right now because
    0:05:17 programming is going to get, just get so much easier and better.
    0:05:23 But if I have a vision for new products or new features that require software engineering,
    0:05:29 which I now have much greater firepower around, I think there’ll be a lot more product management
    0:05:30 jobs.
    0:05:35 I think that these companies, I think Shopify is going to get to expand to new regions because
    0:05:38 they’ll have additional profits and be able to scale up faster with AI.
    0:05:44 As a result, there’ll be a shift in skill sets required, but not a shift in, I don’t think,
    0:05:45 in employment or total employment.
    0:05:47 I think total employment will grow.
    0:05:51 That’s a dangerous thing to say, but I think the idiocracy vision of the world where we’re
    0:05:54 all, none of us need to work and we’re all just sitting on couches, watching big screen
    0:05:56 TVs and getting angry at each other.
    0:05:56 I don’t see that.
    0:06:00 I think there’s still going to be a need and opportunities for people who know how to leverage
    0:06:00 AI.
    0:06:07 Now, specifically, when I said AI is not going to take your job, someone who understands AI
    0:06:08 is going to take your job.
    0:06:10 I still think that’s the case.
    0:06:16 I still think if you can figure out a way to understand how AI is going to impact your
    0:06:20 division and be the person that, quite frankly, understands how to do more with less, I think
    0:06:22 there’s more opportunity for you.
    0:06:26 I’d hate to be a mediocre real estate lawyer right now, but a good real estate lawyer that
    0:06:30 understands AI is going to make a lot more money because he or she is going to be able
    0:06:33 to draft basic documents, but they’re still going to need a human to be creative about
    0:06:39 the type of leases and negotiating with the landlord and reading the market and all of
    0:06:40 that good stuff.
    0:06:46 I think there’s just going to be enormous opportunities here if you understand how to leverage this
    0:06:47 technology.
    0:06:51 PCs supposedly were going to put a ton of people out of business, and if you didn’t understand
    0:06:53 PCs, you probably were vulnerable.
    0:06:56 I think it’s just really important.
    0:06:57 What is my advice here?
    0:06:59 My advice, especially if you have kids, play with AI with your kids.
    0:07:04 What I’ll do with my youngest is when we have a weekend together, I’ll say, okay, let’s
    0:07:07 use AI to come up with the perfect itinerary for fun this weekend.
    0:07:11 We describe each other, and it’s fun, come up with really thoughtful prompts, and then
    0:07:12 boom, it comes up with great ideas.
    0:07:18 I’m using AI all the time, not as a means of creation, but as a means of enhancing my current
    0:07:21 job, making me better at what I do.
    0:07:24 So I’m still kind of holding to my guns here.
    0:07:29 I think what you’re going to see is a continued shift in the economy where skills, education,
    0:07:34 a basic understanding of technology, creativity, ability to get along with and manage other
    0:07:37 people, a feel for other nations and cultures.
    0:07:43 But if you understand AI, I think there’s all sorts of opportunities for you to take those
    0:07:49 additional profits that were saved by AI and come up with new business ideas and new means
    0:07:50 of growth.
    0:07:55 The lower costs, but still, you maintain your margins because you’re more efficient, meaning
    0:07:57 you can expand the market.
    0:07:59 But point taken.
    0:07:59 We’ll see.
    0:08:01 Question number two.
    0:08:03 Hi, Professor Scott.
    0:08:09 I’m John from Virginia, and I wanted to submit a question regarding planning meaningful guys
    0:08:09 trips.
    0:08:15 I have a tight neck of our friends in our mid to late 20s, and like you, we recognize the
    0:08:20 vital role of a healthy support group for young men in a society that sometimes seems apathetic
    0:08:21 to our struggles.
    0:08:25 Although we may not be ballers like you, I wanted to get your two cents of what you think
    0:08:30 makes a killer guys trip, and in a broader sense, how to use the rare opportunity in our
    0:08:35 busy lives to come away with meaningful contributions to our friendships beyond drinking more and making
    0:08:38 a series of bad decisions that might pay off, as you often say.
    0:08:41 That’s a really thoughtful question.
    0:08:47 I would say the key is yes, or the calendar, and that is just putting something on the calendar.
    0:08:53 I find that when you go on a trip with your friends, it’s really not about the place.
    0:08:58 It’s about the people you bring and just doing it.
    0:09:06 I’m 50 years old, 60, and I have this sort of group of six or eight fraternity brothers, and we try to get
    0:09:07 together.
    0:09:10 I would say our intention is to get together every year.
    0:09:14 It ends up being every two or three years because life gets in the way, but I think the key is
    0:09:18 somebody needs to be the ringleader and put a date on the calendar and just try and coordinate and see
    0:09:27 who can make it, who can go to Vegas the week of May 1st or whatever, and just try to plant a flag
    0:09:28 in the sand.
    0:09:29 This is when we’re going.
    0:09:32 Beyond that, I mean, a lot of it’s up to your interest.
    0:09:34 Are you outdoors people?
    0:09:35 Are you adventurers?
    0:09:36 Do you guys like to surf?
    0:09:40 I used to go surfing, which is basically me holding onto a piece of fiberglass for dear
    0:09:43 life every year in Brazil, but it was mostly just an excuse to go to Brazil with a group
    0:09:44 of guys that I like.
    0:09:47 And now I do a ton of guys trips now.
    0:09:48 One, I have the money.
    0:09:51 Two, I just love hanging out with dudes.
    0:09:52 I’m good at it.
    0:09:57 I’m, you know, I have a good group of guy friends.
    0:10:02 So I don’t, I don’t know if I have a ton of insight here other than trying to find what
    0:10:02 you’re interested in.
    0:10:04 It doesn’t have to be a lot of money.
    0:10:07 I used to, from one of my friend’s bachelor parties, we went camping.
    0:10:08 God, that fucking sucked.
    0:10:10 Dr. David Frey took us camping.
    0:10:13 I bet that trip costs 50 bucks a person.
    0:10:14 I hated it.
    0:10:15 I hated it.
    0:10:17 I’m not, I’m not a roughet kind of guy.
    0:10:23 But anyways, you have to decide the economic weight class, but you don’t need money for
    0:10:23 that shit.
    0:10:27 It’s like, save your money to go somewhere nice with your wife or your girlfriend or your
    0:10:32 boyfriend just because, and also for fucking Disneyland, which will cost you $7 million for
    0:10:36 two days so you can eat bad food and stay at a three-star hotel and pay 11-star prices.
    0:10:38 A little bitter, a little bitter.
    0:10:39 Just do it.
    0:10:40 This is an easy one.
    0:10:41 Just get it on the calendar.
    0:10:43 The rest will sort itself out.
    0:10:45 We have one quick break.
    0:10:48 And when we’re back, we’re diving into the depths of Reddit.
    0:10:57 Support for the show comes from Panerai.
    0:10:58 Oh my God.
    0:11:00 I love Panerai.
    0:11:03 A lot of people just rely on their phones to keep track of time.
    0:11:08 But for those of us who are interested in something more timeless and luxurious, you can’t go wrong
    0:11:13 with a gorgeous mechanic timepiece from a legacy watchmaker like Panerai.
    0:11:17 Giovanni Panerai opened his first boutique in Florence in 1860.
    0:11:21 And since then, the brand has been perfecting its watchmaking expertise.
    0:11:25 The result is a collection of timepieces that are as stunning as they are reliable.
    0:11:30 And now their new Luminor Marina collection elevates the collection’s functionality for modern
    0:11:34 collectors while also maintaining the timeless appeal that Panerai is known for.
    0:11:39 An enduring emblem, the Luminor Marina is among Panerai’s most celebrated models, distinguished
    0:11:43 by its contemporary, sporty style, and deep-rooted history.
    0:11:47 I have seven watches, one brand.
    0:11:48 Guess which one?
    0:11:49 That’s right, Daddy.
    0:11:50 One word.
    0:11:52 Pan-a-ri.
    0:11:58 You can shop the Luminor collection at Panerai.com or make an appointment at the boutique nearest you.
    0:12:05 Discover the world of Panerai at P-A-N-E-R-A-I dot com.
    0:12:15 The regular season’s in the rearview, and now it’s time for the games that matter the most.
    0:12:18 This is Kenny Beecham, and Playoff Basketball is finally here.
    0:12:23 On Small Ball, we’re diving deep into every series, every crunch time finish, every coaching
    0:12:26 adjustment that can make or break a championship run.
    0:12:28 Who’s building for a 16-win marathon?
    0:12:33 Which superstar will submit their legacy, and which role player is about to become a household
    0:12:34 name?
    0:12:39 With so many fascinating first-round matchups, will the West be the bloodbath we anticipate?
    0:12:41 Will the East be as predictable as we think?
    0:12:43 Can the Celtics defend their title?
    0:12:47 Can Steph Curry, LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard push the young teams at the top?
    0:12:51 I’ll be bringing the expertise to pass in the genuine opinion you need for the most exciting
    0:12:52 time of the NBA calendar.
    0:12:56 Small Ball is your essential companion for the NBA postseason.
    0:13:00 Join me, Kenny Beecham, for new episodes of Small Ball throughout the playoffs.
    0:13:02 Don’t miss Small Ball with Kenny Beecham.
    0:13:07 New episodes dropping through the playoffs, available on YouTube and wherever you get your
    0:13:07 podcasts.
    0:13:13 So we want to introduce you to another show from our network and your next favorite money
    0:13:15 podcast, for ours, of course.
    0:13:21 Net Worth and Chill hosts Vivian Tu is a former Wall Street trader turned finance expert and
    0:13:21 entrepreneur.
    0:13:26 She shares common financial struggles and gives actionable tips and advice on how to make the
    0:13:26 most of your money.
    0:13:31 Past guests include Nicole Yoder, a leading fertility doctor who breaks down the complex
    0:13:35 world of reproductive medicine and the financial costs of those treatments, and divorce attorney
    0:13:39 Jackie Combs, who talks about love and divorce and why everyone should have a prenup.
    0:13:42 Episodes of Net Worth and Chill are released every Wednesday.
    0:13:46 Listen wherever you get your podcasts or watch full episodes on YouTube.
    0:13:48 By the way, I absolutely love Vivian Tu.
    0:13:49 I think she does a great job.
    0:13:55 Welcome back.
    0:13:57 We asked and Reddit delivered.
    0:13:58 Let’s bust right into it.
    0:14:04 Our Reddit question today comes from Bodega Poet.
    0:14:06 Ooh, aren’t you sexy?
    0:14:08 That is very special.
    0:14:09 Hey, Prof G.
    0:14:13 What are your thoughts on personal debt for business, real estate, or educational pursuits?
    0:14:19 I learned about personal finance from Dave Ramsey and his principles have resulted in my wife
    0:14:21 and I to be in our late 30s with no debt beyond our mortgage.
    0:14:26 We are getting by, but it seems like we will forever be stuck in the middle class.
    0:14:30 Would you ever advise utilizing debt as leverage to increase your earnings potential, returning
    0:14:34 to school, borrowing for seed, capital for a business, or buying property?
    0:14:36 Thanks for considering my question.
    0:14:40 Okay, there’s no easy way to just summarize debt.
    0:14:42 Can debt put you in an awful place?
    0:14:47 Can you go to a, can you apply to a good college and not get in because we as good universities
    0:14:52 or elite universities take pride in scarcity and manufacturing artificial scarcity such that
    0:14:56 we can reject people, go up in the rankings and raise tuition fast and inflation such that
    0:15:01 a good kid gets arbed down to a mediocre college that’s the same price but doesn’t offer the same
    0:15:02 upside opportunity.
    0:15:06 And we’ve shamed everyone into believing if they don’t get a college degree that the
    0:15:12 parents and you have failed so you can borrow cheap credit, student loans, and you can literally
    0:15:16 borrow $100,000 to end up in a job that pays $40,000 a year.
    0:15:17 Yeah, we’ve done that.
    0:15:22 And a lady in a pantsuit with a big logo behind you telling you that you can never go wrong
    0:15:23 investing in yourself.
    0:15:26 Keep in mind, she gets to cash that check.
    0:15:30 And then you want to talk about how mendacious our society is becoming, how much we hate young
    0:15:35 people, student debt is one of the few forms of debt that is not dischargeable in bankruptcy.
    0:15:40 So you literally have a generation, tens if not hundreds of thousands of young kids who
    0:15:43 go to school, it’s not cut out for them, they drop out, but they still get to hold on to their
    0:15:46 debt and for the rest of their life they have this anchor around their neck.
    0:15:49 So there are terrible forms of debt.
    0:15:51 You can get in, you can be house poor.
    0:15:55 Everyone thinks, again, another one of these tropes or conventional wisdom.
    0:16:00 When wisdom becomes conventional, it’s no longer wisdom that everyone needs to own a home
    0:16:02 where you otherwise aren’t an adult.
    0:16:06 And sometimes people just get out too far in front of their skis, the market goes down,
    0:16:13 and they have a $300,000 mortgage on a place worth $190,000, and that can haunt you the rest
    0:16:13 of your life.
    0:16:18 Credit card debt, new offers every day, and you want to lead a good life, you’re working hard,
    0:16:23 you want to, you think I deserve this, and the reality is you wake up with $30,000 in credit
    0:16:23 debt.
    0:16:26 So there’s a lot of bad forms of debt.
    0:16:28 There’s some very good forms of debt.
    0:16:35 Your ability, if you’re buying a house and you can get a good mortgage that is also tax
    0:16:39 deductible up to a certain amount, that is very attractive debt.
    0:16:40 It’s low interest debt.
    0:16:44 As long as you’re thoughtful about buying a place you can afford, you typically don’t want
    0:16:51 to spend more than 30 or 35% of your gross or your net income on rent or a mortgage.
    0:16:56 And also you need to calculate the phantom costs, which people don’t want to do, property taxes,
    0:17:02 maintenance, but if you can finance an asset at 5% or 6% and you get to write off part of
    0:17:04 that, that’s what you call good debt.
    0:17:06 So good debt can give you leverage.
    0:17:11 So there’s good debt and there’s bad debt.
    0:17:16 I like leases more than debts on cars because you can just hand the car back and I think the
    0:17:20 transaction costs of trying and the time and the human capital to try and sell a car is a
    0:17:21 pain in the ass.
    0:17:25 So I always like leases and generally speaking, manufactured sponsored leases sometimes end up
    0:17:26 with a low interest rate.
    0:17:27 So this is what you do.
    0:17:29 How do you discern between good and bad debt?
    0:17:30 You need a kitchen cabinet.
    0:17:35 You need someone who will give it to you straight and say, okay, you’re going to school or if you
    0:17:37 want to go to college, you’re going to have to borrow $120,000.
    0:17:40 What’s the average salary of the person graduating from the school?
    0:17:41 Is it worth it?
    0:17:45 For the first time in a long time, and this is a tragedy, sometimes the answer is no around
    0:17:45 college.
    0:17:47 It’s just not worth the money.
    0:17:50 And even though there’s a nice lady or a nice man telling you that you can get student debt,
    0:17:52 maybe you shouldn’t take it.
    0:17:55 Just having access to debt doesn’t necessarily mean you should take it.
    0:17:56 You need to think about the interest rate.
    0:18:01 You need to think about the term of the loan and you need to think about the incremental bump
    0:18:02 it’s going to give you.
    0:18:07 When you buy a house, houses typically go up throughout history 4% to 6% a year.
    0:18:13 Well, okay, if you can get leverage on something, if you can borrow 80% and it goes up 4%, then
    0:18:18 effectively you’re getting a 15% or 20% return on your equity capital.
    0:18:19 That’s the down payment.
    0:18:20 That’s good debt.
    0:18:23 If it’s a low interest rate, right?
    0:18:23 So what do you need?
    0:18:26 You need someone who understands finance in your kitchen cabinet.
    0:18:32 You need to be very careful around debt and you need to always ask yourself, is this good
    0:18:32 debt?
    0:18:33 Is this good debt?
    0:18:34 What is the interest rate?
    0:18:36 All credit card debt is bad debt.
    0:18:39 Sometimes you want to take out debt to get rid of debt.
    0:18:45 Sometimes you want to take out a home equity line at 8% to pay off your 18% credit card
    0:18:45 debt.
    0:18:47 So sometimes you want to use debt to pay off other debt.
    0:18:51 Real, there’s real nuance here.
    0:18:53 And you need someone who understands debt.
    0:18:55 But the key question is not whether debt is good or bad.
    0:18:58 It’s whether this is good debt versus bad debt.
    0:19:00 And for that, you need people to understand your situation.
    0:19:01 We’ll give it to you straight.
    0:19:05 But in general, you want to be very, you know, it just fucking breaks my heart.
    0:19:09 Buy now, pay later on burritos so I can now finance a burrito.
    0:19:14 If you need to finance your coffee or a burrito, that is bad debt because they will figure out
    0:19:15 a way to charge you more.
    0:19:19 And if you’re late on your payments, huge, hugely punitive penalty is I think I read an
    0:19:23 article saying, you know, these BNPL companies have now figured out a way to sell you a $100
    0:19:24 burrito.
    0:19:29 And I think when you’re at the counter of a specialty retailer going to Coachella and
    0:19:34 you get automatic credit that says, oh, you want to spend $400 instead of $200?
    0:19:37 Ask yourself, okay, if I don’t have the money right now, is this a really good idea?
    0:19:42 Is the incremental outfit at Coachella going to pay off?
    0:19:44 I mean, there’s different types of payoff.
    0:19:45 You might look fabulous.
    0:19:46 You might look fabulous.
    0:19:49 But I think generally speaking, in consumption, you don’t want to go into debt.
    0:19:56 You want to use debt kind of only for things that might grow in value.
    0:19:59 Another thing that’s just so sad, 40% of Americans have medical or dental debt.
    0:20:04 How can we be in the most prosperous nation when almost one in two households have the burden
    0:20:04 of medical debt?
    0:20:07 That’s the kind of debt you can’t avoid.
    0:20:08 You don’t have the money.
    0:20:09 Someone gets sick.
    0:20:14 By the way, we should absolutely lower the age for Medicare from 65 by two years every year
    0:20:17 and then boom, in 30 years, you have socialized or nationalized medicine.
    0:20:19 We’re the only G7 country that doesn’t have it.
    0:20:23 It’s an absolute tax parasite in our society.
    0:20:25 Sure, there’s probably some additional innovation, but it’s just not worth it.
    0:20:31 And that would give us the chance to slowly but surely let the industrial complex that makes
    0:20:36 huge amounts of money off of people suffering in debt give them time to adjust.
    0:20:37 Anyway, it’s not what you asked.
    0:20:39 It’s not whether debt is good or bad.
    0:20:40 It’s what type of debt.
    0:20:42 You need someone to help you discern good debt from bad debt.
    0:20:43 Thanks very much for the question.
    0:20:46 That’s all for this episode.
    0:20:50 If you’d like to submit a question, please email a voice recording to officehours at
    0:20:51 prop2media.com.
    0:20:54 Again, that’s officehours at prop2media.com.
    0:20:59 Or if you prefer to ask on Reddit, just post your question on the Scott Galloway subreddit,
    0:21:02 and we just might feature it in our next Reddit hotline segment.
    0:21:15 This episode was produced by Jennifer Sanchez.
    0:21:16 Our intern is Dan Shallon.
    0:21:19 Drew Burrows is our technical director.
    0:21:22 Thank you for listening to the Prop G pod from the Vox Media Podcast Network.
    0:21:26 We will catch you on Saturday for No Mercy, No Malice, as read by George Hahn.
    0:21:32 And please follow our Prop G Markets pod wherever you get your pods for new episodes every Monday
    0:21:33 and Thursday.

    Scott shares his updated take on whether AI is truly coming for our jobs. Then, he offers tips for planning a meaningful guys’ trip that deepens friendships. 

    And in our Reddit Hotline segment, Scott responds to a listener asking about when it is smart to take on personal debt to level up your life.

    Want to be featured in a future episode? Send a voice recording to officehours@profgmedia.com, or drop your question in the r/ScottGalloway subreddit.

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

  • Planet Money complains. To learn.

    On today’s show: we’re … venting.

    We at Planet Money are an ensemble show – each with different curiosities and styles. But we recently realized many of us have something in common: We’re annoyed consumers.

    So we’re going to get ranty … but then try to understand the people annoying us. Like stingy coffee shops, manufacturers that don’t design things for repair … and stores that send way too many emails every day.

    Along the way, we learn a very sad thing about satisfaction and the future of skilled labor in the U.S.

    (Also, we should all just stop using umbrellas. They have negative consumption externalities. Come on people.)

    This episode was produced by James Sneed. It was edited by Marianne McCune, fact-checked by Sierra Juarez, and engineered by James Willetts. Alex Goldmark is our executive producer.

    Find more Planet Money: Facebook / Instagram / TikTok / Our weekly Newsletter.

    Listen free at these links: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, the NPR app or anywhere you get podcasts.

    Help support Planet Money and hear our bonus episodes by subscribing to Planet Money+ in Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org/planetmoney.

    Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    NPR Privacy Policy

  • #226 Garry Tan: Billion-Dollar Misfits — Inside Y Combinator’s Startup Formula

    AI transcript
    0:00:15 The world is full of problems, like why are people sort of retired in place, pulling down, you know, insane, by average American standards, absolutely insane salaries to build software that, you know, doesn’t change, doesn’t get better.
    0:00:22 You know, sometimes I sit there and I run into a bug, whether it’s a Google product or an Apple product or, you know, Facebook or whatever.
    0:00:32 I’m like, this is an obvious bug. And I know that there are teams out there, there are people getting paid millions of dollars a year to make some of the worst software.
    0:00:36 And it will never get fixed because people don’t care. No one’s paying attention.
    0:00:43 That’s just one symptom out of a great many that is, you know, the result of basically treating people like, you know, hoarded resources.
    0:00:46 The world is full of problems. Let’s go solve those things.
    0:00:58 Welcome to The Knowledge Project. I’m your host, Shane Parrish.
    0:01:05 In a world where knowledge is power, this podcast is your toolkit for mastering the best of what other people have already figured out.
    0:01:14 If you want to take your learning to the next level, consider joining our membership program at fs.blog.com.
    0:01:26 As a member, you’ll get my personal reflections at the end of every episode, early access to episodes, no ads, including this, exclusive content, hand-edited transcripts, and so much more.
    0:01:28 Check out the link in the show notes for more.
    0:01:35 Today, we’re pulling back the curtain on one of the most powerful forces in the tech and venture capital world, Y Combinator.
    0:01:46 With less than a 1% acceptance rate and a track record that includes 60% of the last decade’s unicorn startups, YC has shaped the startup world as we know it.
    0:01:57 Gary Tan, president of Y Combinator, joins us to break down what separates transformative founders from the rest and why so many ambitious entrepreneurs still get it wrong.
    0:02:05 We’ll explore the traits that matter the most, the numbers behind billion-dollar companies, and why earnestness often beats raw ambition.
    0:02:12 But there’s a seismic shift happening in venture capital, and AI is at the center of it.
    0:02:21 We’ll dig into how artificial intelligence is reshaping startups from idea generation to regulation and what it means for the next wave of innovation.
    0:02:32 If you’re curious about Silicon Valley’s secrets, the present and the future of AI, or how true innovation gets funded, this conversation is for you.
    0:02:35 It’s time to listen and learn.
    0:02:42 I want to start with what makes Y Combinator so successful.
    0:02:48 I guess I can’t talk about YC without talking about Paul Graham and Jessica Livingston.
    0:02:52 I mean, it started because they’re remarkable people.
    0:03:06 And, you know, Paul, when he started his company, I don’t think he ever had the idea that he would ever become someone who created a thing like YC.
    0:03:13 He was just trying to help people and sort of follow his own interests, I think.
    0:03:21 He just said, I know how to make products and make software and make them in a way that people can use them.
    0:03:32 And then after he actually sold that company, ViaWeb, it was one of the first, you know, to say we have Shopify, ViaWeb was sort of like the very first version of it.
    0:03:39 He actually basically created the first web browser-based program.
    0:03:47 So he was one of the first people to hook up a web request to an actual program in Unix.
    0:03:51 You know, today we call it CGI Bin or, you know, all these different things.
    0:04:06 But, you know, he was so early on the web that, you know, it was a new idea to make software for the web that didn’t require like some desktop thing that you had to use to configure the website.
    0:04:16 And so I think he’s just always been an autodidact, a really great engineer, and then just a polymath.
    0:04:19 So I think that that’s what really made YC.
    0:04:20 I mean, he wrote essays.
    0:04:26 He sort of attracted all the people in the world who wanted to do the thing that he wanted to do.
    0:04:36 And so I think Paul Graham and his essays became a shelling point for people who this new thing that could really happen in the world.
    0:04:39 And, you know, that started very early.
    0:04:43 I mean, I think it started literally with the web itself.
    0:04:53 And, you know, that’s why in 2005 he was able to get hundreds to thousands of really amazing applications from people who wanted to do what he did.
    0:04:56 And then the magic is it’s only a 10-week program.
    0:05:02 I think he had only a dozen people in that very first program in 2005.
    0:05:07 And then out of that very first program, Sam Altman went through it.
    0:05:10 And Sam, I guess it’s interesting.
    0:05:20 I mean, if you have a draw that is very profound, it will draw out of the world the people who that speaks to those people.
    0:05:27 And so you end up needing in society these like sort of shelling points for certain ideas.
    0:05:39 And then that, you know, the idea that someone could sit down in front of a computer and create a piece of software that a billion people could use turned out to be very contrarian and very right.
    0:05:50 And so, you know, today I think of YC as really, it’s actually, you know, software events and media.
    0:05:55 And, you know, I think you’ve had Naval Ravikant on before.
    0:06:04 And, you know, I think I remember distinctly Naval talking about like those are the few forms of extreme leverage you have in the world.
    0:06:08 And so, you know, I think Y Combinator is this crazy thing.
    0:06:17 It’s like when people realize they could start a startup, they went on Google and they searched and they found Paul’s essays.
    0:06:21 And then through his essays, they found Y Combinator.
    0:06:30 And then YC started funding people like, you know, Steve Huffman, who ended up creating Reddit in that very first batch and selling that to Condé Nast.
    0:06:40 And, you know, Dropbox, then Airbnb, then, you know, today, you know, Coinbase, you know, DoorDash.
    0:06:44 There are just so many companies that, you know, are incredible.
    0:06:53 I mean, Airbnb is this insane marketplace that houses way more people on any given night than, you know, the biggest hotel chains in the world.
    0:06:55 And it’s like, on the one hand, unimaginable.
    0:06:59 On the other hand, like, that’s the kind of thing that you can do.
    0:07:02 Like, you can just, you know, do things, which is wild.
    0:07:05 And so, I think that that’s why it works.
    0:07:11 It’s, we attract people who want to create those things and then we give them money.
    0:07:16 And then more importantly, I think the know-how is we give it away for free.
    0:07:18 Go deeper on that.
    0:07:36 Earlier, just now, we were chatting about this podcast setup, but we spend a lot of time writing essays and putting out content on our YouTube channels and just trying to teach people, you know, how do you actually do this stuff?
    0:07:42 There’s like a lot of mechanical knowledge about how do you incorporate or how do you raise money for the first time?
    0:07:45 And all of that is out there for free.
    0:07:53 And, you know, on the other hand, I think of doing YC, being in the program, it’s a 10-week program.
    0:07:55 We make everyone come to San Francisco now.
    0:08:12 At the end of it, it culminates in people raising, you know, sort of the median raise is about a million to a million and a half bucks for, you know, sometimes teams that are two or three people, just an idea starting at, you know, at the beginning of that.
    0:08:14 So, that’s the demo day, is that the, yeah.
    0:08:22 And yeah, we have, you know, I think we have about a billion dollars a year in, you know, funding that comes into YC companies.
    0:08:27 And that’s because the acceptance rate to get into YC is only 1%.
    0:08:29 So, let me get this straight.
    0:08:32 You have, I think I read somewhere, 40,000 applications a year.
    0:08:35 Yeah, I think it’s close to 70,000, 80,000 at this point.
    0:08:37 How do you filter those?
    0:08:50 Well, we ourselves use software, but we also have 13 general partners who actually read applications and we watch the one-minute video you post.
    0:08:56 And, you know, the most important thing to me is that I want us to try the products, right?
    0:09:02 You know, sure, we can use the resume and, you know, people’s careers and where they went to school.
    0:09:04 You know, we’re not going to throw that out.
    0:09:06 Like, it’s a factor in anything.
    0:09:11 But the most important thing to me is not necessarily the biography.
    0:09:14 It’s actually, you know, what have you built?
    0:09:15 What can you build?
    0:09:16 Go deeper on the software thing.
    0:09:20 I don’t think I’ve heard that before that you guys, obviously, you have to use software.
    0:09:22 But what does the software do?
    0:09:23 How does it filter?
    0:09:29 Yeah, I mean, ultimately, the best thing that we can do is actually brute force read.
    0:09:38 And on average, I think a group partner will read something like 1,000 to 1,500 applications for that cycle that they’re working.
    0:09:47 So the best thing we can do is, like, not – it is basically, like, humans trying to make decisions, you know,
    0:09:51 which is maybe a little antithetical to, you know, the broader thing right now.
    0:09:54 And now it’s, you know, let’s just use AI for everything.
    0:09:58 But I think that the human element is still very important.
    0:10:01 Most mornings, I start my day with a smoothie.
    0:10:04 It’s a secret recipe the kids and I call the Tom Brady.
    0:10:09 I actually shared the full recipe in episode 191 with Dr. Rhonda Patrick.
    0:10:12 One thing that hasn’t changed since then, protein is a must.
    0:10:20 These days, I build my foundation around what Momentus calls the Momentus 3, protein, creatine, and omega-3s.
    0:10:27 I take them daily because they support everything – focus, energy, recovery, and long-term health.
    0:10:31 Most people don’t get enough of any of these things through diet alone.
    0:10:34 What makes Momentus different is their quality.
    0:10:36 Their whey protein isolate is grass-fed.
    0:10:40 Their creatine uses Creopure, the purest form available.
    0:10:44 And their omega-3s are sourced for maximum bioavailability.
    0:10:46 So your body actually uses what you take.
    0:10:52 No fillers, no artificial ingredients, just what your body needs, backed by science.
    0:10:58 Head to livemomentus.com and use code KNOWLEDGEPROJECT for 35% off your first subscription.
    0:11:04 That’s code KNOWLEDGEPROJECT at livemomentus.com for 35% off your first subscription.
    0:11:40 And then at the end, you sort of like, I guess the last filter is like this 10-minute interview.
    0:11:46 So what do you ask in 10 minutes to determine if somebody’s going to be part of Black Combinator?
    0:11:54 I guess the surprising thing that has worked over and over again, ultimately, is in those 10 minutes,
    0:11:59 either you learn a lot about both the founders and the market, or you don’t.
    0:12:03 So we’re looking for incredibly crisp communication.
    0:12:06 So I want to know, you know, what is it?
    0:12:13 And, you know, often the first thing I ask is not just what is it, but why are you working on it?
    0:12:16 Like, I want to sort of understand where did this come from?
    0:12:17 Did you just read about it on the internet?
    0:12:23 Or a much better answer is, you know, well, I spent a year working on this,
    0:12:27 and I got all the way to the edge of, you know, what people know about this thing.
    0:12:35 And, you know, what’s cool about, you know, the biographical is that then it invites more questions, right?
    0:12:38 It’s the best interviews in 10 minutes.
    0:12:40 Like, you learn about an entire market.
    0:12:46 You learn about a set of people that, you know, normally you might not ever hear of.
    0:12:48 It’s like you’re traveling.
    0:12:54 It’s like you’re traveling the idea maze with the people you’re talking to.
    0:12:55 This is all over Zoom.
    0:13:00 And, you know, at the end of those 10 minutes, like, sometimes the 10 minutes becomes 15.
    0:13:06 Like, you want to talk to people longer because that’s what a great interview feels like to me.
    0:13:11 It feels like I’m a cat and I see a little yarn and I’m just pulling on the yarn.
    0:13:15 I’m just pulling on the thread because it’s like this, you know, there’s something here.
    0:13:21 This person understands something about the world that, you know, actually makes sense to me.
    0:13:30 And I think what we’re looking for is actual signal that there’s a real problem to be solved.
    0:13:34 There are people on that end who are willing to pay.
    0:13:53 And then, you know, working backwards, what a great startup ultimately is, is something real that people are willing to pay for that probably has durable moats that, you know, it doesn’t mean that, you know, it means that that company could actually become much bigger than you.
    0:13:58 You don’t want to start a restaurant, for instance, because there’s infinite competition for restaurants.
    0:14:04 But you do want to start, you know, something like Airbnb that has network effects or…
    0:14:06 That can really scale.
    0:14:06 Exactly.
    0:14:13 Or, you know, in AI today, one of the more important things is, you know, are people willing to pay?
    0:14:21 And today, because people are not selling software, they’re increasingly actually selling intelligence.
    0:14:27 They’re like, you know, like it or not, like these are things that you could not buy before.
    0:14:36 Like, you know, probably the most vulnerable things in the world today are things that you could, you know, farm out to an overseas call center.
    0:14:38 That’s sort of like the low-hanging fruit today.
    0:14:46 And, you know, basically, how do you find things that people want and how do you actually provide it for them?
    0:14:51 And the remarkable thing is that, you know, that’s why it only has to be 10 minutes.
    0:15:05 You know, one of the things I feel like I learned from Paul Graham interviewing alongside him so many years was that sometimes I’d go through and this person would come in, they had an incredible resume, you know, they’re like had a PhD or they studied under this famous…
    0:15:21 Or, you know, they worked at Google or Facebook or all these really famous places, they had an impressive resume or they had the credentials of someone who I felt like, you know, should be able to do it.
    0:15:22 But then they had a mess of an interview.
    0:15:26 Like, we didn’t get any signal from it.
    0:15:27 We didn’t understand.
    0:15:28 Or, like, it just seemed garbled.
    0:15:33 Or, you know, at the end of it, sometimes they’re asking, like, oh, we just, you know, 10 minutes is too short.
    0:15:34 We need more time.
    0:15:50 And one of the things I feel like I learned from Paul was that if in 10 minutes you cannot actually understand what’s going on, it means the person on the other end doesn’t actually understand what’s going on and there isn’t anything to understand, which is surprising.
    0:15:52 That’s a really good point.
    0:15:53 I bet you that holds true.
    0:16:02 Do you look at people that you’ve been successful with that don’t work out and then people that you’ve filtered out that do become maybe successful and try to learn from that?
    0:16:02 Oh, definitely.
    0:16:03 All the time.
    0:16:06 I mean, I think that’s the trickiest thing.
    0:16:15 You know, I think the system itself will always produce, you know, both false positives and false negatives because it is only 10 minutes.
    0:16:17 But you have the highest batting average.
    0:16:24 Like, Y Combinator, my understanding is it’s like 5% of the companies become billion-dollar companies.
    0:16:28 Yeah, about 2.5% end up becoming decacorns sooner or later.
    0:16:34 But that would be the highest batting average of any VC firm, maybe with Sequoia being the exception.
    0:16:42 What’s interesting to me is most of the people that I know in that space are doing hundreds of hours of work per company.
    0:16:51 And you guys can’t do that because you have 80,000 people applying and you’re still the most or at least top tier in terms of success.
    0:17:00 Yeah, I mean, what’s great is I, you know, I don’t want to compete with Sequoia or Benchmark or Andreessen Horowitz or, you know, they’re our friends, honestly.
    0:17:00 Yeah.
    0:17:01 Done right.
    0:17:09 Like, we’re much earlier than everyone else because we want to actually give them half a million dollars when they have just an idea.
    0:17:11 Or maybe they don’t even know their co-founder yet.
    0:17:13 That’s what makes it more incredible.
    0:17:18 It’s because the batting average should be way lower based on where you’re at in the stock in terms of funding.
    0:17:19 Yeah.
    0:17:20 You know what it is, though?
    0:17:26 I spent five years, seven years, actually, away from YC before coming back a couple years ago.
    0:17:34 So I ended up, I think, in the top 10 of the Forbes Midas list as my final year before coming back to YC.
    0:17:41 And why haven’t other people, you know, we ask this all the time, why haven’t other people come for us?
    0:17:45 You know, I think there are lots of people who are doing various things that might work.
    0:17:55 And I guess so far, people sort of lose interest or, you know, float off and go do higher status things.
    0:17:55 Right.
    0:18:13 Working with founders when they’re just right at the beginning and just an idea is actually, you know, relatively low status work because, you know, it’s very high status to work with a company that is, you know, worth 50 or 100 billion dollars now.
    0:18:18 But guess what, like, that’s 10 years from now or sometimes 15 or 20 years from now.
    0:18:24 You know, it all starts out very low status and all the way in the weeds.
    0:18:31 Like, you’re answering sort of relatively simple questions and you’re giving relatively small amounts of money.
    0:18:33 Well, you were giving 20 at the start, right?
    0:18:34 Now you give 500?
    0:18:35 Is that the…
    0:18:37 Half a million dollars today, yeah.
    0:18:40 Has that changed the ratio of success?
    0:18:44 I think some of it is, well, we find out in 10 years.
    0:18:48 If anything, I think that the unicorn rate has gone up over time.
    0:18:53 You know, 10, 15 years ago, I think it was closer to maybe 3.5% to 4%.
    0:18:56 And now we’re around 5.5%.
    0:19:04 Some batches from maybe 2017, 2018 are, you know, pushing 8% to 10%.
    0:19:13 Some of those companies in that area, in that vintage, about 50% of companies end up raising what looks like a Series A.
    0:19:20 And then the wild thing about it is it actually takes a long time for people to get there.
    0:19:27 So, you know, I think that YC has actually flipped a lot of the, I guess, myths of venture.
    0:19:38 You know, one of the myths of venture maybe 10, 15 years ago was that, you know, within nine months of funding a company, you will know whether or not that company was good or bad.
    0:19:47 And, you know, going back to that stat, you know, about half of companies that go through YC will end up raising a Series A.
    0:19:52 That’s, you know, much higher than any other pre-seed or seed sort of situation that I know of.
    0:20:00 But about a quarter of those who raise the Series A, they do it in year five or later.
    0:20:07 And that’s a function of, like, we’re funding 22-year-olds, you know, 19-year-olds, 24-year-olds.
    0:20:13 I mean, we’re funding people who are so young that sometimes they’ve never shipped software before.
    0:20:31 Sometimes, you know, they’re fresh off of an internship, you know, it takes three to five years to mature, to learn how to iterate on software, how to deliver really high-quality software, how to manage people, how to manage people effectively, give feedback.
    0:20:37 And so the wild thing is, I mean, sometimes it takes five years for those things to come together.
    0:20:46 In my head, and correct me if I’m wrong here, there’s a bit of, like, misfit, geek, people have told me this won’t work or won’t be successful.
    0:20:51 And then when I get to Y Combinator, I’m around a whole bunch of other people who are exactly like me.
    0:20:52 Oh, yeah.
    0:20:53 For the first time in my life.
    0:20:53 Yeah.
    0:20:54 And they’re super ambitious.
    0:21:01 To what extent do you think that that environment just creates better success or better outcomes?
    0:21:03 Oh, that was definitely true for me.
    0:21:10 I mean, without that, I feel like what my – I mean, I had a good, a really great community at the end of the day.
    0:21:14 Like, it was, you know, my fellow Stanford grads.
    0:21:24 But I guess the weird thing to say is that, like, being around people who are really earnestly trying to build helps, you know, 10x more.
    0:21:30 The default startup scenario out there is not about signal.
    0:21:31 It’s about the noise.
    0:21:33 Like, you’re playing for these other things.
    0:21:35 Like, how much money can I raise?
    0:21:38 And from what, you know, high-status investor?
    0:21:42 Like, you know, some people sort of float off and they become scenesters.
    0:21:45 They’re like, oh, let me try to get a lot of followers on Twitter.
    0:21:47 That’s the most important thing.
    0:21:59 And then what we really try to do at YC during the batch and then afterwards and, you know, in our office hours working with companies is, like, when we spot that kind of stuff, it’s like, oh, no, no.
    0:22:00 Like, maybe don’t do that.
    0:22:11 Like, you know, let’s go back to product, market, actually building and then iterating on that, getting customers, you know, long-term retention.
    0:22:27 All of those things are the fundamentals and everything else is, like, the trappings of success or – and those will always feel – what’s funny is, like, in other communities, all of those things will always feel more present to hand and they’re easier.
    0:22:29 Like, you can just get it.
    0:22:35 Like, you’re, you know, on stage keynoting or, you know, even doing the podcast game, I feel, like, guilty, you know?
    0:22:36 Like, it’s kind of funny.
    0:22:41 We see that in people and then sometimes, you know, often that will kill their startup.
    0:22:43 Like, they take their eye off the ball.
    0:22:44 You know, angel investing.
    0:22:54 If you’re a startup founder and suddenly some, you know, people have heard of you and people try to add you as a scout.
    0:22:58 Like, people kill their startups all the time by that, just by taking their eye off the ball.
    0:23:05 Go deeper on that a little bit in terms of focus and how people sort of lose their way unintentionally.
    0:23:12 And then do they catch it before it starts to go off the rail or does it – it sort of just crashes and then there’s no coming back from it?
    0:23:19 I mean, it crashes and then, you know, sometimes you have to go and do your next startup or, you know, or I don’t know.
    0:23:23 Sometimes people just go off and become VCs after that and that’s okay too.
    0:23:31 Is that the difference between somebody who, like, wants to run a company and start a company versus somebody who wants to be seen as running a company and starting a company?
    0:23:37 I think that that’s probably the biggest danger to people who want to be founders.
    0:23:41 I mean, I think I’ve seen Peter Thiel talk about this.
    0:23:44 Like, he doesn’t really want people who want to start startups.
    0:23:54 From my perspective, it’s certainly much better to find people who have a problem in the world that they feel like they can solve and they can use technology to solve.
    0:23:57 And that’s, like, sort of a more earnest way to look at it.
    0:24:05 And if you look at the histories of some of the things that are the biggest in the world, they actually start like that.
    0:24:14 You know, there are lots of interviews with Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak saying, you know, I never meant to start a company or ever wanted to make money.
    0:24:18 All I wanted to do was make a computer for me and my friends.
    0:24:23 And so, you know, many, many more people kept coming to me saying, can you build me a computer?
    0:24:27 And they just, you know, like a cat, were pulling on this thread.
    0:24:31 It’s like the company was a reluctant side effect on this.
    0:24:45 In history, it seems like a lot of innovation comes from great concentration of people together, whether it’s a city or the Industrial Revolution or all of these things tend to be localized and then spread over the world, if I understand it correctly.
    0:24:47 Why Silicon Valley?
    0:24:48 Why San Francisco?
    0:24:54 And why haven’t other countries been able to replicate that success inside?
    0:24:58 Well, at YC, what we hope is that people actually come to San Francisco.
    0:25:04 And, you know, we do strongly advocate that they stay, but it’s no requirement.
    0:25:16 And then what we hope is that if they do leave, they end up bringing the networks and know-how and culture and, you know, frankly, vibes.
    0:25:20 And they bring it back to all the other startup hubs in the world.
    0:25:24 And I think that that’s some of the stuff that has actually come about.
    0:25:30 I mean, Monzo was started by now my partner, Tom Blomfield.
    0:25:37 He’s a partner at YC now, but he started, you know, multiple startups and a few of them, you know, multiple unicorns, actually.
    0:25:40 And both of them are some of the biggest companies in London, for instance.
    0:25:52 So what we hope is that San Francisco becomes sort of really Athens or Rome in antiquity, you know, send us your best and the brightest, you know, ideally you stay here.
    0:26:03 One thing we spotted is that the teams that come to San Francisco and then stay in San Francisco or the Bay Area, they actually double their chance of becoming a unicorn.
    0:26:04 Oh, wow.
    0:26:14 So if it’s one thing that you could do, it’s be around people and be in the place where making something brand new is in the water.
    0:26:24 So if hypothetically you create a new country tomorrow and you wanted to spur on innovation, what sort of policy, you got to compete with San Francisco.
    0:26:27 What sort of policies would you think about?
    0:26:35 Like, how would you think about setting that up to attract capital, to attract the right mindset of people, to attract and retain these people?
    0:26:41 I think what I want for San Francisco, for instance, is I think the rent should be lower.
    0:26:49 And so rather than subsidizing demand, we actually need to increase supply like fairly radically, actually.
    0:26:50 And that just hasn’t happened.
    0:27:08 I think I was looking at it for the entire last calendar year, I think, you know, maybe Scott Wiener had just posted this on X that literally there were no new housing starts in all of, you know, San Francisco proper for the last year.
    0:27:15 So how are we supposed to actually bring down the rents and make this place, you know, actually livable?
    0:27:32 You know, if San Francisco is the microcosm where, you know, people build the future and it is sort of the siren song for, you know, 150 IQ people who are very, very ambitious and have our, you know, techno-optimistic ideology.
    0:27:48 And it’s also where they are most likely to succeed society and certainly, you know, America is not serving society the right way if we’re getting in the way of these smart people trying to solve these problems, trying to build the future.
    0:27:51 But just continuing on the Y Combinator theme for a second.
    0:27:57 Are there ideas that you’ve said no to, but you think they’re going to be successful, they just scare you?
    0:27:59 And you’re like, no, that’s too scary.
    0:28:06 I mean, if it’s scary, but might or probably will be good, I think we want to fund them.
    0:28:12 And certainly there are things that would be bad for society, but are likely to make money.
    0:28:17 And, you know, the history is our partners are, everyone’s independent.
    0:28:27 You know, we have a process that is very predicated on, you know, if you’re a general partner at YC, you know, you pretty much can fund what you want.
    0:28:31 You know, we run it by each other to make sure, you know, sort of double check, like, the thinking.
    0:28:34 But I think we’re pretty aligned there.
    0:28:43 Like, there are lots of examples of, you know, maybe five or six years ago, there was a rash of telehealth companies that are focused on, for instance, ADHD meds.
    0:28:54 And I distinctly remember one of our partners, Gustav Alstromer, he met that team and he said, you know what, we’re not going to fund these guys.
    0:29:04 You know, it’s going to make money, but I don’t want to live in a world where it is that easy to get, you know, people on these drugs.
    0:29:11 Like, they’re ultimately methamphetamines and, you know, these are controlled substances and this is the wrong vibe.
    0:29:14 Like, we did not like the vibe that we got from the founders of that company.
    0:29:20 So, you know, I hope that YC continues that way and I think it will.
    0:29:29 Ultimately, we want people who are, I mean, ultimately trying to be benevolent, at least, you know.
    0:29:37 How would you think about, like, just the idea of spitballing if I were to come to you and be like, I’m starting a cyber weapons company?
    0:29:40 I guess some of it is like, are you only going to sell to Five Eyes?
    0:29:44 Because, you know, I really liked what MIT put out recently.
    0:29:48 They were very clear.
    0:29:54 They said, you know, MIT is an institution and that institution is an American institution.
    0:30:01 And so, being very clear about that, I thought, was totally the right move for MIT.
    0:30:08 And, you know, I think that YC needs to be a similar, you know, an institution of similar character.
    0:30:09 I like that.
    0:30:12 What do you wish founders knew about sales coming in?
    0:30:14 Oh, how hard it is.
    0:30:22 And, I mean, you know, like it or not, you know, the ideal founder is someone who has lived, like, 20 lifetimes and has the skills of 20 people.
    0:30:26 And the thing is, you know, you can’t get that.
    0:30:35 And so, probably the first conference that we have, the first mini conference we have when we welcome the batch in is the sales mini conference.
    0:30:40 And, essentially, it is don’t run away from the know.
    0:31:01 Spencer Skates of Amplitude has this great analogy that he told, you know, some companies when he came by to speak recently that I’ve been thinking a lot about, which is sales is about, you know, having 100 boxes in front of you and maybe five or six of those boxes has a gold nugget in them.
    0:31:14 And if you haven’t done sales before, you think, I really, I’m going to gingerly, in a very gingerly way, open that first box and hope, hope, hope that, you know, I have a gold nugget.
    0:31:19 And then, you know, I don’t, I almost don’t want to know that there isn’t a gold nugget in there.
    0:31:21 Like, I’m so afraid of rejection.
    0:31:32 It’s sort of remarkable how often high school and family and, you know, the 10,000 hours of human training people get from their childhoods comes up in Paul Graham’s essays.
    0:31:41 I always think about that because I think that most people’s backgrounds just don’t prepare them for a sale.
    0:31:43 It’s a very unnatural thing to do sales.
    0:31:48 But then the sooner that you acquire those skills, like, the more free you become.
    0:31:59 And what Spencer says about those 100 boxes is instead of, like, being incredibly afraid of, you know, getting an F or, you know, nothing’s going to happen to you.
    0:32:01 Just, like, flip open all 100 boxes immediately.
    0:32:05 And then, you know, you should aggressively try to get to a no.
    0:32:12 And, you know, you’d rather get a no so you can spend less time on that lead and you can get on to the next one.
    0:32:22 I mean, I think that that’s, like, a very interesting example of the mindset shift that you can read about, but you sort of need, it takes a village.
    0:32:28 Like, you sort of need to be around lots and lots of people for whom that is true, that has been true.
    0:32:36 And I think that, you know, maybe that’s actually one of the reasons why YC startups are much more successful.
    0:32:45 Like, other people give as much money or, you know, as you said, like, venture capital VC firms tend to give, you know, a lot more money.
    0:32:59 I mean, there are clones of YC right now that give, like, twice as much money, for instance, but I don’t think that they’re going to see this level of success because they’re not going to have as earnest people who become as formidable around you.
    0:33:01 Like, it’s actually a process.
    0:33:07 It’s so interesting to me because as you’re saying that, there’s something that strikes me about the simplicity of what you’re doing.
    0:33:13 And then also, like, Berkshire Hathaway, you know, everybody’s tried to replicate Berkshire Hathaway, but they can’t.
    0:33:14 Yeah.
    0:33:23 And because they can’t maintain the simplicity, they can’t maintain the focus, they can’t do the secret sauce, which obviously has a lot to do with Charlie Munger and Warren Buffett.
    0:33:28 And with you guys, it has a lot to do with the founders that you attract and you can bring together.
    0:33:31 But you have billions of dollars effectively trying to replicate it.
    0:33:32 Nobody’s able to do that.
    0:33:34 I think that that’s really interesting.
    0:33:37 And it’s not like you’re doing something that’s super complicated.
    0:33:37 Yeah.
    0:33:40 It doesn’t sound like it unless I’m missing something.
    0:33:44 Like, it’s a very simple sort of process to bring the people together.
    0:33:48 And obviously, there’s filtering and you guys are really good at doing that.
    0:34:00 I mean, what my hope is, I feel like when Paul and Jessica created YC, I went through the program myself in 2008 and I came out transformed.
    0:34:07 And then that’s very explicitly what I want to happen for people who go through the batch today.
    0:34:17 It’s, you know, it isn’t just like show up to a bunch of dinners and network with some people who happen to be, you know, it’s much deeper than that.
    0:34:28 Like, I want people to come in maybe with like, you know, the default worldview and then I want them to come out with a very radically different worldview.
    0:34:36 I want someone who is much more earnest, someone who is not necessarily trying to sort of like hack the hack.
    0:34:53 They’re trying to, you know, and I think this mirrors what you were saying from, you know, what, you know, rest in peace Charlie Munger talks about and what Warren Buffett talks about around all of these things are in the short term popularity contests.
    0:34:57 But in the end, all that matters is the weighing machine.
    0:35:07 So you can raise your series A, you can throw amazing parties, TechCrunch can write about you, all these Twitter anons can fet you as like the next greatest thing.
    0:35:12 And you could get, you know, hundreds of thousands of followers on X or whatever.
    0:35:19 But, you know, at the end of the day, you look down and did you create something of great value?
    0:35:34 Like, did you, like, did you, with your hands and, you know, did you assemble people and capital and, you know, create something that, you know, when all is said and done, solve some real problem, put people together?
    0:35:37 You know, is there real enterprise value?
    0:35:38 And that’s the weighing machine.
    0:35:49 And, you know, the way that YC makes money, the way that, you know, the founders make money, it’s all aligned at that point.
    0:35:51 Like, yeah, there’s, like, a way to hack the hack.
    0:35:56 And I don’t really know what the end game is on the other stuff.
    0:35:57 It’s just very short term.
    0:36:09 Whereas, you know, on a 5, 10, 15-year basis, like, if you are nose to the grindstone, earnestly working on the thing, you know, you will succeed.
    0:36:13 Like, I think that that’s what Paul Graham’s essay about being a cockroach actually is.
    0:36:22 And, you know, that’s why 25% of the people who reach some form of product market fit at YC do it in year five or later.
    0:36:23 It’s like they don’t quit year one.
    0:36:24 They don’t quit year two.
    0:36:27 Like, you know, they are learning and growing.
    0:36:32 I have one other really crazy stat that, like, I’m thinking about all the time right now.
    0:36:36 There’s a founder, or there’s a VC, actually.
    0:36:38 His name is Ali Tamasab.
    0:36:39 He works at Data Collective.
    0:36:41 He wrote a book called Super Founders.
    0:36:44 And I get this email from him out of the blue.
    0:36:54 He says, did you know that about 40% of the unicorns from the last 10 years in the world were started by multi-time serial founders?
    0:36:55 And I was like, okay, that’s a cool stat.
    0:36:56 Like, makes sense.
    0:37:00 Like, multi-time founders are, you know, they know a lot more.
    0:37:01 They have networks.
    0:37:03 They have access to capital.
    0:37:04 Like, that’s not a surprising stat.
    0:37:08 You know, if anything, it’s a little surprising that it’s only 40%.
    0:37:09 Like, you would have guessed maybe that was 80.
    0:37:13 But the thing he said after that really shocked me.
    0:37:25 He said, did you know that 40%, you know, of those 40%, 60% of those people, the people who created unicorns the last 10 years, are YC alumni.
    0:37:26 Oh, wow.
    0:37:28 So, I’m like, that’s crazy.
    0:37:36 Like, I’m really glad that YC exists now because, you know, even if, you know, YC today is basically a thing that is for first-timers.
    0:37:39 You know, we do have second-timers apply.
    0:37:40 We have, we do accept them.
    0:37:46 But, you know, we primarily think of the half a million dollars, you know, it really is for people who are starting out.
    0:37:48 And it’s kind of hilarious.
    0:37:54 Like, I have no product right now for people who are, you know, for my YC alums.
    0:37:56 And maybe that’s okay.
    0:38:05 You know, it’s, you know, that’s our gift to the rest of Sand Hill Road because, you know, they’re the ones who are going to be the fund returners for all of the rest of Sand Hill Road.
    0:38:16 Would you say, like, in terms of personal characteristics, it sounded like determination was definitely one of the most important outside of the company or venture?
    0:38:29 What are the other personal sort of skills or behaviors or characteristics that people have that you say you would think correlate to the, not only the successful first time, but second, third, fourth?
    0:38:29 Yeah.
    0:38:41 I mean, the number one thing that I want that comes to mind for me is, I mean, maybe it’s even surprising because that’s not a word that you might associate with Silicon Valley founders.
    0:38:43 I think of the word earnest.
    0:38:46 What does earnest mean?
    0:38:48 Like, incredibly sincere, I think.
    0:38:51 Basically, what you see is what you get.
    0:38:53 Like, you’re not trying to be something else.
    0:38:57 It’s, like, authentic, but, like, you know, even humble in that respect, right?
    0:39:00 Like, I’m trying to do this thing.
    0:39:12 The opposite, I mean, and it’s surprising because, you know, I don’t know if people associate that with Silicon Valley startups, but I see that in the founders that are the most successful and most durable.
    0:39:22 I see it in Brian Armstrong at Coinbase, like, which is fascinating because that’s definitely not the trait that you would apply to most crypto founders.
    0:39:27 And, you know, I would use Sam Bankman Freed as sort of the opposite of that.
    0:39:38 Like, you know, Brian Armstrong is an incredibly earnest founder who literally read the Satoshi Nakamoto white paper and said, this is going to be the future.
    0:39:49 And let me work backwards from, you know, when you talk to him, like, the reason why he wanted these things, like, comes directly out of his own experience.
    0:40:05 I mean, at Airbnb, they were dealing with the financial systems of, you know, myriad countries and it’s, like, international, just sending money from one country to another was totally fraught and totally not, you know, something that was accessible to normal people.
    0:40:08 Like, remittance is this crazy scam.
    0:40:15 It’s insane, like, how many fees that people have to pay just to, like, send money home or do cross-border commerce, right?
    0:40:20 So this is something that was incredibly earnest of Brian Armstrong to do.
    0:40:24 He said, here’s the thing that is broken in the world that, you know, he saw personally.
    0:40:40 I think he spent time in, you know, Buenos Aires in Argentina and he saw hyperinflation and he said, you know, this is a technology that solves real problems that I have seen hurt people and I know that this technology can solve it.
    0:40:47 And then after that, he’s just, like, nose to the grindstone working backwards from that thing that he wants to create in the world.
    0:40:50 And, you know, it’s no surprise to me.
    0:41:00 I mean, there were many years in there that I think our whole community were looking at, we were looking at someone like Sam Bankman-Fried and just wondering, like, what’s going on over there?
    0:41:08 He speed ran this sort of money, power, fame game to an extreme degree, so much so that he stole customer funds to do it.
    0:41:09 And, like, that was the answer.
    0:41:12 Like, that’s anti-earnest.
    0:41:15 Like, that is the definition of he was a crook.
    0:41:16 He’s in jail now.
    0:41:30 And, you know, my hope is that people who look, you know, if you just look at Brian Armstrong versus SBF, I’m hoping that, you know, young people listening to this right now take that to heart.
    0:41:32 It’s like the things that actually win.
    0:41:39 You know, I mean, and going back to Buffett, you know, I went to their, you know, sort of conclave in Omaha.
    0:41:41 Oh, you went to the Woodstock for capital.
    0:41:42 Yeah.
    0:41:42 Yeah.
    0:41:44 I mean, amazing.
    0:41:50 And I think those guys are, by definition, extremely earnest.
    0:41:52 You know, I don’t think it’s an affectation.
    0:41:56 I think it’s, like, it’s, like, legit and serious.
    0:41:58 Like, those guys did everything, you know.
    0:41:59 What is it?
    0:42:00 It’s their thing, right?
    0:42:05 It’s, you know, work on high-class problems with high-class people.
    0:42:07 Like, I mean, it’s, that’s very, very simple.
    0:42:09 You know, just do it the right way, right?
    0:42:10 Yeah.
    0:42:13 And so, that’s what I want.
    0:42:27 I think that if YC is the shelling point for earnest, friendly, ambitious nerds to steal something from, you know, I have a friend on Twitter who goes by Visa, VisaCon.
    0:42:31 And, you know, he has a whole book on it.
    0:42:34 I think it’s called Friendly Ambitious Nerd, if you look it up.
    0:42:40 I mean, I think that that’s what YC, by definition, should be attracting.
    0:42:47 And, you know, Brian Armstrong is, like, the best, one of the best founders I’ve ever met and gotten the chance to work with and fund.
    0:43:02 And, you know, I think the world desperately needs more people like that, where, you know, in the background, just, like, consistent, doing the right thing, trying to attract the right people, like, you know, chop wood, carry water, that’s it.
    0:43:10 He also took a big stand before it became popular, that the workplace is, like, a performance place.
    0:43:15 It’s not, you don’t bring all of your politics and all that stuff in.
    0:43:18 But he did that at a time when it was courageous.
    0:43:21 Like, it was really, he was one of the first people out of the gate.
    0:43:23 And he took so much flack for that.
    0:43:24 Yeah.
    0:43:25 And I remember-
    0:43:26 That he’s vindicated now.
    0:43:32 I know, but I remember reading, like, his thing, and I was like, oh, this is great, but, like, why are we even pointing this out, you know?
    0:43:37 Like, and then he got, like, I read the stuff online, and I was like, this is crazy.
    0:43:39 That’s the media environment, right?
    0:43:42 I thought it was interesting, anyway, that he came out and did that.
    0:43:53 And I think where it relates to the earnestness is only somebody who’s really comfortable with themselves and, like, trying to do good in the world could really come out and take that stand at that point in time.
    0:43:55 Yeah, that’s true leadership.
    0:43:55 Yeah.
    0:44:02 What’s the biggest unexpected change you’ve seen in building companies in the AI world?
    0:44:15 I think the biggest thing that is increasingly true, and we’re seeing a lot of examples of it in the last year, is blitzscaling for AI might not be a thing.
    0:44:17 What’s blitzscaling?
    0:44:19 So, I think Reid Hoffman wrote a whole book about it.
    0:44:22 It was definitely true in the time of Uber.
    0:44:42 So, you know, that was sort of a moment when interest rates were descending, and then these sort of international, increasingly international marketplaces, this sort of, you know, offline to online marketplaces like Uber in cars or delivery, or you could say Instacart, DoorDash, you could throw in, you know, Lyft.
    0:44:49 There was sort of this whole wave of, you know, sort of the top startups were marketplace startups.
    0:45:00 But also in software, but also in software too, this idea that, you know, scale could be used as a bludgeon, that, you know, the network effects grow, you know, sort of exponentially.
    0:45:07 And then because you could have access to more and more capital, whoever raised more money would have won.
    0:45:12 And I feel like that was extremely true in that era, sort of the 2010s.
    0:45:16 And then in the 2020s, especially by, you know, we’re in the mid-2020s now.
    0:45:24 I think that we are seeing incredible revenue growth with way fewer people, and that’s very remarkable.
    0:45:30 We have companies basically, you know, going from zero to six million dollars in revenue in six months.
    0:45:36 We have companies going from zero to 12 million dollars a year in revenue in 12 months, right?
    0:45:42 And with under a dozen people, like usually five or six people.
    0:45:44 And so that’s brand new.
    0:45:51 Like, this is the result of large language models and intelligence on tap.
    0:45:54 And so that’s a big change.
    0:46:01 Like, you know, I think we are seeing companies that in the next year or two will get 250, 100 million dollars a year in revenue.
    0:46:08 Really with under, you know, maybe 10 people, maybe 15 people tops.
    0:46:12 And so that was relatively rare.
    0:46:16 And my prediction would be this becomes quite common.
    0:46:20 And my hope is that’s actually a really good thing.
    0:46:28 Like, this is sort of the silver lining to, you know, what has been really a decade of big tech, right?
    0:46:30 Like, it’s more and more centralized power.
    0:46:46 You know, what might happen here is that, you know, and what we’re actively trying to do at YC is we hope that there, you know, are thousands of companies that each can make hundreds of millions to billions of dollars and give consumers an incredible amount of choice.
    0:46:55 And we hope that that will be very different than sort of this, you know, the opposite, I think, was increasingly true.
    0:47:05 Like, we have fewer and fewer choices in operating systems, in, you know, web browsers and, you know, across the board, like, just more and more concentration of power in tech.
    0:47:06 Like, two thoughts here.
    0:47:10 One, like, how much do you think that cloud computing plays into that?
    0:47:16 Because now I don’t have to buy $6 billion in infrastructure to be that, you know, five-person company.
    0:47:19 I can rent it based on demand.
    0:47:22 So that’s enabled me not to compete on a capital basis.
    0:47:24 Yeah, that was true.
    0:47:27 That was even why Y Combinator in 2005 could exist.
    0:47:36 You know, I remember working at a startup in 1999, 2000, or at, like, internet consulting firms.
    0:47:43 And these were, like, million-dollar projects because you had to actually pay $100,000 or hundreds of thousands of dollars to Oracle.
    0:47:48 You had to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to your colo to, like, rack real servers.
    0:47:51 So the cost of even starting a company was just huge.
    0:48:03 Yeah, I mean, I remember Jeff Bezos actually launched AWS at a YC startup school at Stanford campus in 2008, right, when I was starting my first company.
    0:48:07 So I think, you know, cloud really opened it up.
    0:48:12 And, you know, that’s part of the reason why startups could be successful.
    0:48:17 You know, you didn’t need to raise $5, $10 million just to rack your server.
    0:48:21 And, you know, that’s the other big shift.
    0:48:29 Like, I think in the past it was very, very common to have, you know, Stanford MBAs or Harvard MBAs be the CEO.
    0:48:32 And then you would have to go get your hacker in a cage.
    0:48:34 You had to, you know, get your CTO.
    0:48:38 And, you know, there was sort of that split.
    0:48:47 And then now what we’re seeing is, you know what, like, the CEO of the majority of YC companies, they are technical.
    0:48:53 Is this the first revolution, like, technological revolution where the incumbents have a huge advantage?
    0:49:10 You know, I think they have an advantage, but it’s not clear to me that they are conscious and aware and, like, at the wheel enough to take real advantage of it because they have too many people.
    0:49:16 And then it’s all, I mean, I think this is what founder mode is actually about.
    0:49:20 So, last year we had a conference with Brian Chesky.
    0:49:23 We invited our top YC alums there.
    0:49:26 We brought Paul and Jessica back from England.
    0:49:31 And we had this one talk that wasn’t even on the agenda.
    0:49:46 But I managed to text Brian Chesky of Airbnb and I got him to come and speak very openly and honestly in front of, you know, a crowd of about 200 of our absolute top alumni founders.
    0:49:58 And he spoke very eloquently and in a raw way about how your company ends up not quite being your own unless you are very explicit.
    0:50:02 Like, you know, I, this is actually my company.
    0:50:09 I am actually going to have a hand and a role to play in all the different parts of this company.
    0:50:21 I’m not going to, you know, basically the classic advice for management is hire the best people you possibly can and then give them as much rope as you possibly can.
    0:50:25 And then somehow that’s going to result in, you know, good outcomes.
    0:50:34 And then I think in practice, and this is sort of the reaction that is turning out to create a lot of value across our community, certainly.
    0:50:38 But I think the memes are out there and it’s actually changing the way people are running businesses.
    0:50:42 It’s sort of a shade of what you were saying earlier with Brian Armstrong.
    0:50:47 Like, you know, you can sit back and allow your executives to sort of run amok.
    0:50:57 And, you know, if the founder and the CEO does not exercise agency, you know, then it’s actually a political game.
    0:51:02 And then you have sort of fiefdoms that are fighting it out with one another.
    0:51:03 And the leader is not there.
    0:51:13 Then you enter the situation where neither the leader nor the executives have power or control or agency.
    0:51:16 And then you have, everyone’s disempowered.
    0:51:18 Everyone is making the wrong choice.
    0:51:21 You know, retention is down.
    0:51:22 You’re wasting money.
    0:51:28 You have lots and lots of people who are sort of working either against each other or not working at all.
    0:51:38 And that’s, you know, I think a pretty crazy dysfunction that took hold across arguably every Silicon Valley company, period.
    0:51:45 And it’s still, you know, it’s still, you know, mainly in power at, you know, quite a few of those companies, actually.
    0:51:50 Though I think people are aware now that that’s not the way to run your company.
    0:51:53 Are the bigger companies sort of like shaping up or no?
    0:52:03 The way that I think about this analogy is sort of like, if I’m the young skinny kid and I’m competing against the fat bloated company, I want to run upstairs.
    0:52:07 It’s going to suck for me, but it’s going to suck way more for them.
    0:52:15 I think this is maybe a function of, you know, blitzscaling and using capital as a bludgeon like gone wrong.
    0:52:24 You know, you can look at, you know, almost any of these companies, they probably hired way too many people.
    0:52:38 And at some point they were viewing smart people as, you know, maybe a hoarded resource that, you know, if you were playing some sort of adversarial, you know, StarCraft and you didn’t want…
    0:52:46 You know, the ironic thing is like they themselves were not using the resources properly either, right?
    0:52:47 They just didn’t want somebody else to have them.
    0:52:48 Exactly.
    0:52:57 I guess it felt like a little bit of a prisoner’s dilemma because I think the result is that, you know, tech progress itself decelerated.
    0:53:06 You have like the smartest people of a generation basically retired in place working at places that, you know, the world is actually full of problems.
    0:53:22 Like why are people sort of retired in place pulling down, you know, insane by average American standards, absolutely insane salaries to build software that, you know, doesn’t change, doesn’t get better.
    0:53:31 Or, you know, I mean, sometimes I sit there and I run into a bug into, you know, whether it’s a Google product or an Apple product or, you know, Facebook or whatever.
    0:53:34 I’m like, this is an obvious bug.
    0:53:41 And I know that there are teams out there, there are people getting paid millions of dollars a year to make some of the worst software.
    0:53:46 And it will never get fixed because there’s no way, like, you know, people don’t care.
    0:53:48 No one’s paying attention.
    0:54:01 Yeah, that’s just one symptom out of a great many that is, you know, the result of, yeah, I don’t know, basically treating people like, you know, hoarded resources instead of like, they should, you know, the world is full of problems.
    0:54:02 Let’s go solve those things.
    0:54:09 When it comes to AI, the raw inputs, I guess, if you think about it that way, are sort of the LLM.
    0:54:14 Then you have power, you sort of have compute, you have data.
    0:54:20 Where do you think incumbents have an advantage and where do you think startups can successfully compete?
    0:54:21 Yeah.
    0:54:28 I mean, we had a little bit of a scare, I think, last year with AI regulation that was potentially premature.
    0:54:38 So, you know, there was sort of a moment maybe a year or two ago and you sort of see it in the shades of it did make it into, say, Biden’s EO.
    0:54:50 These sort of, you know, passed a certain amount of, you know, mathematical operations like that’s banned or not banned, but, you know, we require all of this extra regulation.
    0:55:02 You have to report to the state, like, you better get a license, you know, it’s, that felt like the early versions of potentially regulatory capture where, you know, they wanted to restrict open source.
    0:55:10 They wanted to restrict, you know, the number of different players, you know, sitting here a year after a lot of those attempts.
    0:55:29 I feel pretty good because it feels like there are five, maybe six labs, all of whom are competing in a fair market trying to deliver models that, you know, honestly, any startup, anyone, you know, any of us could just, you know, pick and choose.
    0:55:33 And, you know, there’s no monopoly danger.
    0:55:40 There’s no, you know, crazy pricing power that one person, one entity wields over the whole market.
    0:55:43 And so, I think that that’s actually really, really good.
    0:55:46 I think it’s a much fairer playing field today.
    0:55:52 And then, I think it’s interesting because it’s an interesting moment.
    0:56:04 I think that, you know, basically, there’s a new Google-style sort of oligopoly that’s emerging around, like, who provides the AI models.
    0:56:15 But because it won’t be, it probably won’t be a monopoly, that’s probably the best thing for the consumer and for actually every citizen of the world.
    0:56:18 Because, you know, you’re going to have choice.
    0:56:22 Let’s go deeper on the regulation and then come back to sort of competition.
    0:56:28 How would you regulate AI or how do you think it should be regulated or do you think it should be regulated?
    0:56:29 It’s a great question.
    0:56:33 I guess there are a bunch of different models that I could see happening.
    0:56:50 You know, I think what’s emerging for me is that the two things that I think, I think the first wave of people who are really worried about AI safety, not to be flippant, but like my concern is that they basically watch Terminator 2.
    0:57:06 You know, and I’m like, I like that movie too, but you’re right now, you know, there’s sort of that moment in the movie where they say suddenly the AI becomes self-aware and it becomes, you know, it takes agency, right?
    0:57:20 I think the funny thing, at least as of today, you know, these systems are, it’s just matrix math and there is no agency yet.
    0:57:28 Like there’s basically, they’re equivalent to incredibly smart toasters and some people are actually kind of disappointed in that.
    0:57:40 And personally, I’m very relieved and I hope it stays that way because that means that there’s still going to be a, you know, clear role for humans in the coming decades.
    0:57:45 And, you know, I think it takes the form of two very important things.
    0:57:48 One is agency.
    0:57:51 I mean, people often ask, like, what should we be teaching our kids?
    0:57:58 And, you know, the ironic thing is we send them to a school system that is not designed for agency.
    0:58:02 It is literally designed to take agency away from our children.
    0:58:05 And maybe that’s a bad thing, right?
    0:58:10 Like, we should be trying to find ways to give our children as much agency as possible.
    0:58:23 That’s why I’m actually personally pretty pro screens and pro Minecraft and Roblox and, you know, giving children like this sort of playground where they can exercise their own agency.
    0:58:25 Have you tried Synthesis Tutor?
    0:58:26 Oh, yeah.
    0:58:27 Yeah, yeah.
    0:58:28 I’m a small personal investor in them.
    0:58:34 And, you know, I think that we’re just scratching the surface on how education will actually change.
    0:58:35 But that’s a great example.
    0:58:47 Like, those Synthesis is, like, designed around trying to help people have, help children, like, you know, actively be in these games that increase instead of decrease agency.
    0:58:48 And it’s crazy.
    0:58:50 So, it teaches the kids math.
    0:58:58 And my understanding just from reading a little bit is El Salvador just replaced, like, the K-5 math with Synthesis Tutor.
    0:59:00 And the results are, like, astounding.
    0:59:02 Yeah, it’s way better.
    0:59:05 I mean, the kids get involved and they’re obviously invested in it.
    0:59:12 The regulation question is really interesting, too, because it begs the question of, it’s a worldwide industry.
    0:59:13 Yeah.
    0:59:20 And so, regulating something in one country, be it the United States or another country, doesn’t change what people can do in other countries.
    0:59:23 And yet, you’re competing on this global level.
    0:59:24 Yeah.
    0:59:31 I think the biggest question around it is, of course, I mean, the existential fear is, like, where are all the jobs going to go?
    0:59:36 And then, my hope is that it’s actually two things.
    0:59:56 One is, like, I think that robotics will play a big key role here, where I think that if we can actually provide robots to people that do real work for people, that will actually change people’s sort of standards of living in, like, fairly real ways.
    1:00:00 So, I think universal basic robot is relatively important.
    1:00:07 You know, I think some of the studies coming back about UEI have not, you know, universal basic income, where you just give money to people.
    1:00:11 It’s just not really resulting in a different…
    1:00:13 I think they’ve never read a psychology textbook.
    1:00:19 I mean, just going away from the economics of it, people need to feel like they’re part of something larger than themselves.
    1:00:19 Yeah.
    1:00:31 And if they don’t feel like they’re part of larger than something, like they’re contributing to something, they’re part of a team, they’re bigger than what they are as a person, then it leads to all these problems.
    1:00:33 Yeah, exactly.
    1:00:46 And then, you know, I think that we really need to actually give everyone, you know, on the planet some real reason why this stuff is actually good for them, right?
    1:01:02 Like, I think if there is only sort of a realignment without a material increase in people’s day-to-day livelihoods and, you know, their quality of life, like, maybe we’re doing something wrong, actually.
    1:01:05 And left to its own devices, like, you know, it’s possible.
    1:01:30 So, I don’t know what the specific things are, but I think that that’s what it would look like, you know, if regulation were to come into play or there was some sort of realignment in reaction to, you know, the nature of work changing, that would be the outcome that, you know, the majority of people, if not all people, like, see the benefit in some sort of direct way.
    1:01:33 And if we don’t do that, then there will be unrest.
    1:01:36 I think that that’s one of the criteria.
    1:01:40 You know, I don’t have the answer, but I think that that’s sort of one of the things I’d be on the lookout for.
    1:01:46 At what point do you think the models start replacing the humans in terms of developing the models?
    1:01:50 So, like, at what point are the models doing the work of the humans in OpenAI right now?
    1:01:54 And they’re actually better than the humans at improving the model?
    1:01:56 Yeah, we’re not there yet.
    1:02:05 So, there’s some evidence that synthetic data is working, and so some people believe that synthetic data is, you know, where the models are, like, sort of self-bootstrapping.
    1:02:12 So, just to explain to people, synthetic data is when the model creates data that it trains itself on?
    1:02:12 That’s right.
    1:02:17 And so, I guess the other really big shift is actually test time compute.
    1:02:28 Like, literally, O1 Pro is this thing that you can pay $200 a month for, and it actually just spends more time at the sort of quarry level.
    1:02:31 It might come back, you know, five minutes, ten minutes later.
    1:02:41 But it will be much more correct than sort of the, you know, predict next token version that you might get out of, you know, standard chat GPT.
    1:02:49 Yeah, from what I can tell, that’s where a lot of the wilder things might come out.
    1:02:54 You know, level four AGI, as defined by OpenAI, is innovators.
    1:03:02 So, we have, you know, lots of startups, both YC and not YC, that are trying to test that out right now.
    1:03:11 They’re trying to apply the latest reasoning models from OpenAI that are about to come out, you know, like O3 and O3 Mini.
    1:03:17 And they’re trying to apply them to actually, you know, scientific and engineering use cases.
    1:03:27 So, you know, there’s a cancer vaccine biotech company called Helix that did YC a great many years ago.
    1:03:34 But what they’ve figured out is they can actually hook up some of these models to actual wet lab tests.
    1:03:41 And, you know, that’s something that I’d be keeping track of, like, over the next couple years.
    1:04:04 Like, if only by applying, you know, dollars to energy that then goes into these models, will there be real breakthroughs in, you know, biological sciences, like being able to do new processes or come to a deeper understanding of, you know, whether it’s, you know, cancer or cancer treatment or, you know, anything in biotech.
    1:04:15 The first experiments of those of that sort that’s happening in the next year, even, you know, in computer-aided design and manufacturing.
    1:04:20 I mean, there’s a YC company called Camfer that is trying to apply.
    1:04:27 They actually were one of the winners of the recent YC O1 hackathon we hosted with OpenAI.
    1:04:34 And their winning entry was literally hooking up O1 to airfoil design.
    1:04:49 So, being able to increase the sort of lift ratio just by applying, you know, spend more time thinking about this O1 and it’s able to create a better and better airfoil given a certain number of constraints.
    1:05:09 So, you know, obviously, these are like relatively early and toy examples, but I think it’s a real sort of optimistic point around how do we increase the standard of living and push out like sort of the light cone of all human knowledge, right?
    1:05:19 Like, you know, that is like a fundamental good for AI, you know, between that and the inroads it might make in education.
    1:05:25 These are like some real, you know, white pill things that I think are going to happen over the next 10 years.
    1:05:37 And these are the ways that AI becomes not, you know, sort of Terminator 2, but instead like, you know, sort of the age of intelligence as, you know, Sam pointed out in a recent essay.
    1:05:48 Like, I think that if we can create abundance, if we can increase the amount of knowledge and know-how and science and technology in the world that solves real problems.
    1:05:52 And, you know, I don’t think it’s going to happen on its own.
    1:06:12 Like, you know, each of these examples are, there’s, you know, frankly, a YC startup, like right there on the edge, trying to take these models and then apply them to domains that, you know, it’s kind of like, you know, Google probably could have done what Airbnb did, but it didn’t because Google’s Google, right?
    1:06:26 And so in the same way, I think that whether it’s open AI or Anthropic or Meta’s lab or DeepSeek or some other lab that wins, like I think that we’re going to have a bunch of different labs and they’re going to serve a certain role, like pushing forward human knowledge that way.
    1:06:48 And then, you know, my white pill version of what the world I want to live in is one where, you know, our kids or really any kid with agency can get access to a world-class education, can get all the way to the edge of, you know, what humans know about and are able to do or able to like sort of affect.
    1:07:01 And then, you know, sort of empowered by these agents, empowered by ChatGPT or Perplexity or, you know, whatever agent, you know, it’s going to look like her from the movie, right?
    1:07:07 Like we’re going to have these, you know, basically super intelligent entities that we talk to.
    1:07:17 I’m hoping that they don’t have that much agency, you know, I’m hoping that actually they are just like sort of these inert entities that are your helpers.
    1:07:23 And if that’s true, like that’s actually a great scenario to be in, you know, that’s the future I want to be in.
    1:07:32 Like I don’t want to be, I don’t think anyone wants to be sort of, you know, to borrow a term from Venkatesh Rao.
    1:07:38 Like I don’t think any of us want to be under the API line of, you know, these AIs, right?
    1:07:41 Like, and I think that really passes through agency.
    1:07:47 The minute a robot can do laundry, I’m in, I’ll be the first customer.
    1:07:52 Yeah, there are YC companies and many startups out there that are actively trying to build that right now.
    1:08:08 My intuition is that it strikes me as immediate progress could come from just ingesting all of the academic papers that have been done on a certain topic and either disproving ones that people think are still correct.
    1:08:20 And thus cutting off research on top of something that’s not likely to lead to anything or making connections because nobody can read all these papers and make the connections and make maybe the next leap, right?
    1:08:24 Like not the quantum leap, but like the next logical step that who’s doing that?
    1:08:25 I mean, that’s inevitable.
    1:08:29 And then someone listening here might want to do it.
    1:08:31 And then in which case they should apply to YC.
    1:08:36 And maybe you should, we should do a joint request for startup for this next YC batch.
    1:08:36 I like it.
    1:08:37 I want equity there.
    1:08:37 All right.
    1:08:49 But it’s also interesting because then you think about that and you’re like, if I’m a government and I’m funding research, that research should all be public because I want people to be able to take it, ingest it, and make connections that we haven’t made yet.
    1:08:54 And it seems like a lot of that research these days is under lock and key.
    1:09:03 So you get this data advantage in the LLMs where some LLMs buy access or steal access or whatever, have access to it, and then some don’t.
    1:09:07 How do you think about that from a data access LLM quality point of view?
    1:09:08 Hmm.
    1:09:09 It’s a good question.
    1:09:12 I mean, yeah, it’s a bit of a gray area these days.
    1:09:14 I mean, I’m not all the way in.
    1:09:19 I don’t actually run an AI lab, even though, you know, and I was not actually at one day.
    1:09:20 You run the meta AI lab.
    1:09:21 Yeah, that’s right.
    1:09:24 Not the meta AI lab.
    1:09:27 Not meta the company, but like meta as in all of them.
    1:09:28 Yeah.
    1:09:30 That’s a good question.
    1:09:42 I guess the funniest thing, my main response to all of that around like provenance of the data itself is at some point, like it feels like it actually is fair use, though.
    1:09:44 I mean, that’s all the way into case law.
    1:09:45 Yeah.
    1:09:48 Well, here’s another interesting twist on this then.
    1:09:52 Like, so the airfoil, they designed this new airfoil.
    1:09:53 Is that patentable?
    1:10:00 I mean, at least in terms of like generated images, my understanding is generated images are not copyrightable.
    1:10:09 But if AI generates not only the science behind it, maybe like we’re at a point where, you know, maybe in the next couple of years, AI is doing more science than we’ve done.
    1:10:17 Like, is that going to be copyrightable or patentable or sort of like withheld or is that public access, public knowledge?
    1:10:24 Well, my intuition would say people are just going to take the outputs of, you know, these AI systems.
    1:10:34 And as far as I know, you know, you can submit a patent and there’s not a checkbox yet that says like, was this, did you use AI as a part of it?
    1:10:38 So why wouldn’t, here’s another startup idea for anybody listening that we both want in on.
    1:10:46 Why wouldn’t somebody just read all the patent filings in the US and be like, make the next logical step for me and patent that, like attempt to just patent it.
    1:10:54 Like a one person company could literally like ingest the US patent database and be like, okay, here’s the innovation in this.
    1:10:58 What’s the next quantum leap or the next, even the next step that’s patentable.
    1:11:02 Okay, automatically file and…
    1:11:02 You’re funded.
    1:11:04 I’m in.
    1:11:05 I got two ideas.
    1:11:06 I love those.
    1:11:07 I don’t know.
    1:11:10 I think these are all totally open and fair game.
    1:11:16 And then I guess maybe going back to regulation, that’s one of the stranger things that is happening right now.
    1:11:26 You know, one of the pieces of discourse out there during the AI safety debates, like in the last year, for instance, are about bioterror.
    1:11:34 And, you know, the wild thing is, you know, basically possessing instruments of creating bioweapons is already illegal.
    1:11:43 So do you really need special laws for a scenario that are already covered by laws that exist?
    1:11:51 I mean, that’s just like my sort of rhetorical question back when people are really, really worried about bioterror.
    1:12:05 You know, I think there’s this funny example where AI safety think tanks were in Congress and they were sort of, you know, going to chat GPT and, you know, typing in sort of a doomsday example.
    1:12:10 And it spits out this, you know, kind of like an instruction manual on like, well, you need to do this.
    1:12:11 You’d have to acquire this.
    1:12:13 You know, here’s this thing you would do in the lab.
    1:12:16 And, you know, of course, like those steps are illegal.
    1:12:29 And then I think a cooler head prevailed in that, you know, the rebuttal was someone next went to Google, entered the same thing and got exactly the same response.
    1:12:33 So, you know, yes, like I’ve seen Terminator 2 as well.
    1:12:35 You know, am I worried about it?
    1:12:37 You know, my PDOOM score is 1%.
    1:12:41 Like, I’m not totally, you know, unworried, right?
    1:12:47 It would be a mistake to completely dismiss all worries.
    1:13:11 It would also potentially be worse to prematurely optimize and basically make a bunch of worthless laws that slow down the rate of progress and prevent things like better cancer vaccines or better airfoils or, you know, frankly, like, you know, nuclear fusion or like clean energy or better solar panels or engineering manufacturing.
    1:13:14 You know, manufacturing methods that are better than what we have today.
    1:13:17 I mean, there’s so many things that technology could do.
    1:13:24 Like, why are we going to stand in the way of it until we have a very clear sense, like, that is actually what we need to do?
    1:13:26 What does scare you about AI?
    1:13:28 I mean, it’s brand new, right?
    1:13:30 So, the risk is always there.
    1:13:32 You know, it’s so funny, though.
    1:13:35 I mean, I’m not unafraid.
    1:13:43 On the other hand, like, you know, this principle of you can just do things still applies to computers, right?
    1:13:52 Like, if the system becomes so onerous, like, maybe you would go and, like, let’s shut down the power systems.
    1:13:55 Let’s shut down the data centers themselves.
    1:13:57 Like, why wouldn’t people try to do that, right?
    1:13:58 And they might do that.
    1:14:02 And, you know, I think that people try to do that every day now.
    1:14:02 Right.
    1:14:03 Before AI.
    1:14:03 Right.
    1:14:11 If it became that bad, like, you know, I’m sure there would be some sort of human solution to try to fix this.
    1:14:22 But, you know, just because I read about the Butlerian Jihad in the Dune series doesn’t mean that I need to live like that’s what’s going to happen.
    1:14:28 So, you don’t believe there’s going to be one winner that dominates, like OpenAI or Anthropic or…
    1:14:30 It might still happen, right?
    1:14:34 You know, I think that there are lots of reasons why it won’t happen right now.
    1:14:35 But, you know, who’s to say?
    1:14:37 Everything is moving so quickly.
    1:14:40 Like, I think that, you know, these questions are the right questions to ask.
    1:14:42 I just don’t have the answers to them.
    1:14:44 I know, but you’re the person to ask.
    1:14:57 It’s like asking, like, I guess, will Windows or Mac win or, you know, we’re just literally living through that time where very, very smart people are, you know, fighting over the marbles right now.
    1:14:57 Totally.
    1:15:12 And then to me, though, like, working backwards, the best scenario is actually one where we have lots of marble vendors and you get choice and nobody has sort of too much control or, you know, cornering of all the resources.
    1:15:23 What’s your read on Facebook almost doing a public good here and spending, you know, I think it’s over 50 billion at this point and just releasing everything open source?
    1:15:30 Yeah, I think that, you know, what Zuck and Ahmad and the team over there are doing is, frankly, God’s work.
    1:15:35 I think it’s great that they’re doing what they’re doing and I hope they continue.
    1:15:37 What would you guess is the strategy behind that?
    1:15:47 It’s kind of funny because my critique on Meta would be, you know, they very openly make everyone, they put in everyone’s faces, right?
    1:15:53 Like, you can’t use Facebook or Instagram without, or even WhatsApp without seeing like, hey, Meta has AI now.
    1:16:01 But the funniest thing is, like, I’m very surprised that they don’t think about sort of like the basic product part of it.
    1:16:08 Like, I went to Facebook Blue app recently and I was going to Vietnam and I just wanted to say, okay, Meta AI, you’re so smart.
    1:16:12 Tell me my friends in Vietnam and it didn’t know anything about me.
    1:16:14 I’m like, this is some basic rag stuff.
    1:16:15 Like, I get it.
    1:16:19 Like, you’re already spending billions of dollars on training these things.
    1:16:31 How about, like, you know, spend a little bit of money on, like, the most basic type of, you know, retrieval augmented generation for me and my, you know, like, it’s, they’re just sort of sprinkling it in and it’s a little bit of a checkbox.
    1:16:34 So, you know, I’m a little bit mystified, right?
    1:16:38 Like, if they were very unified about it, I would really get it, right?
    1:16:43 Like, clearly, the way that we’re going to interface with computers is totally going to change.
    1:16:53 What Anthropic is doing with computer use is, you know, I think that, you know, what I’ve heard is basically every major lab is probably going to need to release something like that.
    1:17:04 Whether it’s an API the way Anthropic has or literally built into this, you know, the, you know, runtime that you run on your computer.
    1:17:07 Like, there’s going to be a layer of intelligence.
    1:17:12 Like, you can sort of see the shade of the very, very dumb version of it from Apple and Apple intelligence.
    1:17:17 It’s like sort of sprinkling in intelligence into notifications and things like that.
    1:17:24 But I think it’s virtually guaranteed that the way we interface with computers will totally change in the next few years.
    1:17:38 You know, the rate of, you know, the rate of improvement in the models, you know, as of today, all the smartest things that you might want to do, there’s still actually things that you have to go to the cloud for.
    1:17:41 And then that opens a whole can of worms.
    1:17:53 But there’s some evidence that, you know, in the frontier research of, you know, the best AI labs, it’s pretty clear that there’s sort of parent models and child models.
    1:18:05 And so there’s distillation happening from the frontier, very largest models with the most data and the most intelligence down into smarter and smarter tiny models.
    1:18:14 There’s a claim this morning that a 1.5 billion parameter model, I think, got 84% on the AIME math test.
    1:18:14 Oh, wow.
    1:18:20 Which is like a 1.5 billion parameters is like so small that it could fit on anyone’s phone.
    1:18:20 Yeah.
    1:18:25 So, you know, and that was like DeepSeek R1 just got released this morning.
    1:18:29 So it hasn’t been verified yet, but I think it’s super interesting.
    1:18:39 Like we are literally day to day, week to week, learning more that, you know, these intelligent models are going to be on our desktops, in our phones.
    1:18:42 And, you know, we’re right at that moment.
    1:18:45 So is the model better?
    1:18:46 Is the LLM better?
    1:18:50 Like what makes that model so successful with so few parameters?
    1:18:50 Oh, I don’t know.
    1:18:51 I haven’t tried it yet.
    1:18:59 But, you know, I mean, some of it is you can be very specific about what parts of the domain you keep.
    1:19:00 Okay.
    1:19:08 And then, you know, I guess, you know, math might be one of those things that just isn’t, you know, it doesn’t require, you know, 1.5 trillion parameters.
    1:19:14 It takes 1.5 billion to do an 84% job of it, which is pretty wild.
    1:19:18 I mean, that’s another weird thing of AI regulation.
    1:19:23 You know, I think Biden, for instance, his last EO was sort of this export ban.
    1:19:29 And DeepSeq is a Chinese company releasing these models open source.
    1:19:34 And I believe that they only have access to last generation NVIDIA chips.
    1:19:41 And so, you know, some of it is like, why are we doing these, like, measures that, like, may not actually even matter?
    1:19:47 It’s interesting, right, because you think of constraint being one of the key contributors to innovation.
    1:19:48 Yeah.
    1:19:56 By limiting them, you also maybe enable them to be better, because now they have to work around these constraints, or presumably have to work around them.
    1:19:57 I doubt they’re actually sort of working around them.
    1:19:58 That sounds right.
    1:20:09 I mean, I think the awkward thing about AI regulation is there’s something like $4 billion of money sloshing around think tanks and AI safety organizations.
    1:20:21 And, you know, someone was telling me recently, like, if you looked at on LinkedIn for some of the people in these sort of giant, the giant NGO morass of think tanks.
    1:20:40 Sorry if people are a part of that and getting mad at me right now hearing this, but, you know, there’s a lot of people who went from, you know, bioterror safety experts to, like, you know, one entry right, you know, right above that in the last even six or nine months, they’ve become AI bioterror safety experts.
    1:20:44 And I’m not saying that’s a bad thing, but it’s just, you know, very telling, right?
    1:20:54 Like, anytime you have billions of dollars going into, you know, a thing, maybe prematurely, you know, people have to justify what they’re doing day to day.
    1:20:55 And I get it.
    1:20:56 So many rent seekers.
    1:21:09 I want to foster an environment of more competition within sort of like general safety constraints, but I don’t think we’re pushing up against those safety constraints to the point where it would be concerning.
    1:21:15 But we also operate in a worldwide environment where other people might not think the same way about safety that we do.
    1:21:21 And then it’s almost irrelevant what we think in a world where other people aren’t thinking that way and it can be used against us.
    1:21:32 I think we’re going into a very interesting moment right now with, you know, the AI czar is Sri Ram Krishnan, who, you know, used to be a general partner at Andreessen Horowitz.
    1:21:35 And I think that that’s a very, very good thing.
    1:21:43 Like, we want people who have the networks into people who have built things, who have built things themselves, you know, as close to that as possible.
    1:21:56 And, you know, I think that it is actually a real concern that the space is moving so quickly that, you know, if it takes legislation two years to make it through, that might be too slow.
    1:22:11 And so it’s sort of even more important that the people who are close to the president and the people who are in the executive branch, at least in the United States, like they should be able to respond quickly, whether it’s through an EO or other means.
    1:22:20 I don’t know what it’s like in the States, but in Canada, I was looking at the Senate the other day and I was just trying to like, is there anybody under like 60 in the Senate kind of thing?
    1:22:26 Like, does anybody understand technology or they all grew up in the world where, you know, Google became a thing after they were already adults?
    1:22:42 And it strikes me that there’s a difference, you know, the pace of technology improvement versus the pace of law, but also, or regulation, but also the people that are enacting those laws don’t tend to, they have a different pace as well, right?
    1:22:44 Like they, our kids are in a different world.
    1:22:49 Like my kids don’t know what a world without AI looks like, neither do yours.
    1:22:52 But we do, you know, cause we’re, we’re similar age.
    1:22:58 And then, you know, our parents have this other thing where it’s like, well, we used to have landline phones and like all of these other things.
    1:23:04 And it strikes me that those people shouldn’t maybe not be regulating, you know, AI.
    1:23:05 That sounds right.
    1:23:08 I mean, I think it’s more profound now than ever before.
    1:23:18 I mean, the other thing that’s really wild to think about is, um, it’s, I, I, what comes to mind is that meme on the internet where like, there’s the guy at this dance.
    1:23:24 It’s just like, you know, that, uh, everyone else is dancing and they’re in the corner and it’s like, they don’t know.
    1:23:32 It’s like, you know, if you go any, almost anywhere in the world, um, I, you know, people maybe have heard of ChatGPT.
    1:23:35 They definitely haven’t heard of Anthropic or Claude.
    1:23:35 Yeah.
    1:23:38 Um, you know, it just hasn’t touched their lives yet.
    1:23:47 And then meanwhile, like the first thing they do is they look at their smartphone and, you know, they’re using Google and, you know, they’re addicted to TikTok and things like that.
    1:23:58 So do you think we get to a point where, and this is very like Ender’s game, if I remember correctly in the movie where, you know, you pull up an article on a major news site.
    1:24:10 I pull up an article on a major news site and at the base, it’s sort of like the same article, but now it’s catered to you and catered to me based on our political leanings or what we’ve clicked on or what we watched before.
    1:24:17 Well, my, my hope is that there’s such a flowering of choice that, you know, it’s going to be your choice, actually.
    1:24:25 I mean, the difficulty is like, well, then you have a filter bubble, but you know, that exists today with social media today.
    1:24:25 Yeah.
    1:24:28 Um, okay.
    1:24:33 So here’s a white pill that I don’t know if it’s going to happen, but I hope it happens.
    1:24:50 Um, you know, one of the reasons why it’s so opaque today is literally that, um, you know, X has, you know, or X or, you know, before it was called Twitter and Twitter had, you know, thousands of people working at that place.
    1:24:54 And, um, you know, you needed thousands of people maybe, right.
    1:24:59 Or I guess the tricky thing is like Elon came in and quickly asked like 80 or 90% of the people.
    1:25:02 And it turns out you didn’t need 80 or 90% of the people.
    1:25:06 So that’s like another, you know, form of founder mode taking hold.
    1:25:17 But, um, like it or not, you know, I can’t go into, uh, Twitter today and tool around with my 4U, like my 4U is written for me, right.
    1:25:21 It’s in some server, some place, and there’s a whole infrastructure thing.
    1:25:21 Yeah.
    1:25:22 You don’t control it.
    1:25:34 But it’s conceivable, um, you know, today with CodeGen, you know, uh, today engineers are basically, you know, writing code about five or 10 X faster than they would before.
    1:25:38 Um, and that sort of capability is only getting faster and better.
    1:25:48 Like it’s sort of conceivable that, uh, you should be able to just write your own algorithm and maybe you’ll be able to, you know, run it on your own, you know, and, and you’ll want choice.
    1:25:55 And so, you know, the kind of, um, regulation that I would hope for is actually open systems, right.
    1:25:58 Like I would want to actually write my own version of that.
    1:26:04 Like I don’t want the, the best version of that is actually like, I want to see an exp, you know, I, I won’t maybe.
    1:26:09 You want to see, uh, my, for you, I’ll go like very plainly.
    1:26:16 And then I want to be able to see, see if I can convert that into the one that I want, or I can choose from, you know, 20 different ones.
    1:26:22 Two ideas here, you know, as you’re mentioning that one, like your list could be your default.
    1:26:28 Like I want this list to be, but the other one is like, maybe there’s just 20 parameters and you get to control those parameters.
    1:26:33 And it could be, uh, you know, you could consider it political as one parameter from left to right.
    1:26:34 Right.
    1:26:38 Um, you can, you could be like happy, sad, like you could sort of filter in that way.
    1:26:40 I know that’d be super interesting.
    1:26:50 So, I mean, if, if regulation is coming, like give me open systems and open choice, and that’s, you know, sort of the path towards liberty and, you know, sort of human flourishing.
    1:26:54 Um, and then the opposite is clearly what’s been happening, right?
    1:27:00 Like, uh, Apple, you know, closing off the iMessage protocol so that, you know, it’s literally a moat.
    1:27:04 Like, oh no, like that person has, uh, an Android.
    1:27:07 So, they’re going to turn our really cool blue chat into a green chat.
    1:27:08 We don’t talk to those people.
    1:27:09 Yeah, right.
    1:27:10 I know, right.
    1:27:19 Uh, I, I mean, that’s just a pure example of, um, you know, Apple even today still, you know, they’re opening it up a little bit more with RCS.
    1:27:26 But, you know, it’s, uh, those are actually in reaction to the work of Jonathan Cantor and the DOJ.
    1:27:27 Yeah.
    1:27:43 So, there are efforts out there that are very, very much worth our, uh, attention around reigning in big tech and reigning in, um, the ways in which, like, these sort of subtle product decisions only make money for big tech.
    1:27:46 And they reduce choice and, you know, ultimately reduce liberty.
    1:28:01 It’d be super interesting to be able to have an advantage if you’re big tech and you, you’re a company and you come up with this, but have that advantage erode automatically over time in the sense that you might have a 12 month lead.
    1:28:09 But what you’re really trying to do is foster continuous, like, if you’re a government and you’re trying to regulate it, it’s like, I don’t want to give you a golden ticket.
    1:28:12 I want you to have to earn it and you can’t be complacent.
    1:28:13 So, you have to earn it every day.
    1:28:20 And so, yeah, maybe you have, like, a two-year window on this blue bubbles and, and then you have to open it up.
    1:28:22 But now you’ve got to come up with the next thing.
    1:28:24 You’ve got to, you push forward instead of just coasting.
    1:28:28 Like, Apple really hasn’t come up with a ton lately.
    1:28:28 Yeah.
    1:28:40 And then I think, uh, the reason why it’s so broken is actually that, uh, government ultimately is, you know, very manipulatable by, uh, by money.
    1:28:41 Yeah.
    1:28:43 And, you know, that’s sort of the world we live in.
    1:28:45 Do you think that’ll be different under Trump?
    1:28:50 I don’t tend to get into politics here, but so many people in the administration are already incredibly wealthy.
    1:28:51 Oh, yeah.
    1:28:52 That’s the hope.
    1:28:56 I mean, uh, we’re friends with a great many people who are in the administration.
    1:29:02 We’re very hopeful and we’re, you know, wishing them, we’re hoping that really great things come back.
    1:29:08 And, you know, uh, in full transparency, like, I think I was too naive and didn’t understand how anything worked in 2016.
    1:29:10 That’s not what I was saying in 2016.
    1:29:15 I was fully, you know, an NPC in the system.
    1:29:18 Um, but, you know, also that being said, I’m a San Francisco Democrat.
    1:29:27 So I really have a very, very little, uh, you know, I have very little special knowledge about how the new administration is going to run.
    1:29:31 Um, except that I, you know, really am rooting for them.
    1:29:37 I’m hoping that they are able to be successful and to, you know, make America truly great.
    1:29:45 Like I am a hundred percent, you know, even though I didn’t vote for Trump, uh, I am 110%, you know, down for making America truly awesome.
    1:29:50 What do you believe about AI that few people would agree with you on?
    1:29:52 It might be that point that I just gave you.
    1:30:01 Like, I think that, um, a lot of people are hoping that, uh, the AI becomes self-aware or, you know, have agency.
    1:30:18 Um, and, um, from here, the kind of world we live in will be very different if somehow the, you know, literally AI entities are given, you know, maybe the line is actually, will we have an, uh, an AI CEO?
    1:30:29 Like, will we have a company that just like literally gives in to, you know, whatever the central entity says, like, that’s what we’re going to do.
    1:30:35 Every problem, you know, you know, it’s sort of the exact, um, extreme opposite of founder mode.
    1:30:36 It’s like AI mode.
    1:30:49 Like, will we live in a world in the future where, you know, corporations decide, like, you know what, a human is messy and kind of dumb and doesn’t have a trillion token context window and, like, won’t be able to do what we wanted to do.
    1:30:55 So we would trust in AI and, you know, an LLM consciousness, based consciousness more than a human being.
    1:30:57 Like, I’d be worried about that.
    1:31:00 I was thinking about this last night, watching the football game, actually.
    1:31:03 And I was like, why are humans still calling plays?
    1:31:15 Like, yes, for coaching, but like calling players in the game, an AI, I feel like at this point with like, oh, one pro or something, we’d be ahead of where we are as human.
    1:31:17 I’m wondering if teams should try that.
    1:31:18 That’d be super interesting.
    1:31:20 Oh, that’s going to be the next level of money ball then.
    1:31:22 We’ll just try it in preseason, right?
    1:31:25 Like, or try it in a regular season game.
    1:31:30 I don’t know, but it strikes me that like, they would know who’s on the field, who’s moving slower than normal.
    1:31:36 Like all these, a million more variables than we can even comprehend or compute or end historical data.
    1:31:45 You know, the last 16 weeks this team has played, you know, when you run to the right after they just subbed or something, like they can see these correlations that we would never pick up on.
    1:31:47 Not causation, but correlation.
    1:31:48 It’d be super fascinating.
    1:32:00 Yeah, I mean, what’s funny about it is, I think in those sort of scenarios, you might just see a crazy speed up because of human effects.
    1:32:11 I mean, when you look at organizations and how they make decisions, so many of them, you know, there’s sort of like a Straussian reading of them.
    1:32:15 There’s sort of like at the surface level, you’re like, I want to do X.
    1:32:20 But like right below that is actually something that is not about X.
    1:32:25 You know, for a corporation, it has to be like, we have a fiduciary duty to our shareholders.
    1:32:27 And we need to maximize profit, for instance.
    1:32:37 And then right below that, you know, corporations or, you know, entities of any set of people, like they do all sorts of things, not for reason X on the top.
    1:32:47 It’s actually like, oh, actually, you know, the people who are really in power, you know, don’t like that person or, you know, they rub them the wrong way or…
    1:32:48 Or human.
    1:32:49 Yeah, exactly.
    1:32:49 Right.
    1:32:53 It’s like, these are like extremely influenceable systems.
    1:32:56 Your idea might be best, but I’m going to disagree because it’s your idea, not my idea.
    1:32:57 Right.
    1:33:07 And then I think that’s why, in general, we really hate politics inside companies because, you know, it sort of works against the collective.
    1:33:14 Do you think we’d ever see a city, like a mayor, then first before even a CEO as like an AI mayor?
    1:33:20 You know, I guess like now that we’re sitting here thinking about it, it’s like sort of conceivable.
    1:33:26 But, you know, in sort of all of these cases, I would much rather there be a real human being.
    1:33:27 Kind of like a plane, right?
    1:33:31 Like we want a physical pilot, even though the plane is probably better off by itself.
    1:33:32 Yeah, that’s right.
    1:33:34 And that might be what ends up happening.
    1:33:41 Like even if 90% of the time you’re using the autopilot, like you always need a human in the loop.
    1:33:46 And, you know, I’d be curious if that turns out to be one of the things that society learns.
    1:34:01 One of the crazier ideas I’ve been talking to people about that, like, I feel like would be a fun sci-fi book would be just speculation playing out on, you know, sort of how this interacts with nation states.
    1:34:07 Like, you know, China obviously is run by a central committee and arguably Xi Jinping.
    1:34:16 You know, seemingly, if you had ASI, you would only want, you know, sort of the central committee to have it.
    1:34:27 And so that might turn into like a very specific form of that, you know, it’s, you know, China might end up having one ASI that is totally centrally controlled.
    1:34:31 And then everything else about it, you know, sort of comes out of that.
    1:34:40 And then you might end up with, I mean, controversially, like, I think often they’re trying to be benevolent, right?
    1:34:42 Like if you spend time in China, it’s incredibly clean.
    1:34:46 It’s, you know, I’m sure there’s all sorts of crazy stuff that happens that is quite unjust.
    1:34:49 Just, you know, I have no idea.
    1:34:55 It’s not really even my place to like argue one way or another what it’s like to be in China.
    1:34:58 But that’s an interesting idea.
    1:35:09 It’s like, you know, that society probably, you know, unless there’s other changes there, like that’s, you can sort of count on a single artificial super intelligence,
    1:35:13 like sort of setting the, how everything works over there.
    1:35:27 I mean, probably internal to the Politburo itself, you know, they’re going to have to have all these discussions about what do we do with this ASI and who gets to, you know, where does the agency, the ultimate agency of that nation come from?
    1:35:37 Going back to something you said earlier, I think the ultimate combination, at least for right now, is human and machine intelligence working in concert where the machine intelligence might be the default and then the human opts out.
    1:35:38 Right.
    1:35:40 And that’s exercising judgment.
    1:35:41 It’s like, no, we’re not.
    1:35:54 And when you look at chess, that tends to be the case where the best players are using computers, but they know when, oh, there’s something the computer can’t see here, or there’s an opportunity that it just doesn’t recognize.
    1:36:00 And I think it was Tyler Cowen who said that, like he had a word for it, mixing the technologies.
    1:36:01 Fascinating.
    1:36:01 Yeah.
    1:36:05 And then, yeah, the question is like, well, what, how does America approach it?
    1:36:07 Like potentially it’s much more laissez-faire.
    1:36:21 And then in that case, like my argument would be like the most American version of it is that like, you know, you and I have our own ASI and like each, you know, each citizen should be, you know, issued an ASI and be taught how to get the most out of it.
    1:36:23 And, you know, maybe it needs to be embodied with a robot.
    1:36:28 Like we should all, you know, we should all be Superman in that, in that sense.
    1:36:38 And that would be like the most empowering version of a society that, of like free and, you know, free people created equal, right?
    1:36:44 And then, you know, there might be other versions and you’re, I mean, I’d be curious, like, you know, what’s the European version of it?
    1:36:53 Maybe that version has, you know, all the check marks and like, oh, is, you know, every decision has to be, you know, was this AI assisted or not?
    1:36:58 And like, let’s check the provenance on like, you know, how that AI was like trained.
    1:37:06 And I mean, I don’t know, there are all these different, there’s like a billion different ways all of these different governments are going to sort of approach this technology.
    1:37:12 What are the smartest people at the leading edge of AI talking about right now?
    1:37:16 I mean, you know, the hard part is like, I spend most of my time not with those people.
    1:37:21 I spend most of my time with people who are commercializing it.
    1:37:31 So, so the very, very smartest people are clearly the people who are in the AI labs actually actively doing, you know, sort of creating these models.
    1:37:40 But, you know, sort of the, the people who I know who are in those rooms, I mean, sounds like test time compute is really it.
    1:37:47 You know, that’s, the reasoning models are sort of the thing that will really come to, come to bear this year.
    1:37:50 Like we’re sort of under, you know, understanding that right now.
    1:37:59 You know, for now, it sounds like pre-training might have hit some sort of scaling limit, you know, the nature of which I don’t understand yet.
    1:38:02 You know, there’s a lot of debate about it.
    1:38:08 You know, will, will there be new 4.0 style models that have more data or more compute?
    1:38:18 And seemingly, you know, there’s just rumors of, you know, training runs gone awry that, you know, basically the scaling laws may have petered out, but I don’t know.
    1:38:24 So, we have sort of like the LLM, we have the reasoning, the LLM and the reasoning model are different, correct?
    1:38:30 The way OpenAI talks about O1, they’re sort of connected, but like different steps.
    1:38:30 Okay.
    1:38:32 And so, we have progress there.
    1:38:33 Yeah.
    1:38:34 Then we have progress with the data.
    1:38:37 And then we have progress with inference.
    1:38:38 Yep.
    1:38:41 Well, we just don’t have enough GPUs, really.
    1:38:48 Like, you know, I think what’s funny is like, I’m still pretty bull on NVIDIA and that they more or less have.
    1:38:48 Oh, talk to me about this.
    1:38:54 Like the monopoly on, you know, sort of the best price performance and…
    1:38:56 So, you think this is going to continue?
    1:39:01 Like these trillions of dollars of investments in AI.
    1:39:05 Basically, you know, I think you can live in two different worlds.
    1:39:08 One world says like, all of this is hype.
    1:39:10 We’ve seen AI hype before.
    1:39:12 Like, it’s not going to pan out.
    1:39:18 And then I think the world that we’re spending a lot of time in, like the world really wants intelligence.
    1:39:25 And then the scary version of this is like, yes, some of it actually is labor displacement, right?
    1:39:29 Like in the past, what tech would do is we’d be selling you hardware.
    1:39:32 We’d be selling you a computer on every desk.
    1:39:33 Like everyone needs a smartphone.
    1:39:36 You know, we’re selling you Microsoft Office.
    1:39:37 We’re selling you package software.
    1:39:41 We’re selling you Oracle, SQL Server.
    1:39:47 Like, you know, we’re selling, you know, SaaS apps like Salesforce.
    1:39:52 Like, you know, it’s $10,000, you know, per seat per year, that kind of thing.
    1:40:04 Or we’re selling, you know, classically Palantir was selling, you know, million dollar or $10 million ACV, you know, very specific vertical apps, right?
    1:40:10 And so all of those things are selling software or hardware, and that’s like selling technology.
    1:40:23 And so increasingly what we’re starting to see is like, you know, especially the bleeding edge is probably customer support and all of the things that you would use for a call center.
    1:40:37 Like those are sort of the things that are already so well defined and specified, and there’s a whole training process for people in, you know, usually overseas to do these jobs.
    1:40:49 And AI now is just coming in and like it’s, you know, the speech to text and text to speech, those things are indistinguishable from human beings now.
    1:41:06 And you can train these things, the evals are good, the prompting is good, you know, going back to what we were saying earlier, like what we’re seeing is like, you know, like it or not is actually replacing labor.
    1:41:12 Has anybody created an AI call center from scratch and now is ingesting customers?
    1:41:20 Yes, I mean, I funded a company in this very current batch that, you know, it’s called Leaping AI.
    1:41:26 They are working with some of the biggest wine merchants in Germany, which is fascinating.
    1:41:30 So, I mean, that’s another fascinating thing.
    1:41:36 Like these things speak all human, you know, they certainly speak all the top languages very, very well and are indistinguishable.
    1:41:46 And, you know, I think 80% of the ordering volume for some of their customers is entirely no human in the loop.
    1:41:49 I would love to see government call centers go to this.
    1:41:50 Yeah, exactly.
    1:41:52 It would scale so much better.
    1:41:58 I was on the hold for like three hours the other day for like a 15-minute question that I had to answer.
    1:42:10 And it’s like, well, this could be, A, it could be done so much quicker by somebody who’s not a human and probably more securely and reliably and more consistent regardless of who’s on the other end or how they’re talking.
    1:42:12 How would you define AGI?
    1:42:20 I guess the funniest thing is Microsoft, I think, is defining it when it gets its hundred billion dollars back.
    1:42:33 But I, you know, am sort of skeptical of that because, you know, I think basically only Elon Musk then would, you know, qualify as a human general intelligence, I think.
    1:42:40 Like AGI, the thing is like in a lot of domains, it feels like it’s here, actually.
    1:42:57 I mean, you know, can it have a conversation with someone and take, you know, give incredibly good wine pairing recommendations and have a perfectly fine indistinguishable from a real human, you know, sort of, or even better than human sort of interaction.
    1:43:02 And also, like, take orders for very expensive wine and have that just work.
    1:43:03 Yeah.
    1:43:04 Yes, like that’s happening right now.
    1:43:05 Yeah.
    1:43:17 So, I think in a lot of domains, and this is sort of the year where, like, maybe there’s like 5% or 10% of things that, like, it’s, you know, sort of hitting the Turing test and, you know, really satisfying that.
    1:43:24 But, you know, I think maybe this is a year where it goes from, like, 10% to 30% and the year after that it doubles again.
    1:43:28 And, you know, the next few years are, like, actually the golden age of building AI.
    1:43:29 Totally.
    1:43:41 I think, like, I’m super optimistic, at least for the next, like, 5 years, about the things we’ll discover, the progress we’ll make, the impact we’ll have on humanity and a lot of the things that plague us.
    1:43:45 What do you, I want to get into how you use AI a little bit.
    1:43:48 What do you know about prompting that most people miss?
    1:43:51 I mean, I’m mainly a user.
    1:43:55 You know, I spend a lot of time with people who spend a lot of time in prompts.
    1:44:00 Probably the person I would most point people to is Jake Heller.
    1:44:02 So, he’s the founder of Case Text.
    1:44:05 He was one of the first people to get access to GPT-4.
    1:44:17 And we think of him at YC as the first man on the moon, in that he was the first to successfully commercialize GPT-4 in the legal space.
    1:44:30 What he said was that, you know, they had access to GPT-3.5 and it basically hallucinated too much to be used for actual, like, legal work.
    1:44:34 Like, lawyers would see one wrong thing and say, like, oh, I can’t trust this.
    1:44:46 GPT-4, he found, actually, you know, with good evals would actually, you know, give, they could program the system in a way that it would actually work.
    1:44:58 And what he says, he figured out was if GPT-4 started hallucinating for them, they realized that they were doing too much work in one prompt.
    1:45:06 They needed to take that thing that they asked GPT-4 to do and then break it up into smaller steps.
    1:45:17 And then they found that they could get deterministic output for GPT-4 like a human if they broke it down into steps.
    1:45:18 Oh, interesting.
    1:45:26 And what he needed to do, I mean, I sort of, it’s sort of equivalent to Taylor time and motion studies in factories.
    1:45:30 It feels like that’s what he did for what a lawyer does.
    1:45:44 Let’s say you have to put together a chronology of what happened in a case and what a real, he’s a real life lawyer, so, which is like sort of unusually perfect to figure out this prompting step.
    1:45:56 Like, he realized that he needed to look at what a real lawyer would do and literally replicate that, like, Taylor time and motion style in the process and prompts and workflow.
    1:46:05 So, for instance, doing this type of summarization, he would have to go through and read all the materials.
    1:46:14 And then this is why apparently lawyers have, you know, sort of their many, many different colored little flags and highlighters and things like that.
    1:46:26 They just get very good at, you know, doing a read through paragraph by paragraph, sentence by sentence, and pulling out the things that are relevant and then sort of synthesizing it.
    1:46:31 And so, you know, early versions of case text and a lot of it today, I think, is still just doing that.
    1:46:34 It’s like, what is a specific thing that a human does?
    1:46:39 Break it down into the very specific steps that a real human would do.
    1:46:44 And then actually, basically, if it breaks, you’re just asking in that step to do too many things.
    1:46:46 So, like, break it down into even smaller steps.
    1:46:48 And somehow that worked.
    1:46:57 And, like, basically, this is the blueprint that I think a lot of YCE companies and AI vertical SaaS startups are doing across the whole industry right now.
    1:47:09 They literally are taking, you know, model out what a human would do in knowledge work and then break it down into steps and then have evaluations for each of those prompts.
    1:47:20 And then as the models get better, because you have, you know, what we call the golden evals, basically, you just run the golden evals against, you know, the newest model.
    1:47:25 Like, you know, 4.0 comes out, Cloud 3.5 comes out, DeepSeek comes out.
    1:47:32 You know, you have evals, which is basically a test set of prompt, context window, data, and output.
    1:47:36 And you can actually, you know, what’s funny is, like, it’s even fuzzy that way.
    1:47:43 Like, you can even use LLMs in the evals themselves to, you know, score them and figure out, you know, does it make sense?
    1:47:45 Can you give us an example of an eval?
    1:47:47 Like, make it tangible for people?
    1:47:47 Oh, yeah.
    1:47:48 It’s really straightforward.
    1:47:49 It’s just a test case, right?
    1:48:03 So, given this prompt and this data, you know, evaluate the prompt to see if, you know, and it usually maps directly to, like, something that is, you know, true, false, yes, no, like, something that is pretty clear.
    1:48:09 Like, you know, let’s say there’s a deposition and, you know, someone makes a certain statement, right?
    1:48:19 You might have a prompt that is, like, you know, is this, you know, is what this person said in conflict with, you know, any of the other witnesses?
    1:48:22 Or, I don’t know, I’m totally making this example up.
    1:48:22 Yeah, yeah.
    1:48:27 Like, this is the kind of thing that you can do, you know, at a very granular level.
    1:48:29 You might have thousands of these.
    1:48:40 And then that’s how, you know, Jake Heller figured out he could create something that would, you know, basically do the work of hundreds of, you know, lawyers and paralegals.
    1:48:46 And it would take, you know, a day or an afternoon instead of, you know, three months of discovery.
    1:48:47 That’s fascinating.
    1:48:50 How do you use AI with your kids?
    1:48:54 Oh, I love making stories with them.
    1:48:58 So, you know, what I find is O1 Pro is actually extra good now.
    1:49:03 So, yeah, actually, there’s, like, an interesting thing that’s happening right now.
    1:49:14 And I saw it up close and personal this morning looking at some blog posts about DeepSeq R1, which is DeepSeq’s reasoning model.
    1:49:22 I was reading Simon Willison’s blog post about he got DeepSeq R1 running.
    1:49:28 It’s the first, one of the first open source versions of sort of the reasoning.
    1:49:42 And so, what we just described with how Jake Heller broke it down into chain of thoughts to make case text work, it turns out that that maps to basically how the reasoning stuff works.
    1:49:58 And so, you know, the difference between what Jake did with GPT-4 when it first came out and what O1 and O1 Pro maybe is doing and what DeepSeq R1 is doing clearly because it’s open source and you can see it,
    1:50:08 is that those steps, like, breaking it down into steps and the sort of metacognition of, like, whether or not, like, it makes sense at all of those micro steps.
    1:50:13 That’s what, in theory, this reasoning is actually happening.
    1:50:17 That’s actually happening in the background for O1 and O3.
    1:50:23 And if you use ChatGPT, you’ll see the steps, but it’s like a summary of it.
    1:50:24 Right.
    1:50:27 And so, it’s, you know, I just only saw it this morning.
    1:50:29 I mean, this is such new stuff.
    1:50:35 Like, I was hoping that someone would do a open source reasoning model just so we could see it.
    1:50:37 And that’s what it was.
    1:50:41 I think Simon’s blog post this morning showed, here’s a prompt.
    1:50:48 And then he could actually see, I think he said, pages and pages of the model talking to itself.
    1:50:51 Literally, you know, does this make sense?
    1:50:53 Like, can I break it down into steps?
    1:51:02 So, what we just described as a totally manual action that a really good prompt engineer CEO like Jake Heller did,
    1:51:07 and he sold his company, Case Text, for almost half a billion dollars to Thomson Reuters.
    1:51:15 That is actually very similar to what the model is capable of doing on its own in a reasoning model.
    1:51:20 And that’s what it’s doing when it’s doing, like, test time compute.
    1:51:24 It’s actually just spending more time, you know, thinking.
    1:51:27 Before it spits out the final answer.
    1:51:35 So, how do you create a competitive advantage in a world like that where perhaps that company had an advantage for a year or two,
    1:51:39 and now all of a sudden it’s, like, built into the model for free?
    1:51:44 Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, ultimately the model itself is not the moat.
    1:51:47 Like, I think that the evals themselves are the moat.
    1:51:51 I don’t have the answer yet.
    1:51:56 Basically, for now, maybe it’s a toss-up.
    1:52:01 If you’re a very, very good prompt engineer, you will have far better golden evals,
    1:52:08 and the outcomes will be much better than what O3 or, you know, DeepSeq R1 can do,
    1:52:12 because it’s specific to your data, and it’s much more in the details.
    1:52:16 I think that that remains to be seen.
    1:52:21 Like, the classic thing that Sam Altman has told YC companies and, you know, told most startups, period,
    1:52:25 is you should count on the models getting better.
    1:52:30 So, if that’s true, then, you know, that might be a durable moat for this year,
    1:52:34 but it might not be past, you know, I mean, O3 we haven’t even seen yet.
    1:52:37 The results seem, like, fairly magical.
    1:52:43 So, it’s possible that advantage goes away even as soon as this year.
    1:52:46 But all the other advantages still apply.
    1:52:51 Like, you know, one thing that a lot of our founders who are getting the $5 to $10 million a year in revenue
    1:52:58 with five people in a single year are saying is, you know, yes, there’s prompting, there’s evals,
    1:53:01 like, there’s a lot of magic that, like, is sort of mind-blowing.
    1:53:06 But what doesn’t go away is building a good user experience,
    1:53:13 building something that a human being who does that for a job sees that, knows that’s for me,
    1:53:18 understands how to start, knows what to click on, how to get the data in.
    1:53:28 And so, you know, one of the funnier quips is that, you know, the second best software in the world for everything
    1:53:36 is using ChatGPT because you can basically copy and paste, you know, almost any workflow or any data.
    1:53:41 And it’s like the general purpose thing that, you know, you can just drop data into it.
    1:53:49 And it’s the second best because the first best will be a really great UI made by a really good product designer
    1:53:57 who’s a great engineer, who’s a prompt engineer, who actually creates software that doesn’t require copy-paste.
    1:53:59 It’s just like link this, link that.
    1:54:00 Okay, now this thing is now working.
    1:54:07 And so I think that that’s, those are the, like, the moats are not different, actually, at the end of the day.
    1:54:12 It’s still, you still have to build good software, you still have to be able to sell,
    1:54:19 you have to retain customers, you have to, but you just don’t need, like, a thousand people for it anymore.
    1:54:20 You might only need six people.
    1:54:22 Okay, I want to play a game.
    1:54:27 I’m going to, you have 100% of your net worth, you have to invest it in three, three companies.
    1:54:28 Oh, God. Okay.
    1:54:32 And so the first company, you have to invest half, and then 30, and then 20.
    1:54:34 So altogether, 100%.
    1:54:40 Which companies out of the big tech companies, how would you allocate that between,
    1:54:45 here’s my biggest bet, my second biggest bet, my third, from today going forward?
    1:54:54 Okay, I guess, you know, is it cheating to say I’d put even more money into my, the YC funds that I already run?
    1:54:55 But that’s a cop out.
    1:54:56 That’s a cop out.
    1:54:57 That goes without saying.
    1:55:06 I think that it’s very unusual, just because, you know, we end up, like, this is the commercialization arm of every AI lab, is what I realize.
    1:55:11 But short of that, I mean, maybe NVIDIA, Microsoft, Meta.
    1:55:13 In that order?
    1:55:14 Probably.
    1:55:15 Why?
    1:55:17 I mean, NVIDIA just, you know, has an out and out.
    1:55:20 Like, for now, they’re just so far ahead of everyone else.
    1:55:33 I mean, it can’t last forever, but I think that, you know, the demand for building the infrastructure for intelligence in society is going to be absolutely massive.
    1:55:39 And maybe on the order of the Manhattan Project, and we just haven’t really thought about it enough, right?
    1:55:56 Like, it’s entirely conceivable, like, if, say, like, level four innovators turns out to work, like, you know, it’s sort of the meta project, because then it’s like the Manhattan Project of instantiating more Manhattan Projects.
    1:56:16 Like, actually, like, you know, you could imagine, if we can, if more test time compute, or, you know, you could do the work of, you know, 10,200 IQ Einsteins working on bringing us, you know, basically unlimited clean energy.
    1:56:16 Yeah.
    1:56:23 Like, that alone will, I mean, if anything, like, that’s probably the bigger problem right now.
    1:56:25 Like, we know that the models will continue to get better.
    1:56:31 We know that, you know, the demand for intelligence will be unending.
    1:56:52 And then, you know, even going back to the robotics question, it’s like, if we end up making, you know, universal basic robotics, you know, the limit will still actually be, you know, sort of the climate crisis and the ability, the available energy available to human beings, right?
    1:56:58 And, you know, and, you know, maybe solar can do it, but maybe there are lots of other sort of solves.
    1:57:05 But, you know, I think energy and access to energy is sort of the defining question at that point.
    1:57:22 Like, everything else you could solve, like, and everything else you could sort of either, you know, if it’s in the realm of science and engineering, like, you know, in theory, between robots and, you know, more and more intelligence, like, we could sort of figure these things out.
    1:57:25 But not if we run out of energy.
    1:57:28 Okay, why Microsoft and why Meta next?
    1:57:33 I mean, I think Microsoft has just really, really deep access to OpenAI.
    1:57:37 And I think OpenAI is probably, you said public companies, right?
    1:57:37 Yeah, yeah.
    1:57:49 And so, you know, I think there’s a non-zero, pretty large percentage of, like, the market cap of Microsoft that I think is pretty predicated on Sam Altman and the team at OpenAI continuing to be successful.
    1:57:50 Totally.
    1:57:53 And then why Meta?
    1:58:00 I mean, I think Meta is sort of the dark horse because, like, they are amassing talent and then they have crazy distribution.
    1:58:06 And I think, you know, I just would never count Zuck out.
    1:58:12 I think that he, you know, it’s so crazy that it’s super smart that he is on that.
    1:58:16 You know, he’s always thinking about what is the next version of computing.
    1:58:23 Like, so much so that he probably put more money than he should have into AR and that was maybe premature.
    1:58:25 He might still end up being right there.
    1:58:37 But, you know, AI for a fraction of what he’s put into AR is likely to push forward all of humanity and, you know, and accelerate technological progress in a really profound way.
    1:58:40 I want to switch subjects a little bit.
    1:58:43 A few years ago, you met with Mr. Beast.
    1:58:44 Oh, yeah.
    1:58:45 And talked about YouTube.
    1:58:46 What did you learn?
    1:58:48 Because your channel changed.
    1:58:49 Oh, yeah.
    1:58:49 He’s great.
    1:58:52 I mean, he was very brusque with me.
    1:58:56 He said, you know, look, man, your titles suck and your thumbnails are even worse.
    1:59:07 And, you know, I think that he spent so much time trying to understand the YouTube algorithm and what people want that he just loaded it completely into his brain.
    1:59:09 And what makes a good title?
    1:59:11 I think it’s clickbait.
    1:59:16 Unfortunately, you know, unfortunately, and this is the thing.
    1:59:24 Like, when you’re trying to make smart content, it’s actually kind of tricky because you don’t want necessarily more clicks.
    1:59:27 You want more clicks from people who are smart.
    1:59:33 So we title our episodes differently on YouTube usually than on the actual audio feed.
    1:59:38 Because if you want YouTube to pay attention, you have to almost be more provocative intentionally.
    1:59:39 That sounds right.
    1:59:40 Yeah.
    1:59:43 Like we could call this, you know, AI ends the world or something.
    1:59:44 Yeah, that’s right.
    1:59:46 You know, get people to watch.
    1:59:48 But that’s not actually what we’re talking about at all.
    1:59:49 What makes a good thumbnail?
    1:59:50 What did you learn about thumbnails?
    1:59:57 Oh, um, usually like a person looking into the camera seems to help a lot.
    1:59:57 Okay.
    2:00:01 Um, and then you want it to be relatively recognizable.
    2:00:16 Like, you know, you want some sort of style that when someone sees it, you know, I mean, basically what I was doing at the time was just taking whatever frame that was, you know, sort of kind of representative and throwing it in there.
    2:00:24 Um, but when you train someone to look at YouTube, you know, back to back to back every time it shows up, like you sort of want to be highly recognizable.
    2:00:30 So you want to have a distinct thumbnail like yours with the overlay, sort of like the red.
    2:00:31 Yeah.
    2:00:38 But, you know, once I stopped posting so regularly, you know, then it sort of didn’t matter as much anymore.
    2:00:42 But if you’re going to post very regularly, that’s pretty important, actually.
    2:00:44 So, yeah, unfortunately, it’s clickbait.
    2:00:54 And then there is an interesting interaction like, um, you know, yes, you can optimize for better thumbnails and better titles for the click through.
    2:01:01 But if it has absolutely nothing to do with the actual body, as you mentioned, you will not get watch time.
    2:01:04 And then YouTube will be like, oh, people aren’t watching this.
    2:01:05 We’re not going to promote it.
    2:01:08 Because the big thing about YouTube is discovery.
    2:01:08 Yeah.
    2:01:16 And, like, we notice this all the time where it’s sort of like you just get this audience, but you don’t get to keep the audience as a creator, which is really interesting.
    2:01:17 Well, you do if you are regular.
    2:01:23 And then the other hack is be very shameless about asking for subs.
    2:01:27 And then the funniest thing is, like, subs do very little, actually.
    2:01:34 There’s no guarantee that you show up in people’s feeds if someone subs.
    2:01:35 It, like, helps a little bit.
    2:01:37 Liking helps more.
    2:01:39 Watch time helps the most.
    2:01:53 And then the extreme, like, you know, over-the-top hack that, you know, probably you should do here is you should ask for the like, subscribe, and hit the bell icon.
    2:02:02 Because if you hit the bell icon and they have notifications on, that’s the only thing that is almost as good as having their email address and emailing them.
    2:02:04 You heard it here, people.
    2:02:05 Gary just told you.
    2:02:11 You got to click like, subscribe, and hit the bell icon because you want knowledge.
    2:02:14 You want to be smart, and this is the place to get it.
    2:02:15 Oh, I love that.
    2:02:16 Thank you.
    2:02:17 Good advertising here.
    2:02:21 I want to ask just a couple of random questions before we wrap up here.
    2:02:28 What are some of the lessons that you learned from Paul Graham that you sort of apply or try to keep in mind all the time?
    2:02:35 I think the number one thing that is very hard, but is so, I mean, you can see it and read it in his essays.
    2:02:47 It’s to be plain spoken and to sort of be hyper aware of artifice, of kind of like bullshit, basically.
    2:02:52 Like, don’t let bullshit, you know, I think like it creeps in here and there.
    2:03:06 I’m like, oh, yeah, you know, I sometimes am in danger of like caring too much about like the number of followers I have and things like that, you know, whereas like actually I shouldn’t be worried about that.
    2:03:14 Like what I should be worried about is, and you know, I spend a lot of time with our YouTube team and our media team at YC talking about this.
    2:03:23 It’s like, if we get too focused on just view count, we’re liable to just, yeah, like optimize for the wrong audience.
    2:03:34 If we’re not being authentic to ourselves or, you know, if we’re just trying to like follow trends or, you know, do things that get clicks, it’s like that’s not helpful to them either.
    2:03:36 Like, then we’re just on this treadmill, right?
    2:03:43 Yeah, basically like trying to be very, very high signal to noise ratio.
    2:03:48 You know, the thing that I probably struggle with most and, you know, I don’t know, maybe some of the listeners here might feel this.
    2:03:55 It’s like sometimes I think out loud and then, you know, really, really great ideas are not like thinking out loud.
    2:04:03 They’re actually figuring out a very complex concept and then trying to say it in like as few words as possible.
    2:04:09 And, you know, the amount of time that Paul spends on his essays is fascinating.
    2:04:18 It’s, you know, sometimes days, like sometimes weeks, like he’ll just, you know, iterate and iterate and send it out to people for comment.
    2:04:34 And, you know, the amount of time he spends whittling down the words and trying to like combine concepts and say the most with the least number of words, it would shock you.
    2:04:38 And then also that is actually thinking, like writing is thinking.
    2:04:47 Like one of the more surprising things that we do a lot of at YC is we help people spend time thinking about their two-sentence pitch.
    2:04:57 So, you know, you would think that that’s, oh, yeah, that’s like something, you know, startup 101, like you’re helping people with their pitch.
    2:04:58 That sounds so basic.
    2:04:59 Like, yeah, I guess that makes sense.
    2:05:01 Like that’s what an incubator would do.
    2:05:07 But the reason why it’s very important is that it’s actually almost like a mantra.
    2:05:09 It’s like a special incantation.
    2:05:17 Like you believe something that nobody else believes and you need to be able to breathe that belief into other people.
    2:05:21 And you need to do it in as few words as possible.
    2:05:25 Like, so if you, the joke is like, oh, yeah, like what’s your elevator pitch?
    2:05:34 But like you might run into someone who could be your CTO, who could introduce you to your lead investor, who could be your very best customer.
    2:05:36 And you will literally only have that time.
    2:05:40 You know, you will only have time to get two sentences in.
    2:05:43 And so, and even then, I mean, I guess it’s kind of fractal.
    2:05:45 Like that’s what I love about a really great interview.
    2:05:49 Like, you know, someone comes in and I’m like, oh, yes, I get it.
    2:05:53 Like, I know what it is and I know why that’s important.
    2:05:55 I know why I should spend more time with you.
    2:05:57 That’s what a great two sentence pitch is.
    2:06:00 And, you know, knowing what it is, is very hard.
    2:06:07 Like that’s all of Paul Graham’s, you know, sort of editing down and whittling down in a nutshell.
    2:06:08 It’s like people do really complex things.
    2:06:12 How do you say what you do in one sentence?
    2:06:14 That’s very hard, actually.
    2:06:18 And then, you know, the second sentence is like, why is it important?
    2:06:19 Why is it interesting?
    2:06:24 Why should I, you know, and then that may well change with like the person that you’re talking to.
    2:06:34 So, yeah, to the degree that clear communication is clear thinking, you know, one of the things I did when I first joined YC,
    2:06:41 I had no intention of ever becoming an investor, ever being a partner, let alone running the place.
    2:06:43 Like I was just a designer in residence.
    2:06:53 And what I did was I did 30-minute, 45-minute office hours with companies in the YC winter 11 batch sitting in back then as an interaction designer.
    2:06:55 I used OmniGraffle a lot.
    2:06:58 And so we just sat there and designed their homepage.
    2:07:01 And it’s like this is what the call to action is to say.
    2:07:03 Here’s, you know, put the logo here.
    2:07:04 Here’s the tagline.
    2:07:10 Here’s the, you know, maybe you have a video here or, you know, right below you have a how it works.
    2:07:19 And then, you know, what’s funny about it is like some people, you know, would take the designs we did in those like 30, 45-minute things and like that would be their whole startup.
    2:07:20 Yeah.
    2:07:25 And like sell those companies for hundreds of millions of dollars years later, which is just like fascinating to think about.
    2:07:31 It’s like clear communication, great design, you know, creating experiences for other people.
    2:07:34 All of those are sort of exercising the same skill.
    2:07:36 And so that’s what a founder really is.
    2:07:42 It’s like, you know, a founder to me is a little bit less what you might expect.
    2:07:48 It’s like, oh, this is someone with a firm handshake who looks like a certain way and like bends the will of the people.
    2:07:52 Like you might think of an SPF that’s like, that’s all artifice.
    2:07:53 Like think about that guy.
    2:07:57 Like that guy was like full of shakes and like the guy was like on meth, right?
    2:08:01 Like the guy was, you know, everything about it was an affectation, right?
    2:08:06 Like he was a caricature of like an autist, right?
    2:08:10 Like we see very autistic, incredibly smart engineers all the time.
    2:08:13 But, you know, for him, it was like that was part of the act.
    2:08:14 Yeah.
    2:08:24 Like I remember he did a YouTube video with Nas Daly and I love, you know, Nasir’s great and I love Nas Daly, but I couldn’t believe the video that SPF went on.
    2:08:27 It was just like full of basically bullshit, right?
    2:08:30 And the exact opposite of Brian Armstrong.
    2:08:34 And yeah, we’re always on the lookout for that.
    2:08:36 He wasn’t trying to fool you.
    2:08:36 Was that?
    2:08:37 Oh yeah, I guess so.
    2:08:39 I mean, he was fooling the world.
    2:08:40 Because you know, right?
    2:08:46 Like you know, it’s hard to fool somebody who knows versus somebody who doesn’t know.
    2:08:47 And he wasn’t trying to appeal to you.
    2:08:50 He was trying to appeal to other people who didn’t know.
    2:08:54 It’s the same as going back to Buffett, just tying a few of these conversations together, right?
    2:09:00 Like everybody repeats what Buffett says, but the people who actually invest for a living or know Warren or
    2:09:07 Charlie or spend time with them can recognize the frauds because they can’t go a level deeper into it.
    2:09:09 They can’t actually go into the weeds.
    2:09:14 Whereas those guys can go from like the one inch level to the 30,000 foot level and everything in between.
    2:09:17 And they don’t get frustrated if you don’t understand.
    2:09:23 Whereas a lot of the fraudsters, one of the tells is they can’t go, they can’t traverse the levels.
    2:09:31 And then they do tend to get defensive or sort of angry with you for not understanding what they’re saying, which is really interesting.
    2:09:33 And then I just want to tie the writing back to what you said.
    2:09:38 You said, if you can’t get it clear in like two sentences, you might miss an opportunity.
    2:09:41 That goes to the 10-minute interview, right?
    2:09:47 Where you’re looking for, maybe it’s not the perfect pitch, but you want that level of clarity with people.
    2:09:54 And it’s really the work of producing that that helps you hone in on your own ideas and discover new ideas.
    2:09:54 Yeah.
    2:09:57 I mean, I feel like we’re in like the idea fire hose.
    2:10:01 So we’re just like hearing about all kinds of things that are very promising.
    2:10:16 And then I think the most unusual thing that I’m still getting used to is, I mean, in full transparency, I mean, probably the median YC startup still fails, right?
    2:10:29 Like, YC might be one of the most successful institutions of its sort that has ever existed, inclusive of venture capital firms on the one hand.
    2:10:33 On the other hand, like the failure rate is absolutely insane, right?
    2:10:43 Like, you know, it is still a very small percentage of the teams actually do go on and, you know, create these, you know, companies worth 50 or $100 billion.
    2:10:49 But the remarkable thing is not that, you know, it’s that low.
    2:10:52 The remarkable thing is that it happens at all.
    2:10:56 Like, it’s just unbelievable that…
    2:10:59 I think you have the coolest job in the world, or at least like warmly.
    2:10:59 Oh, I agree.
    2:11:02 If I had to pick like the top 10, like you’d be up there.
    2:11:03 I agree.
    2:11:13 I mean, it’s especially to have, you know, I pinch myself every day on the regular, like in the morning, I wake up and it’s like, oh, this AI thing is happening.
    2:11:24 And then somehow I’m filling the shoes of the person who, like, I mean, Sam Altman probably brought forward the future by, you know, five years, 10 years, at least 10 years.
    2:11:36 Like, all of the things that, you know, him and Greg Brockman and all the researchers he brought on, like, were working on, that happened, that was going to happen, right?
    2:11:45 Like, I think there’s a lot of the Sam Altman haters or the OpenAI haters out there love to point out, like, oh, you know what?
    2:11:47 Like, the Transformer was made by all these teams.
    2:11:51 I mean, some of it’s like, these teams absolutely did incredible things.
    2:11:52 Like, you can’t take away from that, right?
    2:11:55 The researchers did, you know, Demis did incredible things.
    2:12:03 But at the same time, it’s like they believed a thing that nobody else believed and they brought the resources to bear.
    2:12:04 Totally.
    2:12:10 And so recently, you know, Sam Altman came back to speak at our AI conference this past weekend.
    2:12:21 And we, you know, I couldn’t think of another way to start that conference than have Sam Altman and, you know, a bunch of his, you know, old…
    2:12:22 We had Bob McGrew there.
    2:12:26 We had Evan Morikawa, who was the eng manager who released ChatGPT.
    2:12:32 Bob McGrew actually worked with me at Palantir back in the day, but he’s, you know, outgoing chief research officer.
    2:12:34 Jason Kwan was there.
    2:12:40 He actually worked at YC Legal before leaving to, you know, run a lot of things at OpenAI.
    2:12:42 And so I had them all stand up.
    2:12:54 And we had a room full of, you know, 290 founders, all of whom were working on things that happened essentially because OpenAI existed.
    2:12:57 And there was like a standing ovation.
    2:12:58 Oh, that’s awesome.
    2:13:02 So, and, you know, Sam, to his credit, was like, you know, not just us.
    2:13:05 You know, these researchers did so many things as well.
    2:13:09 But all that being said, it’s like, we’re in the middle of the revolution.
    2:13:10 Oh, totally.
    2:13:12 This is just like, I mean, it’s not even the middle.
    2:13:23 I think it’s like, like, just after the first pitch of the first inning of, like, what is about to be, like, a great, great time for humanity, for technology.
    2:13:24 I’m with you.
    2:13:26 I’m, like, so excited to be alive right now.
    2:13:29 So lucky, so blessed to, like, be a witness to this.
    2:13:32 And I think we’re going to make so much progress on so many things.
    2:13:34 Go back to the haters.
    2:13:35 Like, there’s always people pulling you down.
    2:13:38 But there are never people that are in the trenches doing anything.
    2:13:47 I’ve rarely seen, you know, people who are working on the same problem attacking their competition like that or undermining them.
    2:13:49 Or, you know, it’s just ignore them.
    2:13:53 You know, on our end, we’re just hoping to lift up the people who want to build.
    2:13:54 Yeah.
    2:13:55 This is the golden age of building.
    2:13:56 Amazing.
    2:14:02 I want to just end with the same question we always ask, which is, what is success for you?
    2:14:13 I think looking back, I mean, growing up, I always just looked up to the people who made the things that I loved.
    2:14:18 And, you know, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, like, the people who really created something from nothing.
    2:14:27 And I just think of Steve saying, you know, we want to put a dent in the universe.
    2:14:30 And ultimately, that’s what I want.
    2:14:34 Like, that’s, you know, success to me is how do we bring forward?
    2:14:40 You know, actually, this is actually when Paul Graham came to recruit me to come back to YC.
    2:14:46 I had actually left and started my own VC firm, you know, got to $3 billion under management.
    2:14:48 Yeah, you guys did Coinbase.
    2:14:49 Yeah, totally.
    2:14:54 I mean, returned $650 million on that investment alone.
    2:15:03 You know, I was sort of right at the pinnacle of my investing, you know, as if you’re running my own VC firm.
    2:15:08 And Paul and Jessica came to me and said, Gary, we need you to come back and run YC.
    2:15:14 And it was really, really hard to walk away from that.
    2:15:16 Luckily, I had very great partners.
    2:15:21 Brett Gibson, my partner, my multi-time co-founder, went through YC with me.
    2:15:25 He actually built a bunch of the software with me at YC, you know, before we left.
    2:15:27 He runs it now.
    2:15:29 They’re off to the races and still doing great work.
    2:15:38 And, you know, I sat down with Paul and, you know, right after we shook hands and, you know, he’s like, Gary, do you understand what this means?
    2:15:53 It means that, you know, if we do this right, we, you know, kind of like I think what Sam did with OpenAI with, you know, pulling forward large language models and AI and bringing about AGI sooner.
    2:16:00 Like, YC is sort of one of the defining institutions that is going to pull forward the future.
    2:16:15 And it’s not more complicated than how do we get in front of optimistic, smart people who, you know, have benevolent, you know, sort of goals for themselves and the people around them.
    2:16:32 How do we give them, you know, a small amount of money and a whole lot of know-how and a whole lot of access to networks and, you know, a 10-week program that hopefully reprograms them to be more formidable while simultaneously being more earnest.
    2:16:35 And then the rest sort of takes care of itself.
    2:16:40 Like, you know, this thing has never existed before like this and it deserves to grow.
    2:16:53 Like, it deserves to, you know, if we could find more people and fund them and have them be successful at even, you know, the same rate, we would do that all day.
    2:16:57 I mean, and I think what are the alternatives, right?
    2:17:10 Like, I think of all the people who, you know, they’re locked away in companies, they’re locked away in academia, you know, or heck, like, you know, these days, the wild thing about intelligence is like intelligence is on tap now, right?
    2:17:21 Like, all of the impediments to being able to, all of the impediments to fully realizing what you want to do in the world are starting to fall away.
    2:17:27 Like, you know, there’s always going to be something that stands in the way of any given person.
    2:17:37 And I’m not saying like those things are equal, but they, you know, through technology and through access to technology, those things are coming down.
    2:17:44 Like, if there’s the will, if there’s the agency, if there’s the taste, like, that’s what I want for society.
    2:17:46 I want them to achieve that.
    2:17:53 In a lot of ways, we have more equality of opportunity now than we’ve ever had in the history of the world, but not equality of outcome.
    2:17:54 That’s right.
    2:17:54 Yeah.
    2:17:56 And that, you know, that’s sort of the quandary, right?
    2:17:59 Like, you have to choose.
    2:18:05 Do you want the outcomes to be equal or do you want a rising tide to raise all boats?
    2:18:09 I’m a huge fan in equal opportunity, but not unequal outcome.
    2:18:10 I’m with you.
    2:18:14 Thank you for listening and learning with me.
    2:18:18 If you’ve enjoyed this episode, consider leaving a five-star rating or review.
    2:18:22 It’s a small action on your part that helps us reach more curious minds.
    2:18:32 You can stay connected with Farnham Street on social media and explore more insights at fs.blog, where you’ll find past episodes, our mental models, and thought-provoking articles.
    2:18:35 While you’re there, check out my book, Clear Thinking.
    2:18:42 Through engaging stories and actionable mental models, it helps you bridge the gap between intention and action.
    2:18:45 So your best decisions become your default decisions.
    2:18:47 Until next time.

    Most accelerators fund ideas. Y Combinator funds founders—and transforms them. With a 1% acceptance rate and alumni behind 60% of the past decade’s unicorns, YC knows what separates the founders who break through from those who burn out. It’s not the flashiest résumé or the boldest pitch but something President Garry Tan says is far rarer: earnestness. In this conversation, Garry reveals why this is the key to success, and how it can make or break a startup. We also dive into how AI is reshaping the whole landscape of venture capital and what the future might look like when everyone has intelligence on tap. 

    If you care about innovation, agency, or the future of work, don’t miss this episode. 

    Approximate timestamps: Subject to variation due to dynamically inserted ads.

    (00:02:39) The Success of Y Combinator

    (00:04:25) The Y Combinator Program

    (00:08:25) The Application Process

    (00:09:58) The Interview Process

    (00:16:16) The Challenge of Early Stage Investment

    (00:22:53) The Role of San Francisco in Innovation

    (00:28:32) The Ideal Founder

    (00:36:27) The Importance of Earnestness

    (00:42:17) The Changing Landscape of AI Companies

    (00:45:26) The Impact of Cloud Computing

    (00:50:11) Dysfunction with Silicon Valley

    (00:52:24) Forecast for the Tech Market

    (00:54:40) The Regulation of AI

    (00:55:56) The Need for Agency in Education

    (01:01:40) AI in Biotech and Manufacturing

    (01:07:24) The Issue of Data Access and The Legal Aspects of AI Outputs

    (01:13:34) The Role of Meta in AI Development

    (01:28:07) The Potential of AI in Decision Making

    (01:40:33) Defining AGI

    (01:42:03) The Use of AI and Prompting

    (01:47:09) AI Model Reasoning

    (01:49:48) The Competitive Advantage in AI

    (01:52:42) Investing in Big Tech Companies

    (01:55:47) The Role of Microsoft and Meta in AI

    (01:57:00) Learning from MrBeast: YouTube Channel Optimization

    (02:05:58) The Perception of Founders

    (02:08:23) The Reality of Startup Success Rates

    (02:09:34) The Impact of OpenAI

    (02:11:46) The Golden Age of Building

    Newsletter – The Brain Food newsletter delivers actionable insights and thoughtful ideas every Sunday. It takes 5 minutes to read, and it’s completely free. Learn more and sign up at fs.blog/newsletter

    Upgrade — If you want to hear my thoughts and reflections at the end of the episode, join our membership: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fs.blog/membership⁠⁠ and get your own private feed.

    Watch on YouTube: @tkppodcast

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

  • Raging Moderates: Trump’s 100 Days of Power Grabs

    AI transcript
    0:00:02 Tired of staring at that crack in your windshield?
    0:00:04 Speedy Glass can fix that.
    0:00:06 Our experts will replace your windshield,
    0:00:07 recalibrate your front camera,
    0:00:09 and even submit your insurance claim.
    0:00:11 You don’t have to worry about a thing.
    0:00:14 Book your appointment today at speedyglass.ca.
    0:00:18 Support for the show comes from Virgin Atlantic.
    0:00:19 Let’s talk about flying.
    0:00:21 I do it, you do it, we all do it,
    0:00:24 but it really comes down to how we do it.
    0:00:25 When you fly Virgin Atlantic,
    0:00:27 they make it a memorable trip
    0:00:28 right from the moment you check in.
    0:00:30 On board, you’ll find everything you need to relax,
    0:00:32 recharge, or carry on working.
    0:00:34 Live flat, private suites, fast Wi-Fi,
    0:00:36 hours of entertainment,
    0:00:39 delicious dining, and warm, welcoming service
    0:00:40 that’s designed around you.
    0:00:42 Check out virginatlantic.com
    0:00:44 for your next trip to London and beyond,
    0:00:46 and see for yourself how traveling for business
    0:00:47 can always be a pleasure.
    0:00:53 It was a crisis, a fast-moving crisis.
    0:00:56 And so it’s not surprising in retrospect
    0:00:57 that the debate was truncated.
    0:01:02 But it is surprising the extent to which
    0:01:03 the decisions that were made
    0:01:05 in the early going of the pandemic
    0:01:08 departed from conventional wisdom
    0:01:09 about how to handle a pandemic.
    0:01:13 This week on The Gray Area,
    0:01:15 we’re talking about tough decisions
    0:01:16 that were made during the pandemic.
    0:01:19 New Gray Area episodes drop every Monday,
    0:01:21 available everywhere.
    0:01:26 Welcome to Raging Moderates.
    0:01:27 I’m Scott Galloway.
    0:01:28 And I’m Jessica Tarlov.
    0:01:31 Jessica, it is literally sweltering here.
    0:01:33 It’s 73 degrees.
    0:01:35 Sweltering by London standards.
    0:01:37 Yeah, but it’s, everybody’s out.
    0:01:38 It feels strange.
    0:01:41 I just had this odd sensation I’ve never,
    0:01:44 I’ve had maybe three or four times in London,
    0:01:45 and that is I’m sweating.
    0:01:47 But that feels really good.
    0:01:48 Like you’re back in America.
    0:01:49 Back in America.
    0:01:51 What’s going on with you?
    0:01:51 What’d you do this weekend?
    0:01:54 I was alone with my daughters.
    0:01:57 My husband went to the West Coast for a concert.
    0:01:59 So I was, hashtag single mom.
    0:02:00 Oh, what concert did he go to?
    0:02:02 He went to see Fish at the Hollywood Bowl.
    0:02:03 Oh, he’s one of those cool guys.
    0:02:06 No, I mean, he’s listening.
    0:02:07 So honey, yes, I do think you’re cool.
    0:02:10 He’s a deadhead who will go to Fish concerts,
    0:02:12 but he’s not a big Fish person.
    0:02:14 And I think they rated Fish three out of 10,
    0:02:16 but 10 out of 10 for the venue.
    0:02:17 They’re venue chasers,
    0:02:20 him and his friends from growing up.
    0:02:20 I’m the same way.
    0:02:22 I go to hotels, not cities.
    0:02:25 Yeah, I think that’s a great way to live if you can do it.
    0:02:27 And restaurants, it’s always nice too.
    0:02:28 Yeah, I would go to,
    0:02:30 I would pretty much see anybody play at the Sphere.
    0:02:32 I’ve only, I’ve only saw U2 there,
    0:02:33 but I would go see, I don’t know.
    0:02:36 The Grateful Dead show at the Sphere is unbelievable.
    0:02:41 So I heard there was a rash of people who got sick,
    0:02:42 like more than the usual.
    0:02:45 Like apparently there’s some threshold of people
    0:02:47 who can’t take all of the imagery,
    0:02:49 especially if they may have consumed some drugs.
    0:02:51 That’s good to know.
    0:02:52 Yeah, I don’t.
    0:02:54 Whenever I do edibles or anything,
    0:02:56 I like to be in the safety of my own home
    0:02:57 because all I can do is if I go out and I’m in public,
    0:02:59 I say something, I’m like,
    0:02:59 oh, that was rude.
    0:03:00 That person hates me now.
    0:03:01 I’m such an awful person.
    0:03:04 I don’t like that social anxiety
    0:03:05 that I have enough of anyways.
    0:03:08 But so anything especially fun with the daughters,
    0:03:12 or was it just sort of a kind of prison yard weekend?
    0:03:13 It was mostly about survival.
    0:03:16 My mom helped out a ton, which was great.
    0:03:19 And then Brian’s mom and his aunt came in
    0:03:22 so that I could have the luxurious experience
    0:03:24 of going to Whole Foods by myself,
    0:03:27 which is all that I really wanted in life.
    0:03:30 You know, when you haven’t peed alone in three days,
    0:03:32 you’re like, oh, what would be better
    0:03:35 than being in the aisles alone
    0:03:37 and getting to pick my cheese as slowly as I want?
    0:03:40 But we packed up into the car.
    0:03:43 It felt very suburban to drive to Brooklyn for a play date,
    0:03:45 which felt like a massive achievement
    0:03:48 because there was a family there with both parents.
    0:03:51 So we were like, okay, let’s just play some zone defense
    0:03:53 on what’s going on here.
    0:03:55 So we had a lot of little ladies running around
    0:03:57 and we had three parents to deal with it.
    0:03:58 And it was good.
    0:04:00 And I got my toddler to do this cute,
    0:04:02 like, girls weekend dance.
    0:04:04 So anytime I felt low, I was like, Cleo, hit it.
    0:04:06 And she’d be like, girls weekend.
    0:04:07 And so we had a good time.
    0:04:08 That is cute.
    0:04:09 That’s really cute.
    0:04:10 What did you do besides what?
    0:04:11 We went to…
    0:04:12 Were you in one place?
    0:04:14 Yeah, we were in London and it was a beautiful weekend.
    0:04:19 Saturday night, we did this thing called Bum Bum Train.
    0:04:20 I don’t know if you’ve heard of this thing,
    0:04:23 but it’s this exceptional sort of experiential thing.
    0:04:26 And you sign an NDA, so you’re not allowed to talk about it.
    0:04:27 But it is, if you ever…
    0:04:28 So talk about it on your podcast.
    0:04:29 Is that how it works?
    0:04:31 All I would say is, if you ever get the chance to do it, do it.
    0:04:37 It’s really incredibly inspiring and different and strange all at the same time.
    0:04:40 And then yesterday was all about the boys.
    0:04:44 I did a long workout in Regent’s Park with my oldest.
    0:04:48 And a couple of times he made full sentences when I asked questions.
    0:04:49 So that was very rewarding.
    0:04:50 You feel connected?
    0:04:52 Yeah, no, I’m very, very close to him.
    0:04:57 And then last night, I walked into Marlebone with my son,
    0:05:02 and we had a disproportionate number of pork bao buns, which was really nice.
    0:05:05 And then walked back, and then we watched Game of Thrones.
    0:05:07 So that was kind of the perfect evening.
    0:05:08 Sounds nice.
    0:05:09 I mean, London is…
    0:05:14 It feels jolting when it does get warm,
    0:05:17 but there’s no city that does nice weather better,
    0:05:20 where everybody streams out.
    0:05:21 The pubs are packed.
    0:05:22 The parks are packed.
    0:05:25 You know, I miss that part of it.
    0:05:26 People say the same thing about Chicago.
    0:05:28 Exactly right.
    0:05:28 There you go.
    0:05:29 I am those people.
    0:05:31 I’m the Chicago-London person.
    0:05:32 I would have guessed you were from Chicago.
    0:05:36 Anyways, in today’s episode of Raging Moderates,
    0:05:38 we’re discussing Trump’s second term,
    0:05:41 marking 100 days as he continues a global trade war,
    0:05:42 starts arresting judges,
    0:05:44 and continues Ukraine-Russia peace talks.
    0:05:46 Then we’ll talk about the state of the press
    0:05:48 after the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.
    0:05:51 I’ve avoided all information about the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.
    0:05:53 I was asked to go, and I didn’t.
    0:05:54 I would love to go sometime.
    0:05:57 Anyways, I sound like Kara Swisher right now.
    0:06:00 I was asked to go, of course, but I didn’t.
    0:06:00 I would have gone.
    0:06:03 All right, let’s jump right in.
    0:06:05 On Wednesday, Trump will hit 100 days into a second term,
    0:06:07 where his first one was really about disruption.
    0:06:08 This one is more about domination.
    0:06:11 From mass deportations and sweeping trade wars,
    0:06:14 unprecedented power grabs, and government purges,
    0:06:17 Trump has set a breakneck pace that’s left allies rattled,
    0:06:20 critics reeling, and the rule of law under pressure.
    0:06:23 With markets jittery and public confidence sinking,
    0:06:26 the big question isn’t just where the presidency is headed,
    0:06:29 but what kind of country it will leave behind.
    0:06:31 Jess, let’s start with the big picture.
    0:06:35 A lot of Trump early support came from voters who wanted to kind of shake things up.
    0:06:38 But polling shows his approval rating is slipping.
    0:06:42 His approval at this point is lower than any president in seven decades.
    0:06:43 I know you’re really into polls.
    0:06:47 What is your sort of general meta view of his first 100 days?
    0:06:51 The meta view is that it’s a massive failure,
    0:06:54 certainly by historical standards,
    0:06:57 and looking at the key demographic groups,
    0:07:00 that he was able to swing in his direction as well.
    0:07:03 He’s lost 30 points with young voters, so that was quick.
    0:07:09 So it’s now back to the Biden levels when Biden won in 2020.
    0:07:12 He has an approval rating of 27% with Latino voters.
    0:07:16 And, you know, things are pretty bleak.
    0:07:21 There were four major news outlet polls that came out over the weekend,
    0:07:24 and the headlines were all basically the same.
    0:07:30 Trump approval sinks as Americans criticize his major policies lower than any president in seven decades.
    0:07:32 Americans vent disappointment with Trump.
    0:07:35 Trump’s first 100 days seen as bringing big changes,
    0:07:37 but still too much focus on tariffs.
    0:07:45 And I’m not sure if everything would be hunky-dory if he weren’t doing the tariff business,
    0:07:52 but you can certainly look at that as the major sinking force in terms of his approval
    0:07:57 and the overall feelings about this administration and what it’s been able to do.
    0:08:03 You know, they’re failing on cost of living, inflation, tariffs, the economy writ large.
    0:08:09 Consistently, though, still positive views on border security.
    0:08:11 The crossings are down to basically nobody.
    0:08:15 I mean, we have reporters, Fox reporters who are at the border,
    0:08:18 and they barely see anyone versus at peak, you know,
    0:08:22 we had the 250,000 people that were streaming across the border on a monthly basis.
    0:08:24 So our drones are lonely.
    0:08:27 They’re looking for something and can’t find it.
    0:08:31 But for the first time, this happened last week,
    0:08:34 he’s now underwater in terms of immigration in general.
    0:08:37 And that’s where Democrats really see the opportunity.
    0:08:40 So positive view on deportations.
    0:08:43 People still want to get these folks out of the country.
    0:08:48 But I think the personal stories, like the Abrego Garcias of the world,
    0:08:51 the big one from the weekend was three American citizen children,
    0:08:56 age two, four, and seven, were deported with their mothers.
    0:09:02 The four-year-old has a rare form of cancer and was deported without treatment.
    0:09:08 And the mother was given the option to leave them or to take them.
    0:09:10 So this is two different families, I should say.
    0:09:14 I’m talking about the kid with cancer, but also wasn’t allowed to speak with their lawyer.
    0:09:20 And Tom Homan had to do a morning press conference.
    0:09:21 I don’t know if you saw this.
    0:09:24 He’s out there with Caroline Levitt, the press secretary, saying,
    0:09:25 this is parenting 101.
    0:09:31 You know, you would have accused us of family separation if we had kept the kid and sent the mom home,
    0:09:34 even though the father wanted them to stay here.
    0:09:37 And you know that they’re sweating it.
    0:09:47 They’ve lined the White House lawn with posters, with pictures of undocumented people who have committed crimes here with a big stamp, right,
    0:09:50 that says deported, deported, deported, arrested, deported.
    0:10:01 And they’re in massive fix-it PR mode because it’s sinking into people that while they may be in favor of deporting people who have convicted crimes here,
    0:10:03 that that’s not what they’re actually getting.
    0:10:09 And if you look at the numbers, they are deporting people, less people on a monthly basis than they were at the end of the Biden administration.
    0:10:12 And I think they’re completely frantic about that.
    0:10:20 Yeah, so my friend Doug Seidman was actually a fraternity brother of mine, and we reconnected after, you know, not really staying in touch for 20 or 30 years.
    0:10:25 And he wrote, they were basically the two smartest guys in my fraternity, Jess, let’s talk about me in college,
    0:10:28 were Lauren Mason, who is this philosophy major.
    0:10:31 They’re both philosophy majors, Lauren Mason and Doug Seidman.
    0:10:35 And Lauren, and they were both, I think they were both Broads or Fulbright scholars.
    0:10:39 And Lauren was the first guy I ever met who did a shit ton of shrooms.
    0:10:45 He was just very much about psychedelics and talking about the universe and metaphysics and just the kindest, gentlest guy.
    0:10:52 And then Doug was a guy who used to come home and do 100 pull-ups and wouldn’t, of course, smell alcohol.
    0:10:57 And he would lecture us all on how the membrane in the brain would be contaminated by alcohol.
    0:11:00 He was just constantly optimizing for health and perfection.
    0:11:05 He looks like Arnold Schwarzenegger and incredibly bright.
    0:11:08 Anyways, yeah, ahead of his time.
    0:11:12 And I caught up with him recently and he wrote a book called How.
    0:11:21 And his big thing, and, you know, most books are sort of like there’s one insight and then there’s 12 chapters coming up with analogies and metaphors to drill home, you know, this insight.
    0:11:25 I always found like Malcolm Gladwell, read the first chapter and you get the joke and you can go to the next book.
    0:11:29 So his whole thing is, it’s not what you do, it’s how you do it.
    0:11:39 And if you look at his policies on immigration, on tariffs, on Doge, there’s actually pretty broad public support.
    0:11:43 And he had an opportunity, he had a big mandate coming into the office.
    0:11:50 He had a big opportunity to have an exceptional 100 days, even if it was something that set the media and progressives’ hair on fire.
    0:11:55 But the way he’s handled it has just freaked everybody out.
    0:11:57 You know, it’s one thing to deport people.
    0:12:07 It’s another thing to send them to a hellscape prison and then have evidence that you’re not willing to correct your mistakes and to basically lie and say, we can’t get them back.
    0:12:09 Or round up people with the wrong tattoo.
    0:12:12 It’s one thing to impose tariffs.
    0:12:19 I think a lot of the American public, and correctly, I would argue, our GDP has grown faster than anybody, if not more consistently.
    0:12:28 And yet somehow people want to believe that we have taken advantage of other countries and that GDP growth a lot of times has been on the backs of global trade.
    0:12:32 So it would appear to me that the economics of the data show we’ve taken advantage of the other countries, not the other way around.
    0:12:37 But anyways, there was support for tariffs and people believed that we were being taken advantage of.
    0:12:44 So some kind of mild-targeted, thoughtful tariffs would have been, I think, appreciated, even if they were sort of harsh or punitive against China.
    0:12:46 These are just stupid, right?
    0:12:50 We’ve seen shipping volume from China is down 45%.
    0:13:02 And if all of a sudden the stuff we get from China is down 45%, folks, you’re going to find that restaurants don’t have tablecloths or that you’re not going to be able to find a garage door opener or that the costs are going to skyrocket.
    0:13:06 And thousands of small businesses are going to go out of business.
    0:13:19 And with respect to things like immigration or deporting people, sending out errant letters that are mistaken to PhD students saying you need to self-deport, the bullshit around the attacks on universities.
    0:13:24 It’s just he had a mandate, and I would argue that it’s not what he’s doing.
    0:13:25 It’s how he’s doing it.
    0:13:38 And if he just scaled back somewhat and just been—if they just said, oh, this is—you know, we pretend to, you know, a third of our hardcore MAGA base uses Jesus in every other word.
    0:13:45 And if Jesus came back and saw what we were doing, he’d find us and puke all over us, that, of course, we’re not going to deport in any way.
    0:13:49 Of course, we’re going to come to the aid of a mother and a child who is suffering from cancer.
    0:13:51 Of course, we’re going to make special accommodations.
    0:14:01 And we did to not have someone go down and pose in front of, you know, shirtless prisoners in El Salvador prison like it’s some sort of fucked up snuff porn from Cinemax.
    0:14:05 I mean, this stuff is just—it’s kind of success.
    0:14:16 I always say, or I’ve said, success isn’t going to last 10 percent, and that is the way you establish yourself at work if you’re a young person is if the all-hands meeting is at 8 a.m., show up at 7.50.
    0:14:17 Always be 10 minutes early.
    0:14:22 Always stay 10 minutes too long or be, you know, stay 10 minutes longer than everybody else.
    0:14:35 When you’re almost done with a project and you’re tired and you just want to turn it in, the next 10 percent of going through and proofing it, adding a couple more charts, being known as the person who’s a perfectionist, and even when everyone else is really tired, saying, okay, I’ve got a new idea.
    0:14:37 Let’s just get this in, and it’s really going to be awesome.
    0:14:38 Success is in the last 10 percent.
    0:14:55 In this case, failure has been in the last 10 percent, and that is, while I disagree with a lot of his policies, generally speaking, his core policies and the way or the direction he’s moved about America agrees with, he’s just gone way too far and now is being seen as cruel and reckless.
    0:15:05 So this has been, I would argue, a lesson in how to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, and that is America largely believes, or his constituents,
    0:15:16 that he had a mandate and that directionally he’s correct, but that he’s been so reckless, so aggressive, so unnecessarily cruel and or stupid that people just don’t trust him any longer.
    0:15:17 Your thoughts?
    0:15:27 Yeah, I have in my notes the stupidity and the cruelty are the dominant descriptors that people are talking about with this administration.
    0:15:38 They can’t make sense of the economic policy, and it genuinely feels like he’s always wanted tariffs or liked tariffs, and he went out and found the only economist to get behind it.
    0:15:57 So Peter Navarro, and now you have that person elevated to a dangerous position, so much so that all of these smart CEOs, economists, consultants, all of them are just trying to get on TV to talk about the damage that this is doing because they know that that’s the only way to actually connect with him.
    0:16:06 Like, if Trump didn’t see a clip of it, it’s like it didn’t happen, and so that’s why you have Gary Cohn on the Sunday morning show circuit, Jamie Dimon giving these interviews.
    0:16:15 I’m sure you saw Ken Griffin from the end of the week talking about how the U.S. is 20 percent poorer because of Trump and that the American brand is in crisis.
    0:16:17 Trump thinks about anything.
    0:16:20 He thinks about brands, and he thinks of himself as a brand.
    0:16:33 You are right, though, about how significant the direction that we’re moving in is to voters and to Trump, and that is still what’s going on on immigration, and part of that is Democrats’ fault.
    0:16:44 Like, we broke it to such an extreme degree that people are willing to tolerate a level of stupidity and cruelty and chaos to get us back on the right track.
    0:17:02 And I was struck by one particular finding out of, I think it was the ABC-Washington Post poll, so all of this terrible stuff for Trump, you know, approval rating and high 30s, low 40s, but still he’s seen as more in touch with people’s concerns than the Democrats.
    0:17:05 69 percent say the Democrats are out of touch.
    0:17:07 Only 60 percent say that about Trump.
    0:17:12 We know that independent voters, even though he has strong disapproval, are not regretting their votes.
    0:17:14 So they’re pissed off.
    0:17:18 They’re saying on the generic ballot that they’re going to vote for Democrats in 2026.
    0:17:19 So great.
    0:17:20 Maybe we’ll have a great midterms.
    0:17:21 I’m hopeful about that.
    0:17:24 But we’ve got a long way to go until we get to that point.
    0:17:40 And there was an interesting juxtaposition I saw between Chuck Schumer, who gave this interview to Dana Bash, and I basically wanted to kill myself watching him because she says they’re talking about academic freedom and Harvard.
    0:17:41 And she said, you know, what’s your response?
    0:17:47 And he said, we sent him a very strong letter just the other day asking eight very strong questions.
    0:17:49 Strongly worded letter.
    0:17:51 What in God’s name is that?
    0:17:53 That’ll show him.
    0:17:55 As if Trump opens his mail.
    0:17:59 He was probably so overjoyed seeing that.
    0:18:02 He wasn’t at church, so he was probably watching the Sunday shows.
    0:18:06 And to see Chuck Schumer have that kind of response, he just probably said, we got him.
    0:18:09 They’re completely limp.
    0:18:12 This is so pathetic.
    0:18:13 And he’s right.
    0:18:17 And then in contrast, and I’m curious for our plan to have someone just start running.
    0:18:18 Maybe it’s you.
    0:18:21 But if it’s not you, what do you think about J.B. Pritzker?
    0:18:28 Because he was in New Hampshire over the weekend, and he’s got that real cool billionaire bravado, right?
    0:18:33 He feels very secure about professional success, his partner and his family.
    0:18:36 He feels very secure about what he has done for Illinois.
    0:18:38 And I loved having him on the podcast.
    0:18:39 I thought that he was great.
    0:18:43 But he said, Republicans cannot know a moment of peace.
    0:18:48 Their portraits will one day be put in museums reserved for tyrants and traitors.
    0:18:58 He also said that Democrats are guilty of listening to do-nothing political types who would tell us the House is not on fire even as the flames are licking their faces.
    0:19:09 And he also went after Democrats who wanted to blame our losses on Black people or talking about trans issues or immigrants too much instead of their own lack of guts and gumption.
    0:19:15 And when I was listening to him, A, thinking, oh, maybe you’re running for president because you’re in New Hampshire doing this.
    0:19:23 And that’s not necessarily right around the corner from your penthouse in Chicago or he’s probably in Springfield most of the time.
    0:19:28 But I thought this is the vibe that people want to see.
    0:19:32 And they want to see Democrats also calling out other Democrats.
    0:19:35 Not that we should have a civil war, but they want that fire.
    0:19:42 The imagery of the flames licking their faces really, I don’t know, it sat with me.
    0:19:44 I think Governor Pritzker is fantastic.
    0:19:48 And he’s sort of like similar to Donald Trump.
    0:19:49 He inherited his money.
    0:19:51 I think it’d be better if we had a self-made billionaire.
    0:19:52 We’re working on it.
    0:19:53 I mean, you take what you can get.
    0:19:53 There you go.
    0:19:54 Perfect.
    0:19:55 It’s not on the menu.
    0:19:58 He comes across as thoughtful, strong, not easily rattled.
    0:20:00 He’s a great voice.
    0:20:10 He has that kind of and I think that sort of a bomb or a neosporin of like serious dad energy would be very well received.
    0:20:14 And also Pete Buttigieg has done a great job on these podcasts.
    0:20:17 He’s just so articulate and forceful.
    0:20:20 I watched all three hours of him on the Flagram podcast.
    0:20:20 Yeah.
    0:20:21 And he’s just very good.
    0:20:27 And I don’t know if he’d get through the Democratic primary, but I think that’s neither here nor there.
    0:20:32 I love, did you see Al Gore, his kind of fiery speech?
    0:20:34 I thought Vice President Gore was fantastic.
    0:20:41 I thought Bill Maher was not expecting such an amped up Al over there.
    0:20:43 Yeah, such a hopped up, hopped up Al.
    0:20:46 Look, I personally, they’re all running for president.
    0:20:49 It’s just that they’ve decided that it’s premature to announce.
    0:20:50 And they might be right.
    0:20:59 But my view is at this moment, the Democratic Party is just so void of leadership from a centrist candidate or someone who could be president.
    0:21:03 I’m really inspired by Bernie and AOC’s tour.
    0:21:06 I just don’t think there’s any fucking way they would.
    0:21:11 That would be the worst thing that could happen to us is we fall into the illusion that they become the Democratic nominees.
    0:21:13 That would be we lose by 15 points.
    0:21:15 They’re just not where America is.
    0:21:22 And I think they’re fantastic surrogates, fantastic kind of bulwarks for, you know.
    0:21:26 By the way, I just think your buddy Tim Miller at the Bulwark has been outstanding.
    0:21:39 But I believe any reasonably competent person who announces they’re running for president right now gets on every show and can start to coagulate or gestate a powerful message and be seen as a person to push back.
    0:21:48 Because right now, whenever they want to call or get someone to talk about something, they’re reaching out to just anybody in this grab bag.
    0:21:49 And there’s no cohesive vision.
    0:21:52 There’s no real what I call cogent pushback.
    0:21:57 Senator Schumer says stupid shit that makes us just weak.
    0:21:59 It’s just it’s just awful.
    0:22:02 It’s sort of, OK, maybe I was right to vote for Trump.
    0:22:10 Leader Jeffries is good, but he doesn’t have the kind of fleet of foot forcefulness that we need in a leader.
    0:22:15 There needs to be literally you can’t name who the Democratic leader is right now.
    0:22:22 And so any credible person that announces they’re running for president right now immediately becomes that spokesperson and can start hitting back.
    0:22:26 And every time one of these stupid things comes out, that person can put out media.
    0:22:28 And they don’t need to go on these shows.
    0:22:32 They can establish their own media now, which is exciting about you basically build your own mic.
    0:22:33 And we need that.
    0:22:34 We need somebody.
    0:22:36 So look, Mayor Pete, you’re running.
    0:22:38 Just we all know you’re running.
    0:22:41 Just announce and make things easier for you and everybody else.
    0:22:44 You know, even I’m starting to see Beto pop up.
    0:22:45 He’s back, right?
    0:22:47 Please no more Beto.
    0:22:47 You don’t think so?
    0:22:54 Well, it’s like how much money can we light on fire for Beto O’Rourke and Stacey Abrams?
    0:23:02 And Democrats in Georgia are just praying that she doesn’t run again because she can win the primary, but she can’t win the general.
    0:23:04 And we’re trying to win general elections.
    0:23:13 I think we’ve spent like $400 million in Texas trying to get, you know, far-left progressives to win Senate seats there.
    0:23:16 And people hate Ted Cruz and still keep voting for him.
    0:23:18 Like, that’s a signal to you of where you are.
    0:23:28 Like, please pick winnable races and pick candidates that can appeal to people who may have voted for Trump this time in 2024 but could buy what you’re selling.
    0:23:37 And you look at how John Ossoff is running his campaign for re-election, which is going to be one of the most intense races in the country.
    0:23:38 And I’m like, do that.
    0:23:43 Stop with all of this, like, far-left stuff, but also the normalcy argument.
    0:23:51 And I guess you saw more because you saw Al Gore, but Brett Stevens was making this case for MANA, make America normal again.
    0:23:57 And that infuriated me because people don’t think that the Biden years were good.
    0:24:02 They don’t think that having a president, they’re unclear whether they can do the job, is normal.
    0:24:04 They don’t think our college campuses were normal.
    0:24:06 They don’t think Russia invading Ukraine was normal.
    0:24:08 They don’t think October 7th was normal.
    0:24:10 They don’t think that inflation was normal.
    0:24:12 They don’t think cost of living through the roof was normal.
    0:24:21 So a candidate going out there and saying, MANA, you know, let’s go back to a time where we were respected on the world stage, not going to work.
    0:24:25 They’re still kind of okay with Trump because he’s a chaos agent.
    0:24:28 And they think that we were so messed up that that’s what we need.
    0:24:30 It has to be change.
    0:24:36 And I don’t know how a centrist candidate can pull that off because they’re going to need to be a rebel.
    0:24:38 And also a calming force.
    0:24:41 But we got to find that person or that group.
    0:24:45 I’m still in the Avengers assemble mode where it can be a bunch of people.
    0:24:48 But you have to have moderate policies with fire.
    0:24:52 And Chris Murphy feeling that right now.
    0:24:53 But I don’t know if he can be president.
    0:24:54 We can ask him.
    0:24:57 He’s going to become a friend of the pod, which I’m excited about.
    0:24:58 He’s going to come on with us.
    0:25:01 But I’m upset, Scott.
    0:25:02 To your point, this is what won’t work.
    0:25:09 This notion running against Trump and just saying, we’re not Trump and we need to go back to where we were.
    0:25:10 That’s not going to work.
    0:25:14 It’s got to be, I think, a series of bold policies that people get excited about.
    0:25:19 Whether it’s lowering, okay, we spend $13,000 a year on health care.
    0:25:20 We’re more obese and we die earlier.
    0:25:23 How do we take it down to 6,500 like every other G7 country?
    0:25:30 We’re going to lower the age, the qualification for Medicare by two years for 30 years until we have nationalized medicine.
    0:25:31 It’s time, folks.
    0:25:33 Our health care system isn’t working.
    0:25:35 It’s time to take a different approach.
    0:25:37 We need mandatory national service.
    0:25:49 We need to bring our young people together from different sexual orientations, different income groups, different genders, and get them to realize that when you serve in the agency of something bigger and greater than yourself, specifically your country, it’s good for you and it’s good for us.
    0:25:54 You need to see what wonderful people are out there that may not look, smell, and feel like you.
    0:25:56 We need a tax holiday for everyone under the age of 40.
    0:26:00 We need a progressive tax policy that funds universal child care.
    0:26:05 We need nationalized health care such that 40% of America doesn’t have medical debt.
    0:26:18 We need $7,000 given to every baby, only $40 billion a year, such that in 65 years we can do away with this transfer of $1.3 trillion from young people to old people, which will take our interest rates down, which will take the third largest expenditure.
    0:26:20 interest on our debt down.
    0:26:25 There’s just a series of big, bold programs that Democrats should be putting out there.
    0:26:39 We should have an adult conversation around reducing our spend and increasing our tax base, an alternative minimum tax for corporations that are paying the lowest tax since 1929, an alternative minimum tax of 50, maybe 60% above anyone making more than $10 million.
    0:26:40 Because guess what?
    0:26:43 There’s research showing you get no incremental happiness for more than $10 million.
    0:26:50 There’s a variety, minimum wage of $25 an hour, universal kind of unity of everything or unifying theory of everything.
    0:27:03 We’re going to have a series of policies that I’ll reverse engineer to anyone under the age of 40, can live in dignity, have access to health care, can find someone to mate with, more third places, tax credits for sports leagues, religious institutions, bars.
    0:27:08 You know, whatever gets people together and starts mating again, a child tax credit.
    0:27:10 But we need a series of big, bold ideas.
    0:27:16 But just running on, well, we’re not him and he sucks, and we need to go back to the Biden years, that’s a loss.
    0:27:26 This is an opportunity to be really bold, really visionary, get people excited about a series of new ideas that’s grounded in pragmatism, but also is visionary.
    0:27:29 And just call things out, the industrial medical complex needs to be disrupted.
    0:27:33 We need to have progressive tax policies, enough already.
    0:27:37 We need to have a strong military, but there’s probably real waste in there.
    0:27:39 There’s, again, we’re not going back.
    0:27:50 This is an opportunity to say, all right, let’s come up with a series of really big, bold kind of new ideas, such that we get people excited and say, okay, this is a new Democratic Party.
    0:27:58 And I’ve said, I’ve been giving money out, well, like a drunken sailor to anyone who’s under the age of 40 who’s running for office.
    0:27:59 We need more youth.
    0:28:00 You know, we need more young people.
    0:28:02 We need more vigor and more ideas.
    0:28:08 But all along the way of saying I agree with you, the campaign mantra can’t be, we’re not Trump.
    0:28:09 That’s not a winning idea.
    0:28:13 And that we’re going back to the policies of the 80s.
    0:28:15 People don’t even want to dig up Obama.
    0:28:18 They like him, but they don’t want those policies back.
    0:28:19 That’s the thing.
    0:28:24 Yeah, well, our icon feels outdated now to a lot of people.
    0:28:32 Like, young people now don’t know what it’s like to grow up in the Obama years and how exciting Hope and Change and Yes, We Can was.
    0:28:37 And part of that is they especially don’t know what Iraq and Afghanistan and 9-11 felt like.
    0:28:41 And so how important it was to have a unifying figure like Obama.
    0:28:47 And we are without political, cultural icons at this point.
    0:28:49 You know, we’re getting into the territory.
    0:28:53 We’re going to have to explain to younger people about Hillary Clinton.
    0:28:55 And that even happened at the DNC.
    0:29:03 It was sweet, but also concerning to me how many young Gen Z women I heard around the arena after Hillary spoke.
    0:29:06 And I thought she gave one of the best speeches of her career on the first night of the DNC.
    0:29:09 And they were like, oh, my God, she’s amazing.
    0:29:10 Did you know that?
    0:29:14 And, you know, inside my elder millennial feminist is dying, right?
    0:29:17 And I’m like, how do you not know how amazing Hillary Clinton is?
    0:29:21 But our icons are outdated for what’s going on here.
    0:29:26 And we have to lift up the next generation of that.
    0:29:30 And I think, you know, whether she wins the election for Michigan Senate or not, like a Mallory
    0:29:33 McMorrow, it’s going to have to fill that void.
    0:29:35 And you can have the centrist versions, too.
    0:29:40 I think Alyssa Slotkin will be very exciting for people who want to succeed in politics.
    0:29:45 We’ll see if Lauren Underwood, you know, what she does in the Illinois Senate race, hopefully
    0:29:46 she gets in there.
    0:29:52 But we have to do real solid branding work with the folks that we have and the policies
    0:29:57 that we have, because you just rattled off a platform that I think a good 60 percent of
    0:29:58 Americans would get behind.
    0:30:03 And I’m sure this is the moment in the YouTube comments where it’s Scott for Scott 2028.
    0:30:04 Let’s go.
    0:30:08 But why can’t people just organize their thoughts?
    0:30:16 Why can’t you create a proposal plan or just some basic charts that say education?
    0:30:22 Education, health care, economy, climate, sex, you know.
    0:30:23 Amazing.
    0:30:24 Vocational programming.
    0:30:26 Seven million homes in 10 years.
    0:30:31 Manufactured housing, which costs 30 to 50 percent less than on-site housing.
    0:30:35 Create little hip communities for young people such that we bring down the cost of housing.
    0:30:35 I mean.
    0:30:39 And the case study, you say, Austin, this is what they did.
    0:30:42 This is how we will replicate it where you live.
    0:30:42 Exactly.
    0:30:43 YIMBY.
    0:30:45 National YIMBY program.
    0:30:45 Right.
    0:30:46 Totally.
    0:30:51 Like, you could even just pull sections out of abundance, frankly, and post them.
    0:30:52 We want to bring prices down.
    0:30:55 We’re going to break up these four companies, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google.
    0:30:57 We’re turning into 11 companies.
    0:31:02 And the rents on third-party marketers trying to sell their products on Amazon for advertisers.
    0:31:06 These are the biggest toll boosts, the biggest tariffs or taxes in history is the concentration
    0:31:06 of big tech.
    0:31:11 And the moment we break these guys up, the economic rents and the rents, the extraordinary
    0:31:15 rents that parents are paying to Meta because they have no other choice as a platform and
    0:31:19 their kids feel ostracized if they’re not on these platforms such that they start self-harming.
    0:31:22 It’s like everyone, people have been calling me about Tesla.
    0:31:23 Can Tesla come back?
    0:31:24 I’m like, yeah.
    0:31:24 How do they come back?
    0:31:25 Easy.
    0:31:26 Great fucking products.
    0:31:31 The Democrats can come back if they come up with a series of visionary programs and they
    0:31:32 outline them.
    0:31:33 This is how much it would cost.
    0:31:35 This is how we would get the tax revenue.
    0:31:38 This would be the economic growth that it would inspire.
    0:31:43 If young people can afford to find somebody, mate, and have children and have a home, they
    0:31:47 won’t be as anxious and depressed and likely less obese, which will create less of a tax
    0:31:48 on our healthcare system.
    0:31:49 They’ll be more prosperous.
    0:31:53 We won’t have 3 million able-bodied men exiting the workforce.
    0:31:59 We just need a fucking argument other than we’re not Trump and every American should have
    0:32:00 the right to the American dream.
    0:32:02 Well, okay, so what, boss?
    0:32:04 We’re done with the flowery language.
    0:32:10 There are so many interesting programs that different people have promoted and are available
    0:32:12 to us from around the country, a hotbed.
    0:32:17 The great thing about having 50 individual states has been a hothouse of innovation.
    0:32:21 And all of these guys, everyone just wants to talk about what we might or might do with
    0:32:23 a strongly worded letter.
    0:32:31 There needs to be, and I’m hoping that it’s Governor Newsom or Mayor Pete or Senator, soon
    0:32:35 to be Governor Michael Bennett, who I’m a big fan of because I like Wonks, who’s probably
    0:32:37 never going to be president because he’s not good on TikTok.
    0:32:43 Christ, even if AOC announced, I would be grateful because I think she is very forceful and people
    0:32:47 would constantly go to her for pushback and she’s really good at pushback.
    0:32:54 But the notion, great brands in a digital age are about products and products in this instance
    0:32:57 are programs that will affect people every day.
    0:32:59 And we need to start pushing out more products.
    0:33:01 Okay, let’s take one quick break.
    0:33:02 Stay with us.
    0:33:08 Support for the show comes from Grunz.
    0:33:12 If you’re looking for a new tasty nutrition solution, then look no further than Grunz.
    0:33:16 It’s a convenient, comprehensive formula packed into eight gummies a day.
    0:33:19 Grunz isn’t a multivitamin, a greens gummy, or a prebiotic.
    0:33:23 It’s all of those things, and then some at a fraction of the price.
    0:33:27 Their daily bags contain eight gummies because you just can’t fit the amount of nutrients they
    0:33:28 do just into one gummy.
    0:33:33 Generic multivitamins only contain around seven to nine vitamins, but Grunz have more
    0:33:37 than 20 vitamins and minerals, plus more than 60 whole food ingredients.
    0:33:41 They actually provided us with a bit of science to explain what makes Grunz different.
    0:33:46 Basically, 30% of the population has a gene that messes with how they absorb vitamins, but
    0:33:51 Grunz is methylated, which is a fancy way of saying their vitamins like B12 and folate can
    0:33:52 be absorbed by your body.
    0:33:57 Methylating is an expensive option for a lot of other companies, but Grunz is looking out for
    0:33:57 you.
    0:34:02 Plus, they’re vegan and free of nuts, dairy, and gluten, and they’re made with no artificial
    0:34:03 colors or flavors.
    0:34:07 Get up to 45% off when you go to Grunz.co and use code PROVG.
    0:34:11 That’s G-R-U-N-S dot C-O.
    0:34:14 Using code PROVG for 45% off.
    0:34:20 Support for PROVG comes from Upwork.
    0:34:23 Finding a great freelancer can make a huge difference.
    0:34:25 It gives you the flexibility to grow your business at the right pace for you.
    0:34:28 But hiring that freelancer can be a real hassle.
    0:34:32 They can be hard to find, hard to vet, and you never really knew what you’re going to
    0:34:32 get.
    0:34:33 Not anymore.
    0:34:36 Upwork has more than two decades of experience solving that problem.
    0:34:39 Companies at every stage turn to Upwork to get things done.
    0:34:43 Upwork helps you access a global marketplace filled with top talent in IT, web development,
    0:34:46 AI design, admin support, marketing, and more.
    0:34:48 Posting a job on Upwork is easy.
    0:34:49 There’s no cost to join.
    0:34:53 Once you register, you can browse freelancer profiles, get help drafting a job post, or
    0:34:54 even book a consultation.
    0:34:58 From there, you can easily connect with the perfect freelancer to help you take your business
    0:34:59 to the next level.
    0:35:04 Upwork makes the entire process easier, simpler, and more affordable with industry low fees.
    0:35:08 Post your job today and hire tomorrow with Upwork.
    0:35:11 Visit Upwork.com right now and post your job for free.
    0:35:15 That is Upwork.com to post your job for free and connect with top talent ready to help your
    0:35:15 business grow.
    0:35:18 That’s U-P-W-O-R-K.com.
    0:35:19 Upwork.com.
    0:35:28 Support for the show comes from the NPR Politics Podcast.
    0:35:32 Keeping up with politics means processing a whirlwind of information on the daily.
    0:35:36 The NPR Politics Podcast can help declutter it all for you.
    0:35:41 Every day, the NPR Politics Podcast team focuses on one thing and boils it down to 15 minutes
    0:35:42 or less.
    0:35:46 Each episode makes it easy for you to understand what’s going on in politics, from the complete
    0:35:51 restructure of the federal government to immigration policy, tariffs, and trade, to unpacking the
    0:35:53 first 100 days of Trump’s presidency.
    0:35:58 They explore whether the president has lived up to his early promises and how his executive
    0:36:03 orders and spur-of-the-moment decision-making are changing the nation and your life in the
    0:36:03 long term.
    0:36:07 You can tune in and hear about what’s been done, what’s to come, and what might change, and
    0:36:09 of course, what it means for you.
    0:36:10 I absolutely love NPR.
    0:36:13 I think they do a fantastic job and they try to call balls and strikes.
    0:36:18 Look, if you’re listening to the show, we know you’re interested in politics and you can think
    0:36:23 of the NPR Politics Podcast as your daily political multivitamin with in-depth reporting and a nuanced
    0:36:25 analysis that won’t completely overwhelm you.
    0:36:28 It’s excellent reporting in bite-sized chunks.
    0:36:41 Welcome back.
    0:36:43 Another story caught our eye.
    0:36:47 Milwaukee judge Hannah Dugan was arrested Friday and charged with helping an undocumented immigrant
    0:36:52 avoid arrest, a major escalation of Trump’s crackdown on immigration enforcement and local
    0:36:52 officials.
    0:36:55 Jess, what’s your take on this?
    0:36:56 Can you give us some color here?
    0:36:57 Yeah.
    0:37:05 So the overarching take is this is part of the plan to chill opposition and neuter the other
    0:37:06 branches of government.
    0:37:10 So we know they have no respect for Congress and they now have no respect for the judiciary,
    0:37:15 whether you’re ignoring a Supreme Court ruling, the Fourth Circuit, or arresting a county judge.
    0:37:27 And this judge is accused of helping an undocumented man who has been accused of beating someone, hitting
    0:37:28 them 30 times.
    0:37:33 And he sounds like a pretty violent guy, frankly.
    0:37:38 This doesn’t I have not seen any defense of this, that this guy is actually innocent of it.
    0:37:46 But what the administration says that she did was allow him to exit the side entrance of her
    0:37:48 courtroom and then escape.
    0:37:50 And they ended up catching him on foot.
    0:37:52 So it was a brief foot chase.
    0:37:54 But he’s been arrested.
    0:38:00 And so they decided that they wanted to make a big show of this because everything with this
    0:38:05 administration is for the cameras, like all of the raids that we’ve seen.
    0:38:10 And Kristi Noem wearing her ice Barbie vest and what she was doing down at Seacott, you
    0:38:13 know, thumbs up in front of everyone in prison there.
    0:38:15 And so they wanted to make it a television spectacle.
    0:38:19 And a lot of people have commented on that aspect of it.
    0:38:24 There’s a very famous Milwaukee defense attorney who weighed in saying, you know, not only do
    0:38:29 I think the judge Dugan to be a great judge, but why are you treating her like a common criminal?
    0:38:34 There is no way that she wouldn’t have come downtown to answer your questions, turned herself
    0:38:39 in, et cetera. And she’s going to be back in court, I think, May 15th to have further discussion
    0:38:41 about the charges against her.
    0:38:47 But you have Pam Bondi, the attorney general, on TV saying, we will come after you and we
    0:38:48 will prosecute you.
    0:38:49 We will find you.
    0:38:54 You have Kash Patel, the head of the FBI, who had an enemies list, which was published in
    0:38:56 his book that came out a few years ago.
    0:39:00 And this was something he had to work really hard against in his confirmation hearings.
    0:39:02 Say, I’m not that guy.
    0:39:05 You know, what I wrote doesn’t reflect who I am.
    0:39:06 It’s exactly who he is.
    0:39:09 And you can see that plain and simple.
    0:39:16 So while I think that this seems like this guy was a bad guy and I’d encourage everyone
    0:39:22 if you can to read about it, it seems really boring, but there are actual accounts of how
    0:39:27 the courtroom is built and how the doors work and how many officials there actually were
    0:39:31 there from ICE, from the FBI, DEA agents, et cetera.
    0:39:36 And there are people who are defending Judge Dugan, just saying, actually, the door that
    0:39:38 he went out, there were agents standing on the other side of it.
    0:39:45 She didn’t, like, cover him in a blanket and hide him in her purse and then walk out a door
    0:39:49 and release him out into the open, that if the agents had been paying attention, they would
    0:39:52 have picked him up right outside the door.
    0:39:55 And, you know, that’s neither here nor there.
    0:40:01 But I know that it is a very bad sign when the government is arresting members of the
    0:40:02 judiciary.
    0:40:04 They want no opposition.
    0:40:08 They want to steamroll absolutely everyone here.
    0:40:14 And it feels like that moment is even starker than it was last week when we talked about it,
    0:40:20 where we need everybody to band together in a peaceful civic uprising against this, whether
    0:40:29 you’re, you know, part of big academic universities, big law corporations, advocates, lawyers,
    0:40:37 people who work for the government even, just to say, this is not how we do business in
    0:40:38 America.
    0:40:41 And part of that is cooperating with ICE where it makes sense.
    0:40:44 And I always bring that up and I hate to be the Debbie Downer about it.
    0:40:47 But there are a bunch of blue city mayors who are saying, no matter what, I’m not cooperating
    0:40:48 with you.
    0:40:52 You have to turn over criminals so they can be deported.
    0:40:57 That’s how you have a nation of laws and that you have law and order here.
    0:41:03 But it does not seem like this show of arresting this judge fits into that that category.
    0:41:04 Yeah.
    0:41:05 Again, it goes back to it’s not what you do.
    0:41:06 It’s how you do it.
    0:41:09 There is something chilling about arresting a judge.
    0:41:13 And I don’t know the specifics of the case.
    0:41:15 And it sounds like we still don’t know.
    0:41:18 It sounds like he was a bad hombre, to be clear.
    0:41:20 It sounds to me.
    0:41:21 Yeah, no doubt.
    0:41:24 The question is, did she break the law and should she be arrested?
    0:41:30 And it feels to me, again, it’s how you go about something and saying, look, what you did
    0:41:35 here, if you were facilitating the escape of a criminal, you should be you should be defrocked
    0:41:37 or whatever it is they do to judges.
    0:41:39 Well, that’s what they do to priests, right?
    0:41:42 When they take a bunch of little kids on camping trips.
    0:41:45 Anyways, whatever it is they do.
    0:41:50 But it feels as if, all right, trying to send a chill across the judiciary.
    0:41:52 Do you really want to do that?
    0:41:53 I don’t.
    0:42:00 It feels as if, again, it’s sort of government overreach and this more of this sort of, I
    0:42:05 don’t know, a lack of respect for our judges, generally speaking, are really well respected.
    0:42:08 And it’s important that we uphold that prestige.
    0:42:13 There’s a reason they sit higher up, you know, and they wear a robe because they’ve gone through
    0:42:14 a lot of vetting.
    0:42:17 These are people, generally speaking, who make good livings, but not great livings and can
    0:42:19 make a lot more money in private practice.
    0:42:23 And you do hard work, sometimes very boring work.
    0:42:29 And to just, again, it feels as if we’re sort of digressing into one of those countries
    0:42:34 that we have a difficult time finding people to come be PhD students, go to law school.
    0:42:38 We’re having a difficult time getting good people to run for office.
    0:42:43 And is this going to help people decide to volunteer or to decide to be judges and give
    0:42:46 up private practice?
    0:42:52 But she should be, if she’s, and you’re right about ICE, whether we like it or not, ICE is
    0:42:53 a federal agency.
    0:42:57 And when they’re commanded to uphold the law, you know, vote for a new president.
    0:43:01 And, but you have to comply with ICE.
    0:43:07 At the same time, I also think history is filled with a certain level of civil disobedience.
    0:43:13 And civil disobedience has played a key role in progress in America.
    0:43:18 Now, having said that, if the judge decided to engage in civil disobedience, and history
    0:43:20 might judge her well, she will pay the price.
    0:43:24 And quite frankly, that’s part of the heroism of civil disobedience, is I’m going to protest
    0:43:27 and I’m going to refuse to leave or whatever it is.
    0:43:33 I’m going to join hands in front of, you know, I’m going to refuse to, whatever it is, not
    0:43:37 comply with the government’s order or to leave my seat that’s for whites only.
    0:43:42 A certain amount of civil disobedience, I think, as long as it’s nonviolent, I think people,
    0:43:44 you know, can engage in that.
    0:43:47 I don’t know if this even qualifies as civil disobedience, because I’m not entirely sure
    0:43:50 she thought she was doing anything that was illegal.
    0:43:53 But there is something chilling.
    0:43:55 And again, it goes back to how they’re going about this.
    0:44:03 So speaking of defrocking, or someone, and by the way, I keep getting emails from friends
    0:44:04 of mine who just love this guy.
    0:44:05 The Pope?
    0:44:06 Yeah, just love him.
    0:44:07 Just in…
    0:44:08 He’s pretty inspirational.
    0:44:10 I’m seeing all these wonderful quotes from him.
    0:44:16 So overseas, just moments before Pope Francis’s general, the Vatican, Trump and Zelensky had their
    0:44:20 first face-to-face since that disastrous White House meeting back in February.
    0:44:24 Afterward, Trump questioned whether Putin actually wants a peace deal.
    0:44:27 Zelensky called it a good meeting on social media.
    0:44:29 We talked about this a bit last week.
    0:44:31 But what do you think things are now?
    0:44:32 And do you think this meeting changed anything?
    0:44:40 I think that Trump is such a classic, love the one you’re with person, that it’s a good
    0:44:45 thing that he was with Zelensky, especially because the last time they were together, it went
    0:44:46 so poorly.
    0:44:54 Most of that because of the other people in the room and the cameras and the stress of
    0:44:55 that for Trump.
    0:44:59 And J.D. Vance was obviously poking the bear with the lecture that he was giving him.
    0:45:04 But I was genuinely relieved to see the still shot of Trump and Zelensky sitting in those
    0:45:06 chairs talking to each other.
    0:45:15 And it feels like good progress from last week where Rubio and J.D. Vance had a positive
    0:45:16 comment as well.
    0:45:22 But Rubio is meeting with Ukrainian officials and our European allies versus meeting with
    0:45:28 Russian officials and Mideast partners who are not nearly as invested in a free Ukraine
    0:45:34 and ending this war without us having to tell the Ukrainians, oh, sorry, no big deal.
    0:45:37 Did you need 30 percent of your country, 40 percent of your country, whatever it is that
    0:45:38 Putin’s asking for it.
    0:45:41 So I think it’s a positive development.
    0:45:44 Trump was positive afterwards as well.
    0:45:47 And Zelensky said the same on social media.
    0:45:53 I’m sure the rare earth minerals deal is still one of the most important linchpins in all
    0:45:54 of this.
    0:46:03 But every time Trump has the opportunity to be adulated and to be welcomed into the global
    0:46:07 community in a positive way, he likes that.
    0:46:14 And so I think that we really need to massage this into the coziest environment possible for
    0:46:20 Trump so that he stays on the side of the Ukrainians and really gives the middle finger
    0:46:27 to Putin, who has made no compromise, has violated every ceasefire, but has made no compromises
    0:46:33 whatsoever from his original points about what he wanted as an outcome of this war.
    0:46:36 So, yeah, that’s my view.
    0:46:43 I don’t know if you saw Secretary Rubio’s interview on Meet the Press, but it’s just like it just
    0:46:44 drives me crazy.
    0:46:48 They highlighted this interview where he said, you can’t give in to Putin that he did
    0:46:49 two or three years ago.
    0:46:50 It creates terrible incentives.
    0:46:52 We have to push back.
    0:46:53 And they’re like, what has changed?
    0:46:54 He’s like, well, we need to stop the killing.
    0:46:56 It just doesn’t answer the question.
    0:47:00 It just starts blathering away in whatever the most recent talking point is.
    0:47:05 And Trump was asked, well, what are the Russians willing to give?
    0:47:12 Ukraine has been asked to give up 20% of their territory to guarantee that they will not
    0:47:13 join NATO.
    0:47:17 They’ve even been asked by the Russians or demanded that they disarm, such that if they
    0:47:21 want to take the other 80% at some point, they could with no resistance.
    0:47:25 And Trump was asked, well, what are the Russians willing to give or concede?
    0:47:27 And he said, well, they’re willing to stop the war and stop killing people.
    0:47:32 And when you think about just how fucking stupid that is, that’s like saying to the entire
    0:47:38 world and every autocrat, every murderous, expansionary autocrat, you gain something when
    0:47:40 you invade another country.
    0:47:41 You get collateral.
    0:47:46 You get something to leverage and trade if you go in and start killing people and taking
    0:47:46 over land.
    0:47:51 That’s, according to Trump, is what Russia’s bringing to the table.
    0:47:57 Is there willing to stop the illegal invasion of a democratically elected or a country with
    0:47:59 a democratically elected leader?
    0:48:01 It’s just so strange.
    0:48:03 It’s such strange times.
    0:48:05 And I’ve said this and I have no evidence of this.
    0:48:12 But if we found out that Putin was buying a ton of Trump coin and propping it up such that
    0:48:15 the president would now be worth another $3 billion.
    0:48:19 He’s basically $3 billion wealthier since he took office.
    0:48:20 And let’s look at the timing.
    0:48:25 The Friday before the inauguration, when there was just a ton of noise at night, he said, oh,
    0:48:31 announced the Trump coin, 33 people, likely insiders who know him, who got a tip off, made
    0:48:32 $800 million.
    0:48:39 And since then, a ton of people, about 80,000 smaller investors, have lost several billion
    0:48:40 because it spiked up.
    0:48:42 The insider sold, went way down.
    0:48:50 He then decided, I know, I’m going to neuter and close down the unit of the Department of
    0:48:53 Justice that is investigating crypto scams.
    0:48:55 I’ll just get rid of the whole department.
    0:48:56 Oh, I know.
    0:49:00 The lockup is about to expire, which is when insiders can sell.
    0:49:04 And a lot of insiders probably go, this is a fucking pyramid scheme.
    0:49:05 I’m going to sell.
    0:49:10 So he announces this meeting with the biggest owners of Trump coin around that time.
    0:49:15 I mean, this is such, we’ve never seen grift on this level.
    0:49:21 And wouldn’t Putin be stupid not to buy all these coins and then say, you know, Donald,
    0:49:26 FYI, I’m going to make you the wealthiest man in the world because I just love the Trump
    0:49:29 coin and nobody needs to know I bought and you don’t need to tell anybody that I bought.
    0:49:33 And by the way, can you help us out with Ukraine?
    0:49:34 Wouldn’t this all make sense?
    0:49:41 Because everything it appears that Trump and Vance are advocating for is literally a talking
    0:49:42 point of Lavrov.
    0:49:47 He’s even said, he’s even intimated that somehow Ukraine started this war.
    0:49:53 So it’s not, and when I see them, when I, I think Zelensky has put on a masterclass here
    0:49:57 and that despite, can you imagine this guy every day, people are trying to kill him.
    0:50:05 Every day he’s getting notes from comrades and people he knows about how their sons and
    0:50:06 daughters are being killed.
    0:50:12 And under constant threat of death, his nation is being literally torn apart.
    0:50:17 And then the nation that was supposedly going to be, you know, was the biggest backer of
    0:50:23 democracy and had the back of any freedom loving nation is all of a sudden turned on him, embarrassed
    0:50:24 him at the White House.
    0:50:30 And he has had the discipline not to be insulting, not to be snarky.
    0:50:35 He realizes the best thing for his people is he can do is just trying to remain calm and establish
    0:50:37 some sense of a normalcy in the relationship.
    0:50:42 Because if Trump just likes the guy distinct of the political ramifications, maybe he won’t
    0:50:48 cut off aid as fast, or maybe he’ll start sharing intelligence again, such that, you know, maternity
    0:50:50 wards aren’t, aren’t shelled by the Russians.
    0:50:56 But this is, for me, this is, I mean, the Trump coins right up there for me, the deficits are
    0:51:01 right up there, but the number one kind of thing we’re going to look back on and think this
    0:51:07 was really a strategic mistake in terms of creating a post-World War II order that we have torn
    0:51:09 up and created a series of incentives.
    0:51:10 It says to autocrats, you know what?
    0:51:16 It kind of pays to invade your neighbor if you get the opportunity, because then America
    0:51:21 might show up and just force both sides to negotiate and give you what you already, what
    0:51:22 you have conquered.
    0:51:28 I mean, it’s like the worst game theory, the worst strategy in history in terms of forward
    0:51:29 leaning incentives.
    0:51:31 So I like them being in a room together.
    0:51:35 By the way, it looked like something filmed at the set of Naboo from, remember the Star Wars
    0:51:36 film?
    0:51:39 It looked like they were about to break out lightsabers or something.
    0:51:46 But I like the fact they’re getting together because Trump is a man child and his decisions
    0:51:50 are largely based on two things, his blood sugar level and who we spoke to last.
    0:51:55 The best thing that could happen to the American economy right now is if someone chained Peter
    0:51:57 Navarro to his alcohol cabinet at home.
    0:52:04 Because every time he talks to Navarro, he starts thinking, oh, we should feed into chat
    0:52:05 GPT.
    0:52:08 Yeah, like, OK, I realize I’m all over the place here right now.
    0:52:15 But just so you know, just to remind everybody, the tariffs, the amount of tariffs were fed into
    0:52:21 chat GPT to normalize or bring equivalence or equanimity to the trade deficit.
    0:52:23 People don’t understand.
    0:52:27 And this is part of the problem of having a shitty K through 12 education system in the
    0:52:27 U.S.
    0:52:29 We have a lack of critical thinkers.
    0:52:32 I have a trade deficit with my barber.
    0:52:34 That’s not a bad thing.
    0:52:35 You have a surplus of good haircuts.
    0:52:36 There you go.
    0:52:37 Well, hello.
    0:52:38 I mean, come on.
    0:52:39 You’ll see it on YouTube.
    0:52:45 And then to relate tariffs back to Zelensky, this is how fucking insane we become putting
    0:52:50 in office someone who is now allying himself with our enemies who do not have our best interests
    0:52:51 at heart.
    0:52:54 Tariffs on every nation except for a small number.
    0:52:57 And who are those small number of nations who are exempt from tariffs?
    0:53:03 Russia, Belarus, North Korea, Iran.
    0:53:04 Oh, but guess what?
    0:53:08 Ukraine was not exempt from these tariffs.
    0:53:11 I mean, that kind of tells you what is the mindset.
    0:53:14 What side is our administration on?
    0:53:19 And the question is, is America on the same side as the administration?
    0:53:21 Well, they’re not.
    0:53:25 And that’s confirmed when people get asked this question over and over again.
    0:53:31 And I do think that the Oval Office meeting with Zelensky will be looked back upon as a pivotal
    0:53:36 moment in this administration in the negative direction, not quite as bad as the disastrous
    0:53:38 withdrawal from Afghanistan.
    0:53:40 But people really didn’t like that.
    0:53:46 Even the most hardcore Trump supporters did not feel like it had to go in that direction.
    0:53:52 And they thought that Zelensky could have been more solicitous and, you know, tried to deescalate
    0:53:53 a bit.
    0:53:55 But in general, uncomfortable with that.
    0:54:00 But that’s the case that you’ve been discussing for months now.
    0:54:05 I mean, since we’ve been doing this podcast that no one has made the proper appeal to the
    0:54:06 American public.
    0:54:11 Even if you don’t care about the post-World War II order protecting democracy, just make
    0:54:17 an economic argument about how this is good for us and that you’re making money off of being
    0:54:23 able to equip Ukrainians with the weapons that they need to possibly be able to finish off
    0:54:23 this war.
    0:54:30 And you’re totally right about the blood sugar and, you know, the latest, the last person that
    0:54:33 he was with or the person who gives him the most compliments.
    0:54:39 But an important aspect of it as well is how obsessed this administration is with being able
    0:54:41 to say that they have finished something.
    0:54:48 Even if it’s done completely terribly, if they can just say, we solved this, like you see
    0:54:49 it even with the trade deals.
    0:54:53 Scott Besson was on with Martha Raddatz and she says, well, what’s the status of, you know,
    0:54:56 Trump says we have 200 trade deals that are going to be done.
    0:55:00 He goes, well, I think they’re talking about he’s talking about sub deals, which is basically
    0:55:00 nothing.
    0:55:01 Right.
    0:55:05 That he is, you know, been walking around and saying, wouldn’t it be nice if we had a deal
    0:55:05 with India?
    0:55:09 And then poof, they’re like, oh, we’re on the precipice of a deal with India.
    0:55:12 Did you see also, by the way, that Apple has said that they could just start making the
    0:55:13 phones in India?
    0:55:16 So it’s not like if this is actually going to come back to America.
    0:55:19 They’re just going to find somewhere else cheap to be able to do it.
    0:55:24 But because the administration is obsessed with the finish line and being able to say
    0:55:29 mission accomplished, which obviously didn’t work out that well for George Bush, that they
    0:55:32 just will get to an end no matter the quality of it.
    0:55:37 And I think that’s what Putin understands and that he could be the main beneficiary of this
    0:55:42 because if they’re wanting to put an end date on this, then that’s going to work in his
    0:55:43 favor.
    0:55:46 Ukraine is happy to play the long game with this.
    0:55:47 Russia can’t.
    0:55:48 They don’t have the manpower for it.
    0:55:55 They can’t take the economic destruction that’s happening for that long, even if they are exempt
    0:55:56 from these tariffs.
    0:56:01 And so the faster it goes, the better it works for Putin.
    0:56:05 And that’s in Trump’s interest because he wants to say, sign sealed and delivered.
    0:56:06 Here’s the pretty bow.
    0:56:09 You know, we solved the Ukrainian-Russian conflict.
    0:56:15 Again, timing, understanding the space-time continuum is a real advantage, if you can think
    0:56:15 critically.
    0:56:22 And that is, every day that this war continues, it costs Putin $500 million to a billion.
    0:56:29 In addition, if you look at how Russia interfaces with our economy, its two primary services of
    0:56:34 attack for interfacing with our economy are cyber attacks, which wreak havoc in our economy,
    0:56:35 and stealing our IP.
    0:56:41 Now, when they are losing half a billion to a billion dollars a day fighting this war and
    0:56:47 sending their young men into a meat grinder, it’s logical to think they do not have the
    0:56:53 resources or, at a minimum, are distracted from the havoc they try to wreak every day in
    0:56:53 our economy.
    0:56:59 So the longer this war goes, and this is a terrible, macabre thing to say, because it
    0:57:02 is a meat grinder, the better it is for the United States.
    0:57:08 In addition, long-term, if we don’t want China to invade Taiwan, if we want fewer and fewer
    0:57:13 border skirmishes that could erupt into a regional conflict and then ultimately erupt into something
    0:57:18 much, much worse, we want to create an incentive system where when you invade your neighbor, you
    0:57:19 regret doing it.
    0:57:25 All of the game theory adds up to the notion that the best investment we could make is to
    0:57:30 figure out a way to continue to let the Ukrainian army, the brave men and women who have pushed
    0:57:33 back with incredible technology, including drones, and then adopt some of that technology
    0:57:38 for the West, use it as a stimulus program for the United States weapons manufacturers, which
    0:57:43 mostly go to red states, for about 8% of our military budget.
    0:57:49 The president is a capital allocator, similar to a CEO, and his job is to allocate capital to
    0:57:51 its greatest return.
    0:57:56 There are few ways you could get a greater return on capital than giving Ukraine $60 to $80 billion
    0:58:02 a year to continue to diminish the viscosity and the tensile strength of an adversary.
    0:58:05 Now let’s talk about the great quote-unquote dealmaker, the art of the deal.
    0:58:10 The dealmaker, right, has managed to lose his dad’s money.
    0:58:15 If he’d invested his dad’s inheritance in ETFs or index funds, he’d be wealthier.
    0:58:23 If his dealmaking skills have left a trail of 11 bankruptcies and a ton of unpaid subcontractors.
    0:58:26 He’s an amazing reality TV show host.
    0:58:30 I think he made hundreds of millions, maybe even a billion from The Apprentice.
    0:58:31 He’s amazing.
    0:58:34 He’s not a dealmaker.
    0:58:39 So the notion that he’s going to come to some sort of like great, amazing deals with these
    0:58:44 people and all of this nonsense that 160 countries have lined up to do deals with us, I interviewed
    0:58:46 the prime minister of Canada.
    0:58:48 That’s our biggest trading partner.
    0:58:50 There’s no discussions there.
    0:58:54 She is our third largest trading partner after Canada and Mexico.
    0:58:59 She has stated publicly, we’re not talking to this batshit crazy weirdo.
    0:59:00 We’re not talking.
    0:59:02 And he’s, quote unquote, the great dealmaker.
    0:59:03 Nonsense.
    0:59:05 Nonsense.
    0:59:08 He’s a terrible business person.
    0:59:09 And strategist.
    0:59:12 Because our closest allies now are just going to go make their own deals with China.
    0:59:13 I’m sure you saw that.
    0:59:18 That Japan is like, all right, well, we’re going to have to go it alone here, basically,
    0:59:20 at this point.
    0:59:20 Yeah.
    0:59:27 And, I mean, the Chinese trolling Trump is entertaining, but knowing what we know about
    0:59:34 him and what Peter Navarro has done for this administration, I kind of believed them when
    0:59:39 they said, no, there’s not some secret backdoor deal and we’re going to, you know, pop up next
    0:59:43 week and say everything is fine and you’ll still be able to get your, you know, your towels
    0:59:44 for a dollar off Xi’an.
    0:59:46 Like, this isn’t happening.
    0:59:50 And we’re going to figure out an alternative route to making sure that we continue to make
    0:59:51 money.
    0:59:56 And you guys have got to sort it out and just look at that, you know, that light up image
    0:59:59 of where all the shipping containers are and how they’re not getting here.
    1:00:02 So second half of May, prepare for your empty shelves.
    1:00:05 And then the world’s worst Christmas coming.
    1:00:06 Yeah.
    1:00:11 And just a quick shout out to all the incredible leadership from our Fortune 500 CEOs, everyone
    1:00:16 ranging from nobody to absolutely fucking nobody has spoken up against this madness.
    1:00:20 And, you know, all these guys wake up and look in the mirror and say, hello, Mr. President.
    1:00:24 Most of them think they should be in the cabinet or president themselves.
    1:00:28 And leadership is the primary characteristic of who needs to be or who should be president.
    1:00:32 And leadership is doing the right thing when it’s really hard.
    1:00:34 And none of them are doing anything.
    1:00:37 They’re all doing these backchannel, these conversations because they’re so worried about
    1:00:38 shareholder value.
    1:00:40 None of them have stood up.
    1:00:46 This is the biggest commercial opportunity in decades would be for someone to stand up
    1:00:47 and say, this is wrong.
    1:00:51 You know, our immigrants are an incredibly important part of our world.
    1:00:54 Declaring war on our trade allies is just stupid.
    1:00:58 The way we’re going about this is not in line with our American values.
    1:01:03 And we at Nike or Walmart or Apple stand by American values.
    1:01:04 We’re an American company.
    1:01:06 And what’s going on here is wrong.
    1:01:11 And you would see a flood, a flood of business into that brand.
    1:01:12 Because here’s the bottom line.
    1:01:17 The people who are hardcore MAGA don’t have a lot of disposable income.
    1:01:22 When Nike supported Colin Kaepernick, it was genius because two thirds of their business
    1:01:24 comes from outside of the U.S.
    1:01:28 who don’t care about race relations and two thirds of their revenues within the U.S.
    1:01:31 come from people under the age of 30 who are very progressive.
    1:01:34 And this is the same opportunity.
    1:01:41 The first company that comes out against these reckless, cruel actions is going to get a flood
    1:01:47 of capital because the bottom line is the people who are against these policies and this overreach
    1:01:48 are one thing.
    1:01:51 They’re consumers, meaning they have extra money to spend.
    1:01:54 And he has declared war on so many people all at once.
    1:02:00 He might get angry and threaten to sue Tim Cook or get mad at the CEO of Nike.
    1:02:04 He’s running out of ammunition to fire in a million different directions.
    1:02:08 He’s literally declared war on every front.
    1:02:09 On islands made up of penguin.
    1:02:15 Biggest consumer brand opportunity in a decade will be for a CEO to come out against all this
    1:02:16 bullshit.
    1:02:21 In the positive category, I just want to say, and as evidence of this working, the Marriott
    1:02:29 CEO who defended DEI got 40,000 emails from associates in support of it.
    1:02:30 Well, and the Costco CEO.
    1:02:31 I didn’t know about Costco.
    1:02:33 So there you go.
    1:02:33 All right.
    1:02:34 We’ll take one quick break and we’ll be back.
    1:02:43 On March 12th, Kilmar Abrego Garcia was picked up by ICE in Prince George’s County, Maryland.
    1:02:50 In the days that followed, he was deported to the country where he was born, El Salvador, except
    1:02:53 this time he wound up in its infamous Seacott prison.
    1:02:59 At Seacott, they don’t let any of the prisoners have access to the outside world.
    1:03:04 On March 31st, the Trump administration said it had mistakenly deported Abrego Garcia, calling
    1:03:05 it an administrative error.
    1:03:10 On April 4th, a U.S. district judge told the Trump administration to have Abrego Garcia
    1:03:12 back in the United States by April 7th.
    1:03:16 On April 10th, the Supreme Court entered the chat and more or less agreed, saying the Trump
    1:03:19 administration needed to get Abrego Garcia back.
    1:03:22 But it’s April 23rd, and he’s still not back.
    1:03:28 On Today Explained, we’re going to speak with the Maryland senator who sat down with Abrego
    1:03:33 Garcia in El Salvador last week and figure out how this legal standoff between the Trump
    1:03:36 administration and the courts might play out.
    1:03:47 A surprising amount of just being alive in 2025 means interacting with devices and platforms.
    1:03:51 And this week on The Vergecast, we talk about a lot of devices and a lot of platforms.
    1:03:56 We talk about YouTube, which just turned 20, and what it means that it is essentially the
    1:03:58 whole entertainment industry in one platform.
    1:04:02 We talk about Google and Meta, which are both on trial to see if their platforms are going
    1:04:02 to be broken up.
    1:04:07 We talk about your phone and what it means that there is this one device that has all of your
    1:04:11 most personal information on it that someone at the border can just look at.
    1:04:15 All that and lots more on The Vergecast, wherever you get podcasts.
    1:04:26 The regular season is in the rearview, and now it’s time for the games that matter the most.
    1:04:30 This is Kenny Beecham, and Playoff Basketball is finally here.
    1:04:34 On Small Ball, we’re diving deep into every series, every crunch time finish, every coaching
    1:04:37 adjustment that can make or break a championship run.
    1:04:40 Who’s building for a 16-win marathon?
    1:04:42 Which superstar will submit their legacy?
    1:04:46 And which role player is about to become a household name?
    1:04:50 With so many fascinating first-round matchups, will the West be the bloodbath we anticipate?
    1:04:53 Will the East be as predictable as we think?
    1:04:54 Can the Celtics defend their title?
    1:04:59 Can Steph Curry, LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard push the young teams at the top?
    1:05:03 I’ll be bringing the expertise, the passionate, genuine opinion you need for the most exciting
    1:05:04 time of the NBA calendar.
    1:05:08 Small Ball is your essential companion for the NBA postseason.
    1:05:12 Join me, Kenny Beecham, for new episodes of Small Ball throughout the playoffs.
    1:05:14 Don’t miss Small Ball with Kenny Beecham.
    1:05:19 New episodes dropping through the playoffs, available on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.
    1:05:23 Welcome back.
    1:05:27 Before we go, this year’s White House Correspondents Weekend captured the tension between Trump and
    1:05:28 the press.
    1:05:32 The roast was scrapped, the mood was tense, and once again, Trump skipped a dinner, keeping
    1:05:34 up a tradition from both his terms.
    1:05:39 This all unfolded as his administration tightens control over press access, while the media tried
    1:05:41 to frame the night as a celebration of a free press.
    1:05:45 But now with more MAGA-friendly media in the mix, they’re walking a tightrope.
    1:05:50 Jess, I know you weren’t there, but what did this weekend say to you about the state of
    1:05:51 the press?
    1:05:57 In process, it was very clear from a number of the acceptance speeches, most notably Alex Thompson,
    1:06:06 from Axios, who got a big award for his coverage of Biden’s decline, that the press is doing some
    1:06:12 incredible work at home and abroad, but there’s a lot more to do.
    1:06:22 And this lack of trust that we have in the press and media is an incredibly enormous challenge
    1:06:25 that they’re facing and that they’re well aware of.
    1:06:29 And I was glad to hear that because that’s something certainly working in conservative media that
    1:06:35 I hear about all the time, that you’re not going to be able to repair this fracture unless
    1:06:41 people, generally speaking, take ownership over their coverage through the Biden years.
    1:06:47 And a lot on the left are criticizing Alex Thompson and Jake Tapper and people who are writing
    1:06:54 these kind of expose books about the Biden years saying, you know, you’re aiding and abetting
    1:06:56 an authoritarian regime by doing this.
    1:07:00 And you’re just giving the other side fodder to come and attack us.
    1:07:09 But I do think that it’s important that people in the media are self-reflective and open about
    1:07:14 their own biases and mistakes that they have made or could have made in their coverage.
    1:07:17 And I think that that is moving in the right direction.
    1:07:22 But it was a super somber event, you know, canceling the comedian, I thought, was the right decision.
    1:07:28 But, you know, you look at that room and it just it feels like we have a lot of incredible
    1:07:35 people that are doing groundbreaking work, but also that everything is so bleak and that I don’t
    1:07:43 know how we’ll be able to get back to a time where the presidency and the press corps and
    1:07:49 the consuming public are actually on the same page and have respect for one another.
    1:07:49 Yeah.
    1:07:52 My first inclination was like the media is so obsessed with itself.
    1:07:54 I could kind of care less about this thing.
    1:08:00 But what you said is pretty powerful, that it’s just a shame that a lot of these people are
    1:08:00 really talented.
    1:08:01 They’re really hardworking.
    1:08:04 You know, he’s taken away like one night of fun.
    1:08:07 I mean, it’s just kind of give them their party, right?
    1:08:09 Let them poke fun at each other.
    1:08:11 And the president shows up and shows good humor.
    1:08:13 You’re right.
    1:08:16 It’s sort of, all right, what if I can kill joy?
    1:08:17 We need more parties.
    1:08:19 We need more reasons to get together and laugh together.
    1:08:22 We have a note here to talk about George Santos.
    1:08:24 I could give a fuck about George Santos.
    1:08:25 He’s a trivia question.
    1:08:27 Good luck.
    1:08:27 Enjoy prison.
    1:08:31 What I’m going to do is take this time to talk about.
    1:08:36 I read something that Pope Francis wrote when he was in the hospital that I thought was
    1:08:37 really nice.
    1:08:38 He wrote,
    1:08:42 The walls of hospitals have heard much more honest prayers than churches.
    1:08:45 They have witnessed far more sincere kisses than those in airports.
    1:08:52 It is in hospitals that you see a homophobe being saved by a gay doctor, a privileged doctor saving
    1:08:53 the life of a beggar.
    1:08:59 In intensive care, you see a Jew taking care of a racist, a police officer and a prisoner
    1:09:01 in the same room receiving the same care.
    1:09:07 A wealthy patient waiting for a liver transplant, ready to receive the organ from a poor donor.
    1:09:13 It’s in these moments, when the hospital touches the wounds of people, that different worlds
    1:09:15 intersect according to a divine design.
    1:09:20 And in this communion of destinies, we realize that alone, we are nothing.
    1:09:25 The absolute truth of people, most of the time, only reveals itself in moments of pain
    1:09:28 or in the real threat of an irreversible loss.
    1:09:34 A hospital is a place where human beings remove their masks and show themselves as they truly
    1:09:36 are, in their purest essence.
    1:09:40 This life will pass quickly, so do not waste it fighting with people.
    1:09:43 Do not criticize your body too much.
    1:09:44 Do not complain excessively.
    1:09:46 Do not lose sleep over bills.
    1:09:48 Make sure to hug your loved ones.
    1:09:51 Do not worry too much about keeping the house spotless.
    1:09:54 Material goods must be earned by each person.
    1:09:58 Do not dedicate yourself to accumulating an inheritance.
    1:10:00 You are waiting for too much.
    1:10:07 Christmas, Friday next year, when you have money, when love arrives, when everything is perfect.
    1:10:11 Listen, perfection does not exist.
    1:10:16 A human being cannot attain it because we are simply not made to be fulfilled here.
    1:10:19 Here, we are given an opportunity to learn.
    1:10:22 So make the most of this trial of life and do it now.
    1:10:24 Respect yourself.
    1:10:25 Respect others.
    1:10:29 Walk your own path and let go of the path others have chosen for you.
    1:10:30 Respect.
    1:10:32 Do not comment.
    1:10:33 Do not judge.
    1:10:34 Do not interfere.
    1:10:35 Love more.
    1:10:36 Forgive more.
    1:10:38 Embrace more.
    1:10:39 Live more intensely.
    1:10:42 And leave the rest in the hands of the Creator.
    1:10:44 Isn’t that wonderful?
    1:10:46 Yeah, it was really moving.
    1:10:51 It almost makes me positive on organized religion.
    1:11:06 And the Pope, in a number of junctures throughout his tenure, has made me rethink my kind of aversion to organized religion, setting aside all of the terrible things that have gone on within the Catholic Church.
    1:11:14 But I’m generally pretty anti-religion, you know, very standard Reform Jew that does the High Holidays.
    1:11:31 And I think if more religious leaders were like that and spoke like that about humanity and the inherent connections between us, that we would all be a lot better off and people would be part of these communities.
    1:11:46 And it would save them in all sorts of ways, not just in a hospital bed, but in your daily life, to have people that you can go and pray with and commune with and share meals with and play pickup basketball with and whatever else they get from those kinds of groups.
    1:11:52 And I know that he was not a traditional Pope and that he was very forward-thinking.
    1:11:56 And I guess because it aligned with my politics, I was always comfortable with it.
    1:12:06 And I thought, how can you be criticizing this guy who’s just saying, be decent to immigrants and treat trans kids like human beings and love one another?
    1:12:13 And if you’re LGBTQ+, you know, I’m happy for you to get married the same way as a man and a woman.
    1:12:24 But he revolutionized the papacy, and it’ll be really interesting to see who comes next and what kind of tradition they fall into.
    1:12:26 I guess we’ll know.
    1:12:29 They’ll do it in like 10 days, right, 10 to 15 days from now.
    1:12:33 We’ll see the plume of smoke coming up, right?
    1:12:36 And they will have selected the next Pope.
    1:12:38 But he—I don’t know.
    1:12:41 He felt like a complete global treasure.
    1:12:44 And I don’t know.
    1:12:49 This non-religious person felt impacted by him, and that’s not easy to do.
    1:12:50 Yeah, agreed.
    1:12:52 All right, let’s leave it there.
    1:12:54 Thank you for listening to Raging Moderates.
    1:12:56 Our producers are David Toledo and Chinenye Onike.
    1:12:58 Our technical director is Drew Burroughs.
    1:13:02 You can now find Raging Moderates on its own feed every Tuesday and Friday.
    1:13:03 That’s right, its own feed.
    1:13:08 That means exclusive interviews with a sharp political mind you won’t hear anywhere else.
    1:13:11 This week, Jess is talking with Senator Catherine Cortez Masto.
    1:13:14 Make sure to follow us wherever you get your podcasts so you don’t miss an episode.

    Scott and Jessica break down the first 100 days of Trump’s second term — from mass deportations and trade wars to the arrest of judges and shaky Ukraine peace talks. Plus, they dig into the state of the press after a tense White House Correspondents’ Dinner and the rise of MAGA media.

    Follow Jessica Tarlov, @JessicaTarlov

    Follow Prof G, @profgalloway.

    Follow Raging Moderates, @RagingModeratesPod.

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

  • Everything You Need To Know About A.I. Avatars in 2025

    AI transcript
    0:00:06 Hey, welcome to the Next Way Podcast. I’m Matt Wolf. And today we’re talking with the
    0:00:12 founder of Mindstream, a daily AI newsletter. And well, talking to him, I learned that he
    0:00:19 hates making video. So he became an expert on all of the various AI avatar tools to help
    0:00:24 him create videos. So in this episode, we’re going to dive down the rabbit hole of AI avatars,
    0:00:28 how to use them, how to create them, how to make them the most effective you possibly can.
    0:00:32 It’s an amazing episode. So let’s go ahead and dive in with Adam Biddlecomb.
    0:00:38 Hey, we’ll be back to the pod in just a minute. But first, I wanted to tell you about something
    0:00:43 very exciting happening at HubSpot. It’s no secret in business that the faster you can pivot,
    0:00:47 the more successful you’ll be. And with how fast AI is changing everything we do,
    0:00:53 you need tools that actually deliver for you in record time. Enter HubSpot’s spring spotlight,
    0:00:57 where we just dropped hundreds of updates that are completely changing the game.
    0:01:02 We’re talking breeze agents that use AI to do in minutes what used to take days,
    0:01:08 workspaces that bring everything you need into one view, and marketing hub features that use AI to
    0:01:15 find your perfect audience. What used to take weeks now happens in seconds. And that changes everything.
    0:01:20 This isn’t just about moving fast. It’s about moving fast in the right direction. Visit
    0:01:27 hubspot.com forward slash spotlight and transform how your business grows starting today.
    0:01:31 Thanks for joining me today, Adam. I’m excited to dive in. How are you doing?
    0:01:36 Yeah, I’m good. Thanks so much for having me on. I’ve been looking forward to this for a while.
    0:01:41 And yeah, I’m really interested in these AI avatars. I’m someone who creates like a lot of content for
    0:01:44 social. I’ve been building my following specifically on LinkedIn for a couple of years.
    0:01:49 And dude, I just hate doing video. So anything that can like stop me setting up,
    0:01:54 sitting down in front of a camera, I’m all in. Yeah, yeah. I mean, I really love the concept of
    0:01:59 sort of making an AI avatar who can do, you know, maybe some of the short form video for you. But I’ve
    0:02:05 been really, really sort of scared to do it myself because of how the audience might react, which I’m
    0:02:10 sure we’ll get into some of that conversation a little bit deeper in. But maybe let’s start with
    0:02:16 just sort of the landscape, like what tools are available out there to build this kind of stuff.
    0:02:21 And maybe we’ll get into some of the pros and cons of each. Yeah, 100%. So there’s really two big
    0:02:26 players, which is HeyGen and Synthesia. I kind of think of these as maybe like the ChatGPT and Claw.
    0:02:31 They’re the ones that have a lot of funding, a lot of support behind them, a lot of usage. And they’re
    0:02:35 kind of like, you know, generalist tools as such, like a lot of people are using them for all of
    0:02:40 the different use cases. And I’ve spent most of my time playing around with HeyGen. At HubSpot,
    0:02:45 we have some support from HeyGen. So I can get like that little bit of extra love that isn’t maybe
    0:02:49 available to everyone else. But then there are some other tools. I’ve been playing around with Argyle
    0:02:54 recently, which is specifically made more for people creating this short form content. So they’ve got a
    0:02:59 bit more of like editing built in. And it’s just like very, very quick and easy to use. Whereas HeyGen and
    0:03:01 Synthesia, there might be a little bit of a learning curve.
    0:03:05 Gotcha. Like HeyGen, when they first came out, they actually were called something else. And then
    0:03:12 they rebranded. But Synthesia was actually the first one that I came across early on and was like
    0:03:17 super impressed by it. And the way they were sort of angling these things, like originally when they
    0:03:23 first launched was this like marketing tool where you can make customized videos to your audience.
    0:03:30 So let’s say somebody joins your email newsletter, you can actually email them and a personalized video
    0:03:33 would be talking to you that would say like, Hey Adam, thank you so much for joining the Mindstream
    0:03:38 newsletter. I really appreciate you joining. Here’s some things you can expect from us. And it would
    0:03:43 like actually personalize that video. That was the use case that we’re pitching, but the use case that
    0:03:51 it’s sort of evolved into has been more of this short form content, like AI avatar thing, which has been
    0:03:56 really, really interesting to watch. You know, we were talking before we hit record about Rowan Chung,
    0:04:01 who’s been doing a lot of this kind of stuff. And he kind of modeled that from Varun Maya.
    0:04:06 And then we started to see a whole bunch of other channels pop up that are doing this kind of thing.
    0:04:12 And it sort of blows my mind, like how well they do, right? Like I’m so impressed that they’re not
    0:04:17 getting pushback or people going, Oh, this is gross. It’s an AI character, you know?
    0:04:22 Yeah. Rowan Chung’s Instagram is insane. And he posted a really great case study on it that
    0:04:28 really kind of inspired me. He spoke about like how many followers the account grew to 50,000 followers
    0:04:32 in time of posting 7 million views. I think he’s like more than double that amount of followers now.
    0:04:37 And it’s all exclusively these AI avatar videos. And generally what you find with these pieces of content,
    0:04:43 if you haven’t seen them, is you’ll get kind of like 20% of the video will be the avatar speaking
    0:04:48 to camera. And then 80% will be B-roll. Right. And I think part of the reason with that is if you’re
    0:04:53 seeing the avatar in like quick cuts, it isn’t really on screen enough to kind of maybe put you off or make
    0:04:59 you realize that it is an AI avatar because the fidelity is getting pretty good, but it’s not yet
    0:05:06 kind of human. It’s maybe like 85%. Yeah. Um, so yeah, a lot of B-roll and a lot of cuts to kind of
    0:05:10 get it to that level where the video is really captivating. Yeah. Yeah. When I first saw the
    0:05:16 Varun Maya doing it, the first few videos I saw, I did not even realize they were AI. He actually had
    0:05:21 to point out like, that’s actually not me speaking. That’s actually AI. There’s, I believe he used like
    0:05:25 11 labs to do the voice, to make it sound like him. And it was, Hey Jen, to do the actual video.
    0:05:29 And then Reed Hoffman, I don’t know if you’re familiar with, uh, you know, he was the founder
    0:05:35 of LinkedIn. He actually made like AI virtual read and he does like interviews with himself.
    0:05:40 And originally he was using some sort of like custom model, but it got to a point where Hey Jen got so
    0:05:47 good. But now the whole virtual read is also just Hey Jen. It’s pretty crazy. That video was insane.
    0:05:51 It was a full kind of like studio setup with him sat down, speaking to himself. When that came out,
    0:05:55 that really blew my mind. Yeah. And you see these kinds of use cases out there, like with these
    0:06:00 sort of leaders in the space. And like, you do know that they’re working very closely with the
    0:06:04 technology leaders to get it to that level. Yeah. Yeah. They may even have access to like
    0:06:07 a tier that might not be totally public yet. Some of these guys.
    0:06:12 Yeah, I think so. What I’m really interested in. And I think a lot of people in this space is like,
    0:06:18 what can we get easily? Like that’s where it’s going to become adopted by loads and loads and loads
    0:06:23 of people. So like, where is the technology at with like a very, very basic input. Right.
    0:06:26 And I’ve got some examples I can show you. Yeah. Yeah. I’d love that.
    0:06:32 I’m going to show you like 10, 20 seconds of three models. So I’m going to start off with Hey Jen.
    0:06:37 And they’re all a little bit different. But what we have with Hey Jen is the input recording that I’ve
    0:06:41 used to train the avatar is the same across all of these three. So I recorded two and a half minutes.
    0:06:45 The script was actually provided by Synthesia. And you just kind of like speak to camera and read
    0:06:49 the script. And then I’ve trained the three models. This here is the Hey Jen test.
    0:06:56 Do you think faking your Instagram birthday still works? Not anymore. Instagram has leveled up its AI
    0:07:03 to spot underage users. Even if they lie about their age, it can read between the lines from a sweet 16
    0:07:07 caption to user reports. Yeah, that’s really good. That was generally with Hey Jen.
    0:07:12 Yeah. So the video is in Hey Jen. What I’ve done is I’ve actually uploaded my own audio,
    0:07:18 like true audio recorded with into this microphone. So this, in my opinion, is one of the ways to get
    0:07:24 like a real jump in the output. Hey Jen has this like really easily to do. I’ve tested the Hey Jen
    0:07:30 audio, which I have elsewhere. But natively, the audio options from these tools, I don’t think are
    0:07:34 great. You mentioned 11 labs earlier, they do kind of integrate with 11 labs. So you can go and train
    0:07:40 a voice on 11 labs separately and like connect that in. But if you do have the time to record like a 60
    0:07:45 second audio input, that’s probably where I’d go. And just for general context, we’re going to start
    0:07:49 posting these clips like every day across the mainstream Instagram and LinkedIn actually starting
    0:07:56 today. So this is what we’re going to be doing currently. So jumping over to Synthesia. Synthesia
    0:08:02 is the same input, but in this case, we’re using their audio. Think faking your Insta birthday still
    0:08:09 works? Not anymore. Instagram has leveled up its AI to spot underage users, even if they lie about their
    0:08:15 age. It can read between the lines from a sweet 16 inches caption to user reports. And if it thinks
    0:08:20 you’re under 16, you’re automatically placed in a teen account. So what I think is really interesting
    0:08:26 is I actually think the lip syncing and the fidelity is better here, but maybe that’s because you’re using
    0:08:28 their audio. Right.
    0:08:33 Right. Whereas if you’re kind of uploading the audio separately, the model is kind of struggling to
    0:08:38 maybe pick up your audio. Yeah. So you almost have this like trade-off of like, what’s more important,
    0:08:43 the audio or the kind of lip syncing fidelity. Yeah. And it’s so funny. I remember when I was
    0:08:48 listening to you speaking about Eleven Labs, you said that when you listen to your own voice, it sounds
    0:08:53 rubbish. But when anyone else listens to it, they tell you it’s good. And I kind of think that it might
    0:09:00 be the same with me critiquing the Adam AI avatar. And I probably need to give these to somebody else
    0:09:04 to tell me which really is the better option. Yeah. Yeah. It’s a weird phenomenon that happens.
    0:09:07 Yeah. With the Eleven Labs, I’m like, this doesn’t sound like me at all. And then all of the comments
    0:09:12 like it sounds exactly like you. And when I watched this, I was really impressed with the voice that
    0:09:16 came out of it. Yeah. I feel like maybe with Hey Jen, there was a little bit more motion in your
    0:09:20 head where this one, it felt like you looked a little stiffer, you know, but the voice sounded
    0:09:24 great to me. Yeah. And the other thing that I’ve learned kind of when playing around with these
    0:09:30 models is the audio input, like when you’re using your own voice really dictates how the video output
    0:09:36 comes out. So if you record like the audio input and be like really dynamic and energized, then the kind
    0:09:39 of avatar will move around a little bit more. And if you speak a little bit slower and monotone,
    0:09:44 it doesn’t give that level of dynamism. Right. Right. The third one I wanted to show you is
    0:09:50 Argyle. And what I really liked about Argyle is I trained the model with the same input and then to
    0:09:54 create the video, I put in the script. And then as you’re going through the creation process, it just
    0:10:00 added subtitles for me. And it said to me, do you want to add B-roll? And I was like, sure. Okay. So
    0:10:06 this output, I have done no editing. I have not like checked it or anything. I’ve just accepted the
    0:10:11 subtitles, accepted the B-roll. And when you talk about speed to execution, this is really exciting.
    0:10:12 Cool. Let’s check it out.
    0:10:19 Think faking your Insta birthday still works? Not anymore. Instagram has leveled up its AI to spot
    0:10:24 underage users. Even if they lie about their age, it can read between the lines from a sweet 16 caption
    0:10:31 I think this is awesome. I think to get that level of output from just putting a script in, like it’s
    0:10:36 reading the script, it’s finding B-roll that’s relevant. And like the B-roll is very relevant.
    0:10:41 It’s added that music in. Obviously, this is all adjustable. But to go from like idea to posting
    0:10:47 something in this format with no editor researching your own B-roll or whatever, I think this is a
    0:10:50 pretty cool kind of like one-stop solution for this specific use case.
    0:10:57 With the Argyle, is it its own custom model or is it using like a Haygen or Synthesia on the back end?
    0:10:57 Do you know?
    0:11:02 I don’t actually know. I should look that up. But yeah, it’s an interesting thing you raised,
    0:11:06 because I think at the start of this, I mentioned how like, you know, I think a Haygen and Synthesia is
    0:11:12 like the comparable to like ChatGPT, etc. I do think that like a lot of these kind of wrapper companies
    0:11:17 are going to pop up with like specific use cases. I’ve got a friend who’s running one specifically for
    0:11:22 coaching. So they’ve got like the avatar thing built in, but then they’ve also got in the software,
    0:11:26 like all of the marketing tools that you need and like booking appointments and all of these things
    0:11:31 specifically so you can create an AI coach of yourself. So yeah, I do think that’s interesting.
    0:11:32 Go on.
    0:11:36 Now, I’m curious, when you showed me the first one, the Haygen one, you said that you actually
    0:11:42 recorded your own voice into it. Is there a benefit to doing that versus, you know, just flipping on the
    0:11:47 camera and, you know, recording your voice to the camera? Because, you know, at the end of the day,
    0:11:51 it’s probably the same amount of time that you put into like actually recording your voice
    0:11:55 to feed it to Haygen versus just flipping on the camera and recording into a camera.
    0:12:02 I think for myself, if I want to record a video, even if I use something like a teleprompter,
    0:12:06 I personally just find it quite hard. Like first, I’ve got to like turn all my lights on and everything,
    0:12:11 get my camera set up, and then I’ve got to deliver and read to camera and be dynamic and all of these
    0:12:17 things. And for me to record like a 60-second clip like that might take 30, 40 minutes. But if I have a 60-second
    0:12:22 script read, I can read that in one take pretty dynamically. Maybe two. But I feel quite
    0:12:27 comfortable just recording audio compared to video. That’s just me. Obviously, I’m speaking to
    0:12:31 you, Matt, who’s been doing YouTube forever. So for you, it probably seems like second nature to just
    0:12:36 click with camera and click record. But I think where this is going to be particularly interesting
    0:12:39 is for people like myself who are not so used to recording videos.
    0:12:44 You know, there’s a lot of these things that have gone like really viral. Like we mentioned
    0:12:47 Varun Maia, we mentioned Rowan Chung. There was another one that you mentioned earlier.
    0:12:48 Ruben Hasid, yeah.
    0:12:52 We mentioned a few others. I think maybe it’d be cool to show off some of these videos
    0:12:56 that have gone viral so people could kind of see what sort of results others are getting with these.
    0:12:59 A hundred percent. So here’s one of Rowan’s.
    0:13:04 This AI can turn any photo into a 3D world you can explore. World Labs, founded by the godmother
    0:13:10 of AI, Fei-Fei Li, created a system that transforms regular images into interactive 3D environments.
    0:13:14 Their system lets you step inside the picture and look around as if you were really there.
    0:13:20 You can also add real-time visual effects, change depth of field, and experiment with camera effects
    0:13:20 like dolly zooms.
    0:13:25 Very cool. Yeah, that one looks like he pretty much did the whole thing generatively.
    0:13:28 You know, it sounded like the audio was probably like an 11 labs kind of audio.
    0:13:32 And then he had all the B-roll. I don’t know if Rowan specifically
    0:13:36 uses an AI tool that sort of sources the B-roll for him,
    0:13:40 or if he does this sort of AI avatar, the whole video is shot,
    0:13:45 and then he sends it to a team member who goes and finds B-roll to kind of hide any of the uncanniness, you know?
    0:13:49 Yeah, the interesting thing is the fact that the avatar is in there for about two or three
    0:13:56 seconds in the middle. What this really is, is like great short form storytelling video with B-roll.
    0:14:01 And the avatar gives it that personal touch to kind of tie it back to like a personal brand,
    0:14:06 or even if it was a business. Whereas like, you know, when I scroll through like my Instagram or
    0:14:11 TikTok or whatever, there’s so many like great AI generated videos that don’t have any personality.
    0:14:16 The recent viral ones I’ve seen, have you seen those like, you wake up as a France in 1800s?
    0:14:23 Yeah. So like people are out there making like great AI videos, but here is a way to kind of take
    0:14:27 these AI videos and give a little bit of personality towards it. And I think the interesting thing as
    0:14:32 well is, you know, the specific use case we’re talking about is kind of me expanding and leveraging
    0:14:38 my personal brand. But I think there’s opportunity for people here to create net new personal brands
    0:14:42 that are completely fabricated, completely AI. Right. You can go and design an avatar around
    0:14:46 someone and then kind of add that as an extra element to these like faceless YouTube channels
    0:14:52 that you hear about. Yeah. Yeah. So you can almost be sort of anonymous yourself, but create a character
    0:14:56 that’s out into the world that people kind of assume is a real character. I mean, we’ve actually been
    0:15:02 seeing that quite a bit with the whole Instagram AI influencer thing, which, you know, I have very mixed
    0:15:07 feelings about it. Right. I don’t totally get it, but a lot of people are doing, you know,
    0:15:12 they’re really successful with these AI avatars and like having Instagram accounts with hundreds of
    0:15:17 thousands of followers. And the character isn’t even a real person, which, you know, kind of blows my mind
    0:15:21 still. It’s insane. Are you aware of little Michaela? I think she’s like the most famous one.
    0:15:26 That was probably like the original, right? That has kind of like the genesis of it.
    0:15:31 Yes. I was doing a bit of research. I think she launched in like 2016. Yeah. It was a startup
    0:15:38 called Brood. Trevor McFedry’s and Sarah Deku, they developed and managed her persona, social media
    0:15:44 presence, brand collaborations. And then this company was acquired in 2022. The crazy thing is,
    0:15:51 is this little Michaela earns $10 million per year from brand partnerships. And she has some insane
    0:15:57 collaborations, like with BMW of all companies, which shows that like real brands are kind of
    0:16:03 willing to work with these AI personas. And I think the thing that’s interesting is that we talk about
    0:16:09 this being launched in like 2016. This was pretty technologically revolutionary at the time, really,
    0:16:14 like this is not easy to do. But now with some of these tools, like anyone can do this for like 50
    0:16:21 bucks a month and go and create these personas. I think this AI influencer industry thing is really
    0:16:26 going to expand. And yeah, I don’t really know what that means for like, you know, the future.
    0:16:32 It’s quite scary. Yeah. I don’t know. I think there’s sort of like a generational thing, right?
    0:16:37 Like I feel like, you know, at my age, like I don’t totally get it, but I feel like I might be sort of
    0:16:41 like aged out of it, right? Because a lot of like younger generations are really into the whole like
    0:16:47 character AI thing and, you know, chatting with fictional characters on character AI. And that seems to be a
    0:16:52 popular thing. Obviously, a lot of these Instagram AI influencers get a lot of followers. For whatever
    0:16:57 reason, it doesn’t click in my brain. Like when it comes to social media, I like to connect with other
    0:17:02 humans. But I also, again, I think it’s a generational thing. I think as younger generations sort of grow up
    0:17:07 with this kind of technology sort of being natively in their lives, it’s just going to become more and
    0:17:12 more normal. I don’t know how I feel about that. Yeah, it’s very strange. I was kind of looking
    0:17:17 through her Instagram earlier and this one video like really blew my mind. She was reviewing a
    0:17:23 skincare brand. So it’s this digital avatar, like putting this kind of like skincare, like
    0:17:26 makeup stuff on and be like, this is great. It’s going to make your skin really like clean and
    0:17:31 whatever. And you kind of think the people who are watching that ad to go like, yes, I want to buy
    0:17:36 that thing now. Like surely you need to see it on a human and see kind of, you know, before or after.
    0:17:41 It’s better now. It’s all digital. Yeah. It’s so weird. So we were talking about Rowan earlier
    0:17:46 and you mentioned he put out a report and in the report, he did comment about like how it was
    0:17:51 perceived. What were some of the like things that were talked about? Because, you know, like we sort
    0:17:57 of mentioned in the beginning, my sort of biggest worry around doing that kind of thing, a short form
    0:18:01 video is, is just how it’s going to be perceived. The funny thing is I watch Rowan’s videos and I watch
    0:18:06 Varun’s videos and I don’t really think twice about it, but I’m worried about doing it myself
    0:18:11 because I’ve sort of put myself out there. I haven’t been an AI avatar. If I start doing it,
    0:18:16 are people going to be like, oh, he’s starting to go the lazy route or whatever. You know, I don’t know
    0:18:20 how it’ll be perceived. And that’s what worries me about it. Yeah. It’s wild. Like Rowan put out this
    0:18:26 tweet and maybe we can link it below, but the kind of crux of it is he says like nobody cared. Like he
    0:18:32 didn’t have any negative sentiment. And I think that is partly due to the AI thing,
    0:18:36 but also partly because of the kind of quality of the work he did. I think if he was to start posting
    0:18:41 like AI avatar content and like the B-roll wasn’t as kind of relevant and researched and all of those
    0:18:47 things, like we said, and the script wasn’t so good at storytelling, you know, I think people need good
    0:18:53 content. That’s what people are like desperate for. And if you can deliver that with this technology,
    0:18:56 technology, then I don’t think people are going to be too unhappy. And the other thing he said,
    0:19:01 which I think is crazy is he believes that the avatar is better than he is on camera. So again,
    0:19:05 I think he’s potentially quite similar to me. Don’t really want to do video. Don’t have a bunch of
    0:19:09 experience with it. Let’s look at this technology. Whereas again, for you, I think it’d be quite a
    0:19:13 leap. Yeah. You know, biggest AI YouTuber. He’s had enough of doing video.
    0:19:19 Yeah. I mean, I know Rowan personally pretty well, and I can, I can attest to the fact he doesn’t want
    0:19:23 to be on camera. We’ve tried to get him on this podcast. I’m calling him out right now. We’ve tried to get him on
    0:19:27 this podcast a handful of times and he’s always been like, yeah, I don’t really want to be on
    0:19:33 camera. So yeah, I know that’s kind of the case with him is he prefers to be behind the camera,
    0:19:39 run his newsletter and put it out videos like that. So I think, you know, like the sort of next logical
    0:19:46 discussion here is like outside of this sort of virtual influencer kind of concept, maybe we can
    0:19:51 sort of rattle off some of the various like other ways to use kind of this technology. I already
    0:19:55 mentioned one in the very beginning when this stuff first came out, sort of personalized
    0:20:00 videos that look like you created this video specifically for the person that just opted in,
    0:20:06 right? There’s APIs that can automatically, whenever you opt into an email list, feed the person’s name
    0:20:11 into like a Hey Jen generator. Hey Jen generates the videos. And then, you know, whatever, 30 minutes
    0:20:17 later, you get a welcome email with a personalized video to you, which is really, really going to
    0:20:22 probably increase retention because people feel like, Oh my God, this guy just sent me a video.
    0:20:26 Like, even if they know it’s AI, they’ll be like, I can’t believe, you know, they sent me this
    0:20:31 personalized thing. So that’s like one other use case that I’ve seen, but you know, what are some
    0:20:36 other sort of business implications? This is obviously a HubSpot podcast. They’re a B2B company,
    0:20:39 like anybody that’s listening to this, how else can they use this stuff?
    0:20:44 Yeah. Just one thing I’ll say on that personalization. Like if you think about this AI avatar,
    0:20:48 like say, Hey Jen, as part of like a big tool stack, personalization is getting more and more
    0:20:51 important. And like when you receive an email in your inbox, that doesn’t have a level of
    0:20:57 personalization, it’s almost an insult to like today. I’m really excited to see people integrating
    0:21:02 this tool with something like Clay. So like you get the personalization of like, Hey Matt,
    0:21:07 as an introduction, but then it can also bring in like extra personalization. Like I’ve scraped your
    0:21:12 LinkedIn and I know everything about you and I can make that personal message specifically to you.
    0:21:17 I think when you start getting videos like that land in your inbox. And the other thing is I get
    0:21:21 these sales emails quite often now where someone’s like, they’re offering me like, let’s say LinkedIn
    0:21:27 personal branding services. And they’ve done like a 20 second loom of them scrolling up and down my
    0:21:32 LinkedIn account while they’re kind of playing me a not very personalized thing over the top.
    0:21:37 I think personalization in outreach where you were using an AI avatar to give the personalization of
    0:21:41 yourself, but you’re integrating with tools like Clay to get a lot of information on someone and have
    0:21:44 very, very targeted outreach. I think that’s super exciting.
    0:21:49 Yeah, no, that’s definitely another thing. I mean, you’ve got these tools like, um, I think it’s
    0:21:54 pronounced N8N or Natan. I don’t know, but it’s like an AI automation tool where you can sort of
    0:21:59 start to connect all of these various tools together. So it could do things like that. Like when somebody
    0:22:05 opts in, go scrape their LinkedIn, add it to my CRM, go, you know, look at their Twitter bio, add it to my CRM.
    0:22:11 You know, do they have a website, go add that info to my CRM. And then it can pull all that data, feed it
    0:22:17 into, you know, chat GPT or clot or Gemini or whatever, and write up like a personalized message
    0:22:22 about them. Like, Hey, I know you’re into guitar and surfing. That’s really cool. I’m into that too,
    0:22:27 whatever. Right. And send like a personalized email based on all of this information that it grabbed
    0:22:32 and then even feed it into HeyJet and create a personalized video with all of that information.
    0:22:38 And I mean, right now I feel like that stuff’s still kind of expensive and still pretty slow, but I mean,
    0:22:43 it’s the worst it’s ever going to be, right? Like as the saying goes, it’s only going to get easier and faster.
    0:22:48 Yeah, a hundred percent. I think when you look at like how things are changing across any type of content creation.
    0:22:55 So we’ve talked about social media, like content creators, you could look at onboarding documents for your team.
    0:23:00 You can look at sales outreach. You can look at weekly reports in your Slack. You can look at investor emails,
    0:23:08 like any of these sorts of things. You’re kind of starting to see often like a little bit at the top of the email where you can listen to the email.
    0:23:15 I think in the future, there’s the option where you can watch the email. And I think the nice thing about the democratizing of content creation,
    0:23:22 let’s say it enables people to create content for others in the way that they like to consume it.
    0:23:28 You know, someone who is a newsletter operator. Now they have a video podcast with Hey Jen. They also have an audio podcast.
    0:23:35 They also have short form content they’ve created and you’re just able to kind of meet your audience where they want to be met.
    0:23:44 I wonder how long it’s going to be before, you know, companies like Twitter or Facebook, Instagram allow sort of this extra personalization on the video, right?
    0:23:49 You’re scrolling your Instagram feed and it’s like, Hey Matt, stop for a sec. You know, Hey Adam, stop for a sec.
    0:23:53 Have you checked out this elderberry supplement, whatever. Right.
    0:24:01 But it’s like, it personalizes and stops you based on like, um, you know, knowing your name and all the details these companies have on you.
    0:24:09 I bet you it’s not far off. Although I do feel some of those companies may like test that and then sort of pull back on it as people get creeped out by it.
    0:24:15 Yeah, I think so. The adoption curve is going to take a bit of time. I’m pretty sure you might know about this.
    0:24:21 I’m pretty sure I saw that Instagram was testing translation, which is another thing that these avatars can do.
    0:24:28 Um, so, you know, if you’re putting out content generically in English, like it’s going to automatically translate it into Spanish or whatever for different audiences.
    0:24:30 So that’s almost like the first step of that coming out.
    0:24:36 Yeah. Yeah. And not only is it translating it, I don’t know if the Instagram specifically is doing it, but I know Hey Jen does it.
    0:24:43 It actually lip syncs it. So it looks like you’re actually saying it in that other language where like, you know, YouTube has native translation.
    0:24:50 Now I don’t think it’s rolled out to everybody yet, but they have this native audio translation feature, but it doesn’t sync anything up.
    0:24:59 It just sort of overdubs like a, a translated voice over to the rest of the video, but with like Hey Jen and Synthesia and some of these tools that are out now, it actually changes your lips.
    0:25:03 So it looks like you’re saying it in that language. It doesn’t actually look like a dub anymore.
    0:25:18 Yeah. A hundred percent. And I think if you are a big content production, whatever, you know, even looking at a company like HubSpot that produces all of this video content, being able to distribute that worldwide to like every market is a huge, a huge piece of leverage of this technology.
    0:25:35 Yeah. I mean, even on YouTube, there was an interview that Colin and Samir did with Mark Zuckerberg. And then later in the interview, Mr. Beast jumped on. Right. And when Mr. Beast was on this interview, he was telling Mark Zuckerberg that only about 30% of his audience speaks English.
    0:25:50 And the reason he’s not putting more focus on Facebook is because Facebook doesn’t have that native translation and YouTube does. And, you know, when he puts it on YouTube again, 30% of people are listening in English. The other 70% are completely different languages.
    0:25:57 So it’s like, if he puts it on Facebook, he’s like missing out on potentially 70% of the people that could watch his videos.
    0:26:06 That’s insane. Mr. Beast is like so hot on this translation thing. He’s been looking at it for a while and he like has a separate company or part of his company that does this, this translation.
    0:26:15 And he’ll like hire movie stars in the countries that he wants to distribute to kind of be him on these videos, which I think is so smart.
    0:26:16 Yeah. Yeah.
    0:26:21 The thing we should talk about is the negative use case, the possibility of scamming of scammers with this technology.
    0:26:31 I was listening to an episode that you did recently where you’re talking about audio and scamming and like how, you know, you can personalize someone’s voice and call their mother or grandma or whatever.
    0:26:42 I actually had this moment like a couple of days ago, I was trying to set up a new Google account for a new business I was starting and I tried my number for the 2FA and it was like, no, you’ve got too many Google emails with this number.
    0:26:53 You can’t use it. I tried my partners, the same thing. So then I sent a 2FA code to my mom and text her saying, Hey mom, can you give me that code? And then I realized like, Oh wow, this is the kind of scam workflow.
    0:27:01 So I sent my mom a picture of myself and said, it’s actually me. Send me the code. She sent me the code. That was just a selfie that I took in that moment.
    0:27:08 You know, imagine if someone kind of got an access to a photo of me from anywhere, then they have that. That’s kind of how easy it is to get someone to send you a code.
    0:27:16 But they don’t even need to get a selfie. They could probably generate one. If there’s enough images of you online to train in, you could probably, people will be able to generate them of you.
    0:27:32 A hundred percent. So when you think about that and then you can have my voice perfectly emulated and then someone can also have my likeness personally emulated, sending a selfie video to my family member saying, I’ve just crashed my car. Can you send me some money? Like this is a pretty scary place we’re going towards.
    0:27:44 Yeah. And I mean, we’ve already seen it in like scam ads as well. You know, we mentioned Mr. Beast, Joe Rogan apparently has had it happen to him. It’s kind of popped up quite a bit where, you know, they’ll start running Facebook ads, Instagram ads, Twitter ads.
    0:27:57 And it looks like Joe Rogan or Mr. Beast or one of these big names is actually promoting a product, but they just used an AI tool, trained those person’s voice into it, and then generated an ad as those people.
    0:28:13 I don’t think that’s going away anytime soon. I think a lot of these companies are going to try to figure out how to put guardrails up against it, but it’s going to be a constant cat and mouse game, right? Like whenever new guardrails come up, the people that are trying to do this stuff are just going to figure out more sophisticated ways to get around it.
    0:28:22 But yeah, so we’re just kind of entering this world where you’ve got to be really careful. You know, you’ve got to know that this exists and kind of question everything almost, right?
    0:28:32 Like you mentioned with the scenario with your mom, like I told my parents, if you ever get a call from me saying I’m in trouble and need money or something like that, ask for this passcode, right?
    0:28:46 And then this is how you can confirm that it’s actually me is I will give you this word. If they can’t give you this word back, then you know, it’s not really me and it’s possibly a scam because look, I’m somebody who puts my likeness online a lot.
    0:28:58 I’ve got thousands of hours of video, thousands of hours of audio. I’m probably one of the easier targets for some of this kind of stuff, but you know, it’s only going to get easier and easier for people to kind of do that sort of thing.
    0:29:12 A hundred percent. And that’s a physical word that you’ve said to your mom in person or like written down somewhere. That’s really smart. I haven’t heard that before, but that is potentially one of the only ways to do it in this new world. We’re looking towards the other thing that’s interesting.
    0:29:31 You mentioned there these kind of like fake and disingenuous ads, but I do think that these avatars are really interesting for UGC ads. There are a couple of companies that I noted down, Arcads and Creatify that are kind of specifically for these use cases where you can go in and use like hundreds of their UGC creators.
    0:29:41 They’re kind of preloaded. I was looking through earlier and like, you know, you click through and it will be John and then you can have John sat laying in a hammock or sat in a podcast studio or like lying on his bed or whatever.
    0:29:46 And, you know, you can put in scripts and then B-roll and you can have them kind of holding your product.
    0:29:58 So I think when you look at like speed to market of testing and validating ideas, you can get pretty decent AI ads and test them without having to hire an actual UGC creator and ship products to people and all these sorts of things.
    0:30:04 Yeah. Yeah. I was looking at Arcads the other day. I thought it was interesting that they actually used real actors, right?
    0:30:09 They didn’t go and create like AI characters and now you can go and generate videos with those AI characters.
    0:30:14 They actually got a whole bunch of actors to come in and actually do a bunch of training.
    0:30:19 And then they use those actors inside, which if I was one of those actors, I don’t know, that would make me nervous, right?
    0:30:23 Like you’re scrolling Twitter and you see yourself in a Viagra ad or something, you know?
    0:30:27 That’s crazy. I didn’t, I didn’t realize they’d use real people to create their avatars.
    0:30:39 That’s quite interesting that that has to tell you that it cannot create the likeness of a person as well as a real person, or at least you cannot create the likeness of a person to the level that an AI can mimic a person, which is quite interesting.
    0:30:45 Yeah. Yeah. I think they had these people go and do a lot of the sort of reactions because if you look at Arcads, it’s a lot of reactions.
    0:30:51 It’s people like pointing up or people doing like the shocked face or crying or, you know, laughing or that kind of thing.
    0:31:00 And from what I understand, they brought in actors, had them do all of those things, and now you can prompt it and it will sort of mimic what they did.
    0:31:02 But obviously, you know, they’re speaking involved and stuff like that.
    0:31:14 So it’s sort of generating the reaction, but they actually have footage of those people doing those real reactions as well to sort of, you know, sort of fine tune it on those kinds of reactions.
    0:31:17 That’s really smart. I’d love to know the deal that those UGC creators made.
    0:31:22 Is it like a, is it a one-time fee that they got paid to kind of lease their likeness forever?
    0:31:26 Are they getting like two cents every time someone makes an ad with their likeness?
    0:31:28 Yeah, I have no clue.
    0:31:42 I was actually reading a story the other day, though, about how a handful of Hollywood actors are all like really, really upset because they actually gave permission and gave people the ability to use their likeness in ads and things like that.
    0:31:50 And now they’re all frustrated because they’re starting to see ads that they would have never actually approved being in spreading online.
    0:31:55 So, yeah, it’s definitely a really weird and interesting world we’re entered into with this.
    0:32:03 But I mean, the sort of like ethical use cases of making your own creators and making your own short form videos or creating ads for your own products.
    0:32:10 To me, it’s really exciting, but, you know, you do have that sort of unethical counterbalance that needs to be figured out as well.
    0:32:14 A hundred percent. I think that’s the case with kind of all of these new AI technologies.
    0:32:19 The other thing I think is interesting is the idea of brands and creator-led brands.
    0:32:27 And, you know, sometimes you will have a brand that kind of starts with a creator and then that, you know, creator will move on for whatever reason and the brand kind of gets left.
    0:32:35 I think that there’s a world where we see kind of brands that create AI personas that become the creator for that brand.
    0:32:37 But, you know, it’s not a real person. It’s forever licensed to the brand.
    0:32:49 Like, even kind of like the Duolingo owl, like, is there a version of that where, you know, that owl is actually like an AI avatar, like creator type thing that’s doing all this, like, video content?
    0:32:52 There’s obviously a range of, like, more and less human.
    0:32:54 Well, like this Lil Mikaela example.
    0:33:00 Like, if Lil Mikaela was to license herself forever to BMW and was forever the spokesperson to BMW,
    0:33:06 you can kind of create these brands around creators and get the momentum of a creator-led brand,
    0:33:09 but never, ever have the risk of that creator moving away from the brand.
    0:33:15 Yeah, we were actually talking, we had Nikola from Wonder Studio on the show not too long ago.
    0:33:23 And when we were talking to him, we were talking about this concept of, like, if you’re a brand, you can create your own, you know, Geico, Gecko, you know, Tony the Tiger,
    0:33:30 you know, all of these companies that have, like, this mascot that’s not a real human, but people know the mascot, right?
    0:33:35 Anybody can go and create that now and have that mascot do these ads for them.
    0:33:41 You know, this was in the context of using Wonder Studio and actually creating, like, a 3D character model of it
    0:33:44 and then putting them in a world using something like Wonder Studio.
    0:33:49 But, yeah, I mean, like, anybody can go and do that now and have their own sort of mascot.
    0:33:56 Like, for me, I can have, like, an animated cartoon wolf or something that pops up in my videos, and I own him forever.
    0:33:57 That’s my IP.
    0:33:59 He’s never going to, like, you know, go look for another job.
    0:34:05 Yeah, and then when you think about where you can place that character, like, so, yeah, you pick up the phone to kind of, like, tell them you crashed your car
    0:34:11 and it’s the Geico Gecko that answers you, you know, and you, like, do the chatbot on the website and, like, the avatar of them pops up
    0:34:12 and it’s not just a chatbot.
    0:34:14 It’s, like, the Gecko speaking to you, you know.
    0:34:21 I think it’s a really smart opportunity for some brands to go out and really, really own this and put this, like, whatever it is, everywhere.
    0:34:23 Like, all the touch points with this brand.
    0:34:30 You can even imagine walking into a store, like, walking into the Apple store, and there’s just this, like, Apple, like, talking to you, like a hologram of an Apple.
    0:34:38 The company, I think they’re called Hypervision, that are doing these holograms, which are similar to the avatars for, like, conference booths and, like, welcoming in stores.
    0:34:41 So, I think that’s a kind of exciting tangent of it.
    0:34:48 I went to a small meetup up in San Francisco a couple months ago, and as you walked in the door, it wasn’t a hologram.
    0:34:51 It was, like, a giant flat screen TV that had, like, a camera on the top.
    0:34:55 But as you walk in the door, it was like, hey, welcome into our store.
    0:34:56 Oh, I love the shirt you’re wearing.
    0:34:57 That plaid looks really good on you.
    0:34:59 Oh, and you’ve got a nicely trimmed beard.
    0:35:01 Thanks for joining us today, right?
    0:35:05 And it was actually, like, commenting on your appearance as you walked in, right?
    0:35:13 I can totally see stuff like that, either in hologram or, you know, in the beginning, maybe on just, like, big flat screen TVs that’s sort of interacting with you.
    0:35:19 But it’s a character interacting with you and actually sort of giving feedback and actually responding to what it sees.
    0:35:23 So, it’s actually specifically talking about you as you walk through the door.
    0:35:24 100%.
    0:35:27 It sounds insane, and it sounds like a Black Mirror episode.
    0:35:32 But really, with the kind of, like, piecing these tools together, it could be, like, 6, 12 months away.
    0:35:35 I think you’ll probably do it today, you know, if you wanted to.
    0:35:37 I think it’s super exciting.
    0:35:38 Yeah, yeah, for sure.
    0:35:43 Well, is there any other avenues that we should travel down that we haven’t around some of these concepts?
    0:35:47 I’ve got one more thing I can show if you like.
    0:35:51 So, I’ve got a breakdown of the personal avatar compared to studio avatar done in HeyGen.
    0:35:52 Okay, cool.
    0:35:52 Yeah, yeah.
    0:35:54 So, let’s start with the personal avatar first.
    0:35:59 So, if anyone’s created an avatar with HeyGen or Synthesia before, you’ve probably created a personal avatar.
    0:36:02 You kind of sit down, you can do it with your webcam, your phone.
    0:36:07 You do a little 10-second recording of yourself saying, I give permission for Synthesia to make this.
    0:36:10 And then, you’ll read a kind of two to three-minute script.
    0:36:12 So, that’s the personal avatar.
    0:36:19 So, this is, like, I think similar to the use cases that we’ve seen from Ruben previously and some of the tests I’ve done before.
    0:36:23 DeepSeek R1, and it went viral overnight.
    0:36:29 Built at a fraction of the cost, DeepSeek’s open-source model offers advanced math, coding, and reasoning skills.
    0:36:31 Within days, it topped the app store charts.
    0:36:33 So, that’s the idea of the personal avatar.
    0:36:39 Now, the studio avatars, when I recorded this studio avatar, I went to a local studio.
    0:36:50 I didn’t do it with HeyGen, but they gave us a very, very specific list where they said, use this camera, this light, stand in front of this type of green screen, have this type of microphone.
    0:36:51 Like, it was very, very specific.
    0:36:57 And we had very specific instructions on how to kind of speak and all of those sorts of things.
    0:36:59 And the output of this one is pretty insane.
    0:37:00 Let’s have a look.
    0:37:08 DeepSeek, the Chinese AI startup, recently dropped its game-changing chatbot, DeepSeek R1, and it had gone viral overnight.
    0:37:14 Built at a fraction of the cost, DeepSeek’s open-source model offers advanced math, coding, and reasoning skills.
    0:37:17 Within days, it topped the app store charts.
    0:37:18 So, there you go.
    0:37:19 What do you make of the difference between those two, Matt?
    0:37:21 Yeah, I mean, they look really good.
    0:37:25 One thing I’ve noticed is that, you know, the second one, it had more of the full-body shot.
    0:37:33 And one thing that I’ve seen, I think HeyGen is the one that does it, is they can actually do videos now of you, like, walking down the street.
    0:37:39 And it sort of, like, changes your lips so it looks like you’re walking and talking to the camera, which sort of blows my mind.
    0:37:42 But yeah, so you can record them full-body.
    0:37:46 It’s funny, like, out of those two, the studio one was very expensive to record.
    0:37:50 And it had a lot longer process, and we worked kind of more in collaboration with HeyGen.
    0:38:02 But because you have the green screen, you can imagine that is amazing for, like, there’s so many use cases you can imagine that from, you know, changing the background all the time, presentations, you know, you could have someone kind of speaking over slides, like all of those sorts of things.
    0:38:10 But for the specific use case that we’ve been working on, the short form video, the best background ever is the same background that I have when I’m on podcasts or whatever.
    0:38:12 So that personal avatar actually works in that case.
    0:38:17 I’m curious with the one that you showed, was the B-roll, did you go and do that, like, separately?
    0:38:20 Or was that one of the tools that actually helped put the B-roll?
    0:38:29 Because you had the, I don’t know what the sort of editing style is called, but when you have the words and it jumps between all the articles but stays focused on the same word, was that something that you, like, custom edited?
    0:38:33 Or was that, like, an AI sort of function of one of these tools you’re using?
    0:38:39 Yeah, so that one did run kind of, like, through an editor, and that is the workflow we’re working with now.
    0:38:47 Obviously, we’re creating these videos on the Mindstream brand, which is owned by HubSpot, and we’ve got to be, like, really, really careful with what we put out and make sure it is the highest quality.
    0:38:56 I haven’t spent a lot of time with, like, AI editing softwares, but I don’t know right now if we’re at the level that it kind of really can replace a full-time editor at the highest level.
    0:38:56 Right.
    0:39:01 In, like, kind of, like you say, matching all those and getting that really kind of, like, high level of video editing.
    0:39:02 Yeah, yeah.
    0:39:12 Descript actually put out a video about a new AI video agent that they’re calling the cursor for video editing, where you can basically say, hey, at, you know, this minute, go change this.
    0:39:15 During this scene, add this B-roll into it.
    0:39:16 At this scene, do this.
    0:39:20 And you just keep on chatting with it, and it edits your video through natural language.
    0:39:22 I mean, I haven’t gotten my hands on it.
    0:39:26 I don’t know how effective it is, but the concept is really interesting to me.
    0:39:28 Yeah, that’s really smart.
    0:39:34 My editor has said to me that, like, Descript is his favorite, but it’s kind of like vibe editing, like we’re seeing this vibe coding now, right?
    0:39:34 Yeah.
    0:39:43 I think the magic of it with any of these things is if an AI tool can make it easier to do something, you still need to know what you’re trying to do to get there.
    0:39:54 And someone who’s got a kind of 1,000 hours of video editing experience, put the AI tool in their hand, they’re going to get like a 10x output compared to myself who’s never edited videos.
    0:39:56 And it’s like, oh, where do I even start?
    0:40:04 Yeah, now that really, really solid editor can get you that edit back in three days instead of a week and a half, you know, but still just as quality.
    0:40:11 You know, that’s what excites me about it is it sort of up levels the abilities of the people that actually know what they’re doing.
    0:40:25 Like I’ve done a lot of the vibe coding stuff, but because I’m not that proficient of a coder, I know like a little bit, but because I’m not that proficient, I’ll run into bugs and I’ll sit there for like three hours trying to fix the smallest, tiniest bug.
    0:40:30 That seems like it should be a simple fix, but the AI can’t figure out how to overcome that bug.
    0:40:33 And because I don’t know enough about coding, I can’t get to where I want to go.
    0:40:37 So, you know, vibe coding often turns into rage coding very, very quickly.
    0:40:39 A hundred percent.
    0:40:43 One more thing I’ll say that I found really interesting with these avatars.
    0:40:48 And I do think it’s a little bit of a barrier when you’re just kind of like, you said the layman sitting down to make their first avatar.
    0:40:52 When we created, we did the studio avatar first with Heygem.
    0:40:55 We did that back in January and I’ve worked closely with them.
    0:40:58 And recently we did a personal avatar.
    0:40:59 So this is like the basic one.
    0:41:05 But I did the recording with a Heygem kind of consultant on call with me.
    0:41:09 So I went and did the two minute recording and he said, okay, now let’s change this thing.
    0:41:14 And we did eight inputs until he said that input will create the best avatar.
    0:41:19 And what that input is doesn’t really feel like it will create the best avatar.
    0:41:23 You want to create an avatar that’s going to do kind of social media reels.
    0:41:27 You’d expect the input to be like, hey guys, it’s Adam here.
    0:41:29 And like, you know, do like the YouTube voice.
    0:41:30 Right.
    0:41:32 If you do that, it will break the avatar.
    0:41:36 To get the best avatar output, you need to be the least human.
    0:41:40 The take that Heygem, the kind of Heygem tech team were most happy with.
    0:41:46 I was literally sitting there and going, hello, my name is Adam speaking really, really slowly.
    0:41:53 And when you do a hand movement, they say like, bring it up, hold it for like three seconds and then take it down really slowly.
    0:41:55 If you do this, it will break the model.
    0:42:01 And so then you create this avatar in this really robotic way that is very, very unnatural.
    0:42:08 And then when you kind of then do like the inputs, you know, I said earlier, it’s about the input audio dictates the kind of dynamism of the video.
    0:42:16 And then you can, you know, with all these hand movements you do, you can kind of like set them as expressions and you can actually like retrofit them in to train the avatar.
    0:42:21 But I think that’s really hard to communicate in like a kind of onboarding process.
    0:42:27 Like, Hey guys, don’t record the avatar, how you want it to sound, record it like a robot to look human.
    0:42:29 That’s interesting.
    0:42:41 So, but you can still the output, you can still get something that looks excited and energetic, even though you train it on a sort of monotone, almost like boring sort of version of yourself.
    0:42:41 Yeah.
    0:42:44 And I’ll clarify, it’s not monotone or boring.
    0:42:45 It’s very, very slow.
    0:42:46 Okay.
    0:42:46 Slow.
    0:42:46 Okay.
    0:42:47 Very slow.
    0:42:57 And when you’re kind of doing your voice movement, if you’re doing like facial features or whatever, you kind of have to accentuate them and move slowly.
    0:42:59 So it’s unnatural.
    0:43:00 It’s very, very unnatural.
    0:43:03 The kind of input you have to do.
    0:43:09 And yeah, again, if you’re sitting down and you’re like, well, I want my avatar to be very, very professional or very dynamic or whatever.
    0:43:15 That’s kind of all done in the edit, really not in the input recording of the avatar.
    0:43:17 I think that’s a really, really good takeaway.
    0:43:21 I’m glad you added that in because I think that’ll be like really, really helpful to people.
    0:43:30 You know, one thing I mentioned sort of off recording is that I have issues because I have a beard and sometimes like the beard starts to look a little blurry and fuzzy around my lips as I start talking.
    0:43:35 Or it looks like I have hair on my lips or, you know, something weird like that when I go to generate something.
    0:43:39 But what you just described could be the solution to it, right?
    0:43:42 I tend to get really excited and just talk really, really fast.
    0:43:47 So when I go and train one of those models, I do it how I do it on video.
    0:43:48 I talk fast.
    0:43:48 I sound excited.
    0:43:50 Maybe that’s the problem.
    0:43:52 Maybe that’s what I’m doing wrong.
    0:43:53 Potentially, potentially.
    0:43:58 If you’re speaking kind of at the level you are now, I do think the model will struggle, but some would have been taught.
    0:44:01 Another thing that’s obvious I haven’t mentioned, don’t ever cover your mouth.
    0:44:03 So the way you’re sat now, you’re sat quite close to your microphone.
    0:44:07 You know, if you did like kind of dip into that, that’s going to break it as well.
    0:44:13 So yeah, like super slowly, you have to take long pauses kind of between the scripts they give you.
    0:44:15 You also have to have a like home base.
    0:44:18 So on the studio avatar, I was kind of holding my hands like that.
    0:44:22 You know, I had to do that and move away from that, but always come back to that.
    0:44:28 So, you know, if you don’t want your hands in shot, keep them out of shot, bring them into shot for a movement, but then take them back out.
    0:44:33 You have to kind of have that home base that you always come back to, which will be like the home base of the avatar.
    0:44:34 Right, right.
    0:44:37 And same rules apply for either of the models that you’re using.
    0:44:38 I believe so.
    0:44:41 This, all this kind of learning I’ve got is from working with HeyGen.
    0:44:45 I would assume it applies to Synthesia and Agile and all of them as well.
    0:44:45 Awesome.
    0:44:46 Well, very cool.
    0:44:48 I think that’s super helpful for people.
    0:44:50 So this has been super fascinating.
    0:44:52 I really, really appreciate all the tips and insights.
    0:45:01 And I think a lot of people are going to have a lot of ideas of how they can go and use this technology inside of their marketing, or if they want to go and become a creator or things like that.
    0:45:05 If people want to go and learn more from you, learn more about what you’re up to, where can they go check you out?
    0:45:07 So I’m very active on LinkedIn.
    0:45:08 I post twice a day there.
    0:45:09 It’s just my name, Adam Biddlecum.
    0:45:12 But also, I’m still running the Mindstream newsletter.
    0:45:14 It’s now owned by HubSpot.
    0:45:18 So if you want kind of daily AI updates, make sure to subscribe to Mindstream.
    0:45:18 Cool.
    0:45:20 And where do they go to subscribe to it?
    0:45:21 Mindstream.news.
    0:45:23 You can tell I don’t do too many pods, can’t you?
    0:45:26 This has been so much fun, Matt.
    0:45:26 Thanks for having me on.
    0:45:27 It’s been a blast.
    0:45:28 Yeah, thanks for joining me.
    0:45:36 And everybody who’s listening, if you enjoy this type of content, make sure you like this video and subscribe to this podcast because we’ve got more where that came from.
    0:45:37 Thanks so much.
    0:45:37 Thanks so much.

    Episode 56: Is it possible to build a thriving content strategy—without ever stepping in front of a camera? Matt Wolfe (https://x.com/mreflow) is joined by guest Adam Biddlecombe (https://x.com/adam_bidd), founder of Mindstream, the daily AI newsletter now owned by HubSpot. Adam has rapidly grown his audience (especially on LinkedIn) while openly hating making videos. His solution? Becoming an expert in AI avatar tools to handle his video content creation.

    In this episode, Matt and Adam dive deep into the world of AI avatars: the tools, the workflow, the best approaches for maximizing quality, and how these avatars are powering everything from viral Instagram channels to hyper-personalized B2B outreach. Whether you’re camera-shy, looking to scale your personal brand, or curious about the ethical and business implications of AI-driven video, this is the ultimate guide to the current landscape (and what’s coming next) for AI videos—straight from the creators who use them every day.

    Check out The Next Wave YouTube Channel if you want to see Matt and Nathan on screen: https://lnk.to/thenextwavepd

    Show Notes:

    • (00:00) Name Changes and Synthesia’s Evolution

    • (05:30) Testing Avatar Models: Heygen Analysis

    • (09:17) Instagram Enhances AI for Age Detection

    • (10:59) Video Recording Challenges

    • (14:53) AI Influencers: Expanding Industry Trends

    • (18:54) Personalized AI Videos Boost Retention

    • (19:43) AI-Driven Email Personalization Trends

    • (25:19) Scamming Risks in Voice Tech

    • (28:02) UGC Avatars for Advertising Innovation

    • (32:13) Create Your Own Brand Mascot

    • (33:03) Brand-Interactive Avatars Revolution

    • (38:59) Enhancing Efficiency with Proficient Editors

    • (40:40) Challenges in Avatar Creation

    • (42:56) Microphone Usage Guidelines

    Mentions:

    Get the guide to build your own Custom GPT: https://clickhubspot.com/tnw

    Check Out Matt’s Stuff:

    • Future Tools – https://futuretools.beehiiv.com/

    • Blog – https://www.mattwolfe.com/

    • YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/@mreflow

    Check Out Nathan’s Stuff:

    The Next Wave is a HubSpot Original Podcast // Brought to you by Hubspot Media // Production by Darren Clarke // Editing by Ezra Bakker Trupiano

  • How Nick Saban’s Side Hustle Might Make Him a Billionaire

    AI transcript
    0:00:01 Where were you when you were thinking about this?
    0:00:04 I have this room in my house where I have the best ideas.
    0:00:07 It’s a cool room because if you need a shower, you’re already there.
    0:00:08 It’s just the bathroom.
    0:00:09 Okay, so I’m in the bathroom.
    0:00:11 I feel like I can rule the world.
    0:00:13 I know I could be what I want to.
    0:00:16 I put my all in it like no day’s off.
    0:00:19 On the road, let’s travel, never looking back.
    0:00:21 All right, I got a business I can tell you a little bit about that.
    0:00:22 It kind of blew my mind.
    0:00:26 So I was on TBPN by our good buddy, John Coogan.
    0:00:28 I went on there, and they asked me a question.
    0:00:36 They go, so you’re a creator, and you’ve got this kind of cool business underneath yourself as a creator.
    0:00:39 Are you bullish on investing in creators right now?
    0:00:44 And I go, no, but I’m bullish on creators investing in businesses.
    0:00:46 And they were like, what do you mean?
    0:00:49 I said, well, actually, what I’m doing is it’s not that somebody invested in me.
    0:00:51 I’m investing.
    0:00:56 I’m buying pieces of businesses that I think should exist or that I can accelerate in some way.
    0:00:58 And that’s going really, really well for me.
    0:01:00 So I think that’s going to be a model that people do.
    0:01:06 And so I started thinking about this and saw an example today that kind of blew my mind.
    0:01:08 So do you know who Nick Saban is?
    0:01:11 I smell what you’re stepping in.
    0:01:12 Great.
    0:01:13 Not a friend.
    0:01:13 Great.
    0:01:13 Yes.
    0:01:15 I love where you’re going with this.
    0:01:16 Yes, I do know who he is.
    0:01:18 You tooting my horn?
    0:01:20 Yeah, beep, beep, my friend.
    0:01:21 I like Nick Saban.
    0:01:21 All right.
    0:01:26 So Nick Saban, who is the, he was the coach, football coach at Alabama and LSU.
    0:01:31 And he’s like probably the most successful modern day college football coach.
    0:01:35 The guy made probably $150 million as a coach.
    0:01:36 Amazing money.
    0:01:38 Is that real?
    0:01:40 $150 million as a college football coach?
    0:01:41 Yeah.
    0:01:42 He’s like in his 50s.
    0:01:43 So he’s been doing it for a long time.
    0:01:47 But like his last contract was basically a 10-year, $100 million contract.
    0:01:50 He was making $10 to $12 million a year, his last contract.
    0:01:51 Wow.
    0:01:53 But Nick Saban is actually going to be a billionaire.
    0:01:56 And he’s going to be a billionaire because of car dealerships.
    0:01:58 And I found this pretty fascinating.
    0:01:59 I couldn’t believe what I was reading.
    0:02:01 So the story is pretty cool.
    0:02:03 Here’s how it goes.
    0:02:06 So Nick Saban has partnered up with this guy.
    0:02:08 I think his name is John Agresti.
    0:02:11 And the headline of the article was,
    0:02:13 The Man Who Will Make Nick Saban a Billionaire.
    0:02:19 And it talks about how Saban, while he was coaching, was deciding like,
    0:02:19 you know what?
    0:02:21 I think I might go into car dealerships.
    0:02:24 And car dealerships have had like an interesting history with athletes.
    0:02:27 I remember growing up in Colorado, John Elway,
    0:02:29 all the car dealerships had John Elway’s name on him.
    0:02:32 And he was our active quarterback at the Broncos.
    0:02:35 And I didn’t really know this because I was just a kid at the time.
    0:02:36 But I went back and looked.
    0:02:38 I was like, what happened with John Elway’s car dealerships?
    0:02:42 And it turns out Elway basically had this insane story where he,
    0:02:47 while he was a player, he started this car dealership brand,
    0:02:50 selling Toyotas and like Chevys or something like that.
    0:02:57 And before he retires, he sells his car dealership group to AutoNation for $87 million,
    0:02:58 mostly stock.
    0:03:04 And so he gets, he gets paid out $90 million, which is more than he was making as a quarterback for,
    0:03:06 you know, professional quarterback in the NFL.
    0:03:13 And he then also licensed them his face and his name so that they could continue using his brand all the way for like another 10 years.
    0:03:15 And he, but he had a non-compete during that time.
    0:03:18 And two crazy things happened.
    0:03:26 One, because of that, because of that deal structure, John Elway, both made, he made a bag and he lost a huge bag at the same time.
    0:03:27 So he made $87 million.
    0:03:34 But then when he retires, it turns out that the owner of the Broncos offered John Elway an incredible deal.
    0:03:39 He basically told him, you can buy 10% of the team for $15 million today.
    0:03:44 And actually I owe you this like deferred salary because you’re going to retire earlier or something like that.
    0:03:46 He owed him $21 million of deferred salary.
    0:03:47 He said, you know what?
    0:03:51 I’ll let you buy another 10% for that 21 million.
    0:03:55 And he’s John Elway is like, I don’t know.
    0:03:56 That’s a lot of money.
    0:03:59 And the guy goes, I’ll make it even more of a no-brainer for you.
    0:04:03 If you want to, if you change your mind, you don’t like it.
    0:04:05 You want to sell the team within the next five years.
    0:04:11 I will pay you back everything you may, everything you put in plus $5 million and 8% annual interest.
    0:04:14 So you, you literally can’t lose money in this deal.
    0:04:15 Like you can only make money.
    0:04:17 Who owned the Broncos at the time?
    0:04:18 Bernie Madoff?
    0:04:20 Because this sounds like a deal too good to be true.
    0:04:21 Pat Bolin.
    0:04:24 And so Pat wanted John Elway to be part of the team.
    0:04:27 So he wanted him also to work as an exec with the team.
    0:04:27 Got it.
    0:04:30 And I guess he was like, I’m going to pay you this money either way.
    0:04:32 How about instead I trade you stock for the team?
    0:04:33 Okay.
    0:04:36 So Elway actually turns the deal down.
    0:04:38 He turns it down for two reasons.
    0:04:43 One, he’s illiquid because he sold for $87 million, but it’s auto trader stock.
    0:04:46 And so he didn’t have liquidity at the time.
    0:04:47 Maybe you can sell right away.
    0:04:52 He didn’t have the 15 million cash on hand because he had also just made an investment for $15 million.
    0:04:57 It’s some guy named Sean Mueller, who was actually just running a Ponzi scheme that ended up failing.
    0:05:00 And he lost, you know, half of his money in that.
    0:05:00 He got half of it back.
    0:05:01 He lost half of it.
    0:05:02 So he didn’t have the cash.
    0:05:03 So he’s like, ah, I can’t do it.
    0:05:05 And then he’s like, you know, also.
    0:05:07 Dude, he listened to the wrong, the wrong Ponzi scheme guy.
    0:05:08 I thought it was the Bracco guy.
    0:05:10 Turns out it was this other guy.
    0:05:10 Exactly.
    0:05:15 And by the way, that stake, that 20% stake, that’s about a billion dollar stake today in the team.
    0:05:16 The team just sold for $5 billion.
    0:05:19 So Eloy missed out on that.
    0:05:25 And after the non-compete ended, he then went back into the car dealership business and he’s built it back up.
    0:05:30 And now that car dealership business does like, you know, again, over a billion dollars in sales.
    0:05:34 And he’s worth a few hundred million dollars from his second rodeo on the car dealership side.
    0:05:36 So I don’t really, I don’t know.
    0:05:38 I didn’t put enough respect on the car dealership name.
    0:05:40 Let me tell you about the Nick Saban one now.
    0:05:46 What caught my eye is that a story came out saying that they bought two dealers, two dealerships in Miami.
    0:05:48 Two, two car dealerships in Miami.
    0:05:49 Guess the price.
    0:05:51 $20 million.
    0:05:52 I don’t know.
    0:05:52 Ten.
    0:05:55 You’re only off by 680 million.
    0:05:56 Wait, what?
    0:06:00 They bought two dealerships for a reported $700 million in Miami.
    0:06:02 Oh my God.
    0:06:03 Oh, and they’re Mercedes.
    0:06:04 I’m looking at the article.
    0:06:06 They’re high-end Mercedes dealerships.
    0:06:07 I think they have like an exclusive.
    0:06:12 I think they’re in like the prime ultra rich area of Miami.
    0:06:18 But dude, I had no, I actually spent 30 minutes this morning to figure out, is this a typo?
    0:06:22 Because I was like, there was no way that individual dealerships could be worth $350 million.
    0:06:27 In fact, I’m still like 25% convinced that might be a typo and it might be 70 million.
    0:06:30 But I couldn’t, after 30 minutes of digging, I couldn’t find it.
    0:06:31 But it’s pretty insane.
    0:06:36 Their dealership group, they now own like, I don’t know, 10 to 15 dealers, dealerships
    0:06:40 across like Alabama, where he was the coach, to now Miami.
    0:06:47 And he says that the guy said that they sell 22,000 cars a year, 22,000 Mercedes a year, which
    0:06:50 is, and then he says they do about $2 billion in revenue on that.
    0:06:51 That’s insane.
    0:06:53 The partner is now worth a billion dollars on paper.
    0:06:56 And Saban will probably be worth a billion dollars after these deals.
    0:06:57 Isn’t that wild?
    0:06:58 It’s crazy.
    0:07:01 Did I not bring this up a while ago?
    0:07:05 I thought, because I think I read some, I didn’t know that he was a billionaire, but
    0:07:07 I read some stat about car dealerships.
    0:07:08 It’s crazy.
    0:07:10 And you told me you wanted to cover car dealers.
    0:07:15 Interestingly, recently, Forbes, they did an article with another beautiful title.
    0:07:19 It was called The Car Dealership Billionaire No One Knows.
    0:07:26 And it’s about this guy named Terry Taylor, who owns, I think, 120 car dealerships.
    0:07:27 And he also lives in Florida.
    0:07:32 But they came across him because they’re like, well, this guy doesn’t do any interviews.
    0:07:34 We’ve never seen a photo of him.
    0:07:35 We don’t know anything about him.
    0:07:40 But what we do know is that someone recently bought Tommy Hilfinger.
    0:07:44 They bought his $30 million mansion in New York City.
    0:07:49 And it turns out the same LLC owns $250 million worth of real estate.
    0:07:50 who’s behind this.
    0:07:56 And they find out that it’s this auto dealership owner who owns practically the whole thing.
    0:07:58 And he owns a bunch of them.
    0:08:00 And he’s just making a lot of money.
    0:08:01 And they eventually get a hold of him.
    0:08:03 And he goes, I heard you’ve talked to all my associates.
    0:08:04 Fine.
    0:08:06 I will answer just a few questions for you.
    0:08:10 And the whole story is how he purposely is trying to be low key and under the radar.
    0:08:14 But they uncover that he owns, you know, an $80 million jet.
    0:08:15 He owns all this amazing stuff.
    0:08:20 And so it turns out car dealerships, shockingly amazing companies.
    0:08:21 Shockingly amazing.
    0:08:22 Yeah.
    0:08:26 Like, I think they get little local monopolies because I think you get like a territory.
    0:08:30 You might become the only dealer for that brand in that area.
    0:08:36 And then people tend to buy from, you know, a local radius if they’re not buying online.
    0:08:40 And I think the way that they work is like the car manufacturers basically do like floor
    0:08:41 financing or something like that.
    0:08:45 They basically like lend you, they basically finance you to own the inventory.
    0:08:48 So I think you’re not out of pocket as much as it would sound like.
    0:08:50 It’s very bank friendly.
    0:08:56 So in this article, they were talking about how once you’ve proven to Mercedes or whoever
    0:09:01 that you’re a decent operator, they, you know, they’re like, yeah, we would love to expand.
    0:09:02 You’re trustworthy.
    0:09:02 Let’s go.
    0:09:07 And then the banks will be like, yeah, like this is a very like predictable business.
    0:09:09 Like we’ve seen this for a hundred years.
    0:09:11 We will loan you money once you prove it to be successful.
    0:09:13 So it’s a very loanable business.
    0:09:18 And the way that this happened was Saban was sponsored by Mercedes.
    0:09:21 So he had just got done some events, show up, take some pictures, kiss some babies.
    0:09:25 And so he goes to these Mercedes events and he’s like, oh, okay.
    0:09:27 Like, I think like Mercedes is great.
    0:09:29 So he talks to them.
    0:09:29 He’s like, yeah, I’m interested.
    0:09:32 Actually, like I might, I may be interested in like doing a dealership.
    0:09:35 And they go, listen, you’re not going to want to operate these things.
    0:09:39 You keep being Nick Saban, God tier football coach.
    0:09:40 You go obsessed over that.
    0:09:41 Let’s enter.
    0:09:45 We’ll introduce you to four or five of our favorite franchisees that we think do kick ass.
    0:09:46 We have all the data.
    0:09:47 We know who kicks ass.
    0:09:49 You might be able to partner with one of them.
    0:09:52 So he does a four-hour meeting with the first guy they introduce him to, this guy, John.
    0:09:54 And he takes no more meetings.
    0:09:57 He agrees after the four hours, I’m going to partner with this guy.
    0:09:59 And he goes, it’s like interviewing an offensive coordinator.
    0:10:02 When you know, you know, which is so romantic.
    0:10:06 Thought he would use like a love analogy, but he’s like offensive coordinator.
    0:10:08 And this guy, John, is a hustler.
    0:10:13 So in addition to the car dealerships, they had a new bourbon company that they started,
    0:10:16 a Kentucky bourbon company, him, Saban again.
    0:10:20 And then during COVID, they created a medical supplies business called Dream Medical Group.
    0:10:23 So they have Dream Auto Group and they created Dream Medical Group
    0:10:27 and sold over $100 million of PPE during COVID-19.
    0:10:28 This guy’s doing shit.
    0:10:33 That, by the way, whenever I hear that story of someone doing PPE during COVID.
    0:10:34 Always a hustler.
    0:10:36 Well, it can go one of two ways.
    0:10:37 You’re always a hustler.
    0:10:40 You’re in that circle, but it’s like you’re either full of it or…
    0:10:41 Good hustle or bad hustle.
    0:10:43 Yeah, like there’s something about it.
    0:10:44 How fascinating.
    0:10:46 I did not realize it was that big.
    0:10:48 It seems like the key to this is two things.
    0:10:50 Partnering with the right dealer before…
    0:10:55 Like, you know, I own a Mercedes and it seems like Mercedes has been booming for the last 10 years.
    0:10:56 Like they’re cool now.
    0:11:00 They were always cool, but now they’re like they have…
    0:11:03 It’s like they have some accessible models that many people can buy.
    0:11:04 So I imagine they’re selling a lot.
    0:11:06 But also he picked the right cities.
    0:11:10 So he picked Nashville in like 2016 or something like that.
    0:11:11 You know what I mean?
    0:11:16 Like picking like the right geos that are growing with richer people to be able to support a dealership.
    0:11:20 Even where your name, if you’re an athlete or a coach, carries weight.
    0:11:23 Like it’s kind of silly, but like just the…
    0:11:25 What is Elway’s one called?
    0:11:27 I think it’s called John Elway Chevrolet.
    0:11:31 It’s the number one Chevy dealer in the country.
    0:11:32 Because guess what?
    0:11:34 We like our hometown kid.
    0:11:38 We like the local hero, you know, the local quarterback who brought us the Super Bowl, right?
    0:11:40 Like that’s a heroic guy.
    0:11:44 And John Elway Chevrolet, it does 50 to 100 million dollars a year in revenue.
    0:11:46 Just that one dealership.
    0:11:49 And, you know, that’s pretty crazy.
    0:11:51 And so I think these guys have done a good job.
    0:11:53 By the way, here’s a quote from this dude.
    0:11:54 Tell me what you think of this.
    0:11:56 So it says, they’re talking about this guy, John.
    0:11:58 They go, he’s even more obsessed with the financial details.
    0:12:03 He’s a former accountant and he compiles his own monthly statement for every single store.
    0:12:06 Quote, if you say to me, how’s March going?
    0:12:10 I can look and say, Cutler Bay sold 13 cars last night, eight new, five pre-owned.
    0:12:12 I can tell you who the salespeople were.
    0:12:13 I can tell you that Evelyn bought one.
    0:12:16 I know every name, every car we sold, how much money we made.
    0:12:20 And I tracked them on parabolic curves to make sure we’re not overcharging or undercharging anybody.
    0:12:22 What a beast, man.
    0:12:25 The only thing is, what is he talking about parabolic curves for?
    0:12:26 What could that even mean?
    0:12:28 I tracked them on parabolic curves.
    0:12:33 It’s in a parabolic curve, like at the beginning of when exponential growth happens.
    0:12:34 Yeah, but what does that mean?
    0:12:36 I tracked them on parabolic curves.
    0:12:36 What does that even mean?
    0:12:42 Patrick Collison tweeted this thing the other day and he used the phrase local maxima.
    0:12:43 Did you see that?
    0:12:44 Love that.
    0:12:46 Love breaking through a local maxima.
    0:12:49 I had to go and figure out what all this meant.
    0:12:58 He said, I think worry about local maxima comes from imaging the 3D world where it is, in fact, easier to get trapped.
    0:13:00 I didn’t know what that meant.
    0:13:01 I had to go figure out.
    0:13:03 Each word had to be individually looked up.
    0:13:06 I did not know what that sentence meant at all.
    0:13:10 And then he goes, but company space has many more dimensions.
    0:13:14 And so most critical points are, as you say, just saddles.
    0:13:16 There’s almost always a positive gradient.
    0:13:18 You can trundle along.
    0:13:21 I did not know what any of that, any of those sentences.
    0:13:22 Did not or do not?
    0:13:23 I did not.
    0:13:26 And so I had to, I shared, I said, could someone explain to me?
    0:13:29 And he explained what it said.
    0:13:29 And it’s actually brilliant.
    0:13:31 And I totally got into this.
    0:13:32 What does it mean?
    0:13:38 It means people often worry that they’re going to grow their company a bit and hit a ceiling and get stuck.
    0:13:41 Like reaching a small success and thinking that’s as far as it can go.
    0:13:47 But the original quote says that business isn’t like climbing a simple hill where you can easily get trapped on a small peak.
    0:13:50 Business has many moving parts, product team, market pricing strategy, et cetera.
    0:13:53 And that creates lots of directions to explore.
    0:13:57 So even if growth stalls or slows, it’s rarely the true limit.
    0:14:01 There’s almost always another path forward, something you could tweak, improve, change to unlock more growth.
    0:14:06 Most stuck points in business are just temporary plateaus, not dead ends.
    0:14:09 And the saddle thing kind of blew my mind.
    0:14:12 It’s a mathematical, it’s like a, it’s like a mathematical thing.
    0:14:16 But if you Google, like, if you’re, if you look, you could, you could, I could show you this, but.
    0:14:18 Oh, I see the picture of us out of shape.
    0:14:18 Yeah.
    0:14:21 It’s kind of, it’s kind of mind blowing, actually.
    0:14:24 When I like saw this photo, it’s hard to explain to the listener.
    0:14:30 We’ll put, we’ll put the, uh, the photo up, but it’s basically looking at a normal, like X and Y axis.
    0:14:35 But now there’s a third and it’s 3D and it shows that you can go forward or back up or down.
    0:14:38 And it actually kind of was mind blowing.
    0:14:44 I, I felt like Tom Haverford, uh, in the show Parks and Rec, where he like sees like a piece of art and he’s like, this makes me feel something.
    0:14:45 That’s so strange.
    0:14:48 And someone actually explained to him, that’s like, yeah, that’s what art does.
    0:14:49 Like it makes you feel something.
    0:14:55 And I remember seeing this, uh, this weekend and I just sat there and I’m like, I feel, I feel, I feel special after reading this.
    0:14:56 Like I’ve just learned.
    0:14:57 And, and, and it was kind of cool.
    0:15:01 I think you got, you got reality distortion fielded, my friend.
    0:15:04 I, I, he just RD’d my ass hard.
    0:15:11 Telling somebody they’re at a local Maxima is always one of the like patch on the head.
    0:15:13 It’s like, wait, are you patting me?
    0:15:14 Or are you like telling me I’m a little boy?
    0:15:15 Right.
    0:15:19 If you ever use that on somebody, it’s a great backhanded disc.
    0:15:24 Just says like, you’re doing great, but you don’t realize you’re still at the kid’s table right now.
    0:15:26 And there’s this other game that’s the global Maxima.
    0:15:28 You got to throw in a bud there.
    0:15:29 You’re like local Maxima, bud.
    0:15:30 Local Maxima.
    0:15:34 In fact, this article with the car dealership guy says an article on Forbes.
    0:15:37 And at the end of it, they go, Joe loves deal making so much.
    0:15:40 He, you know, in the middle of our interview, I had to apologize.
    0:15:42 Sorry, pal.
    0:15:42 Don’t mean to be rude.
    0:15:44 I just really got to close this deal.
    0:15:46 And I was like, oh damn, he just palled you.
    0:15:48 And you put that in, you put that in the article.
    0:15:53 Joe, Joe sounds cool, but also like a douche.
    0:15:56 He’s got into the whiskey business too.
    0:15:59 Check, check, check.
    0:16:02 Did you call him Joe?
    0:16:03 His name’s John.
    0:16:06 Local Maxima, bud.
    0:16:07 I don’t remember.
    0:16:08 I don’t remember.
    0:16:10 I don’t remember names.
    0:16:12 That’s hilarious.
    0:16:17 That was the virtual version of slapping someone on the ass and say, go get them.
    0:16:18 We call them the wrong name.
    0:16:20 All right.
    0:16:20 What else we got?
    0:16:22 I have some other stuff.
    0:16:22 All right.
    0:16:27 So in AI, there’s been these like waves where four or five of the same company will get started
    0:16:30 and they’ll all get like an incredible amount of traction.
    0:16:35 So a few years ago, this was when chat, maybe GPT three or 3.5 was out.
    0:16:38 It was like a copywriting services.
    0:16:43 So Jasper, copy AI, there was a whole bunch of companies that just exploded past 10 million
    0:16:48 and revenue very quickly with a, with the same idea, which was like, Hey, we’ll help you
    0:16:49 write blog posts and marketing copy, right?
    0:16:51 Marketing copy written for you.
    0:16:53 That was like one idea.
    0:16:59 And that, and then they got kind of wrecked by just chat GPT just became good enough where
    0:16:59 you could do all those things.
    0:17:02 You didn’t need a separate tool so that they, they ran into trouble.
    0:17:06 I shouldn’t say they got wrecked, but they ran into, to some headwinds where the growth,
    0:17:08 the explosive growth didn’t last forever.
    0:17:13 And then the current batch of AI companies that’s doing this is these website builders.
    0:17:16 So lovable is one of them.
    0:17:20 Replit is another bolt is another.
    0:17:22 And so there’s these website builders, which is very simple.
    0:17:28 Like just the way you had Squarespace and Wix, you go drag and drop and make a website without
    0:17:29 code.
    0:17:30 Now you don’t even have to drag and drop.
    0:17:31 You just say what you want.
    0:17:33 You’re like, Hey, I want a website for a law firm.
    0:17:35 And then just gives you a beautiful website for a law firm.
    0:17:37 You’re like, ah, make the hero thing a carousel.
    0:17:38 And it makes it a carousel.
    0:17:41 Like you don’t have to, you don’t have to code and you make these sites.
    0:17:43 And so these businesses have now exploded.
    0:17:46 There’s some of the fastest growing companies.
    0:17:47 I don’t know the latest revenue numbers.
    0:17:48 Is cursor one of them?
    0:17:50 No, cursor is a little different.
    0:17:58 Cursor is a tool for existing developers, but like, you know, lovable hit 4 million.
    0:18:02 It was doing basically a million dollars of, of ARR every week for the first four weeks.
    0:18:04 And it’s now at 20 million plus.
    0:18:05 That’s insane.
    0:18:07 Bolt is at 20 million levels at 20 million.
    0:18:09 It’s crazy.
    0:18:09 Right.
    0:18:11 So like they’re, they’re growing really, really fast.
    0:18:16 And so those are there now, but I also kind of predict that that’s going to be a very shaky
    0:18:17 space to build on.
    0:18:17 I don’t know.
    0:18:20 It’s going to be like a Groupon, you know, like.
    0:18:21 Could be.
    0:18:22 It might be that they’re the next Squarespace.
    0:18:25 Squarespace, you know, eventually become a public company, but I don’t, I don’t personally
    0:18:25 think so.
    0:18:29 I think that that’s going to be just like a feature inside of ChatGPT.
    0:18:30 It’s like, make me a website.
    0:18:32 And I think they’re going to be able to do that.
    0:18:35 Something like Replit’s a little different because it’s got a whole backend or whatever.
    0:18:36 Anyways, that’s all nuance.
    0:18:42 What I’m saying, what I’m trying to get to is it got me thinking, what would be a more
    0:18:43 defensible AI business?
    0:18:49 So what’s a simple business that’s about AI, but is not going to get just wrecked by the
    0:18:50 next ChatGPT update.
    0:18:55 And so I started thinking, I was like, okay, well, some of the most defensible businesses
    0:19:00 are marketplaces and nobody’s really built a good AI marketplace yet.
    0:19:01 What would that even be?
    0:19:03 You know, why, why not?
    0:19:06 We all know that marketplaces are super, super valuable when they get built, right?
    0:19:08 eBay, Amazon, Airbnb, et cetera.
    0:19:11 Uber, these are all marketplaces, supply, demand.
    0:19:13 Where were you when you were thinking about this?
    0:19:18 Tell me, walk me through, like, when you’re having these, these very strange conversations
    0:19:19 with you, where?
    0:19:25 I have this, I have this room in my house where I have the best ideas and it’s like, we have
    0:19:27 tile on the floor.
    0:19:31 It’s a cool room because if you need to poop or pee, you’re already there.
    0:19:32 If you need to shower, you’re already there.
    0:19:33 It’s just the bathroom.
    0:19:41 Hey, Sean here.
    0:19:43 I want to take a minute to tell you a David Ogilvie story.
    0:19:44 One of the great ad men.
    0:19:46 He said, remember, the consumer is not a moron.
    0:19:47 She’s your wife.
    0:19:49 You wouldn’t lie to your own wife.
    0:19:51 So don’t lie to mine.
    0:19:52 And I love that.
    0:19:53 You guys, you’re my family.
    0:19:55 You’re like my wife and I won’t lie to you either.
    0:19:56 So I’ll tell you the truth.
    0:20:01 For every company I own right now, six companies, I use Mercury for all of them.
    0:20:05 So I’m proud to partner with Mercury because I use it for all of my banking needs across
    0:20:09 my personal account, my business accounts, and anytime I start a new company, this is my
    0:20:10 first move.
    0:20:11 I go open up a Mercury account.
    0:20:13 I’m very confident in recommending it because I actually use it.
    0:20:14 I’ve used it for years.
    0:20:16 It is the best product on the market.
    0:20:22 So if you want to be like me and 200,000 other ambitious founders, go to mercury.com and apply
    0:20:22 in minutes.
    0:20:26 And remember, Mercury is a financial technology company, not a bank.
    0:20:30 Banking services provided by Choice Financial Group and Evolve Bank and Trust Members, FDIC.
    0:20:31 All right, back to the episode.
    0:20:39 Okay, so you’re just sitting in the bathroom thinking about defensible AI companies.
    0:20:40 Okay, as one does.
    0:20:41 As one does.
    0:20:45 And so I’m thinking, I’m like, why isn’t there like a high end, like, you know, one of the
    0:20:49 hardest things about AI right now is just keeping up with the tools and being able to do something.
    0:20:56 And I was thinking somebody should make a Upwork or Fiverr that is just for highly skilled
    0:20:57 AI doers.
    0:21:02 So a place where I can go and I can just put up a task that I know probably somebody
    0:21:06 with AI can either do it, build it for me, or show me how to do this on a recurring basis
    0:21:13 and make a very skilled marketplace where people can go earn a ton of money for their own AI
    0:21:13 enthusiasm.
    0:21:16 Because I know a bunch of people that are like really enthusiastic about this stuff and they
    0:21:17 build their own pet projects.
    0:21:20 They try every new tool that comes out, but they don’t really have like businesses where
    0:21:23 they need to use them because they’re just like AI enthusiasts.
    0:21:24 They’re just like kind of bored on Twitter all day.
    0:21:30 And I think that you could, if you even just had like 150 people on the supply side for
    0:21:35 this, I think every, a lot of businesses know that they could probably benefit from AI.
    0:21:39 And I think if you went there and you were able to just like state your problem and then have
    0:21:44 people sort of like tell you what they could do with AI to solve your problem and you just pay
    0:21:45 them to do that.
    0:21:50 I think you could build a marketplace around skilled AI practitioners right now.
    0:21:51 I think that, I think that could be built.
    0:21:56 It’s like the upscale version, you know, you go, you go to like the, the top kind of like
    0:22:02 1% level of quality of job on Upwork or Fiverr or 99 designs.
    0:22:06 Dude, I always thought that like somewhere, your company somewhere or something like this should
    0:22:12 just make it where I can hire an expert and they could come and I, they could spend three or
    0:22:16 four weeks looking at my company and saying, I can make this better, this better, and this
    0:22:18 better because that’s what I want.
    0:22:23 Because I see online that everyone’s like, you know, I think Shopify made this announcement.
    0:22:27 They go, instead of hiring, you first must say, can I hire AI?
    0:22:29 And if you can’t, then you can hire a human being.
    0:22:35 And I see these things like this and I’m like, oh man, I feel left out.
    0:22:36 I don’t know how to do any of this.
    0:22:39 Like, I want, I want to automate all this.
    0:22:42 Like when you say AI, to me, I’m still on level one.
    0:22:44 It’s just me talking to chat GPT.
    0:22:48 But then I hear about all these other things and vectors and all this stuff.
    0:22:52 And I’m like, I know it’s important, but I don’t know how to do any of it.
    0:22:53 Do you know what I mean?
    0:22:57 It’s like saying like, Sean, do you want the V6 or the V8 car?
    0:22:59 And you’re like, I don’t know what any of that means, but I know that the V8 is better.
    0:23:02 I like, that’s how I am with AI.
    0:23:05 And I wish I could pay someone to just come and do this.
    0:23:07 So I think this is an excellent idea, by the way.
    0:23:10 So you can, there’s, there are consultants that will do this.
    0:23:11 They’ll shadow your work.
    0:23:12 They’ll, they’ll come into your company.
    0:23:14 They’ll do a discovery phase.
    0:23:18 And I mean, all the way up to Accenture, I think is going to do a billion dollars this
    0:23:19 year in AI consulting.
    0:23:22 Like big companies are hiring McKinsey and Accenture to do it.
    0:23:25 And then small companies can hire these like indie shops to basically say, all right, I’ll
    0:23:31 pay five to 10 grand to come do a like six week program where you kind of figure out where
    0:23:33 you can optimize and then, and then optimize.
    0:23:37 But a lot of that’s so speculative and like, what if, what if you don’t find anything?
    0:23:38 That sounds like work on my end.
    0:23:40 Here’s kind of how I want it to work.
    0:23:42 So what would you call this?
    0:23:44 What would I call it?
    0:23:50 I’d call it cute name up slice top slice.
    0:23:51 I call it top slice.
    0:23:51 Do you remember?
    0:23:52 That’s not bad.
    0:23:52 Do you remember?
    0:23:53 That’s actually kind of cool.
    0:23:55 Do you remember when we talked about a team?
    0:23:57 I thought that name was so good.
    0:23:57 A team is fantastic.
    0:23:59 It was a fantastic name.
    0:24:01 A team, I want that name for everything.
    0:24:04 Let me just give out some marketing, some absolute marketing gold here.
    0:24:06 Have you ever heard this phrase?
    0:24:11 I’m almost scared to say this because I love like the marketing genius of this phrase is
    0:24:12 so good.
    0:24:13 Nobody ever talks about it.
    0:24:17 And I really want to use the same principle on something, but I’ll give it away here.
    0:24:20 Have you ever heard of marry me chicken?
    0:24:23 No, I don’t know what that is.
    0:24:23 Is that a nursery rhyme?
    0:24:25 No, it’s a chicken recipe.
    0:24:31 And it’s like, you ever, it’s like, oh, if you want to learn how to make my, like this
    0:24:33 is, this chicken dish is called marry me chicken.
    0:24:36 Cause if you make it for a man, he will be like, marry me right away.
    0:24:38 And it’s this thing that women say.
    0:24:41 It’s like a, it’s a, it’s a, it’s a way to say the recipe.
    0:24:44 And it’s like, if you just think about that, there’s a thousand ways they could have described
    0:24:46 like this creamy chicken recipe, right?
    0:24:47 Creamy chicken.
    0:24:48 It could have been like the name of the ingredient.
    0:24:50 It could have been the cooking process.
    0:24:52 No, marry me chicken.
    0:24:53 Love that phrase.
    0:24:55 Love the idea of marry me chicken.
    0:24:59 And I think for any business, you should come up with like a marry me chicken level
    0:25:02 description of like what the person really would want.
    0:25:06 Like how good must it be that they say, marry me at the end of it.
    0:25:06 Right.
    0:25:07 So I love that.
    0:25:11 So I would love to come up with something like that for this, but yeah, I think that there’s
    0:25:13 an opportunity to create, create something like this.
    0:25:14 Here’s what I would want it to work.
    0:25:17 So I have a buddy who invests in this e-commerce company.
    0:25:18 I was like, why’d you invest in that?
    0:25:21 And he goes, he’s doing really interesting stuff with AI.
    0:25:25 And honestly, I wanted to invest just so that I could like see what he’s trying.
    0:25:28 He’s trying to build the company, the whole company AI first.
    0:25:29 So he’s trying not to hire anybody.
    0:25:30 He’s trying to do AI for pretty much every job.
    0:25:34 It’s e-com in the sense of they make a product and they sell it, or it’s like Amazon.
    0:25:35 Like it’s like a, it’s like a platform.
    0:25:38 So like they make a product, it’s like a brand, like you buy the supplement and then
    0:25:41 you, and then they, they sell it on Shopify.
    0:25:44 And I was like, oh, fascinating.
    0:25:44 So like, what’s he doing?
    0:25:45 I really want to know.
    0:25:46 I got an e-com brand.
    0:25:51 And I think actually that’s a, that’s a kind of a good hook, which is instead of saying,
    0:25:55 let me study your business or you come in and you describe the problem that, you know,
    0:25:55 AI can solve.
    0:25:59 Cause that already presupposes, you know, quite a bit about what AI could, could or couldn’t
    0:25:59 do for you.
    0:26:05 But if I just subscribed, I was like, Hey, I want you to tell me once a week what somebody
    0:26:11 paid somebody to build for their e-com brand here and show me kind of like how it works.
    0:26:16 I then as an e-com store owner would be like, oh, you can just, I don’t have to do product
    0:26:17 photography anymore.
    0:26:19 I could just use this thing to do all my photography.
    0:26:22 It actually works like, wow, that’s great.
    0:26:23 I didn’t even realize that.
    0:26:28 And then, oh, the next thing, oh, they set up this agent that manages the supply chain.
    0:26:33 So it takes every freight forward invoice and it puts it into the sheet and then it checks
    0:26:35 that sheet to make sure that there’s no overages.
    0:26:38 And then it, and then it posted in Slack.
    0:26:39 That’s great.
    0:26:40 I have a person doing that today.
    0:26:41 That’s awesome.
    0:26:44 Well, you know, I’d like to take that task and sell it to AI instead.
    0:26:50 And so I think the problem with most businesses adopting AI is a problem of imagination, not
    0:26:50 capability.
    0:26:54 Like you could sit down and figure it out, or you could hire somebody to do any of these
    0:26:54 things.
    0:26:56 It’s an imagination problem for most people.
    0:26:58 They don’t even really realize where they could be doing things.
    0:27:04 So for you with Hampton, for example, you might, maybe it could be as granular as like
    0:27:06 memberships or paid communities or something like that.
    0:27:08 Or it might just be like somebody who’s doing sales.
    0:27:10 It’s like you subscribe to the sales feed.
    0:27:11 It’s like, cool.
    0:27:16 Anytime somebody comes in and pays for an AI, AI job that improves their sales process.
    0:27:17 I want to know what they did.
    0:27:21 Like I’ll give you an example in one of my companies, I have a, this company is going
    0:27:26 really fast and so fast that we literally can’t get enough proposals out the door.
    0:27:30 Like customers want to pay, but the sales guys have too many proposals to create.
    0:27:36 And so what he did was he created this, our CTO created this little agent that will listen
    0:27:40 to the sales call and it knows what our capabilities are.
    0:27:43 And it just, it’s, it’s listened to the sales call and it knows our capabilities.
    0:27:48 So it auto generates a draft invoice of what services we should package to this customer.
    0:27:52 And there probably wasn’t like a good plugin and he just customized it for you.
    0:27:55 Yeah, that didn’t exist.
    0:27:58 In fact, I think there’s a whole startup idea somebody should build, but like he built that
    0:28:02 internally and our sales guys, as soon as they get off the call, the draft proposal is ready.
    0:28:04 They just need to tweak three things.
    0:28:05 And I was like, wow, this is genius.
    0:28:08 And again, like, I think that should just be a startup idea altogether.
    0:28:13 It’s like a, you know, a tool for salespeople that like by the time they get off the call,
    0:28:16 the AI agent has already figured out the follow-up email, the draft, the proposal,
    0:28:19 the CRM thing that it needs to input, et cetera.
    0:28:20 This is kind of a 10 out of 10.
    0:28:21 Idea.
    0:28:23 Yeah, I think so.
    0:28:24 I think this might be a 10 out of 10.
    0:28:25 I don’t know if it’s…
    0:28:27 Which one, the AI marketplace or the sales thing I just said?
    0:28:28 Because they’re both kind of dope.
    0:28:30 Well, I don’t know anything about the second one, but yeah, that’s cool.
    0:28:36 But the first one, because I’m like thinking, like I, I guess like I would easily give money
    0:28:41 to someone right now if they, if like, because a lot of times AI, it feels like I don’t know
    0:28:43 what I don’t know, but I know it’s important.
    0:28:50 And it’s like, if just give me all the examples of how this is helpful for me and just do it.
    0:28:50 Right.
    0:28:50 You know what I mean?
    0:28:56 Like now the, the, the hard part about a business like this is of course, marketplaces are incredibly
    0:28:57 difficult to spin up, right?
    0:28:58 It’s a chicken and egg problem.
    0:29:00 How do you get supply when there’s no demand?
    0:29:02 How do you get demand where there’s no supply?
    0:29:03 How do you, how do you increase?
    0:29:06 Are you, how do you figure out are you supply constrained or demand constrained?
    0:29:09 That initial cranking of the crank is really hard.
    0:29:16 So this is not something that like, I would say a B, B minus entrepreneur can do, you know,
    0:29:20 like I think, I think you basically have to be an A plus entrepreneur to do marketplaces.
    0:29:24 As just like maybe a personal belief, because I think the initial cranking is so difficult
    0:29:27 and takes so much kind of skill and hustle to do.
    0:29:32 But I think it’s a great opportunity because when you build them, they’re very valuable when
    0:29:33 you, when you do build them.
    0:29:36 And so if anybody wants to work on this, feel free to email me, shaunashampuri.com or
    0:29:37 DM me.
    0:29:40 I want to, I want to hear if anybody tries this or is interested in trying it.
    0:29:44 Well, how is Fiverr taking advantage of the AI stuff?
    0:29:45 Have you seen anything?
    0:29:46 Dude, I used to use Fiverr so much.
    0:29:47 I don’t use it at all anymore.
    0:29:49 We’ll know from the homepage.
    0:29:53 It’s still the same old junk.
    0:29:58 And I feel like, I bet if I had to imagine a lot of their business was graphic design and
    0:30:03 now it’s basically just taking advantage of people who don’t know that ChatGPT exists and
    0:30:04 they’re like, yeah.
    0:30:07 And they’re like, Hey, can you like, Oh, I can just pay this kind of making an image.
    0:30:08 He gets back to me so fast.
    0:30:10 It takes a lot of iteration though.
    0:30:11 But, but you know what?
    0:30:14 One thing I heard people do, I think there’s a, there’s people who are rolling up the top
    0:30:15 Fiverr accounts.
    0:30:16 Cause they’re like, cool.
    0:30:21 You have top, uh, real estate under graphic design on Fiverr.
    0:30:25 So you’re just automatically getting, you know, hundreds of jobs a week inputted to you.
    0:30:30 So they’re buying them and then they’re just replacing the creator with AI and like an AI
    0:30:31 managed service underneath it.
    0:30:33 And I thought that was pretty fascinating.
    0:30:37 It’s like buying, you know, beachfront property on the world’s shittiest, on the world’s shittiest
    0:30:38 island.
    0:30:44 But this is, yeah, this sounds like a horrible idea because that’s like, uh, you know, what
    0:30:49 happened to the Thrasios property, like right where the hurricanes keep hitting.
    0:30:52 And yeah, I mean, this sounds horrible.
    0:30:59 So the key with any rollup is like, yes, either you’re going to get extreme durability, in which
    0:31:02 case you pay a higher multiple or you get unknown durability.
    0:31:06 But if you’re buying it like one X, for example, or you’re buying it like one and a half X or two
    0:31:08 X or something like that, you can make it work, right?
    0:31:13 Like you can, you can end up looking like a genius if you, if you buy at a low enough multiple.
    0:31:17 So in something like this, I bet these people have never been offered anything before.
    0:31:22 It’s like, oh, you’ll pay me like a year of earnings or two years of earnings for, for if
    0:31:23 I just walk away right now.
    0:31:27 And then I know that I can kind of increase the earnings of the cost potential, you know,
    0:31:29 the cost savings by, you know, 30%.
    0:31:34 And as long as this holds for, you know, two years, as long as Fiverr doesn’t just go under
    0:31:37 the next two years, every year after that, it’s a profit, right?
    0:31:39 So, you know, you could make it work.
    0:31:41 It’s not like, it’s not, there’s not a horrible idea is what I’m saying.
    0:31:47 My mother-in-law has this pillow business and it does many, many hundreds, close to seven
    0:31:49 figures a year in revenue.
    0:31:50 And it’s quite profitable.
    0:31:53 Like she’s paying herself a good salary.
    0:31:59 And, you know, now that she’s got some, a bunch of grandkids, she’s like, I guess I’m
    0:31:59 just going to shut this down.
    0:32:03 And I was like, you know, Smithy, I, I don’t know anything about e-commerce, but I’m pretty
    0:32:05 sure, you know, you could sell a business.
    0:32:06 And she was like, what do you mean?
    0:32:11 I was like, well, someone will pay you something like, it could be one times, it could be eight
    0:32:11 times.
    0:32:17 I’m not sure your, your salary, like they’ll pay you that or your owner’s earnings to buy
    0:32:17 your business.
    0:32:18 And it blew her mind.
    0:32:21 And she was like, someone will buy this.
    0:32:26 And it, it, it, it was like amazing to hear this woman who’s like killing it just on Etsy
    0:32:31 realize that someone will pay her money, uh, like to own this thing.
    0:32:33 And I don’t, I have no idea what it’s worth.
    0:32:37 I don’t know if it’s one times, uh, if it’s five times what it’s worth, but it was pretty
    0:32:38 cool to see her go through this exercise.
    0:32:44 Are you doing, are you actually using AI in a meaningful way in anything, uh, in your company
    0:32:45 or I’ll ask differently.
    0:32:49 Are your employees using, I’m sure you use it as a thought partner.
    0:32:53 Are you using it like, are your staff using it on a daily basis where your company has
    0:32:55 gotten significantly more productive?
    0:33:02 Well, the example I just gave you on the sales side, that’s probably the most, the most impressive
    0:33:11 example, I would say other than that, it’s like more chat GPT plus, you know what I mean?
    0:33:13 It’s kind of like, oh, review this email.
    0:33:16 It’s like, Hey, we need to write this thing.
    0:33:18 We need to like research this thing.
    0:33:20 We need to, uh, draft something.
    0:33:22 Stuff like that is like the daily stuff.
    0:33:26 I don’t, we haven’t like replaced job functions yet with AI.
    0:33:31 That’s the, that’s what I’m waiting for is like, basically like, oh, we don’t need to hire
    0:33:38 this person because AI, an AI agent or this person with AI is better than this person with
    0:33:39 another person.
    0:33:43 But that’s where something like this service is, this actually plays like an interesting
    0:33:49 part here because you know, it’s important, but you, for a variety of reasons, haven’t
    0:33:49 implemented it.
    0:33:51 Then there’s all these other people.
    0:33:53 So I, I, you know, I’m not the CEO of any of these businesses.
    0:33:58 So, you know, they, the people who run these businesses are their heads down in the business.
    0:34:01 They’re not as AI curious as I am.
    0:34:05 And yeah, but they have the same mindset, which is either, I’m either too busy right now, or
    0:34:06 I don’t exactly know how to do this.
    0:34:10 Or this sounds like a project that I, I’m, I’m a little bit ignorant on, but I know that
    0:34:11 this is interesting.
    0:34:16 And then you have all these guys who have like, in the past three years, been like raised on
    0:34:16 this stuff.
    0:34:18 And they’re like, are you a fool?
    0:34:20 Why aren’t you doing it this way, this way, this way?
    0:34:20 You know what I mean?
    0:34:22 And there, that connection would be very valuable.
    0:34:27 New York City founders.
    0:34:30 If you’ve listened to my first million before, you know, I’ve got this company called Hampton
    0:34:33 and Hampton is a community for founders and CEOs.
    0:34:38 A lot of the stories and ideas that I get for this podcast, I actually got it from people
    0:34:39 who I met in Hampton.
    0:34:41 We have this big community of a thousand plus people and it’s amazing.
    0:34:46 But the main part is this eight person core group that becomes your board of advisors for
    0:34:47 your life and for your business.
    0:34:48 And it’s life changing.
    0:34:55 Now to the folks in New York City, I’m building a in real life core group in New York City.
    0:34:59 And so if you meet one of the following criteria, your business either does 3 million in revenue
    0:35:04 or you’ve raised 3 million in funding, or you’ve started and sold a company for at least
    0:35:06 10 million dollars, then you are eligible to apply.
    0:35:09 So go to joinhampton.com and apply.
    0:35:12 I’m going to be reviewing all of the applications myself.
    0:35:15 So put that you heard about this on MFM.
    0:35:16 So I know to give you a little extra love.
    0:35:17 Now back to the show.
    0:35:26 I remember, so we both did the newsletter business and the workflow for the hustle was
    0:35:28 probably similar than the, of the workflow for the-
    0:35:29 Dude, it was so janky.
    0:35:32 So like, what’s the output?
    0:35:34 The output is we got to write an email.
    0:35:39 We got to write an email that’s going to go to, you know, hundreds of thousands or millions
    0:35:40 of people tomorrow morning.
    0:35:45 And it’s got to basically say, here’s the most important stories that you should care about.
    0:35:47 Here’s what happened.
    0:35:49 Here’s our kind of quick commentary of what it means.
    0:35:52 And let’s make you laugh, right?
    0:35:54 And let’s entertain you along the way.
    0:35:55 And let’s put in the sponsorships and all that.
    0:35:57 And there needs to be the right ads.
    0:35:58 The right ads need to be in the email.
    0:36:01 I had a full-time person whose job was to do that.
    0:36:04 And when you say the right ads, what do you mean by the right ads?
    0:36:07 Just explain the complexity for somebody who’s like, why do you need a full-time person to
    0:36:08 make, what do you mean the right ad?
    0:36:08 Just put the ad in.
    0:36:13 Because if you’re sending an email to, let’s say, 3 million people, and you make $100,000
    0:36:18 every time you hit send, sometimes, like let’s say Target will say, I want to spend $1 million
    0:36:20 with you over the course of the next 3 months.
    0:36:26 And then Warby Parker will say, well, I want to spend $20,000 with you over the next 3 weeks.
    0:36:29 You have to figure out how to mix and match.
    0:36:35 So today’s email to 3 million people, 500,000 is going to see the Warby Parker ad.
    0:36:38 2.5 million is going to see the Target ad.
    0:36:40 And then next week, it’s going to be swapped.
    0:36:43 And you have to make sure that not the same people are seeing the same ad.
    0:36:46 And no technology, at least when I started, did any of that.
    0:36:49 So I had to one person manually do all of this.
    0:36:51 And it’s not crazy complicated.
    0:36:56 But when the stakes are high, and it’s like my whole business, and you have people giving you-
    0:36:58 Ad ops was kind of the name of the job, right?
    0:37:01 Like you’re not the salesperson, but you’re the ad ops person in between.
    0:37:02 So, okay, great.
    0:37:04 So I met a guy who was doing a news business.
    0:37:06 And there’s multiple ads per email.
    0:37:09 But even if you take the ads out for a second, if you just take the content itself.
    0:37:10 Okay, so what do you need to do?
    0:37:13 That means every day, somebody’s figuring out what are all the top stories today.
    0:37:16 So there’s like a search, and then there’s a curation.
    0:37:20 And then you have to like, so you find all the top stories, you make a judgment call on
    0:37:22 which ones are worth talking about.
    0:37:23 Then you have to research those topics.
    0:37:25 And then you have to write about, you have to summarize them.
    0:37:28 And then you have to maybe add some commentary, some value add.
    0:37:29 Okay, so we had to do that every day.
    0:37:31 And, you know, we did it with one or two writers.
    0:37:33 I think you did it initially with a few writers.
    0:37:39 And so let’s say that the cost of production there was like, you know, let’s just call
    0:37:43 it on the lowest end, $250,000 a year.
    0:37:47 If both of us weren’t so scrappy, like another person running that business, in fact, when
    0:37:52 we sold the business, it became like closer to a million dollars a year of cost to like
    0:37:52 do the editorial.
    0:37:55 We were definitely spending seven figures.
    0:37:59 And so I met a guy who’s doing this entire workflow with AI.
    0:38:00 So he just did that thing.
    0:38:01 And he was just like, cool, I’m going to do this with AI.
    0:38:08 So he’s like, he was using AI to scan specific sources to figure out what stories are hot.
    0:38:11 Then he would use AI to summarize those articles.
    0:38:19 Then he would use AI to check which influencers were reposting those articles on Twitter as
    0:38:24 a signal for like social signal of what’s important, what’s generating buzz.
    0:38:29 And then he would take that final thing and then he would send it to a human dude who was
    0:38:31 living in Japan who would just like proofread it overnight.
    0:38:36 And they’d be like, yep, this all, this is like legitimate fact check, just kind of like
    0:38:37 make sure the AI didn’t hallucinate.
    0:38:42 He’s paying that guy like whatever, $50 an hour to spend two hours on it, you know, like
    0:38:45 a 50 or a hundred bucks a day on this, uh, on the editing.
    0:38:50 And then he never wrote, he never wrote it and he never had a writer and it, oh, and then
    0:38:52 it auto formatted it for him.
    0:38:59 So it created an HTML email for him and it inserted the ad and then it sent it out and then it tracked
    0:39:00 the results and it sent him a report.
    0:39:05 To take it even a step further, that sounds like I’m going to one up, one up you.
    0:39:10 I know a guy who is doing the same thing, but it’s for local newsletters.
    0:39:16 And the thing about local newsletters is it’s a fantastic business minus the fact that the
    0:39:21 profits are totally destroyed because you have to have local ad sales and local writers for
    0:39:21 everyone.
    0:39:28 But if you could just have like lots of newsletters, uh, for Raleigh, for Nashville, Louisville,
    0:39:30 but not have the writers, it would be a very great business, right?
    0:39:34 And he’s doing what you’re describing, but for local news.
    0:39:39 And it very quickly spins up a place, uh, a newsletter that says like, Hey, and it makes
    0:39:44 an ad and it says, Hey, Danville in California, do you want news just for Danville?
    0:39:46 And it goes to a danville.com or whatever.
    0:39:50 And he’s built this whole local newsletter empire, all automated.
    0:39:52 How’s it doing?
    0:39:56 It does six figures right now a month in revenue and it’s just him doing it.
    0:40:01 And so it’s him and it’s buying ads on Facebook, targeting local people to get subscribers.
    0:40:02 That’s awesome.
    0:40:04 That’s great.
    0:40:05 Very cool.
    0:40:05 Dude.
    0:40:07 Our business is like, Oh my God.
    0:40:08 Thank God.
    0:40:08 Right.
    0:40:09 Thank God.
    0:40:09 We got out.
    0:40:12 But why are you saying that?
    0:40:15 You’re saying, thank God, because it’s just way different.
    0:40:16 It’s just way more competitive now.
    0:40:18 Or what, what are you, what is the underneath?
    0:40:19 What is the underneath that feeling?
    0:40:21 I have the same feeling, but I think maybe for a different reason.
    0:40:23 I think, uh, okay.
    0:40:26 So when I started in 2016, people like laughed at us.
    0:40:31 And I know you hear that story a lot, but like people were literally like you, you were
    0:40:31 that person.
    0:40:31 Yeah.
    0:40:34 You said, why are you doing this stupid drink?
    0:40:35 Yeah.
    0:40:37 She said people left.
    0:40:41 You were like, why are you doing this silly thing?
    0:40:44 And I was like, no, it’s like, if you read the math, that could be big.
    0:40:51 Now, like I, like, I, I know these like hips, like hipsters have newsletters.
    0:40:57 Like it’s like, it’s, everyone has a newsletter and it’s way more complicated inside of someone’s
    0:40:58 inbox to stand out.
    0:41:05 And so it was, I think I succeeded because it was a silly business that I took seriously.
    0:41:08 And there weren’t that many serious operators in there.
    0:41:11 And you could say I wasn’t even that serious of an operator, but I still succeeded.
    0:41:16 Now there’s actually really smart people trying to win the game and makes it much harder for
    0:41:19 just like, you know, it’s just harder.
    0:41:24 Let’s say you were motivated to start the hustle this year.
    0:41:28 What do you think would be the outcome four years from now?
    0:41:32 So the caveat is you’re committed to doing it.
    0:41:33 You’re going to work hard on it.
    0:41:36 Does it have to be the same genre of content?
    0:41:37 No, it could be different.
    0:41:40 I think I could build a significantly larger business.
    0:41:44 I think it would look a lot closer to industry dive.
    0:41:51 So where it would be lots of different newsletters built for job titles that are kind of forgotten
    0:41:52 and ignored.
    0:42:01 And then to monetize it, it would be newsletter, it would be advertisements, but then also it would be community peer groups, sort of like Hampton would be on the back end.
    0:42:04 And I think it wouldn’t grow as fast and I could own it forever.
    0:42:09 I think it would be very, very hard to grow as fast as I grew it, the hustle.
    0:42:11 And what if you did the hustle idea again?
    0:42:14 I don’t think it would succeed.
    0:42:16 I think that it would, I would not succeed.
    0:42:21 Dude, I got to like 300,000 subscribers organically in like two years.
    0:42:23 Like it was so easy looking back on it.
    0:42:24 That would never happen again.
    0:42:26 There’s too much noise.
    0:42:30 I think that to buy subscribers on Facebook, it’s actually shockingly the same price.
    0:42:33 I don’t know if you know anything about the market.
    0:42:35 I don’t, but I hear it’s still like $1.50.
    0:42:42 But we grew organically because we got popular on Reddit, on Hacker News, places like that.
    0:42:46 And it was considered outlandish and silly and remarkable what we were doing.
    0:42:47 It was noteworthy rather.
    0:42:49 It’s not noteworthy anymore.
    0:42:51 So it’s too hard to have something spread virally now.
    0:42:53 Do you agree?
    0:42:56 Yeah, I think all the things you said are true.
    0:43:05 But I do think you could do it again and you, I think you could do it again and win because you’re good at that type of content and that type of business.
    0:43:08 So I think you would, I think you would figure it out again.
    0:43:16 And I think you’d have other advantages, which is that like, you know, newsletter advertising is a lot more sophisticated and like available than it was back then.
    0:43:18 But it’s also cheaper now though.
    0:43:24 So we used to charge, I forget what we charged, but I think it was $25 to $40 per 1,000 cents.
    0:43:27 I’m hearing now it’s much cheaper because there’s so many options.
    0:43:29 Interesting.
    0:43:30 I didn’t know that.
    0:43:34 When we were doing Milk Road, I think we were charging that or more.
    0:43:37 And that was only two, three years ago.
    0:43:38 So maybe it’s changed or maybe it was crypto.
    0:43:43 So it was like financial, financial newsletters, I think definitely command a premium.
    0:43:44 So I’m not sure.
    0:43:46 But I would never do it again.
    0:43:48 It’s hard.
    0:43:50 It’s a way harder business than people realize.
    0:43:51 It’s fucking hard.
    0:43:54 Can we wrap up with me telling you something funny?
    0:43:55 Okay, let’s do it.
    0:43:55 Go to this.
    0:43:58 Go to spermracing.com.
    0:44:00 Have you seen sperm racing?
    0:44:02 What do you mean go to it if it’s my homepage?
    0:44:04 Yeah.
    0:44:06 I mean, you seem like a sperm racing.
    0:44:12 They were trying to figure out who just sent the sponsorship deck guy.
    0:44:13 They’re like, Sean seems like a sperm guy.
    0:44:19 Guys, two words, blank check.
    0:44:22 All right.
    0:44:28 So the world’s first sperm race and one of the most epic little videos behind it.
    0:44:31 Okay, so what is this?
    0:44:34 So click manifesto and just read the first couple lines.
    0:44:35 All right.
    0:44:37 So sperm racing.
    0:44:39 When people hear it, they ask me the same thing every time.
    0:44:40 Wait, is this really happening?
    0:44:42 And the answer is always, hell yeah, it is.
    0:44:43 But here’s the thing.
    0:44:45 Sperm racing is not just a joke.
    0:44:48 It’s not just some viral idea for the internet to laugh at.
    0:44:49 It’s something much bigger.
    0:44:50 All right.
    0:44:51 That’s let’s see.
    0:44:53 Let’s see if they can pay off that promise.
    0:44:56 Male fertility is declining like a lot.
    0:44:58 It’s happening quietly, steadily, and nobody’s talking about it.
    0:45:05 And then there’s a diagram of the average sperm count in a man from the 1970s to today.
    0:45:07 And it’s basically cut in half.
    0:45:11 So we have half as much sperm per milliliter of semen.
    0:45:12 Wow.
    0:45:13 A metric I didn’t even know.
    0:45:15 I didn’t even know you could measure that.
    0:45:16 I didn’t even know that existed.
    0:45:17 All right.
    0:45:18 T-I-L.
    0:45:19 All right.
    0:45:25 And spermability, which is how fast it moves, which is a massive factor in fertility and getting pregnant,
    0:45:29 is a measurable, trackable thing, just like running a race or lifting weight.
    0:45:30 It’s something you could actually improve.
    0:45:33 And nobody’s cared about it until now.
    0:45:35 So we’re turning health into a sport.
    0:45:37 And they built a racetrack for sperm.
    0:45:41 Two competitors, two samples, one microscopic finish line.
    0:45:44 And then they have a MS paint diagram of the track.
    0:45:47 Is this a real thing or is it a joke?
    0:45:48 It’s 100% real.
    0:45:50 Can I watch this live?
    0:45:51 Can I pay pay-per-view for this?
    0:45:52 So listen to what they’re doing.
    0:45:55 So this is from an article, thetimes.com.
    0:46:00 So once the samples are taken, which I assume that means they have to go backstage because
    0:46:02 it’s got to be ready to roll right away.
    0:46:07 It’s going to be placed into the middle of the stadium and a live video feed that’s magnified
    0:46:11 40 times to display the sperm will track the samples progress.
    0:46:18 And the sperm are going to swim through a, they typically swim five millimeters per minute,
    0:46:22 meaning this race is going to take 40 minutes because they’re going to have them swim through
    0:46:23 this course.
    0:46:29 The event will run over three races in front of a crowd of 4,000 spectators and feature
    0:46:34 play-by-play commentary, instant replays, and leaderboards.
    0:46:41 And this company, according to this article, is run by like three 17-year-olds and they’ve
    0:46:42 raised $1.5 million.
    0:46:45 This is incredible.
    0:46:52 So everyone else out there who is working on a product that isn’t working, take notes.
    0:46:54 All right.
    0:46:55 The hype video was amazing.
    0:47:02 I genuinely think we should be sponsoring this and, or we should be the presenting sponsor.
    0:47:05 Presenting podcast of the-
    0:47:06 For us, by us, baby.
    0:47:09 So, okay.
    0:47:10 So, but what are they really trying to do?
    0:47:11 Okay.
    0:47:16 So they’re going to sell out this venue, 5,000 attendees, to watch this, which is hilarious.
    0:47:21 They’re trying to raise awareness, but is this just an awareness?
    0:47:26 Is this an offshoot of a bigger brand or they want to make this a sport?
    0:47:27 I don’t know.
    0:47:32 It’s hard to, they haven’t like, they’ve done the right thing so far, which is they haven’t
    0:47:34 relieved the tension from the joke.
    0:47:37 Like, you know, that’s, I think the way to go about it.
    0:47:41 But look at the photo that I posted on here where this guy-
    0:47:42 Oh, I know this kid.
    0:47:42 The photo of him.
    0:47:42 Eric.
    0:47:45 And he says, the future of technology.
    0:47:48 How beautiful is this?
    0:47:55 And so I assume that this is all about like content marketing for some type of male fertility
    0:47:55 startup.
    0:48:00 But they’ve done the best thing ever, which is they’ve not acknowledged that it’s a joke.
    0:48:03 And you might, and apparently the founder is Eric Zhu, Z-H-U.
    0:48:05 But that’s like a pretty common name.
    0:48:06 So you probably know-
    0:48:07 No, I know this guy.
    0:48:08 I did a phone call with this kid.
    0:48:13 He was doing a different startup before this that I didn’t think was that, like, was the
    0:48:13 one.
    0:48:14 Did you advise him?
    0:48:15 Did you advise him?
    0:48:17 You’re like, I got an idea.
    0:48:17 Hear me out.
    0:48:21 I said, just dream about the future you want to build.
    0:48:22 And this is what he came up with.
    0:48:27 What’s a secret, Eric, that you know that no one else knows?
    0:48:33 We wanted flying cars and we instead got sperm racing.
    0:48:34 Yeah.
    0:48:35 Wow.
    0:48:36 This is crazy.
    0:48:37 Fun project though.
    0:48:42 You know, I’ve talked about this before, actually, but I think that silly projects like this, and
    0:48:47 not to be insulting because obviously this is actually greatness, but things that to others
    0:48:52 might seem silly are amazing starter businesses.
    0:48:59 And I think that one mistake a lot of people make when you’re early on as a founder is you
    0:49:02 try to do A, what you think will work.
    0:49:07 So you end up doing some like, I don’t know, some, a boring business that you’re not really,
    0:49:12 you don’t really understand very well, but it sounds good on paper or you try to, you
    0:49:15 know, shoot for the moon where you’re not, you know, you shoot for the moon, but you don’t
    0:49:16 have a rocket, right?
    0:49:18 You don’t have the skills, the capability, the network, the whatever.
    0:49:21 And of course those can work.
    0:49:26 And there’s no, I’m not saying don’t do those, but I think another path that I did, which was
    0:49:31 like my first business was a sushi restaurant chain, like most outlandish idea.
    0:49:36 Yours, you were doing like, I don’t know what your first verse was, but like you did a
    0:49:38 hot dog stands, you worked for the American pickers guy, right?
    0:49:44 You did like a bunch of random things that the business itself isn’t great.
    0:49:49 You know, opportunities of sort of three out of 10, four out of 10, but at the time you don’t
    0:49:49 know any better.
    0:49:52 But the important thing is that you’re going to build a bunch of like random skills.
    0:49:57 And so like, for example, with our sushi restaurant, I learned because we were trying to make stuff.
    0:49:59 I learned how to pitch investors.
    0:50:01 I learned how to do, I learned Photoshop.
    0:50:03 I learned how to use After Effects a little bit.
    0:50:04 I learned how to use iMovie.
    0:50:06 We created a YouTube channel.
    0:50:08 We’d learned how to do, you know, door-to-door sales.
    0:50:13 We learned a bunch of random, random experiences that I wouldn’t have got had I just, A, had
    0:50:18 a traditional job or B, if I had done a startup that was just like more serious in nature.
    0:50:23 I guess because the startup was like a little bit fun, I was willing to do things that, or
    0:50:24 it felt normal.
    0:50:28 Once the first idea is a little bit fun, you know, then your marketing idea can be a little
    0:50:28 fun and out there.
    0:50:30 And then your hiring practice can be a little fun and out there.
    0:50:35 You could just sort of stack on from there when you kind of have like what feels more
    0:50:40 like a sandbox where you could be creative versus when you feel like you have a, you’re on tight,
    0:50:42 tight rails of what you’re supposed to do.
    0:50:43 I don’t know if that makes a lot of sense, but.
    0:50:44 That makes a lot of sense.
    0:50:45 And I agree with it.
    0:50:45 And I also think.
    0:50:46 Reminds me of me.
    0:50:51 We didn’t do something as anywhere near as interesting or cool as this, but like we’ve
    0:50:55 talked about Henry and Dylan, those, those guys who were doing a clip, they were making
    0:50:55 content.
    0:50:58 They have this like little like animation, what’s it called?
    0:51:01 Like a service business, like a funny newsletter.
    0:51:05 They’ll do like, they came to our house and they built our podcast studios.
    0:51:07 They’re just doing a bunch of random shit.
    0:51:10 That was like building little skills for them.
    0:51:13 They weren’t experts in any of those things, but they became expert level doing them.
    0:51:17 And, uh, they started pivoting from one idea to the next until others, it might look like
    0:51:20 they’re sort of lost, but I’ve seen it work out very well for myself and my friends who
    0:51:21 I was doing it with.
    0:51:24 And so I don’t know if you could advise people to do that, but if you’re already doing that,
    0:51:26 I would say don’t sweat it.
    0:51:28 That can, it can actually pay off.
    0:51:32 And Eric zoo is listening to this podcast right now.
    0:51:36 And he’s saying, I need to clip this and send this to my Chinese immigrant parents who
    0:51:41 are like, it’s like, they still, you know, they’re not on board with sperm racing.
    0:51:46 Uh, and imagine being 17 years old and selling out a 4,000 person, uh, uh, uh, stadium.
    0:51:48 I mean, that’s pretty, it’s pretty baller.
    0:51:49 Yeah.
    0:51:50 Although they’re just saying it’s sold out.
    0:51:51 Is it actually sold out?
    0:51:56 Uh, when you go to the ticket, when you, when you go to ticket master to buy a ticket, there’s
    0:51:58 a lot of blue, you know, there’s a lot of open seats.
    0:52:04 So I don’t know, uh, you know, I’m not exactly sure, but I could see this being a pretty
    0:52:06 fun thing for a bunch of college kids.
    0:52:09 It’s like, are you going to go watch the sperm event, the sperm race?
    0:52:13 Even the logo is so good.
    0:52:15 Everything about the branding is extremely well done.
    0:52:16 Oh no.
    0:52:17 Event canceled.
    0:52:18 What?
    0:52:19 Oh no.
    0:52:21 All right.
    0:52:22 Update from the sperm guy.
    0:52:24 He’s I go, is the event canceled?
    0:52:25 I don’t see it on ticket master.
    0:52:30 He goes, no, we got effed over by the, by the palladium.
    0:52:33 I guess the, the, the venue, they weren’t happy with the TMZ interview and some other
    0:52:34 stuff.
    0:52:39 And then he goes, it’s still the same day, but we moved it to LA center studios.
    0:52:40 Tickets will redrop Tuesday.
    0:52:41 Oh my God.
    0:52:44 What is, what is, what is the other stuff is?
    0:52:46 It sounds like a sticky situation.
    0:52:47 I don’t think I want to know.
    0:52:48 Yeah.
    0:52:50 All right.
    0:52:51 That’s it.
    0:52:51 That’s the pod.
    0:52:53 I feel like I can rule the world.
    0:52:57 I know I could be what I want to put my all in it.
    0:52:59 Like no days off on the road.
    0:53:00 Let’s travel.
    0:53:01 Never looking back.

    Episode 701: Sam Parr ( https://x.com/theSamParr ) and Shaan Puri ( https://x.com/ShaanVP ) talk about Nick Saban’s car dealership play, plus the most defensible ideas for AI startups. 

    Show Notes: 

    (0:00) Car dealership billionaires

    (13:35) Local Maxima

    (17:07) Most defensible AI ideas right now

    34:40) AI workflows for profitable newsletters

    (43:10) Spermracing 

    Links:

    • Want to make $ with AI? Get the database here: https://clickhubspot.com/bfu

    • John Elway – https://www.elwaydealers.com/ 

    • Lovable – https://lovable.dev/ 

    • Replit – https://replit.com/

    • Bolt – https://bolt.new/

    Check Out Shaan’s Stuff:

    Need to hire? You should use the same service Shaan uses to hire developers, designers, & Virtual Assistants → it’s called Shepherd (tell ‘em Shaan sent you): https://bit.ly/SupportShepherd

    Check Out Sam’s Stuff:

    • Hampton – https://www.joinhampton.com/

    • Ideation Bootcamp – https://www.ideationbootcamp.co/

    • Copy That – https://copythat.com

    • Hampton Wealth Survey – https://joinhampton.com/wealth

    • Sam’s List – http://samslist.co/

    My First Million is a HubSpot Original Podcast // Brought to you by HubSpot Media // Production by Arie Desormeaux // Editing by Ezra Bakker Trupiano

  • Prof G Markets: The Trump Fold & Tesla’s Brand Death

    AI transcript
    0:00:03 Support for the show comes from Public.com.
    0:00:06 If you’re serious about investing, you need to know about Public.com.
    0:00:09 That’s where you can invest in everything, stocks, options, bonds, and more,
    0:00:13 and even under 6% or higher yield that you can lock in with a bond account.
    0:00:19 Visit Public.com slash PropG and get up to $10,000 when you transfer your old portfolio.
    0:00:21 That’s Public.com slash PropG.
    0:00:26 Paid for by Public Investing, all investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal.
    0:00:30 Brokered services for U.S.-listed registered securities, options, and bonds
    0:00:34 in a self-directed account are offered by Public Investing, Inc., member FINRA,
    0:00:36 and SIPC.
    0:00:39 Complete disclosures available at Public.com slash disclosures.
    0:00:42 I should also disclose I am an investor in Public.
    0:00:51 If you think talking about finances in general is hard, try talking to your parents about money.
    0:00:54 What you don’t want to do is like, do you have any money?
    0:00:59 What’s going on? You know, you don’t want to come at them in a more adversarial way.
    0:01:03 Or, as I said, you don’t want to come out like you’re now the parent.
    0:01:06 What to do about the ups and downs of your 401k?
    0:01:10 If you or someone you care about plans to retire soon,
    0:01:12 that’s on the next Explain It To Me.
    0:01:14 New episodes every Sunday morning.
    0:01:21 Hey, Cam Hayward here from the Pittsburgh Steelers.
    0:01:25 This week’s episode of Not Just Football, we’re live from Green Bay for the NFL Draft.
    0:01:30 And we’re talking with 2024 Walter Payton, NFL Man of the Year, Eric Armstead,
    0:01:35 two-time Super Bowl champion and former offensive tackle for the Pittsburgh Steelers, Max Starks,
    0:01:39 and NFL Network and CBS NFL Game Analyst, Charles Davis.
    0:01:45 We’re diving into our draft day experiences with Eric and Max and answering your fan questions
    0:01:48 and getting Charles to share his best go-to phrases from Madden.
    0:01:52 This episode is now available wherever you get your podcasts and on YouTube.
    0:01:54 That’s Not Just Football with Cam Hayward.
    0:01:57 Today’s number, 283.
    0:02:00 That’s the percentage increase in viewership of the movie Conclave,
    0:02:03 the day after Pope Francis died.
    0:02:05 Ed, what does a priest’s scrotum look like?
    0:02:06 Oh, boy.
    0:02:08 I don’t know.
    0:02:08 I don’t know.
    0:02:10 What does a priest’s scrotum look like?
    0:02:11 Come on, man.
    0:02:12 Every child knows that.
    0:02:26 Welcome to Prop G Markets.
    0:02:28 Rest in peace, El Papa.
    0:02:30 Rest in peace.
    0:02:35 I just love that J.D. Vance killed the Pope.
    0:02:38 I absolutely love that.
    0:02:39 It answers the fuck, marry, kill, right?
    0:02:40 We got the couch.
    0:02:41 We got his wife.
    0:02:42 Now we got the kill.
    0:02:44 I’m recycling everything.
    0:02:47 I’m a walking meme right now, Ed.
    0:02:48 I’m a walking meme.
    0:02:49 What’s going on with you?
    0:02:50 It’s time for banter.
    0:02:50 Let’s see.
    0:02:51 What is going on with me?
    0:02:54 I hung out with Anthony Scaramucci yesterday, which is very fun.
    0:02:55 The Mooch?
    0:02:57 Where did you hang out with Anthony?
    0:02:58 I went to his office.
    0:02:59 Went to Skybridge.
    0:03:00 Took me around.
    0:03:03 Showed me all of his paraphernalia and his books.
    0:03:07 And by the way, I learned that Anthony was a classics major.
    0:03:07 Yeah.
    0:03:11 He’s actually, he has sort of this Long Island feel about him, but he’s, not that Long Island
    0:03:13 people aren’t well read.
    0:03:18 But he’s very, he, you get the sense he’s kind of a blue collar guy.
    0:03:21 He’s actually very well read and very intelligent.
    0:03:23 I like him a lot.
    0:03:24 I’m a huge fan of his.
    0:03:24 Let me guess.
    0:03:25 You’re starting a podcast.
    0:03:27 The rest, the rest is Ed.
    0:03:28 Isn’t this another thing?
    0:03:28 The rest is podding.
    0:03:29 The rest is Ed.
    0:03:32 I think you’re starting a podcast with him.
    0:03:32 We’re actually doing it.
    0:03:35 We’re doing something, a limited series called The Lost Boys.
    0:03:35 What is that?
    0:03:36 Your 20th podcast?
    0:03:38 What are we at now?
    0:03:41 Well, look, every one I do, I make another 10 or 12 bucks in gross margin.
    0:03:44 So, you know, baby needs new shoes.
    0:03:47 And listen to my, listen to how dreamy my voice is.
    0:03:48 Say, now look at me.
    0:03:49 Listen to my voice.
    0:03:50 Now look at me.
    0:03:50 Enough said.
    0:03:51 Podcasts.
    0:03:53 Podcasts.
    0:03:53 The moneymaker.
    0:03:54 You know it.
    0:03:56 By the way, how was your time with your father?
    0:03:57 It was great.
    0:03:58 I had a great time.
    0:04:00 And your parents live in the UK?
    0:04:00 Is that right?
    0:04:01 Oh no, they live here now.
    0:04:01 No, no, no.
    0:04:03 They’re still in London.
    0:04:04 Yeah, he was just visiting.
    0:04:06 Not that I don’t know anything about you, Ed.
    0:04:09 What’s your last name again?
    0:04:10 Wait, hold on.
    0:04:12 Yeah, see, banter for us is just sort of like getting to know each other, right?
    0:04:13 Yeah.
    0:04:15 We’re still not quite there yet.
    0:04:17 Been four years, but we’re getting close.
    0:04:18 They live in the UK.
    0:04:20 Yeah, they do.
    0:04:22 I’ll have to set you up.
    0:04:25 You can go get a drink with my dad at Kensington Gardens.
    0:04:26 I can see that.
    0:04:29 I’m actually sort of, I wouldn’t say either, but I’m curious about your dad.
    0:04:30 What did your dad do professionally?
    0:04:31 Finance.
    0:04:32 And you went to Princeton.
    0:04:33 Huh.
    0:04:35 Boy, it’s been rough for Ed.
    0:04:38 It’s just amazing you’ve overcome all this adversity.
    0:04:41 Really impressive.
    0:04:43 The biggest adversity I’ve had in my life is you, Scott.
    0:04:46 I’m here for a reason, my brother, and it’s only getting started.
    0:04:47 Get to the headlines.
    0:04:50 Let’s start with our weekly review of Market Vitals.
    0:05:00 The S&P 500 climbed, the dollar hit a three-year low,
    0:05:02 Bitcoin rose, and the yield on 10-year treasuries declined.
    0:05:04 Shifting to the headlines.
    0:05:08 President Trump is inviting the top 220 holders of his meme coin
    0:05:10 to join him for a private dinner.
    0:05:13 That news sent the token’s price up more than 60%
    0:05:16 as investors rushed to increase their holdings and secure a spot.
    0:05:20 Boeing shares climbed 6% after the company posted first quarter earnings
    0:05:24 that beat expectations, with revenue up 18% year over year.
    0:05:27 The stock also got a boost the day before
    0:05:31 on a $10.6 billion partial sale of its navigation business.
    0:05:34 And finally, a new report shows that in 2024 alone,
    0:05:40 the 19 wealthiest households in America added $1 trillion to their net worth.
    0:05:44 That is the largest single-year increase on record.
    0:05:48 Scott, your thoughts, starting with Trump coin.
    0:05:53 Trump is inviting the top holders of Trump coin to an exclusive dinner
    0:05:56 and also a VIP tour of the White House.
    0:05:57 This is great news, isn’t it?
    0:06:02 I think we have hit a new low where we’re selling off access to the president
    0:06:06 in a dinner based on his Swiss, who puts the most money in a Swiss banking account.
    0:06:09 And the reality is, these are the amateurs or the people,
    0:06:12 the cultists who are fascinated by him.
    0:06:16 The most important people in terms of the Trump meme coin would never show up
    0:06:18 because what they’ve done is they’ve bought a bunch of meme coins,
    0:06:21 probably with his permission or his encouragement,
    0:06:24 in exchange for geopolitical advantage from America.
    0:06:26 It would never dare thinking of showing up.
    0:06:29 I got to give it to him for being this transparent.
    0:06:34 I think the Democrats have what I call low-grade diet co-corruption,
    0:06:38 where Speaker Emberto Pelosi trades stocks for tens or hundreds of thousands
    0:06:38 or maybe millions.
    0:06:43 And he’s like, if you’re going to be corrupt, go big and create a vessel.
    0:06:47 And somebody pitched him on this and he said, yes, where you can make billions.
    0:06:49 And that’s what he’s done here.
    0:06:54 And I hope this thing gets a lot of attention and a lot of people start focusing on what is
    0:07:01 easily the greatest financial grift in the history of presidents.
    0:07:06 I can’t think of, I mean, it just cracks me up that people were pissed off about
    0:07:10 Hunter Biden going on a board, which he shouldn’t have been on.
    0:07:14 We need to know what he was doing in China and Russia while his father was vice president
    0:07:18 and or while his father was preparing to become the president.
    0:07:20 This is corruption at its core.
    0:07:22 Folks, this is what people hate about the swamp.
    0:07:25 This is a part of how Donald Trump won in the first place,
    0:07:28 saying that we’re going to get rid of these sweetheart deals.
    0:07:34 We’re going to make sure that we clean up the axis of power in a place like Washington, D.C.
    0:07:40 And yet we have a meme coin and he’s inviting people to the White House for the dinner.
    0:07:41 I don’t know.
    0:07:45 I find the whole thing it’s verging on comical if it wasn’t so tragic.
    0:07:46 I think that’s exactly right.
    0:07:51 I think this is the most egregious act we’ve seen from this administration so far.
    0:07:57 And we can talk about the tariffs and the deportations and the threats to Jerome Powell, etc.
    0:07:58 None of that’s good.
    0:08:05 But you can at least begin to fashion an argument as to why in some version of reality it might
    0:08:07 be beneficial to the nation.
    0:08:10 You couldn’t make a good argument, not a rational argument.
    0:08:11 You couldn’t make a sane argument.
    0:08:13 But you could try to make the argument.
    0:08:16 You could try to say we need to reshore jobs, etc.
    0:08:18 There’s no argument for this.
    0:08:21 You can’t even attempt to steel man this.
    0:08:28 It is pure grift, pure corruption, using the White House, using the presidency as a vehicle
    0:08:33 to shake down regular investors, not wealthy political donors, which you could make the argument
    0:08:39 that maybe the Democrats do, but retail investors in order to raise money, again, not for some
    0:08:47 greater cause, not even to fund some political campaign, but purely to enrich your friends, to
    0:08:49 enrich your family and to enrich your allies.
    0:08:52 This is completely unheard of.
    0:08:58 And I just want to highlight that lock-up period, which it was a three-month lock-up period.
    0:09:03 It basically meant that the insiders of the coin can’t sell until the period expires.
    0:09:04 So this is very important.
    0:09:10 When, and we said this, we need to pay attention to when the lock-up period expires.
    0:09:13 It expired last week.
    0:09:21 So is it any surprise that this bullshit incentive plan to pump up the price of the coin, which
    0:09:27 is leading to this rat race where its winner takes dinner with the president, that sent the
    0:09:30 coin skyrocketing up 60% in one night.
    0:09:35 Is it any surprise that this coincided right when the lock-up period expired?
    0:09:36 Definitely not.
    0:09:42 And I think what we’ll find out soon enough is that the insiders, this was their, the Hail
    0:09:44 Mary that they threw right, right before they sell.
    0:09:50 And I would not be surprised if we find out, you know, that they sold, that they profited
    0:09:56 significantly off of this, not in terms of what they realized in a gain on Trump coin, but
    0:10:00 in dollar terms, I think they announced the dinner and then we find out they cashed out.
    0:10:06 And I just want to remind you again of the damage that this does to regular investors.
    0:10:10 Let’s look back to a few months ago when the coin was first launched.
    0:10:18 You look at the on-chain data and you will find that there were 31 early traders who made
    0:10:21 a profit of almost $700 million trading this coin.
    0:10:24 And you think, boy, that’s, that sounds pretty corrupt.
    0:10:33 But then you see the 800,000 other investors who lost cumulatively more than $2 billion.
    0:10:36 And this is what we have to remember about meme coins.
    0:10:38 And this is why this is so dark.
    0:10:40 This is a zero-sum game.
    0:10:43 For every winner, there is a loser.
    0:10:45 In fact, more often than not, thousands of losers.
    0:10:54 And, you know, the losers, I hate to say it, are the ones who are dumb enough to buy into
    0:10:54 this shit.
    0:10:58 And that’s also what I find so disturbing about this.
    0:11:01 It’s the fact that the Trump organization actually knows that.
    0:11:07 They know that there is a certain percentage of their fan base that is dumb enough to do
    0:11:11 whatever they tell them to do, to jump off a cliff if Trump demands it.
    0:11:16 Not the whole fan base, but certainly a percentage of it.
    0:11:22 And in this case, jumping off the cliff means throwing away your savings to bet on this rigged
    0:11:28 casino game that is disguised as a meet and greet with the president and a VIP tour of the White
    0:11:28 House.
    0:11:32 I mean, I am just still shocked.
    0:11:33 And I’m with you that it’s comical.
    0:11:35 It is comical because it’s so shameless.
    0:11:42 But that that shouldn’t detract us from calling it what it is, which is unprecedented corruption.
    0:11:45 And it is tragic.
    0:11:51 His team also collects fees on each trade and they’ve earned roughly a hundred million dollars
    0:11:52 just in January alone.
    0:11:58 And of course, you know, I love in 2016, he was just irate at the conflicts of interest and
    0:12:02 that Secretary Clinton was getting a quarter of a million dollars for a speech.
    0:12:05 I mean, in this instance, he isn’t even asking for donations.
    0:12:06 It’s worse.
    0:12:12 He’s asking for people to buy a volatile, unregulated coin that enriches him directly.
    0:12:19 And if I were Vladimir Putin and if I get kicked out of Ukraine, it probably means at some point
    0:12:20 I get thrown out of a window.
    0:12:24 I mean, people, people lose power in Russia.
    0:12:26 It usually doesn’t end well for them.
    0:12:31 And I’m spending 60 to 100 billion dollars a year on this failed war effort.
    0:12:32 I’m losing.
    0:12:38 I’ve lost almost a million young men sending them into this meat grinder, which at some point
    0:12:42 has got to take a toll on the morale and the popularity.
    0:12:49 Wouldn’t he be just stupid to figure out a secure way, maybe using signal on a phone,
    0:12:58 to call the president and say, all right, price discovery is dictated at the margin, right?
    0:13:04 If the Trump coin has a $7 billion market cap, you might be able to take it to 10 or 15 billion
    0:13:08 with just 100 million, 500 million, a billion in purchases, right?
    0:13:11 What if he said to him, look, I can make this thing.
    0:13:13 I can, I really love the Trump coin.
    0:13:18 And I’m going to make sure that for at least five years until you’re well out of office,
    0:13:25 that this thing never, you know, or that at some point it’s at least worth 50 billion and
    0:13:26 your stake is 80%.
    0:13:30 So you’re about to become the richest man in the world, President Trump, just because I
    0:13:31 love the coin.
    0:13:36 And in unrelated news, how do you feel about cutting support to Ukraine?
    0:13:44 I mean, wouldn’t Putin, one, wouldn’t Putin be stupid not to make that call and make that
    0:13:44 offer?
    0:13:49 And two, wouldn’t it be logical?
    0:13:56 Wouldn’t it be the next point in the data pattern in the line for Trump to act on that
    0:13:56 call?
    0:13:58 I mean, he started a meme coin.
    0:14:01 What do you think he did it for?
    0:14:08 And the notion that he wouldn’t be subject to this sort of influence, it just doesn’t
    0:14:16 look at the corruption and the trail of bankrupt companies, the trail of unpaid subcontractors.
    0:14:22 And I’m incredibly disappointed the Democrats aren’t putting up a better fight.
    0:14:27 I can’t believe they’re not all over the press today talking about all the different scenarios
    0:14:30 for the Trump coin and how this is nothing but pure grift.
    0:14:33 Let’s move on to Boeing and Boeing’s earnings.
    0:14:34 They had actually a really good earnings report.
    0:14:38 Revenue up 18% to $19.5 billion.
    0:14:40 Deliveries up nearly 60%.
    0:14:45 They’ve also reduced their cash burn down to $2.3 billion.
    0:14:47 A year ago, it was $4 billion.
    0:14:50 And there was a really big pop in the stock here.
    0:14:54 I think, you know, it was a great report.
    0:14:58 I think I’m really surprised to the upside, though, and what the markets are pricing in
    0:15:05 here was how optimistic Boeing was and their CEO was, Kelly Ortberg, about the tariff environment.
    0:15:10 Because, you know, meanwhile, you’ve got all these other companies that are somewhat freaking
    0:15:11 out about the tariffs.
    0:15:18 40% of earnings calls so far this quarter have mentioned the word recession, which is
    0:15:18 unbelievable.
    0:15:21 By the way, 90% of them have mentioned the word tariff.
    0:15:23 And you actually called this.
    0:15:26 You said that tariffs was going to be the new AI on earnings calls.
    0:15:27 That is what’s happening.
    0:15:32 But he did not seem that concerned about these tariffs.
    0:15:35 And he was asked up front, you know, what about China?
    0:15:38 China is your second largest market in aviation.
    0:15:40 Are you concerned about that?
    0:15:42 And he didn’t seem phased.
    0:15:46 And if I had to paraphrase his response, it would be, we’re watching it, but we’ll be OK.
    0:15:51 And then he had this line where he said that 2025 would be Boeing’s, quote, turnaround year.
    0:15:54 So very optimistic.
    0:16:00 I think what that tells you is that he and Boeing believe that these tariffs, particularly
    0:16:02 on China, are going away.
    0:16:09 And we’ll discuss more what’s happened in terms of tariffs and how Trump appears to be caving.
    0:16:14 But it is interesting that these earnings came out before we heard those comments from Trump.
    0:16:21 And so it appears that Boeing, in my view, had some sort of inside knowledge or at least
    0:16:27 some inside feeling that, yeah, these China tariffs, they look very scary, but ultimately
    0:16:29 we’re not too worried about it.
    0:16:34 How else would they not be worried about it if they didn’t have some inkling or some real
    0:16:37 sense that these tariffs wouldn’t be going through it?
    0:16:38 I mean, one of two things has happened.
    0:16:41 Either he called the Boeing CEO and said, don’t worry.
    0:16:42 Don’t worry, boss.
    0:16:44 Hey, do you want to come to my crypto meeting?
    0:16:46 Don’t worry, right?
    0:16:49 We know you’re a great company.
    0:16:49 Don’t worry.
    0:16:52 And, you know, let me put out a press release saying you’re hiring more people.
    0:16:55 Just don’t be critical of your earnings call, obviously.
    0:17:00 Or the Boeing CEOs just said, this guy’s full of shit.
    0:17:02 Nothing’s going to happen here.
    0:17:02 Could be that.
    0:17:04 We make great planes.
    0:17:05 Airbus.
    0:17:10 I mean, the thing about it, this is a duopoly controlled by two companies, Airbus and Boeing.
    0:17:15 And even if Airbus for a time being makes a better plane, you know, as the global economy
    0:17:20 grows and demographics grows, there’s always a need for more commercial aircraft and no one
    0:17:22 of them can produce enough.
    0:17:29 So it really is a duopoly and they have incredible pricing power and these are just, these are just
    0:17:30 incredible companies.
    0:17:34 And I think what he’s decided is, okay, this is a fucking distraction.
    0:17:39 And his earnings seem to seem to cement that.
    0:17:44 And while China’s threatened to reduce their order book, I would bet the order book that
    0:17:49 the Chinese, the CCP and the people at Boeing who are very smart and hire former ambassadors
    0:17:55 have all said to each other, look, there’s a non-zero probability, a most likely opportunity
    0:18:00 that the order book and the way we do business is going to stay exactly the same.
    0:18:05 What we’re seeing with a lot of these big corporate CEOs, companies like Target, companies
    0:18:10 like Walmart, companies like, you know, other companies in defense, like GE Aerospace.
    0:18:15 Many of these CEOs are meeting with the White House, they’re meeting with the president, and
    0:18:19 they’re coming out of those meetings, appearing to be a lot calmer.
    0:18:24 And in fact, this was reported by Charles Gosporino at Fox Business.
    0:18:30 The administration at the White House is actually actively alerting Wall Street executives.
    0:18:35 They’re reaching out and telling them that they are nearing agreements on these trade deals,
    0:18:41 which is a very interesting dynamic that we’re now entering into a market and a world where
    0:18:47 actually the heads of the largest corporations and the heads on Wall Street, they’re getting
    0:18:53 a heads up and they’re able to front run the largest news item of our time.
    0:18:58 Now, you could say, you know, that this has happened in the past, but I don’t think at the level
    0:19:03 that we’re seeing today, you know, usually it would be that with very highly sensitive economic
    0:19:09 data like this, there is a protocol and the White House comes out and they publicly announce
    0:19:15 it and you give markets an equal time and equal footing to react to what is happening.
    0:19:20 But it appears that there’s such a level of disorganization in the White House and they’re
    0:19:26 so freaked out by how the markets are reacting, it feels as if what is happening is the administration
    0:19:33 is having no choice but to call the big dogs of the Fortune 500 and say, hey, hey, just don’t
    0:19:33 worry about it.
    0:19:34 It’s going to be OK.
    0:19:38 And that’s material information right there.
    0:19:42 I mean, that is ground zero for insider trading.
    0:19:47 That hasn’t actually happened yet, but we all know that the line between fair trading
    0:19:52 versus insider trading is very blurry and we’re in an incredibly blurry time right now.
    0:19:58 And we’ll talk more about that in our main story when we really focus on these tariffs.
    0:20:03 Let’s just move on to this new data on wealth inequality.
    0:20:11 The top 19 households minting $1 trillion in wealth last year, biggest single year increase
    0:20:12 in history.
    0:20:20 They now own, those top 19 households now own 1.8% of the entire household wealth in America.
    0:20:22 That’s up from 0.1% in 1982.
    0:20:29 By the way, the bottom 50% of Americans, they own 3% of the household wealth.
    0:20:35 So you’ve got half of America with 3% and the top 19 households with 1.8%.
    0:20:45 There are now 1,990 billionaires in America, and that number is up 45% since 2021, just four
    0:20:45 years ago.
    0:20:53 So we talk a lot about income inequality and also wealth inequality on this podcast.
    0:20:57 And here we have some new data, which is just telling us the same thing.
    0:21:00 We are a massively unequal society.
    0:21:03 Well, to speak to the moral argument, it’s bad for the economy.
    0:21:09 And that is when all of that prosperity is being crowded into the 0.01%.
    0:21:15 One, I don’t think they have as much of a vested interest in public infrastructure and the
    0:21:16 well-being and prosperity of America.
    0:21:19 Do they have a vested interest in our healthcare system?
    0:21:19 No.
    0:21:22 Do they even have a vested interest in our national security?
    0:21:26 Because at the end of the day, they can peace out to New Zealand or Dubai or London.
    0:21:34 So you’re essentially creating a superclass of people that control so much economics and
    0:21:38 have so much power over our government, but don’t exercise the power in a means that affects
    0:21:44 all of America because they’ve basically become sequestered from America and what’s good or
    0:21:45 what’s bad about it.
    0:21:48 They’re literally behind gilded gates.
    0:21:52 And, you know, at some point, and I don’t think they believe this, at some point, people
    0:21:56 show up with pitchforks and lanterns, right?
    0:22:01 But if you think about third world nations that never, never able to get out of the way and
    0:22:05 ultimately end up in revolution, they have, what’s the common feature across all of them?
    0:22:08 Crazy income inequality.
    0:22:16 So this is not only bad for the economy, it’s bad, it’s really damaging for our culture.
    0:22:22 And what you see here is that young people are increasingly disillusioned with America.
    0:22:27 More than 4 in 10 young Americans today under 30 say they’re barely getting by financially,
    0:22:33 while just 16%, 1 in 6 young people say they’re doing well or very well.
    0:22:37 1 in 6 young Americans, the wealthiest country in the world, say they’re doing well or very well.
    0:22:40 Now, some of that is probably a benchmarking problem where they think if they’re not on
    0:22:42 a Gulfstream or in St. Bart’s, they’re failing.
    0:22:44 But still, some of that is real.
    0:22:46 They have less money.
    0:22:52 Fewer than half feel a sense of community with only 17% reporting deep social connection.
    0:22:53 That is really sad.
    0:22:56 Now, is income inequality driving all of this?
    0:22:57 No.
    0:23:01 But I’ve said on this show for a long time that the majority of what ails America
    0:23:07 can either be reverse engineered or partially correlated to massive income inequality.
    0:23:11 I think the reason that we’re talking about this and the reason that this is important
    0:23:17 and it relates to our discussions of markets, it also has a place in the world of politics.
    0:23:24 I really believe that this is the defining issue of our time and of this generation.
    0:23:34 I think this is the most important thing that we’re going to see and that I’m going to be grappling with for probably the rest of my life.
    0:23:40 And I was just thinking, you know, you’re talking about the 0.1%, the 99% there.
    0:23:42 You sound a lot like Bernie Sanders.
    0:23:46 And this is what people used to make fun of Bernie for.
    0:23:50 And I think back to, you know, the Occupy Wall Street days,
    0:23:54 where actually it was the same issues that were on the table.
    0:23:59 And it was the same things that people were upset about and that people were protesting against.
    0:24:03 And you had people like Bernie who talked about the issues,
    0:24:07 but who over time were kind of written off by the establishment.
    0:24:13 Many sort of wrote him off as a quack or a little crazy or a socialist or a communist.
    0:24:18 But one stat I would point you to, which blew me away.
    0:24:27 Last week, Bernie Sanders and AOC held a rally in California and 36,000 people showed up.
    0:24:33 Just for comparison, a Trump rally is on average around 5,000 people.
    0:24:38 The Madison Square Garden rally, that was 20,000 people.
    0:24:41 This was 36,000 people.
    0:24:50 And the message from those two candidates or those two politicians is simply about inequality.
    0:24:52 That’s the whole thing.
    0:24:57 And it’s just so fascinating that 10, 15 years ago, when Occupy Wall Street was at its peak,
    0:25:00 people were saying this is a big problem.
    0:25:01 It’s only gotten worse.
    0:25:03 Yeah, it’s gotten much worse.
    0:25:04 It’s gotten way worse.
    0:25:06 Which says to me, we need a new framing.
    0:25:10 And that is, I think it’s inspiring that AOC and Bernie are able to turn out these many people.
    0:25:14 There’s definitely a groundswell of dissatisfaction.
    0:25:16 I think it was more inspired by some of the
    0:25:22 illegal seizure of the constitutional power, the idea that people are being rounded up effectively,
    0:25:29 some of the corruption, people being fired in sort of a reckless and cruel manner.
    0:25:33 I don’t know if this was directly about income inequality, but that’s sort of Bernie’s talk track.
    0:25:41 I would reframe it because sometimes I think he comes across, I think the class warrior rap hasn’t really resonated.
    0:25:44 But per your comments, it continues to get worse.
    0:25:48 I think the framing should be something along the lines of the following.
    0:25:54 And that is, the greatest innovation in history was not the iPhone or the semiconductor.
    0:25:55 It was the American middle class.
    0:25:57 It’s created more tax revenue.
    0:25:59 It’s fought wars.
    0:26:02 It’s funded everything from the iPhone to vaccines.
    0:26:05 The American middle class is the greatest innovation in history.
    0:26:07 Now, how did it happen?
    0:26:12 It happened because 7 million men returned from war and they demonstrated heroism.
    0:26:13 They were fit.
    0:26:15 And we put a bunch of money in their pockets.
    0:26:17 We had the National Highway Transportation Act.
    0:26:18 We had FHA loans.
    0:26:20 We had the GI Bill.
    0:26:22 And we made them very attractive to women.
    0:26:25 So they mated, had the baby boom.
    0:26:29 And then we took a lot of that money and that prosperity from these households that were very productive.
    0:26:34 We taxed it at a fair rate, including corporations that were sometimes paying 40 and 50 percent.
    0:26:37 The super wealthy that were sometimes paying 70, 80, and 90 percent.
    0:26:44 And we not only reinvested continually in the middle class, but we said, we need to invite more people who have been sequestered from this prosperity into the fold.
    0:26:49 And we had legislation that advanced the rights of women and of non-whites.
    0:26:52 And we built the greatest society in history.
    0:26:56 And it all started from a really robust middle class.
    0:26:58 And I was like, well, okay, that’s fine.
    0:26:59 You got me there.
    0:27:11 Most people would agree, Republicans and Democrats, where sometimes we differ in opinion is that Republicans or the super wealthy will try and convince you that the middle class is a self-healing organism that happens on its own.
    0:27:20 Or that if you let the most productive people in the world, i.e., the super rich, do their thing unfettered, that the value they create will trickle down to the middle class.
    0:27:23 We have so much data showing that just doesn’t work.
    0:27:38 And I think we need to come out of the closet and say, you have to redistribute income from corporations and from the wealthy to the middle class in the form of education, child tax credit, a truly progressive tax system.
    0:27:42 Maybe young people under the age of 40 or anyone that makes less than $100,000 plays 10 percent.
    0:27:46 Anyone that makes over a million, an alternative minimum tax of 40 percent.
    0:27:47 And here’s the thing about taxes.
    0:27:50 You wouldn’t need to – you could lower the tax rates if you enforce them.
    0:27:53 It’s the tax code where everybody gets fucked.
    0:28:05 And until we acknowledge that the middle class is not a self-healing organism and there needs to be redistribution from corporations and the super wealthy to the middle class, it’s just going to continue to go sideways and wither.
    0:28:15 And actually, the middle class hasn’t declined, if you will, but it’s been static relative to the unbelievable prosperity that’s been crammed into the top 1 percent.
    0:28:22 And then you lay on top of that social media, which is basically an orgy of the life of the top 0.1 percent.
    0:28:24 So that’s the new benchmark.
    0:28:36 And what you end up with is people who see prosperity everywhere but aren’t participating in it unless they’re in the top 0.1 percent, which leads to an obese, angry, depressed, anxious younger generation.
    0:28:48 So all of this is on a downward spiral focused on not only prosperity being crammed into the 0.1 percent, but that prosperity being rubbed in everyone’s face.
    0:29:00 And if people under the age of 40 in the most prosperous nation in history don’t feel confident enough that they can form a household and have a kid, then none of this matters.
    0:29:05 We’ll be right back after the break with a look at Trump’s policy reversals.
    0:29:11 If you’re enjoying the show so far, be sure to give the Prof.G Markets feed a follow wherever you get your podcasts.
    0:29:23 Support for the show comes from the Fundrise Flagship Fund.
    0:29:25 Real estate investing is boring.
    0:29:32 Now, prediction markets, on the other hand, or even the stock market, which can swing wildly on a headline, those will keep you on the edge of your seat.
    0:29:39 But with real estate investing, there’s no drama or adrenaline or excuses to refresh your portfolio every few minutes.
    0:29:42 Just bland and boring stuff, including diversification and dividends.
    0:29:48 So you won’t be surprised to learn the Fundrise Flagship Real Estate Fund is a complete snooze fest.
    0:29:57 The fund holds $1.1 billion worth of institutional caliber real estate, managed by a team of pros focused on steadily growing your net worth for decades to come.
    0:29:57 See?
    0:29:58 Boring.
    0:30:00 And that’s the point.
    0:30:06 You can start investing in minutes and with as little as $10 by visiting Fundrise.com slash Prof.G.
    0:30:11 Carefully consider the investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses of the Fundrise Flagship Fund before investing.
    0:30:16 Find this information and more in the Funds Perspectives at Fundrise.com slash Flagship.
    0:30:18 This is a paid ad.
    0:30:26 Support for the show comes from Mercury, the banking product that feels extraordinary to use.
    0:30:34 When you’re a startup founder getting your business off the ground, the last thing you want to be doing is toggling between a dozen apps and clunky banking services that can barely keep up with your needs.
    0:30:36 Enter Mercury.
    0:30:39 Mercury is the banking product made by entrepreneurs for entrepreneurs.
    0:30:40 What makes it so special?
    0:30:43 Oh, well, Mercury isn’t technically a bank.
    0:30:49 They provide banking services through partner banks and are able to focus on delivering well-designed software that helps navigate some of the TDM for you.
    0:30:54 Because when your finances are simple, your mind is free to focus on the real work of growing your business.
    0:31:01 With Mercury, you get the tools you need to operate at your best, scale your business, and keep your spend under control.
    0:31:06 Visit Mercury.com to join over 200,000 entrepreneurs who use Mercury to do more for their business.
    0:31:08 Mercury, banking that does more.
    0:31:11 Mercury is a financial technology company, not a bank.
    0:31:16 Banking services provided by Choice Financial Group, Column N.A., and Evolve Bank and Trust members FDIC.
    0:31:20 The IO card is issued by Patriot Bank, member FDIC, pursuant to a license from MasterCard.
    0:31:25 Support for the show comes from Public.com.
    0:31:26 All right.
    0:31:29 And if you’re serious about investing, you need to know about Public.com.
    0:31:31 That’s where you can invest in everything.
    0:31:33 Stocks, options, bonds, and more.
    0:31:41 They even offer some of the highest yields in the industry, including the bond account’s 6% or higher yield that remains locked in even if the Fed cuts rates.
    0:31:44 With Public, you can get the tools you need to make informed investment decisions.
    0:31:49 Their built-in AI tools called Alpha doesn’t just tell you if an asset is moving.
    0:31:54 It tells you why the asset is moving so you can actually understand what’s driving your portfolio performance.
    0:32:00 Public is a FINRA-registered, SIPC-insured, U.S.-based company with a customer support team that actually cares.
    0:32:05 Bottom line, your investments deserve a platform that takes them as seriously as you do.
    0:32:13 Fund your account in five minutes or less at Public.com slash PropG and get up to $10,000 when you transfer your old portfolio.
    0:32:15 That’s Public.com slash PropG.
    0:32:19 Paid for by Public Investing, all investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal,
    0:32:23 brokered services for U.S.-listed registered securities, options, and bonds,
    0:32:28 and a self-directed account are offered by Public Investing, Inc., member FINRA, and SIPC.
    0:32:32 Complete disclosures available at Public.com slash disclosures.
    0:32:35 I should also disclose I am an investor in public.
    0:32:45 We’re back with PropG Markets.
    0:32:48 A clear pattern is emerging in Trump’s policymaking.
    0:32:52 Bold declarations followed by abrupt reversals.
    0:32:55 After posting on Truth Social that Fed chair Jerome Powell’s, quote,
    0:32:57 termination cannot come fast enough,
    0:33:00 Trump later told reporters that he had, quote,
    0:33:02 no intention of firing Powell.
    0:33:07 Similarly, after implementing a 145% tariff on Chinese imports,
    0:33:10 he’s now saying that the level of tariffs could, quote,
    0:33:12 come down substantially.
    0:33:17 He also is planning to exempt car parts from those tariffs and the tariffs on steel and aluminum.
    0:33:21 On Wednesday, all three major indices initially jumped.
    0:33:27 However, they pulled back from their morning highs when Scott Besson clarified that Trump hadn’t
    0:33:30 offered to remove the tariffs on China unilaterally.
    0:33:33 Still, the Nasdaq closed two and a half percent higher.
    0:33:37 The S&P 500 was up three percent and the Dow rose more than one percent.
    0:33:43 Scott, you predicted that Trump would walk back on many of these issues.
    0:33:45 It seems like that is happening.
    0:33:46 What is your take on this?
    0:33:50 The only two things you have to remember in a negotiation are, one, not to make it personal.
    0:33:51 Don’t make it win-lose.
    0:33:55 Don’t create emotion on either side that’s going to, you know, if you act like an asshole,
    0:33:58 people don’t want to do a deal with you.
    0:33:59 They want to hurt you in the negotiation.
    0:34:02 They’re not inclined to cut you a break or want to get a deal done.
    0:34:07 And then the second thing is I always feel a credible willingness to walk away.
    0:34:12 He imposed in what was the ultimate little dick energy move.
    0:34:16 They raise their, they keep matching and he keeps going and he went to 145.
    0:34:22 And then he says those tariffs are too high and will clearly come down.
    0:34:30 Okay, you raise them to this point and then a week later say they’re clearly too high and
    0:34:31 they need to come down.
    0:34:33 You’re the one that put this shit in.
    0:34:41 So my prediction all along is going to be that, or has been, that after all of this
    0:34:47 noise and damage to our brand is done, the global tariff system, other than world trade
    0:34:52 that will be inspired across strange bedfellows because we’ve got them to start speaking and
    0:35:00 cooperating, but the U.S. tariff complex or structure across the world will look strikingly
    0:35:04 similar to the way it looked before we started this bullshit nonsense.
    0:35:10 And all we have done is alienated people and massively reduced our goodwill and our brand
    0:35:10 equity.
    0:35:14 The weird thing is this guy is such a fucking toxic narcissist.
    0:35:17 I think he enjoys this shit.
    0:35:23 He doesn’t care because he’s going to make a billion plus dollars in his Trump meme coin.
    0:35:27 And he just wants to be the center of attention every day.
    0:35:34 It’s like when my youngest used to act out and be a total asshole and you realize, OK, they’re
    0:35:35 acting out because they want attention.
    0:35:38 I mean, this guy is acting out every day.
    0:35:44 I think he would threaten nuclear war if he were out of the news cycle long enough and want
    0:35:47 to desperately back in regardless of the damage.
    0:35:50 So, he’s walking everything back, right?
    0:35:54 And one thing that I think has been interesting has been China’s response.
    0:36:00 You saw this hashtag that went viral in China, which was hashtag Trump chickened out.
    0:36:07 So, however it is positioned by this administration, the message that the public has received and
    0:36:11 the message that China received is that he blinked, as you predicted.
    0:36:12 He folded.
    0:36:13 He caved.
    0:36:14 He chickened out.
    0:36:15 However you want to call it.
    0:36:23 And I think the question is, OK, what does it mean for markets that that’s how the world
    0:36:24 perceives us?
    0:36:29 I mean, initially, the markets reacted quite positively, right?
    0:36:30 I mean, the Dow rose 1%.
    0:36:32 The S&P was up 2%.
    0:36:33 NASDAQ up 2.5%.
    0:36:41 I think they’re pricing in some positivity that Trump is walking back the craziness, whether it
    0:36:47 comes to the tariffs on China, the tariffs on the auto industry, or his threats to the chair
    0:36:48 of the Federal Reserve.
    0:36:52 But I do think it’s also important to keep in mind the damage that has still been done
    0:36:55 since Liberation Day, since April 2nd.
    0:36:59 Since that day, the NASDAQ is down more than 5%.
    0:37:02 The S&P is down more than 5%.
    0:37:04 The Dow is down more than 6%.
    0:37:07 The yield has risen more than 20 bps.
    0:37:10 It’s at around 4.4% right now.
    0:37:14 So I think the question is, OK, what are the markets telling us?
    0:37:20 Yes, the tariffs are likely to be, if not reversed, significantly reduced.
    0:37:27 But what are they pricing in right now that is worse than pre-Liberation Day?
    0:37:34 And I think the answer is probably just the damage that we have done to our brand and our
    0:37:40 reputation as a safe economy, as a reliable trade partner, etc.
    0:37:45 And there were some comments from Ken Griffin, which I thought were particularly telling.
    0:37:47 And I think he actually put it quite well.
    0:37:51 And you remember Ken Griffin, founder, CEO of Citadel.
    0:37:53 This is a guy who is a Trump supporter.
    0:37:56 He donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund.
    0:38:01 He donated $100 million to the Republican Superbacks in the last election cycle.
    0:38:05 He’s a pretty much a MAGA guy.
    0:38:08 He said, quote, the U.S. is more than a nation.
    0:38:09 It’s a brand.
    0:38:11 And we’re eroding that brand right now.
    0:38:13 And I think that’s right.
    0:38:19 And I think that brand erosion is what’s being reflected in the stock markets and the bond markets
    0:38:19 right now.
    0:38:21 They had a little bit of an uptick.
    0:38:26 But ultimately, you look, since that date, since Liberation Day, we’re still way down.
    0:38:29 And I think the question is, is this reversible?
    0:38:31 Is it too late?
    0:38:32 Or is the damage already done?
    0:38:36 Well, I was thinking, he listens to this show.
    0:38:40 We’ve been talking about that the long-term damage here is to the erosion in our brand
    0:38:45 equity, which decreases our margin and in millions of different ways that we’ll never
    0:38:46 know directly.
    0:38:49 I think our allies are just less likely to share information with us.
    0:38:56 I think someone who is asked to deliver weapons to what might be a terrorist cell is less likely
    0:38:58 to call the American embassy and say, hey, I saw this.
    0:39:04 I think people are less likely to send their best and brightest to the U.S. when PhD students
    0:39:07 are being sent errant emails asking to self-deport.
    0:39:13 And those types of injuries, it’s like having a high blood pressure.
    0:39:20 It’s just at some point, it creates an opportunity set or a corpus that is just more prone to bad
    0:39:22 things to happen to that person.
    0:39:27 And that’s what’s essentially he’s giving us really high cholesterol or high blood pressure,
    0:39:31 making us more vulnerable to opportunistic infections.
    0:39:32 Can it be repaired?
    0:39:33 Sure.
    0:39:35 I mean, we’ve had really dark moments in our history.
    0:39:43 I think a Democratic or a different Republican in the White House and maybe even some learning
    0:39:47 that comes out of this and seeing Americans kind of rise up and realize that their rights
    0:39:49 are not foregone conclusions.
    0:39:55 And then leveraging the Democratic process to change direction, you know, I think our allies
    0:39:55 will forgive us.
    0:39:57 I think we have a longer history with them than that.
    0:39:58 And that’s the real damage.
    0:40:05 The damage and the opportunity is that to tear up 80-year alliances and erode that goodwill
    0:40:07 is just stupid.
    0:40:09 And it’s sort of been something we’ve taken for granted.
    0:40:15 The good news, the good news is I think a lot of that ill will has been ring-fenced to
    0:40:15 one man.
    0:40:20 This guy will go down as the stupid presidency.
    0:40:24 It used to be coarseness and cruelness, but he had a certain feel for the markets.
    0:40:25 People thought he was a good business person.
    0:40:27 The markets did do well during his first term.
    0:40:31 You know, a lot of people from different cohorts did well.
    0:40:36 Now, granted, did we spend $7 trillion in additional deficits or $8 trillion?
    0:40:41 Yeah, but it would be hard to punch too many holes in the economic record of his first administration.
    0:40:47 Now, this one is just seems like, okay, how do we go out is just really stupid.
    0:40:50 But I absolutely think we can repair this.
    0:40:53 And I think the upside is that a lot of the ill will is not towards America.
    0:40:55 It’s towards one individual.
    0:41:01 Yeah, I think we’re sort of in a race against China to get the world on our side.
    0:41:02 And I think I’m with you.
    0:41:09 I think people would be faster to renormalize relations with the US than they will with China.
    0:41:12 But having said that, China is trying.
    0:41:16 I mean, they just lifted these sanctions on the EU.
    0:41:22 They just sent their trade delegations to Sweden, to Hungary, to Norway, to Germany.
    0:41:25 They are certainly trying to rekindle those relationships.
    0:41:33 And I think for US investors and US companies, the question is, can we normalize our relationships
    0:41:36 with other nations faster than China can?
    0:41:40 I think we probably can, but it’s four years.
    0:41:44 So, you know, we’re definitely running against the clock here.
    0:41:49 And that is going to have a massive impact on US markets, especially given what we’ve seen
    0:41:53 with the global rotation and the capital flows that are leaving America.
    0:41:56 And as we discussed last week, entering back into Europe.
    0:41:59 So that’s probably the question.
    0:42:03 And we’ll see.
    0:42:04 That’s all I’ll say on that.
    0:42:08 We’ll be right back after the break with a look at Tesla’s earnings.
    0:42:13 And if you’re enjoying the show so far, hit follow and leave us a review on Prof G Markets
    0:42:13 feed.
    0:42:24 Support for the show comes from Gruen’s.
    0:42:28 If you’re looking for a new tasty nutrition solution, then look no further than Gruen’s.
    0:42:32 It’s a convenient, comprehensive formula packed into eight gummies a day.
    0:42:36 Gruen’s isn’t a multivitamin, a greens gummy or a prebiotic.
    0:42:39 It’s all of those things and then some at a fraction of the price.
    0:42:43 Their daily packs contain eight gummies because you just can’t fit the amount of nutrients
    0:42:45 they do just into one gummy.
    0:42:48 Generic multivitamins only contain around seven to nine vitamins.
    0:42:53 But Gruen’s have more than 20 vitamins and minerals plus more than 60 whole food ingredients.
    0:42:57 They actually provided us with a bit of science to explain what makes Gruen’s different.
    0:43:01 Basically, 30% of the population has a gene that messes with how they absorb vitamins.
    0:43:07 But Gruen’s is methylated, which is a fancy way of saying their vitamins like B12 and folate
    0:43:08 can be absorbed by your body.
    0:43:13 Methylating is an expensive option for a lot of other companies, but Gruen’s is looking out
    0:43:14 for you.
    0:43:18 Plus, they’re vegan and free of nuts, dairy and gluten, and they’re made with no artificial
    0:43:19 colors or flavors.
    0:43:23 Get up to 45% off when you go to grunst.co and use code PROFG.
    0:43:30 That’s G-R-U-N-S dot C-O using code PROFG for 45% off.
    0:43:36 Support for PROFG comes from Upwork.
    0:43:38 Starting a new business is exciting.
    0:43:39 You’ve had an idea.
    0:43:40 You’ve planned it all out.
    0:43:41 You’ve gotten it launched.
    0:43:42 It’s going well.
    0:43:46 But then you run into something you don’t know how to do yourself and can’t do alone.
    0:43:49 That can be a challenging moment, but it happens to every single entrepreneur.
    0:43:51 Upwork is here to help.
    0:43:54 Companies at every stage turn to Upwork to get things done.
    0:43:58 Upwork helps you access a global marketplace filled with top talent in IT, web development,
    0:44:00 AI design, admin support, marketing, and more.
    0:44:02 Posting a job on Upwork is easy.
    0:44:04 There’s no cost to join.
    0:44:08 You can register, browse freelancer profiles, get help drafting a post, or even book a consultation.
    0:44:12 From there, you connect with the perfect freelancer for your needs.
    0:44:16 Upwork makes the entire process easier, simpler, and more affordable with industry low fees.
    0:44:19 Post a job today and hire tomorrow with Upwork.
    0:44:22 Visit Upwork.com right now and post your job for free.
    0:44:27 That’s Upwork.com to post your job for free and connect with top talent ready to help your business grow.
    0:44:30 That’s U-P-W-O-R-K dot com.
    0:44:31 Upwork.com.
    0:44:36 Support for the show comes from LinkedIn.
    0:44:40 While the latest technology, gadgets, and algorithms can be useful for your small business,
    0:44:43 at the end of the day, the most important thing is still the quality of people you hire.
    0:44:46 LinkedIn wants you to feel confident that you’re hiring the best.
    0:44:52 Based on LinkedIn’s data, 72% of SMBs using LinkedIn say that it helped them find a high-quality candidate.
    0:44:59 LinkedIn makes it easy to post your job for free, share it with your network, and get qualified candidates that you can manage all in one place.
    0:45:06 And LinkedIn’s new features can help you write job descriptions and then quickly get your job in front of the right people with deep candidate insights.
    0:45:12 They say you can even add a hashtag hiring frame to your profile picture and get two times more qualified candidates.
    0:45:15 Either post your job for free or pay to promote.
    0:45:17 Promoted jobs get three times more qualified applicants.
    0:45:22 Find out why more than two and a half million small businesses use LinkedIn for hiring today.
    0:45:24 Find your next great hire on LinkedIn.
    0:45:27 Post your job for free at linkedin.com slash prof.
    0:45:30 That’s linkedin.com slash prof to post your job for free.
    0:45:32 Terms and conditions apply.
    0:45:41 We’re back with Prof G Markets.
    0:45:48 Tesla’s first quarter results fell short across the board, missing expectations on the top and bottom lines.
    0:45:54 Net income plunged 71% year over year, and automotive revenue fell 20%.
    0:45:56 Overall revenue dropped 9%.
    0:46:00 Still, the stock jumped 5% in after-hours trading.
    0:46:06 Part of the lift came from the broader market rally we just discussed, but investors were also encouraged.
    0:46:14 After Elon pledged to significantly reduce the time he spends on Doge, and he promised to refocus his efforts on Tesla starting next month.
    0:46:17 Scott, I listened in on the call.
    0:46:25 I have a number of observations, but first, just your take on these quarterly results, as well as Elon’s decision to step back from Doge.
    0:46:31 First off, let me just go to how incredibly cynical it is for Elon Musk to show up to the government with a chainsaw.
    0:46:49 And then shut off $75 billion in USAID going to people struggling with malaria in Myanmar or soup kitchens in war-torn Ukraine.
    0:46:56 And his company would have been unprofitable had it not been for him reselling carbon credits.
    0:46:59 They were saved by the regulatory credits this quarter, yeah.
    0:47:00 I mean, get this.
    0:47:02 It’s automotive revenue declined 20% year on year.
    0:47:12 I can’t name an automobile company, maybe at some point Jeep or I think Jaguar had a rough couple years, that has declined 20% year on year.
    0:47:12 Staggering.
    0:47:17 So this company is declining faster than any automobile company in America.
    0:47:21 You know, I bet, I don’t know, Ford was probably at 4% or 6%, I’m guessing single digits.
    0:47:23 These guys are down 20%.
    0:47:25 While reducing prices.
    0:47:31 Their top track has always been, we’re really not a car company, we’re a software company, we’re an energy company.
    0:47:39 But even if you, okay, fine, if we’re a car company, because we’re all EVs, we have dramatically fewer parts.
    0:47:45 We’re able to have a much more robust supply chain, much more efficient production and assembly schedule.
    0:47:47 And we’re the most American-made company.
    0:47:48 We’re the most vertical.
    0:47:49 We own our dealerships.
    0:47:55 We don’t have this weird thing with the local billionaire or the local, the guy who used to bake a quarterback for Alabama or whatever, opening a bunch of dealerships.
    0:47:59 And it’s, Teslas, to their credit, are actually the most American-made product.
    0:48:05 The majority of products or parts, which was dramatically fewer than going to a Tesla, are sourced in America.
    0:48:11 All of this adds up to operating margins that were remarkable for the industry of 20%.
    0:48:14 But the automobile industry is a business of scale.
    0:48:24 When you buy a Porsche Cayman, is that the SUV, an Audi Q7 or a Volkswagen Touareg, you’re buying the same car.
    0:48:26 They’re off the same platform.
    0:48:35 These platforms are so expensive to build and maintain that you have to shove a ton of throughput across these assembly lines.
    0:48:48 And then in the case of the Touareg, the Q7, and the Cayenne, the last 10% of the assembly line, they take three different routes, and they put in nicer finishes and nicer leather and nicer badging.
    0:48:55 And they charge different prices and different – they market them differently in different ad campaigns, different value propositions, right?
    0:49:01 But if you don’t have the scale, it is an impossible industry.
    0:49:08 As evidenced by Rivian that makes a great car, they have to sell for $80,000, even though it’s costing them $120,000 to produce these things.
    0:49:12 And until they produce 3x the number, they’re never going to get the profitability.
    0:49:28 So when Tesla’s automobile revenues declined 20%, it’s exponentially bad to descale in the automotive industry because those assembly lines are not registering a decrease in costs, even though you have less throughput.
    0:49:33 As a result, their operating margins have gone from 20% to 2.1%.
    0:49:43 So their operating margins have declined 90%, yet the stock was up 5%, and this is a company that is technically unprofitable.
    0:49:45 They’ve also lost their leadership position.
    0:49:58 Volkswagen overtook Tesla as the top EV seller in Europe, and registrations for VW EVs increased 150%, while Tesla registrations dropped 38%.
    0:50:05 And yet, he is able to take the stock up 5% by saying, I am going to focus more on Tesla.
    0:50:07 We still have this idolatry of innovators.
    0:50:13 We’re still under the belief that him spending more time at Fremont, at Tesla, is somehow going to turn this company around.
    0:50:27 So I just think it’s a case study in meme stocks and how storytelling and our idolatry of innovators has resulted in an irrational market where the stock price begins to absolutely disassociate from the fundamentals,
    0:50:30 which I guess is the definition of a meme stock.
    0:50:31 What are your thoughts, Ed?
    0:50:33 Yeah, I think I agree with all that.
    0:50:35 I mean, just some observations from the earnings call.
    0:50:48 I think my number one takeaway is that, you know, if he’s trying to convince investors that Tesla is fine, which he needs to do, I think he did a really bad job of it.
    0:50:52 Having said that, the market appears to disagree with me because the stock jumped.
    0:50:56 I think a lot of your meme stock explanation might be part of it.
    0:51:05 But what I heard on that earnings call was a CEO who is panicked, who is confused, and who is most importantly in a state of denial.
    0:51:08 And I will explain what I mean there.
    0:51:17 But the first thing to note is his opening remarks, which were a monologue about Doge and how important the work he’s doing at Doge is.
    0:51:26 And if you’re trying to convince investors that you care more about Tesla, your company, than you do about Doge, you should probably start the earnings call by talking about Tesla.
    0:51:31 Instead, he goes on about Doge and how he’s saving America by cutting wasteful spending.
    0:51:37 Then he addresses the Tesla protests, which I credit him.
    0:51:37 He should.
    0:51:39 It’s a huge problem for the company.
    0:51:54 But he makes this wild claim that the real reason people are protesting Tesla isn’t because of any of his actions or any of his comments or the fact that he saluted a crowd in what very much appeared to be a Nazi salute.
    0:51:56 He didn’t acknowledge any of that.
    0:52:05 He said the reason that people are protesting Tesla is because they’re upset that Elon is, through Doge, restricting their ability to get government handouts.
    0:52:08 I mean, he really said this.
    0:52:14 He said, those protesters, they’re all receiving these wasteful and fraudulent dollars from the government.
    0:52:17 And it’s because of Elon, they’re angry.
    0:52:25 They’re not going to get this free money anymore, which is just an insane claim that completely disregards what is actually happening to the company.
    0:52:30 And its brand, and it’s an extremely important thing to address.
    0:52:37 I mean, this 20% drop-off in revenue, it’s almost entirely to do with the brand damage.
    0:52:43 So you have to be upfront about it, and you have to engage with that issue honestly.
    0:52:52 He was then asked directly about the brand damage by one of the analysts and asked, you know, what does this brand damage mean or these rumors of brand damage?
    0:52:53 What does it mean for the company?
    0:53:01 And on that occasion, he completely deflects, and he starts going on about the macro environment, which didn’t make any sense at all.
    0:53:04 He said, I’ll quote him, quote,
    0:53:18 But as far as absent macro issues, we don’t see any reduction in demand.
    0:53:19 Doesn’t make sense.
    0:53:21 And also, it’s completely not true.
    0:53:33 My favorite line, though, came when he was trying to assuage investors that Tesla is, in fact, okay.
    0:53:41 And the way he does that, he’s talking about how Tesla has had struggles in the past, how they’ve, you know, faced issues, which is all true.
    0:53:45 And then he says, quote, we are not on the ragged edge of death.
    0:53:47 Not even close.
    0:53:54 And that, to me, that tells me that Elon is thinking about this thing called the ragged edge of death.
    0:53:57 I mean, I knew Tesla’s situation was bad.
    0:53:59 I didn’t think it was that bad.
    0:54:12 But if Elon’s saying that, if he’s thinking about it, or if he at least thinks that other people are saying it, well, now I’m certainly considering the possibility that Tesla is, quote, on the ragged edge of death.
    0:54:14 Because he just put it in my brain.
    0:54:18 So, I thought this was some of the worst investor relations I’ve seen.
    0:54:20 Clearly, the market disagrees with me.
    0:54:21 And fair enough.
    0:54:26 But my takeaway is, yes, Elon’s back, kind of.
    0:54:29 He said he’s still going to spend one to two days a week at Doge.
    0:54:30 So, he’s kind of back.
    0:54:37 But he’s clearly, in my view, still in a state of delusion and total denial.
    0:54:41 And I think he did a terrible job of disproving that.
    0:54:41 Yeah.
    0:54:45 I mean, this just calls on so many themes we’ve sort of beaten to death.
    0:54:46 Poor governance.
    0:54:47 No CEO would be allowed to do this.
    0:54:50 And just, I can’t help but take the bait.
    0:55:00 If Doge was an attempt to audit a $7 trillion enterprise, I can’t think of a single enterprise of $1 trillion that would be issued such a clean bill of health.
    0:55:07 As Doge has accidentally, unintentionally, much to their disappointment, issued around the federal government.
    0:55:11 First, they said they were going to save $2 trillion, then $150 billion.
    0:55:15 It looks like it’s about $60 to $65, although that can’t be verified.
    0:55:19 And they just, and where’s the fraud?
    0:55:25 You know, Pam Bondi’s ready to take a call in from Elon Musk and go after some federal employee who’s been stealing.
    0:55:27 They’re all ginned up to do that and announce it.
    0:55:32 This is a clean bill of health or as clean a bill of health as you could hope for.
    0:55:36 Now, some people would say that’s incompetence on the part of the auditors.
    0:55:46 But his board, if he had a real board, they would have called him and said, look, if you want to go play in traffic as an advisor to the president, that’s your business.
    0:55:48 But you can’t be CEO of this company.
    0:55:50 And also, why are you doing this?
    0:55:51 You’re really hurting us.
    0:55:55 So I don’t, this is just sort of new territory here.
    0:56:00 The market seems to believe that he’s going to be able to create some of that magic pixie dust.
    0:56:02 You know, how does Tesla come back?
    0:56:07 A lot like America, I think the rumors of Tesla’s brand death have been greatly exaggerated.
    0:56:13 I think if they came up with two or three amazing products in the next three to five years, it’s like, we love you again.
    0:56:19 I think Americans still value product over, you know, great value products over anything else.
    0:56:19 Agreed.
    0:56:21 So it could absolutely come back.
    0:56:24 Whether they have those in the pipeline, I don’t know.
    0:56:25 That’s the question.
    0:56:26 That’s the bull case.
    0:56:33 And those products are, and they said this on the call, it’s the Robotaxi and it’s the humanoid robot, the Optimus robot.
    0:56:46 And I think the other explanation for the reaction from the stock market is that they did say that they are on track for the Robotaxi pilot launch in Austin in June, which is what the market has been waiting for.
    0:56:51 So, you know, according to them, it’s going to happen.
    0:56:54 I think I believe them at this point.
    0:56:58 The question is, what does a pilot launch actually mean?
    0:57:04 Like, is it a fake PR event like we saw last year in LA with the CyberCab show?
    0:57:13 Is it just one or two cabs rolling around and you have to book like months in advance?
    0:57:20 Or does it mean you can actually go to Austin, you can open your phone and order a ride in Tesla, just like you could a Waymo in San Francisco?
    0:57:23 And that’s the question.
    0:57:28 One thing that made me a little bit bearish is that Elon’s response to what it would look like, he said, quote,
    0:57:32 we’re still debating the exact number to start off on on day one.
    0:57:37 But it’s like, I don’t know, maybe 10 or 20 vehicles on day one.
    0:57:39 So 10 or 20, I thought that was a pretty low number.
    0:57:45 And given he has a track record of over-promising and under-delivering, I could see it being even lower than that.
    0:57:50 You compare it to Waymo, which has 700 vehicles operating on the ground right now.
    0:57:52 But that’s the question.
    0:57:56 It’s like, do we think the Robotaxi is going to be legit or not?
    0:57:58 That’s the opportunity.
    0:58:00 My view, let’s just wait and see.
    0:58:05 I mean, why buy this company if you don’t know what you’re actually buying?
    0:58:08 I mean, people say, oh, it’s a robotaxi company.
    0:58:09 It’s an AI company.
    0:58:11 It’s a humanoid robot company.
    0:58:13 Well, okay, show me the robot.
    0:58:16 Show me one taxi ride.
    0:58:17 Ship one ride.
    0:58:19 And I’ll believe you.
    0:58:23 But they haven’t generated a single dollar off of this yet.
    0:58:26 And so until they can do that, yeah, I’m not buying.
    0:58:30 And I’m not going to have an argument with you about whether this is a car company or not.
    0:58:35 As of today, April 2025, it’s a car company whose sales are down 20%.
    0:58:36 That’s what it is.
    0:58:42 Waymo is, I think, going to be in 10 or 11 cities, including Tokyo by the time Tesla hits.
    0:58:44 Austin, so what is the competitor?
    0:58:47 Okay, we’ll believe you this time.
    0:58:49 You said in 2017 it was a year away.
    0:58:50 That didn’t happen.
    0:58:51 We’ll believe you this time.
    0:58:52 In 2010.
    0:59:01 What is your advantage when you have Waymo’s out there with cars and they’re launching in the biggest cities and then launching globally?
    0:59:03 How are you going to compete?
    0:59:06 Or is this just going to be a race to the bottom?
    0:59:07 Or is there…
    0:59:08 His response is it’s cheaper.
    0:59:12 That Teslas are less expensive and that’s their advantage.
    0:59:13 Which I’ll take.
    0:59:18 But even until then, ship the product.
    0:59:19 Okay, but that’s one of two things.
    0:59:23 That’s either you have scale, software that’s better.
    0:59:27 Once the fixed investment is made, I don’t…
    0:59:29 It’s all about…
    0:59:34 In software, it’s about they’re driving the same goddamn cars, approximately the same dollar volume.
    0:59:36 How would it be cheaper?
    0:59:41 It would have to be scale, which means they would take a penetration strategy and lose a shit ton of money.
    0:59:44 And Alphabet has a much bigger balance sheet.
    0:59:45 I just don’t…
    0:59:48 I don’t see how they’re going to sustain…
    0:59:55 I mean, Alphabet or Waymo will match their price, whatever Tesla claims they’re saying.
    1:00:06 And given that Tesla does not have the most profitable toll booth in the world, i.e. Google, to subsidize that market share or penetration strategy, I just…
    1:00:07 They’re going up against…
    1:00:11 They’re a squirt gun against a bazooka when they’re talking about capital and scale.
    1:00:11 Exactly.
    1:00:21 Unless Alphabet says, after all of this money and all this time in establishing market leadership, we’re just going to give it up because Elon’s decided to engage in a price where they’re going to say, fuck you, bring it on.
    1:00:28 And then these robots, God, I mean, everybody has to put something crazy out there, I think, to give people excited, fine.
    1:00:32 The concept cars you see at auto shows, none of them are going to be in the showroom.
    1:00:39 And I’m personally really excited to get home from work and ask my Tesla robot if it took the meat out of the freezer.
    1:00:41 I just can’t wait for that moment.
    1:00:45 But robots?
    1:00:47 I just don’t…
    1:00:51 I mean, robots have huge commercial applications.
    1:00:52 It’s called robotics and automation.
    1:00:54 But I don’t…
    1:00:56 What is the use case for the robots?
    1:01:00 I just find the whole thing kind of comical.
    1:01:05 They asked Elon about the humanoid robot, asking a similar question.
    1:01:08 They said, could you confirm if it is currently operational?
    1:01:11 If so, what is the current production rate per week?
    1:01:17 And Elon said, quote, I want to emphasize Optimus is still very much a development program.
    1:01:20 This is sort of the play with this.
    1:01:21 Just talk about it.
    1:01:24 And then when they ask for the specifics, just sort of delay and obfuscate.
    1:01:25 That’s how he’s handling it.
    1:01:27 But the market likes it.
    1:01:28 We’ll see.
    1:01:30 Let’s take a look at the week ahead.
    1:01:34 We’ll see data on the Personal Consumption Expenditures Index for March.
    1:01:38 And we’ll also see earnings from Microsoft, Meta, Apple, and Amazon.
    1:01:39 Scott, do you have any predictions?
    1:01:44 Essentially, Donald Trump is about to get Mark Carney elected as Prime Minister of Canada.
    1:01:48 This was a foregone conclusion that he was going to lose.
    1:01:51 I’m not sure I’m saying his name correct.
    1:01:55 But the conservative candidate, Polly Evre, I believe.
    1:01:56 I’m terrible at this.
    1:01:59 He was going to win.
    1:02:01 Trudeau was so unpopular.
    1:02:07 And entering into this trade war and who Mark Carney, as current prime minister, has been very kind of forcefully dignified.
    1:02:12 This will be the greatest comeback in probably political history.
    1:02:15 25 points down at the turn of the year.
    1:02:16 And it’s all because of Trump.
    1:02:22 So, anyways, my prediction, and I interviewed Prime Minister Carney on the Prop G pod.
    1:02:25 It has almost a million views, I think, on YouTube.
    1:02:27 And he’s very likable.
    1:02:30 He’s very – he comes across as incredibly thoughtful.
    1:02:31 Schooled in the U.S.
    1:02:32 Went to work for Goldman Sachs.
    1:02:35 Was the first non-Brit to head the Bank of England.
    1:02:37 So, he’s incredibly –
    1:02:41 Probably the best resume of all time in the world, maybe.
    1:02:41 Yeah.
    1:02:43 It’s just hard to argue with his credentials.
    1:02:45 And he’s tall.
    1:02:46 He’s handsome.
    1:02:48 You know, he’s out of central casting.
    1:02:53 And he’s just handled this – he’s what you would want from us.
    1:02:58 You would want someone forceful and dignified and not having an emotional reaction.
    1:03:02 But, you know, saying this is not adequate for us.
    1:03:03 We look forward to reestablishing relations.
    1:03:06 But until that point, we’re obviously going to stand our ground.
    1:03:12 Anyways, prediction is Trump is about to elect a guy who was 25 points down just four months ago.
    1:03:15 The next prime minister of Canada will be Mark Carney.
    1:03:18 Are we political insiders in Canada then if he wins?
    1:03:20 I expect to be invited to at least a hockey game.
    1:03:21 Okay, good.
    1:03:23 I want to tag along.
    1:03:26 Just CC me on the email.
    1:03:28 He grew up in Edmonton, so he’s an Oilers fan.
    1:03:29 So, we’re going to have to go all the way out there.
    1:03:32 Maybe we’ll go for the Calgary Stampede or something.
    1:03:33 But, yeah, he and I are good, good friends now.
    1:03:34 We’re very close.
    1:03:36 Very close.
    1:03:39 I’m going to be the secretary of something in Canada.
    1:03:40 Secretary of hockey.
    1:03:41 There you go.
    1:03:41 How’s that?
    1:03:43 I like it.
    1:03:44 I’ll take it.
    1:03:48 This episode was produced by Claire Miller and engineered by Benjamin Spencer.
    1:03:49 Our associate producer is Alison Weiss.
    1:03:51 Mia Silverio is our research lead.
    1:03:53 Isabella Kinsel is our research associate.
    1:03:54 Dan Shallon is our intern.
    1:03:56 Drew Burrows is our technical director.
    1:03:59 And Catherine Dillon is our executive producer.
    1:04:02 Thank you for listening to Prof G Markets from the Vox Media Podcast Network.
    1:04:08 Join us on Thursday for our conversation with Mark Mahaney, only on Prof G Markets.
    1:04:21 We’ll see you next time.
    1:04:23 We’ll see you next time.
    1:04:24 We’ll see you next time.
    1:04:26 We’ll see you next time.
    1:04:28 We’ll see you next time.
    1:04:46 We’ll see you next time.

    Scott and Ed discuss Trump’s decision to invite the top holders of his memecoin to a private dinner, Boeing’s first quarter earnings, and a new report underscoring the worsening wealth inequality in the U.S. Then, they explore how Trump’s policy reversals are undermining America’s global reputation in the markets. Finally, they break down Tesla’s first-quarter report, why the markets reacted so positively to the terrible results, and the key moments from the earnings call. 

    Subscribe to the Prof G Markets newsletter 

    Order “The Algebra of Wealth,” out now

    Subscribe to No Mercy / No Malice

    Follow the podcast across socials @profgpod:

    Follow Scott on Instagram
    Follow Ed on Instagram and X

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

  • Politics after Covid

    AI transcript
    0:00:04 I’ve got some news before we start today’s show.
    0:00:07 You can now listen to The Gray Area without any ads.
    0:00:10 That’s right. Just become a Vox member.
    0:00:15 You’ll directly support the work we do on this show and get all kinds of other cool perks,
    0:00:19 including unlimited access to all of Vox’s stories.
    0:00:23 Just go to vox.com slash members to sign up.
    0:00:32 Support for this show comes from ServiceNow, a company that helps people do more fulfilling work,
    0:00:34 the work they actually want to do.
    0:00:37 You know what people don’t want to do? Boring, busy work.
    0:00:42 But ServiceNow says that with their AI agents built into the ServiceNow platform,
    0:00:46 you can automate millions of repetitive tasks in every corner of a business.
    0:00:50 IT, HR, customer service, and more.
    0:00:55 And the company says that means your people can focus on the work that they want to do.
    0:00:58 That’s putting AI agents to work for people.
    0:00:59 It’s your turn.
    0:01:04 You can get started at ServiceNow.com slash AI dash agents.
    0:01:12 There are lots of stories to tell about the COVID pandemic.
    0:01:17 But almost all of them, if you drill down, are about politics.
    0:01:27 About who makes the decisions, who questions those decisions, who matters, who suffers, who survives, who doesn’t, and why.
    0:01:31 But what did we get right?
    0:01:34 What did we get wrong?
    0:01:39 And what do all those choices say about the health of our democracy?
    0:01:45 I think it’s safe to say we’ll be living in COVID’s shadow for a long time.
    0:01:53 But perhaps there’s enough distance now to have a serious conversation about all these questions.
    0:01:58 I’m Sean Elling, and this is The Gray Area.
    0:02:04 Today’s guest is Frances Lee.
    0:02:15 She’s a professor of political science and public affairs at Princeton University, and a co-author of a book called In COVID’s Wake, How Our Politics Failed Us.
    0:02:21 It treats our response to COVID as a kind of stress test of our political system.
    0:02:34 Lee and her co-author, Stephen Macedo, look at all the institutions responsible for truth-seeking, journalism, science, universities, and asks, how did they perform?
    0:02:37 Were they committed to truth?
    0:02:38 Open to criticism?
    0:02:43 Did they live up to the basic norms of liberalism and science?
    0:02:48 Were we able to have a reasonable conversation about what was happening?
    0:02:51 And if we weren’t, why not?
    0:02:52 And can we have it now?
    0:02:59 Frances Lee, welcome to the show.
    0:03:01 Thank you, Sean.
    0:03:13 I’m going to start this conversation where you start the book, which is with a, I think, a pretty revealing quote by Francis Collins.
    0:03:17 And if you don’t mind, I’m just going to read it very quickly.
    0:03:24 We failed to say every time there was a recommendation, guys, this is the best we can do right now.
    0:03:26 It’s a good chance this is wrong.
    0:03:27 We didn’t say that.
    0:03:36 We wanted to be sure people actually motivated themselves by what we said, because we wanted change to happen in case it was right.
    0:03:41 But we did not admit our ignorance, and that was a profound mistake.
    0:03:45 And we lost a lot of credibility along the way.
    0:03:48 So, who is Francis Collins?
    0:03:52 What does he represent in this story?
    0:03:55 And how does that quote really anchor this book?
    0:04:00 So, Francis Collins is the head of the National Institutes of Health.
    0:04:09 And in that passage, he is reflecting back on the way in which science agencies in the U.S. handled the pandemic.
    0:04:21 He’s on a panel with a trucker from Minnesota, and it’s at a Braver Angels event, which tries to bring together people from diverse perspectives for dialogues.
    0:04:29 And he is just being remarkably candid in reflecting back on what he saw as the failings of the pandemic response.
    0:04:45 You know, we saw what he had to say at that panel as sort of summing up the argument of the book, which is that experts were not frank with the public about the limits of their knowledge and their uncertainties.
    0:04:50 They were improvising through the pandemic to a very considerable degree.
    0:04:56 They got a lot of things wrong, and they lost a lot of credibility, just as Francis Collins said.
    0:05:03 And that they should have been more honest with people about what they knew and did not know.
    0:05:07 And they would have retained the public’s trust to a greater degree.
    0:05:16 How would you characterize the debate we had in this country about our response to COVID as we were responding?
    0:05:19 From your point of view, what went wrong?
    0:05:23 Well, it was a crisis, a fast-moving crisis.
    0:05:28 And so it’s not surprising in retrospect that the debate was truncated.
    0:05:43 But it is surprising, as we looked back and did the research for this book, the extent to which the decisions that were made in the early going of the pandemic departed from conventional wisdom about how to handle a pandemic.
    0:05:55 And violated recommendations that had been put on paper in calmer times about how a crisis like this should be handled.
    0:06:13 So countries around the world sort of scrapped pre-existing pandemic plans in order to follow the example set in Wuhan and then in Italy, with Italy having the first nationwide lockdown, and improvising along the way.
    0:06:24 There wasn’t a scientific basis for the actions that were taken in the sense that there was no accumulated body of evidence that these measures would be effective.
    0:06:30 That it was hoped that they would be, but there was the lack of evidence.
    0:06:41 And, you know, if you go back and take a look at a report that was prepared by the World Health Organization in 2019, so just months before the pandemic broke out,
    0:07:00 that document goes through each of the proposed non-pharmaceutical interventions, meaning the measures that are taken to keep people apart in the context of an infectious disease pandemic, like, you know, masking or social distancing, business closures, school closures.
    0:07:06 Takes a look at each of those measures in turn and discusses the evidence base around them.
    0:07:10 And across the board, the evidence base is rated as poor quality.
    0:07:19 And several such measures are recommended not to be used under any circumstances in the context of a respiratory pandemic.
    0:07:27 And among those were border closures, quarantine of exposed individuals, and testing and contact tracing.
    0:07:42 And then all those measures were, of course, employed here in the U.S. and around the world in the context of the COVID pandemic without any kind of reckoning with the reasons why those measures were recommended against in the pre-pandemic planning.
    0:07:47 Well, that seems like an important point. It wasn’t just here. This is pretty much what everybody was doing, right?
    0:07:48 Yes, that’s right.
    0:07:54 Okay. Why do you suppose that was? Why the departure from these pre-pandemic plans?
    0:08:06 Well, it was the example in Wuhan. So the first such measures, you know, lockdowns, were imposed in Hubei province in China.
    0:08:17 And the World Health Organization sent a delegation. There were a couple of Americans on that delegation to Wuhan in early February 2020.
    0:08:23 They spent a week there. They saw the scale of the society-wide response.
    0:08:31 And they admired it tremendously, the extent to which everyone seemed to be pulling together to try to suppress the spread of the disease.
    0:08:34 And then you see cases start to fall.
    0:08:40 And the temporary hospitals that had been put up were taken down.
    0:08:47 And the report declares the Chinese response a success and recommends that same approach to the whole world.
    0:08:53 So there wasn’t a—I mean, I think there should have been more skepticism at the time.
    0:08:56 We knew that pandemics come in waves.
    0:09:04 And so it was hard to know to what extent the fall in cases was just the natural patterns that we’d previously seen with pandemics,
    0:09:07 and to what extent it was a result of the actions taken.
    0:09:13 And the public around the world are clamoring for action to protect us from this crisis.
    0:09:19 And here in the U.S., when the closures were first announced in March 2020, they were enormously popular.
    0:09:29 A Pew Research Center study that we cite in the book shows that 87% of Americans approved of those closures, large majorities of both parties.
    0:09:33 So the initial response was, this makes sense to us.
    0:09:38 Let’s do this on the part of the public at large.
    0:09:48 There was a lot of consensus at that time, and then that consensus fades pretty quickly for reasons we’ll get into.
    0:09:56 But before we do that, I think it’s important for you to set up the story you tell in the book.
    0:10:05 And a big part of that story is about how certain groups of people were disproportionately harmed by our COVID policies.
    0:10:07 Can you say a bit about that?
    0:10:13 Well, the effects are wide-ranging, the effects of the pandemic response.
    0:10:17 And across the board, they tend to fall harder on the less well-off.
    0:10:19 So let’s start with the closures themselves.
    0:10:22 Not everyone can stay home.
    0:10:27 In order for society to continue to function, for us to stay alive, some people have to keep working.
    0:10:34 Well, disproportionately, that’s working-class people who had to keep working through the pandemic, the so-called essential workers.
    0:10:40 I mean, you think of medical personnel, and so those are essential workers, too.
    0:10:56 But the bulk of the people who had to collect the trash, keep the utilities working, deliver the food, drive the trucks, you know, all the things that needed to be done during the pandemic were largely being done by working-class people.
    0:10:59 So the closures are not protecting them.
    0:11:01 Meanwhile, their kids can’t go to school.
    0:11:07 It’s hard for me to even understand exactly how people got through this crisis under those circumstances.
    0:11:08 They certainly had to scramble.
    0:11:25 As you look at the effects of those school closures, the learning losses are greater among high-poverty areas on disadvantaged students, on students who were lagging academically before the pandemic, they lost more so that the gaps became wider.
    0:11:38 The inflation that resulted from the pandemic response here and around the world, that also places a greater pinch on people who are not doing as well.
    0:11:43 The enormous rise in housing costs that followed the pandemic.
    0:11:45 You just go through the list.
    0:11:51 Every case, as you look at the response, it hits harder in some parts of society than others.
    0:11:58 I noticed in a lot of the descriptions of the pandemic that journalists would write about it as that the pandemic exposed inequalities.
    0:11:59 Well, it did.
    0:12:02 It exposed them, but it also exacerbated them.
    0:12:04 It made them bigger.
    0:12:09 Say more about the class biases at work here.
    0:12:12 What were the blind spots on the part of the decision makers?
    0:12:14 What trade-offs did they miss?
    0:12:19 What potential harms did they discount or overlook?
    0:12:25 It was not a deliberative process, and there were biases in who was at the table making these decisions.
    0:12:36 Decisions around COVID policy tended to be made by small groups of people, and it’s basically some generalist government officials and specialists in infectious disease.
    0:12:41 So there just weren’t a diversity of voices being brought to bear.
    0:12:43 Is that avoidable?
    0:12:48 This seems to be—not to say it isn’t a problem, but it seems kind of unavoidable on some level.
    0:13:06 Remember, this is a long crisis that, you know, so we can talk about March 2020 and what was done then, but then we have to ask, you know, what was the capacity of governments to take on board new information, listen to more voices, and adjust course?
    0:13:28 When you look at our response comparatively to the rest of the world, does it seem to you from the perch of the present that we performed more or less on par with most other countries?
    0:13:35 Or was there something exceptional about our responses and these sorts of effects, either in a good way or a bad way?
    0:13:42 Well, our handling of the pandemic became more party polarized than is characteristic around the world.
    0:13:58 That 2020 was a presidential election year, and with Trump in the White House when the crisis began, you saw sort of an in-power, out-of-power dynamic where Democrats—I mean, Democrats didn’t like or trust President Trump before the crisis.
    0:14:08 And so then to have him at the helm, while there was so much fear, there was a tendency to reject anything he had to say, you know, to sort of assume that if he said it, it had to be wrong.
    0:14:27 And so you saw a sorting out process where Democrats reacting against President Trump and Trump’s inconsistent stances on, you know, what to do in the context of the crisis was certainly not confidence-inspiring even for independents during that time.
    0:14:36 So what we see is this enormous partisan structuring of the pandemic response, not just at the level of policy, but also at the level of individual behavior.
    0:14:48 It’s very remarkable to the extent to which party is your key variable for predicting how any individual or how any jurisdiction would respond to the crisis.
    0:14:53 Yeah, this part of the story is pretty startling and pretty depressing.
    0:15:00 Why do you think our COVID strategies became so strongly associated with political partisanship?
    0:15:02 Trump is part of the story here, but not all of it.
    0:15:14 To be honest, I don’t think that we have an entirely satisfactory account because, I mean, certainly you can see the reaction around the president, the reaction against Trump.
    0:15:21 And Democrats had already had a higher opinion of science and science agencies.
    0:15:26 You know, you’d already had the March for Science under Trump before the pandemic, you know.
    0:15:40 And so the political dichotomy that Americans perceived during the crisis was there’s Trump versus the scientists, Trump versus Fauci, politicians versus the scientists.
    0:15:44 And presented with that choice, Democrats said, well, I trust the scientists.
    0:15:51 That began to be the dichotomy on which the attitudes towards the pandemic broke down.
    0:15:54 Trump is obviously mentioned in the book.
    0:15:57 There’s no way to tell this story without him.
    0:16:01 But he’s not a central focus.
    0:16:02 Why is that?
    0:16:12 We don’t focus on Trump because the U.S. response is not so different from other countries, at least, you know, in the early going.
    0:16:17 It evolves in different ways, but that’s not really a Trump story so much as a story of U.S. federalism.
    0:16:22 The governors are the primary decision makers over the course of the crisis.
    0:16:31 I mean, Trump was on television a lot, and the coronavirus task force made recommendations about what to do and, you know, offered guidance.
    0:16:39 And you might remember the gating processes and the color-coded schemes that they came up with about when states could reopen.
    0:16:40 But all of that was advisory.
    0:16:43 The key decisions were made by the governors.
    0:16:51 And so we see those as more central actors in a policy making sense in the U.S. response.
    0:17:00 You know, as far as the broader partisanship problem, I mean, I think it has become very clear that this intense polarization, especially in this information environment,
    0:17:05 it means a lot of people aren’t really committed to any stable set of ideas.
    0:17:08 Like, the only thing they’re committed to is disliking the people on the other side.
    0:17:13 And that kind of negative partisanship really does blinker our intuitions on almost every other front.
    0:17:18 I mean, the term we use in the book for that phenomenon is moralized antagonism,
    0:17:23 where you see people who have different views on a policy issue as bad people.
    0:17:28 And so you don’t look at whether there are any reasons why they hold those views.
    0:17:33 You don’t consider it as, you know, potentially worthwhile.
    0:17:35 You know, what is there to be learned from bad people?
    0:17:43 And I think that was to a great extent where we saw failures in the truth-seeking institutions of American democracy,
    0:17:51 in the academy, among journalists, some reporting, and also among scientists.
    0:17:55 Okay, so the partisan split is very apparent.
    0:17:57 And it’s very apparent very early.
    0:18:07 And you note in the book that there was no real gap in health outcomes in red and blue states until the vaccine was released.
    0:18:11 What starts to change post-vaccine and why?
    0:18:23 So it’s so fascinating, like when you track cumulative COVID mortality over time in the states grouped by partisanship.
    0:18:28 You can see that red and blue states track pretty close together in that first year.
    0:18:39 And in fact, in December 2020, when the vaccine was rolled out, there’s no difference at that point in per capita cumulative COVID mortality in red and blue states.
    0:18:42 But it starts to emerge right away.
    0:18:50 And, you know, from the work that, you know, was done at the level of public opinion and attitudes towards the vaccine,
    0:18:56 it was evident immediately that Democrats were just chomping at the bit to get the vaccine.
    0:18:58 They were so much more eager to get vaccinated.
    0:19:00 So you saw that in public opinion polling.
    0:19:05 You also saw it in the press to get appointments for vaccines,
    0:19:12 that it was much more difficult to get an appointment in blue states and blue jurisdictions than in red states.
    0:19:13 Yeah, I was in Mississippi.
    0:19:14 I had no problem.
    0:19:15 No problem, that’s right.
    0:19:16 I was in and out.
    0:19:19 I took my mom down to get hers from the National Guard.
    0:19:22 And, yes, there was no problem for her to get the vaccine early.
    0:19:27 But it was more challenging, you know, in the strongly democratic parts of the country.
    0:19:38 And so you see just a quick divergence in vaccine uptake across Republican and Democratic leaning jurisdictions.
    0:19:43 And, again, you know, thinking of this from a social science point of view,
    0:19:51 it’s a nice linear relationship between the partisan lean of the state and the rate of vaccine uptake.
    0:19:57 And then that relationship also tracks COVID mortality over the coming year.
    0:20:02 So that states with higher vaccine uptake have lower COVID mortality starting in 2021.
    0:20:11 You know, one key point, you know, I want to emphasize that our book does find that Democratic states did better than Republican states over the course of the pandemic.
    0:20:12 They absolutely did.
    0:20:14 It’s a clear difference.
    0:20:18 But that difference emerges in year two of the pandemic, not in year one.
    0:20:20 So what did work?
    0:20:26 A lot more research needs to be done on what succeeded and what failed.
    0:20:35 What we have in the book is pretty highly aggregated analysis so that we can show that places that had kept their schools closed longer didn’t do better.
    0:20:40 That places with longer lockdowns didn’t do better than places with shorter lockdowns.
    0:20:46 Places that locked down more quickly don’t do better than places that were slower to announce stay-at-home orders.
    0:20:51 So we can show that, you know, that there’s a lack of correlation there.
    0:20:53 But why?
    0:20:54 What drives that lack of correlation?
    0:21:09 Is it because these measures are not sustainable for human beings over the long timeline necessary to get from the start of a crisis to a vaccine that had been tested and shown to be efficacious and safe?
    0:21:22 Is that because a large share of the workforce always had to keep on working regardless so that the virus just continued to spread?
    0:21:31 And if anything, maybe the lockdowns had the effect of just ensuring that that spread took place disproportionately among essential workers, but really didn’t reduce it that much.
    0:21:32 You know, again, we don’t know what the peaks are.
    0:21:39 Like, pandemics unfold in waves, which means that in that first wave, you don’t get full population exposure.
    0:21:46 what I would argue here is that there’s an awful lot we still don’t know.
    0:22:02 Support for this show comes from Shopify.
    0:22:06 When you’re creating your own business, you have to wear too many hats.
    0:22:15 You have to be on top of marketing and sales and outreach and sales and designs and sales and finances and definitely sales.
    0:22:19 Finding the right tool that simplifies everything can be a game changer.
    0:22:23 For millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify.
    0:22:28 Shopify is a commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world.
    0:22:33 And according to the company, 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S.
    0:22:37 From household names like Mattel and Gemshark to brands just getting started.
    0:22:42 They say they have hundreds of ready-to-use templates to help design your brand style.
    0:22:45 If you’re ready to sell, you’re ready for Shopify.
    0:22:51 You can turn your big business idea into with Shopify on your side.
    0:22:58 You can sign up for your $1 per month trial period and start selling today at Shopify.com slash Vox.
    0:23:01 You can go to Shopify.com slash Vox.
    0:23:03 That’s Shopify.com slash Vox.
    0:23:14 Support for the show comes from the podcast Democracy Works.
    0:23:18 The world certainly seems a bit alarming at the moment.
    0:23:19 And that’s putting it lightly.
    0:23:23 And sometimes it can feel as if no one is really doing anything to fix it.
    0:23:26 Now, a lot of podcasts focus on that.
    0:23:28 The doom and gloom of it all.
    0:23:31 And how democracy can feel like it’s failing.
    0:23:35 The people over at the Democracy Works podcast take a different approach.
    0:23:39 They’re turning their mics to those who are working to make democracy stronger.
    0:23:42 From scholars to journalists to activists.
    0:23:45 They examine a different aspect of democratic life each week.
    0:23:50 From elections to the rule of law to the free press and everything in between.
    0:23:59 They interview experts who study democracy as well as people who are out there on the ground doing the hard work to keep our democracy functioning day in and day out.
    0:24:07 Listen to Democracy Works wherever you listen to podcasts and check out their website, democracyworkspodcast.com to learn more.
    0:24:12 The Democracy Works podcast is a production of the McCourtney Institute for Democracy at Penn State.
    0:24:32 This week on Net Worth and Chill, I’m talking to Mike, the situation Sorrentino, who skyrocketed to fame on Jersey Shore earning millions before it all came crashing down.
    0:24:34 Tax evasion, prison time, addiction battles.
    0:24:41 Mike is rebuilding his wealth with purpose and helping the people and communities that lifted him up during his darkest days.
    0:24:46 I believe that you are the writer, director, and producer of your life.
    0:24:50 And if you want a better outcome, then you need to make it so.
    0:24:54 Listen wherever you get your podcasts or watch on youtube.com slash yourrichbff.
    0:25:18 Well, I think this is a good spot to talk a little more in detail about the decision makers and how they made those decisions.
    0:25:24 Now, I want to read to you a quote that gets at what I’m really asking here.
    0:25:27 It’s from one of the health officials in your book.
    0:25:52 What is wrong with saying and adopting, as a matter of policy, that the most important thing is saving lives, and we should save lives at all costs.
    0:25:59 I believe that that’s a quote from Deborah Birx, and so she was the coordinator on the coronavirus task force.
    0:26:08 She was not able, she said, to do a kind of cost-benefit analysis where she could calculate how much a life was worth.
    0:26:13 I mean, that’s a very understandable response, an attitude.
    0:26:25 But you have to remember that as policymakers faced with the kinds of measures that were being employed to control the spread of a disease, lives are on both sides of the equation.
    0:26:33 Let’s begin with one of the first measures taken, was the shutting down of so-called non-essential health care.
    0:26:37 And it was defined quite broadly.
    0:26:46 There were a lot of cancer treatments that were canceled and regarded as non-essential, depending on how advanced the cancer was.
    0:26:56 So you’re trading off future risks to life to preserve health care capacity now.
    0:27:06 When you are exacerbating inequalities, when you are depriving people of education, that has long-term health effects.
    0:27:10 I mean, education is one of the best predictors of people’s longevity.
    0:27:14 So you’re trading off present and future.
    0:27:17 It’s not so simple.
    0:27:18 These are very difficult choices.
    0:27:29 The reason why we do cost-benefit analysis is in order to be responsible as policymakers, that you can’t only focus on one threat to human beings, that we’re faced with many.
    0:27:34 And look, it’s even more excruciating in terms of the trade-offs, right?
    0:27:48 Because different population groups were not equally vulnerable here, even if you’re talking about saving lives at the highest priority, well, okay, old people were more vulnerable than young people, right?
    0:27:56 And so there may be policies that would save the lives of older population groups or more, you know, health-compromised people.
    0:28:03 And that might come at the expense of real harm to children in school, right?
    0:28:04 How do you weigh that?
    0:28:07 You know, it’s just, there’s no formula for that.
    0:28:14 Well, there was a refusal to weigh it during the crisis, that there was sort of a denial that that was what was happening.
    0:28:16 Do you think it was a denial, though?
    0:28:17 How do we know it was a denial?
    0:28:22 And how do we know they just did their best and made their choices?
    0:28:23 Some of them were good, some of them were bad.
    0:28:28 Well, they acknowledged that they didn’t discuss the costs or the trade-offs.
    0:28:37 So, you know, we have a lot of quotations to that effect from policymakers involved, saying that that was really somebody else’s job and not their job to consider the costs.
    0:28:42 So they’re pretty frank about that, that they simply weren’t doing it.
    0:28:44 And who’s they?
    0:28:46 You’re talking about the health officials mostly?
    0:28:47 Yeah, health officials.
    0:28:47 That’s right.
    0:28:58 So when you think about the policy process around COVID, you’ve got government officials, elected officials, and you have health virologists and public health officials.
    0:29:01 And that’s basically who’s in the room.
    0:29:09 And so then it would be the elected officials’ job to consider everything else.
    0:29:22 But how would they do it if they’re not being advised, if they have no perspectives being brought to bear that would shed light on the trade-offs and on the costs present in the room?
    0:29:29 Now, you know, I think they certainly deserve blame here, too, that it doesn’t all rest on public health.
    0:29:38 You know, elected officials had a tendency to want to hide behind public health, to say we’re just following the science, as if that’s possible in the presence of all these value trade-offs.
    0:29:49 But it made their lives easier to pretend like they were not exercising any discretion, and that they were doing the only thing that could be done.
    0:30:03 Part of the critique here, at least of the public officials and the health experts, is that they were intolerant of criticism, or they were intolerant of skepticism.
    0:30:10 And, again, I’m trying to be fair in retrospect to the people that were in the fire here.
    0:30:21 And I can imagine that one reason for that intolerance of skepticism, whatever one thinks of it, is that they really were in a very tough position.
    0:30:27 Do you have sympathy for the predicament that these people were facing?
    0:30:30 I mean, how would you have weighed the trade-offs here?
    0:30:33 Well, I do have empathy.
    0:30:41 I also know, and experts should be cognizant of this as well, that they have their limitations.
    0:30:43 We have our limitations.
    0:30:46 And that there’s always a risk of hubris.
    0:30:52 And that they should have acknowledged the possibility of failure.
    0:30:57 That these measures wouldn’t work as well as they hoped that they would.
    0:31:01 And that should have been factored into their decision-making.
    0:31:04 It’s not just, you know, lives versus the economy.
    0:31:07 It’s also the question of, how many lives are you even saving?
    0:31:10 Like, is this really, are these policies workable for society?
    0:31:14 There was a lack of evidence based on that.
    0:31:21 And so you can’t just make policy affecting the whole of society on a wing and a prayer.
    0:31:24 And to a great extent, that is what they were doing.
    0:31:42 You implied earlier, and you certainly talk about this in the book, that some of these health officials, people like Fauci and Birx, who were the face of these measures, that there was a bit of a disjunction between what they were saying in private and what they were saying in public.
    0:31:50 That they were lying at worst, that they were lying at worst, or being misleading at best when facing the public and talking about this.
    0:32:01 I just don’t want that to hang out there without being, without examples being offered, because I know there is a lot of bad faith attacks out there, and I don’t want to do that.
    0:32:05 So, can you give me an example of what you mean by that?
    0:32:08 How do we know that there was this disjunction?
    0:32:14 Well, in her memoir, Deborah Birx is quite frank that two weeks to slow the spread was just a pretext.
    0:32:25 And it was just an effort to get Trump on board for initial closures, and that as soon as those closures were in place, she says, we immediately began to look for ways to extend them.
    0:32:50 I think one of the more devastating noble lies that was told during the pandemic was to go out there in summer, spring and summer 2021, even into the fall of 2021, with the vaccine mandates and tell people that if you get vaccinated, you can protect your loved ones from catching the disease from you, that you will become a dead end to the virus.
    0:32:55 They did not have a scientific basis for making that claim.
    0:32:59 The vaccine trials had not tested for an outcome on transmission.
    0:33:10 We knew that, you know, based on the trials, that people who were vaccinated were less likely to report symptoms consistent with it and less likely to test positive for COVID.
    0:33:18 But there weren’t tests conducted on whether getting vaccinated would protect people in your household, for example.
    0:33:23 Like, they could have done tests for transmission, but that was not part of the endpoint of the trials.
    0:33:29 And so when they went out and made claims that it would affect or stop transmission, they were going beyond their data.
    0:33:45 We also knew that a systemically administered vaccine, meaning a shot, it’s not a nasal vaccine, doesn’t prevent you from contracting the virus and for it proliferating in your nasal cavity so that you can transmit.
    0:33:47 That was known.
    0:33:56 And so you shouldn’t have gone out there and just reassured people that this would work and you’d be able to protect your loved ones.
    0:34:05 Everybody found out in rather short order that getting vaccinated for COVID didn’t prevent you from getting COVID and also from transmitting it to others.
    0:34:34 If you were in one of those rooms making these decisions in that moment about what to tell the public, what would you do if you were faced with a choice where you could either mislead the public with a noble lie that you were absolutely convinced would say thousands of lies, but you also knew that if the public were to learn about the lie later, it would shatter trust in scientific institutions for maybe a generation.
    0:34:39 Honestly, Francis, I don’t know what I would actually do in that position.
    0:34:40 I know what I would tell you.
    0:34:42 I would do if you asked me now.
    0:34:45 I’d say, well, I’d tell the truth and let the chips fall.
    0:34:52 But that’s very easy to say from a distance and probably a lot more difficult when you’re in the fire like that.
    0:34:54 But is this something you thought about?
    0:34:55 What would you have done?
    0:34:59 This is a very important question.
    0:35:11 I mean, what I, what I, again, I would turn to is what is the basis for believing that these measures would work, that that you have to, you have to be able to accept uncertainty.
    0:35:15 If you’re a scientist, you know, there’s a lot we just don’t know about the world.
    0:35:20 To a great extent, the more expertise you develop, the more you learn about what we don’t know.
    0:35:26 And so you have, you have to come to terms with your ignorance as a policymaker.
    0:35:31 And so you may be wrong about what you think is going to work.
    0:35:41 And so under those conditions, now you’re trading your future credibility for some, for measures that will be suboptimal, may not have nearly the effectiveness that you hope for.
    0:35:50 That, that I think is the greater failing that, you know, to, to, to, to not confront the limits of our knowledge.
    0:36:03 It’s hubris because, you know, if you ask them, well, on what basis do you make this claim that if you get this vaccine, which is a shot, that will stop you from transmitting a respiratory virus?
    0:36:04 Like, well, on what basis?
    0:36:09 And so here’s where I think, you know, we see failures in other truth-seeking institutions.
    0:36:11 Where were the academics?
    0:36:16 Where were the journalists asking hard questions of policymakers during that time?
    0:36:20 Critical thinking, I think, got suspended during the pandemic.
    0:36:27 And so then government officials, including public health officials, are not being held accountable in the way they should be to justify themselves.
    0:36:38 We are talking about the lines between scientific judgments and political judgments or scientific judgments and value judgments.
    0:36:51 Do you think COVID shattered the delusion, if anyone still held on to it, that there’s a value-free science, that we can make policy choices like these based on science alone?
    0:37:06 One should not think that it is possible for science to settle political questions in the way that politicians talked about the COVID response, that they’re just following the science.
    0:37:09 That was never a responsible rhetoric.
    0:37:12 It was never a responsible way to make policy.
    0:37:24 That you have to come to terms with the reality of politics, you know, which is diverse values and diverse interests.
    0:37:29 And that when you make policy choices, there are always winners and losers.
    0:37:33 And you have to see that with clear eyes.
    0:37:35 And you try to make as many winners as possible.
    0:37:38 And you try not to harm people unnecessarily.
    0:37:48 But you can’t blind yourself to the effects of the choices that you make by sort of pretending like there was no choice at all.
    0:37:50 Which, you know, I think we saw a lot of that during the pandemic.
    0:37:58 There’s no version of a crisis like this that won’t involve mistakes, obviously, because of all the uncertainty.
    0:38:02 So how do we draw a line between mistakes and deceptions?
    0:38:06 I mean, I think mostly what we’re talking about are mistakes.
    0:38:12 But they were compounded by failures of accountability relationships.
    0:38:26 That, you know, had there been more tough questions being asked, I think it would have exposed some of the weaknesses of the assumptions that were being made or the claims that were being made.
    0:38:31 So with the start, tremendous uncertainty choices are made.
    0:38:40 But under those conditions, recognizing how little you know, you should be on a quest, on a mission to try to learn as much as you can.
    0:38:58 There should have been enormous interest in the successes in school reopening in spring of 2020 in Europe, in the handful of schools that reopened in Montana and Wyoming here in the U.S. in the 2019-2020 school year.
    0:39:02 So there were some schools that did reopen even then, not very many, but some.
    0:39:07 Lots reopened in the fall across whole swaths of the U.S.
    0:39:17 And it seemed to make little impression on the outlets of elite opinion leadership, major newspapers and news magazines.
    0:39:28 There wasn’t a quest for information on the scale that I would have thought officials would want to launch if they had recognized to their ignorance.
    0:39:33 But they made a set of policy decisions like they knew how to handle this crisis.
    0:39:35 And then they were not really open to learning.
    0:39:50 On March 12th, Quilmar Abrego Garcia was picked up by ICE in Prince George’s County, Maryland.
    0:40:00 In the days that followed, he was deported to the country where he was born, El Salvador, except this time he wound up in its infamous Seacott prison.
    0:40:05 At Seacott, they don’t let any of the prisoners have access to the outside world.
    0:40:12 On March 31st, the Trump administration said it had mistakenly deported Abrego Garcia, calling it an administrative error.
    0:40:14 On April 4th, a U.S.
    0:40:19 District Judge told the Trump administration to have Abrego Garcia back in the United States by April 7th.
    0:40:26 On April 10th, the Supreme Court entered the chat and more or less agreed, saying the Trump administration needed to get Abrego Garcia back.
    0:40:29 But it’s April 23rd, and he’s still not back.
    0:40:43 On Today Explained, we’re going to speak with the Maryland senator who sat down with Abrego Garcia in El Salvador last week and figure out how this legal standoff between the Trump administration and the courts might play out.
    0:40:48 The regular season is in the rearview, and now it’s time for the games that matter the most.
    0:40:51 This is Kenny Beecham, and playoff basketball is finally here.
    0:40:59 On Small Ball, we’re diving deep into every series, every crunch time finish, every coaching adjustment that can make or break a championship run.
    0:41:01 Who’s building for a 16-win marathon?
    0:41:04 Which superstar will submit their legacy?
    0:41:07 And which role player is about to become a household name?
    0:41:12 With so many fascinating first-round matchups, will the West be the bloodbath we anticipate?
    0:41:14 Will the East be as predictable as we think?
    0:41:16 Can the Celtics defend their title?
    0:41:20 Can Steph Curry, LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard push the young teams at the top?
    0:41:26 I’ll be bringing the expertise, the passionate, genuine opinion you need for the most exciting time of the NBA calendar.
    0:41:30 Small Ball is your essential companion for the NBA postseason.
    0:41:34 Join me, Kenny Beecham, for new episodes of Small Ball throughout the playoffs.
    0:41:40 Don’t miss Small Ball at Kenny Beecham, new episodes dropping through the playoffs, available on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.
    0:41:51 This week on Prof G Markets, we speak with Ryan Peterson, founder and CEO of Flexport, a leader in global supply chain management.
    0:41:59 We discuss how tariffs are actually impacting businesses, and we get Ryan’s take on the likely outcomes of this ongoing trade war.
    0:42:05 If they don’t change anything and this 145% duty sticks on China, it’ll take out, like, mass bankruptcies.
    0:42:09 We’re talking, like, 80% of small business that buys from China will just die.
    0:42:12 And millions of employees will go, you know, we’ll be unemployed.
    0:42:17 I mean, it’s sort of why I’m like, they obviously have to back off the trade.
    0:42:19 Like, that can’t be that they just do that.
    0:42:21 I don’t believe that they’re that crazy.
    0:42:25 You can find that conversation exclusively on the Prof G Markets podcast.
    0:42:49 A book like this, a conversation like this, is ultimately only valuable if there are lessons to be drawn from the failures.
    0:42:52 Can you tell me about some of those lessons?
    0:43:06 Well, I think, you know, for me, the key lesson, you know, as I look back on it, is that policymakers have to be honest with themselves and with the public about what they know and they don’t know.
    0:43:21 You can’t just wing it and you can’t pretend, you know, tremendous loss of credibility in terms of your relationship with the public and also bad judgments when you don’t acknowledge what you don’t know and don’t seek to learn.
    0:43:24 So I see that as really at the core.
    0:43:27 The book Steve and I have written is not a muckraking book.
    0:43:38 You know, we’re not accusing officials of nefarious motives or corruption or, you know, it’s not the plandemic that sometimes—
    0:43:38 Yeah, it’s interesting.
    0:43:40 There are no real villains in this book.
    0:43:41 It’s not that kind of story.
    0:43:46 It’s more a story of folly than villainy.
    0:43:58 So that kind of honesty about what you know and don’t know, and this is a trick—policy making in our highly complex world is rife with uncertainty.
    0:44:05 And we have to confront that squarely in order to avoid making big mistakes.
    0:44:11 What do we know about the loss of public trust in our institutions and our government?
    0:44:13 Do we have good data on this yet?
    0:44:17 Was there a clear erosion of trust after COVID?
    0:44:18 Yes, there has been.
    0:44:21 I mean, it was already on a downward trend.
    0:44:28 I mean, trust in institutions had been on the decline for a long time, but you can see it really does markedly drop.
    0:44:35 And so it’s not just public health that is affected, also universities, and it’s also the media.
    0:44:41 They have all taken a hit, and they were all not in great shape before COVID, but they’re—well, I take that back.
    0:44:53 Public health was in pretty good shape before COVID, but I regret to say universities and the media were not in such great shape, and they’ve all suffered.
    0:44:55 I can see it in the people around me.
    0:44:59 Something was ruptured.
    0:45:00 For a lot of people.
    0:45:04 And I don’t think we quite understand it yet, but I think it was significant.
    0:45:12 And I think it has some really alarming downstream implications for our society.
    0:45:25 That is at the root of our motives in writing the book, that we want to confront this history and try to reach some kind of broader shared understanding about what happened and what it means.
    0:45:41 And so we’re trying to push that conversation so that we can, instead of just turning away from this episode, we can process it and come to at least the contours of a common understanding.
    0:45:50 Maybe that’s too much to hope for in our polarized context, but that is what we hope to be able to advance.
    0:45:52 I agree with you in principle.
    0:45:55 I also don’t know what that would actually look like.
    0:46:03 What would it mean for public officials like that to be held accountable in that way?
    0:46:10 Are we capable of doing that right now in this polarized climate in a civilized and productive way?
    0:46:22 I don’t know if, you know, it would work to sort of haul them in front of a congressional committee and watch them get roasted, if that’s what, you know, if that’s what we mean by accountability.
    0:46:33 I think accountability can happen more in society with conversations like the one we are having, with conferences and academia and the classrooms.
    0:46:45 There are some policymakers who had positions of great responsibility during the crisis who are able to have a conversation about what they got right and what they got wrong.
    0:46:47 And certainly that should be encouraged.
    0:46:50 Those can happen in societal settings.
    0:46:56 It doesn’t have to be a highly charged political setting where those conversations occur.
    0:47:01 But I think that’s the path forward towards healing these ruptures.
    0:47:08 And I do agree with you that there were profound ruptures during the pandemic in society.
    0:47:16 You know, divisions between families and friends over how they were interpreting the pandemic response.
    0:47:23 Presumably we can draw lessons from this that will help us navigate the next societal crisis.
    0:47:29 To that end, what do you think is the most important takeaway here?
    0:47:33 What lesson must we absolutely learn for the next storm?
    0:47:34 Whatever form that takes.
    0:47:42 Killer comet or climate catastrophe, fill in the blank, you know, with your favorite extinction threat.
    0:47:48 So the acknowledgement of uncertainty, the willingness to keep learning,
    0:47:54 and then resist that impulse towards moralized antagonism.
    0:48:01 You know, dismissing the perspectives of people you disagree with or that on the other side politically.
    0:48:03 Resist that.
    0:48:06 Listen to them and try to evaluate what they say on the merits.
    0:48:12 And don’t assume that you have nothing to learn from people you think are bad people.
    0:48:16 What we saw in the pandemic was, you know, society sort of turning on itself.
    0:48:23 So Democrats blaming Republicans, Republicans blaming Democrats, you know, all these different divides,
    0:48:31 where the root problem was that this crisis was not within our, we did not have the technology to control or stop this crisis.
    0:48:40 All we could really do is mitigate it and sort of acknowledging our frailties as human beings.
    0:48:41 That’s difficult.
    0:48:48 It’s much easier and more comfortable just to blame the bad things that are happening on the people you don’t like anyway.
    0:48:50 And so we saw an awful lot of that.
    0:48:52 I’m going to leave it right there.
    0:48:58 Once again, the book is called In COVID’s Wake, How Our Politics Failed Us.
    0:49:01 Frances Lee, this was a pleasure.
    0:49:02 Thank you.
    0:49:02 Thank you, Sean.
    0:49:10 All right.
    0:49:12 I hope you enjoyed this episode.
    0:49:22 I certainly did in the sense that it was a reminder of how chaotic and complicated this time was
    0:49:28 and how agonizing the decisions that had to be made really were.
    0:49:33 But as always, we want to know what you think.
    0:49:37 So drop us a line at the gray area at vox.com.
    0:49:44 Or you can leave us a message on our new voicemail line at 1-800-214-5749.
    0:49:53 And if you have time after that, go ahead and rate and review and subscribe to the podcast that helps get the word to more people.
    0:50:04 This episode was produced by the gray area.
    0:50:12 And if you decide to sign up because of this show, let us know.
    0:50:24 And if you decide to sign up because of this show, let us know.

    There are lots of stories to tell about the Covid pandemic. Most of them, on some level, are about politics, about decisions that affected people’s lives in different — and very unequal — ways.

    Covid hasn’t disappeared, but the crisis has subsided. So do we have enough distance from it to reflect on what we got right, what we got wrong, and what we can do differently when the next crisis strikes?

    Professor Frances E. Lee — co-author of In Covid’s Wake: How Our Politics Failed Us — thinks we do. In this episode, she speaks with Sean about how our politics, our assumptions, and our biases affected decision-making and outcomes during the pandemic.

    Host: Sean Illing (@SeanIlling)

    Guest: Frances E. Lee, professor of politics and public affairs at Princeton and co-author of In Covid’s Wake: How Our Politics Failed Us

    Listen to The Gray Area ad-free by becoming a Vox Member: vox.com/members

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

  • Understand What Pets Actually Want & Need | Dr. Karolina Westlund

    中文
    Tiếng Việt
    AI transcript
    0:00:05 Welcome to the Huberman Lab Podcast, where we discuss science and science-based tools for everyday life.
    0:00:14 I’m Andrew Huberman, and I’m a professor of neurobiology and ophthalmology at Stanford School of Medicine.
    0:00:17 My guest today is Dr. Carolina Westland.
    0:00:22 Dr. Carolina Westland is an animal ethologist and expert in animal behavior.
    0:00:26 Dr. Westland and I discuss the relationship between humans and domesticated animals
    0:00:32 with a focus on the evidence-based protocols for optimizing the mental and physical health of our pets.
    0:00:35 Dr. Westland explains the best way to interact with our animals.
    0:00:40 Now, we may assume that the way we pet our animals and exercise them and feed them makes them truly happy.
    0:00:47 But as she points out, many of the things that people assume turn out to be false when it comes to our pets and their fundamental drives.
    0:00:52 She teaches us the very basic but powerful things that we can do to satisfy those drives,
    0:00:56 both for the animal’s sake, of course, and to better our relationship with them.
    0:01:01 Dr. Noah Westland, We also discuss the unique neurological and physiological requirements of different dog breeds.
    0:01:04 That’s a fascinating conversation that stems from their lineage from wolves.
    0:01:10 And we’ll tell you whether or not your particular breed, even if it’s a mutt, should be exercised in a particular way,
    0:01:14 whether or not it needs additional forms of stimulation that you’re not currently giving it, and so on.
    0:01:18 And because we both realize there are also cat owners out there too,
    0:01:23 we discuss the often misunderstood communication signals and social needs of cats.
    0:01:30 As you may know, there is a tremendous amount of debate out there about the best training and practices for taking care of our dogs and other animals.
    0:01:35 And so much of that is grounded in speculation and training outcomes, which, of course, are important.
    0:01:49 The conversation today with Dr. Westland approaches animal health and welfare through the lens of ethology and the species that our pets evolved from to provide actionable protocols that are grounded in science and that you can implement right away to improve your pet’s well-being.
    0:01:53 So if you’re a pet owner, this episode is going to be of immense value to you.
    0:01:59 If you’re not a pet owner, you’ll still learn a ton about animal biology and psychology, including yours.
    0:02:04 Before we begin, I’d like to emphasize that this podcast is separate from my teaching and research roles at Stanford.
    0:02:11 It is, however, part of my desire and effort to bring zero-cost-to-consumer information about science and science-related tools to the general public.
    0:02:15 In keeping with that theme, this episode does include sponsors.
    0:02:18 And now for my discussion with Dr. Carolina Westland.
    0:02:21 Dr. Carolina Westland, welcome.
    0:02:22 Thank you.
    0:02:24 I’m super excited for this conversation.
    0:02:25 Yeah, me too.
    0:02:26 I can barely contain myself.
    0:02:33 I think we have so much to learn from animals, and I think we have so much to learn from our relationship to animals.
    0:02:42 I also believe that we have all sorts of ideas about what animals experience, what they think about us, the relationship that we think we have with them.
    0:02:43 Oh, yeah.
    0:02:45 Today, you’re going to set the record straight.
    0:02:54 To start off, could you just briefly list off some of the species of animals that your students have worked with and studied?
    0:02:58 Most of my students are like guardians of animals.
    0:03:03 So they’re like dog owners or horse trainers, or they might be veterinarians.
    0:03:09 Some of them work in a zoo as a zookeeper or animal trainer and so on.
    0:03:11 So my students are really diverse.
    0:03:24 And their knowledge levels is also really diverse from the sort of person who has their first dog at the age of 40 to somebody who’s been training animals for 30 years.
    0:03:42 I grew up around a few horse people, my first girlfriend had a horse, and it was remarkable to me to see and to get some just external understanding of the relationship between human and animal through observing that.
    0:03:53 I think of all the relationships between animals and humans, the horse-human relationship seems to be the one where there’s the most amount of physical contact, right?
    0:04:13 You ride a horse, you learn to read the horse’s intentions, it learns to read yours through these subtle squeezing of the legs or kicking, not kicking hard, but just like a nudge of the heel, just a slight tug on the reins.
    0:04:14 It’s really remarkable.
    0:04:20 What does the horse experience the world as?
    0:04:32 I’ve heard before that, you know, they sort of have these orbs of awareness around them and that they’re paying attention to things on the horizon, that they’re clearly paying attention to things very up close to their body.
    0:04:47 But if you were to put us into the mind of a horse as best you can, how does the horse experience the world as a wild horse and with a rider on its back trying to steer it in a particular direction at a particular speed?
    0:04:53 As an ethologist, I tend to take a step back and look at sort of the species in general.
    0:04:56 And horses are prey animals.
    0:04:59 They are also herd animals.
    0:05:14 And I think that we as humans, we tend to not really understand how different animal species can be from ourselves in how they perceive the world and what’s important to them.
    0:05:19 So horses being prey animals means that they’re usually quite vigilant.
    0:05:26 So they’re paying a lot of attention to the world and they have this, their visual field is really big so they can sort of see what’s happening back there.
    0:05:41 The issue I have with how we raise and keep horses today as an ethologist and sort of looking at how animals live their lives in the wild is that we keep them in a way that sort of challenges them in several aspects of that.
    0:05:47 So we tend to separate them quite early from their mom, even though in the wild, they would stay for a very long time.
    0:06:03 So I think some of the concerns that I have as an ethologist with how we raise horses is the early weaning that we sometimes see and also single housing for a species that’s an aggregating species.
    0:06:08 And also that they, in the wild, they will forage up to 16 hours a day.
    0:06:19 And when we bring them into captivity, we typically feed them in a way that promotes very quick eating, you know, for just a fraction of that time.
    0:06:21 And that can then lead to problem behavior.
    0:06:37 So for me, I think horses are probably one of the captive animal species where for many individual horses, the type of life that we’re offering is really not that great.
    0:06:37 Interesting.
    0:06:43 Dogs, I know, are very smell-oriented.
    0:06:50 They experience the world perhaps largely, but certainly quite a bit through their noses.
    0:06:56 They can sense odor instead of distance and certainly up close.
    0:07:00 They like to get their nose right into things and sniff, get deep sniffs.
    0:07:03 And they’re always collecting information with their noses.
    0:07:07 There’s a huge range of dog breeds.
    0:07:16 And I think any discussion about dogs requires that we first kind of separate out some of the major differences, at least in terms of the purebred versions of them.
    0:07:29 When I see a mastiff versus a chihuahua versus like a scent hound, I’m looking at, to me, what appear to be very different animals.
    0:07:33 Is it true that certain dogs rely on their sense of smell far more than others?
    0:07:41 And if so, do the ones that rely on their nose just not pay attention to what they’re looking at unless you insist?
    0:07:49 I mean, the other version of this question is how should we interact with dogs differently depending on what breed of dog they are?
    0:07:49 Yeah.
    0:07:52 So I think I can’t really answer the first part of that question.
    0:08:02 I don’t know the extent to which different dog breeds, their sensory capabilities, how much that differs between different dog breeds.
    0:08:09 However, how to interact with different dog breeds, I think that’s really a really interesting question.
    0:08:28 Because so during the process of domestication and in just the last couple of hundred years, really, we started selecting for different capabilities in the different dog, dogs that we needed for different tasks, essentially.
    0:08:40 So if we look at a wolf hunting sequence, what they’ll do is they’ll do an orient response where they sniff and they’re sort of looking for a prey.
    0:08:43 And then they will do some eyeing and stalking behavior.
    0:08:51 So they’ll focus and they’ll do stalking and then they’ll do chasing and then they’ll do a grab bite, a killing bite.
    0:08:54 Then they’ll dissect and then they’ll eat the prey.
    0:08:58 So we have this whole predatory sequence that we see in wolves.
    0:09:06 And what happened during the process of domestication was that we sort of selected for certain aspects of that sequence in different breeds.
    0:09:11 So we’ll have the sniffers, the hounds that are really great.
    0:09:13 And I guess maybe that answers your first question.
    0:09:18 I think that probably all dog breeds enjoy sniffing.
    0:09:22 It’s one of the big things that people are exploring a lot now is nose work.
    0:09:26 But anyway, back to this process of domestication.
    0:09:38 And then we had the pointers who sort of we have really selected for that behavior.
    0:09:46 You know, in a litter of puppies, we would select the one that was the most prone to do that behavior.
    0:09:54 And so over generations, we really sculpted that niche, so to speak.
    0:10:00 So a pointer will typically not proceed to the next behavior of the predatory sequence.
    0:10:10 And then we have like the border collies who might do some chasing or some eyeing and stalking and a little bit of chase, but ideally no grabbing.
    0:10:14 And we have the pure chasers, the greyhounds, for instance.
    0:10:18 And then we have the grabbers, the retrievers.
    0:10:22 And then we have the killers, the terriers.
    0:10:27 People, I’m assuming, were anticipating you to say the pit bulls or the Dobermans.
    0:10:33 But anyone that’s owned a terrier will know that they are great ratting dogs.
    0:10:38 They were bred to exterminate small like rodents and stuff.
    0:10:44 Anyone who’s seen a Westie, those cute little West Highland Terriers, the little white ones, they’re real cute.
    0:10:51 If one of those hears or senses a rodent in the wall, I’ve seen one stalk one for several days.
    0:10:53 It will move along.
    0:10:54 We used to call it rat TV.
    0:11:01 The Westie will sense when and where the rodent is there with an absolute fixation.
    0:11:06 And if there’s any way to get into that wall and kill that rodent, it’s coming out with that rodent in its mouth.
    0:11:07 It’s remarkable.
    0:11:09 The amount of dedication is just striking.
    0:11:12 And it’s all about killing that rat.
    0:11:19 So we systematically intentionally bred for that like a couple hundred years ago.
    0:11:29 And then we have the ones that don’t show much of the predatory sequence at all, that simply mostly just eat, which are the – what do you call them?
    0:11:34 The ones that help livestock guardians.
    0:11:36 They still like the sniffing.
    0:11:50 So they tend to retain the sniffing part and then specific breeds will have one or perhaps a few of the behaviors from the hunting sequence.
    0:12:03 So I think if we want to offer dogs a good life, we should understand where they are on that scale.
    0:12:17 And also that the working dogs come sort of with this evolutionary backpack, their genetic backpack will encourage them to really want to do that work.
    0:12:31 And then we have also the sort of – I think they’re sometimes referred to as toy breeds, the ones that are lap dogs who are not that interested in any of that working dog behavior.
    0:12:42 So I think it’s – we need to – with regards to the different breeds, we need to really understand what purpose they were bred for, I think.
    0:12:46 I’d like to take a quick break and acknowledge our sponsor, Our Place.
    0:12:50 Our Place makes my favorite pots, pans, and other cookware.
    0:13:00 Surprisingly, toxic compounds such as PFASs or forever chemicals are still found in 80% of nonstick pans, as well as utensils, appliances, and countless other kitchen products.
    0:13:13 As I’ve discussed before on this podcast, these PFASs or forever chemicals like Teflon have been linked to major health issues such as hormone disruption, gut microbiome disruption, fertility issues, and many other health problems.
    0:13:15 So it’s really important to try and avoid them.
    0:13:17 This is why I’m a huge fan of Our Place.
    0:13:23 Our Place products are made with the highest quality materials and are all completely PFAS and toxin-free.
    0:13:26 I especially love their Titanium Always Pan Pro.
    0:13:30 It’s the first nonstick pan made with zero chemicals and zero coating.
    0:13:32 Instead, it uses pure titanium.
    0:13:37 This means it has no harmful forever chemicals and does not degrade or lose its nonstick effect over time.
    0:13:39 It’s also beautiful to look at.
    0:13:42 I cook eggs in my Titanium Always Pan Pro almost every morning.
    0:13:46 The design allows for the eggs to cook perfectly without sticking to the pan.
    0:13:50 I also cook burgers and steaks in it, and it puts a really nice sear on the meat.
    0:13:54 But again, nothing sticks to it, so it’s really easy to clean, and it’s even dishwasher safe.
    0:13:57 I love it, and I basically use it constantly.
    0:14:03 Our Place now has a full line of Titanium Pro cookware that uses its first-of-its-kind titanium nonstick technology.
    0:14:12 So if you’re looking for non-toxic, long-lasting pots and pans, go to fromourplace.com slash Huberman and use the code Huberman at checkout.
    0:14:15 Right now, Our Place is having their biggest sale of the season.
    0:14:20 You can get up to 30% off all products now through May 12th, 2025.
    0:14:30 With a 100-day risk-free trial, free shipping, and free returns, you can try Our Place with zero risk and see why more than 1 million people have made the switch to Our Place Kitchenware.
    0:14:35 Again, that’s fromourplace.com slash Huberman to get up to 30% off.
    0:14:38 Today’s episode is also brought to us by 8Sleep.
    0:14:42 8Sleep makes smart mattress covers with cooling, heating, and sleep tracking capacity.
    0:14:48 Now, I’ve spoken before on this podcast about the critical need for us to get adequate amounts of quality sleep each and every night.
    0:14:54 Now, one of the best ways to ensure a great night’s sleep is to ensure that the temperature of your sleeping environment is correct.
    0:15:00 And that’s because in order to fall and stay deeply asleep, your body temperature actually has to drop about 1 to 3 degrees.
    0:15:07 And in order to wake up feeling refreshed and energized, your body temperature actually has to increase by about 1 to 3 degrees.
    0:15:12 8Sleep automatically regulates the temperature of your bed throughout the night according to your unique needs.
    0:15:21 Now, I find that extremely useful because I like to make the bed really cool at the beginning of the night, even colder in the middle of the night, and warm as I wake up.
    0:15:24 That’s what gives me the most slow-wave sleep and rapid eye movement sleep.
    0:15:30 And I know that because 8Sleep has a great sleep tracker that tells me how well I’ve slept and the types of sleep that I’m getting throughout the night.
    0:15:37 I’ve been sleeping on an 8Sleep mattress cover for four years now, and it has completely transformed and improved the quality of my sleep.
    0:15:46 Their latest model, the Pod 4 Ultra, also has snoring detection that will automatically lift your head a few degrees in order to improve your airflow and stop you from snoring.
    0:15:51 If you decide to try 8Sleep, you have 30 days to try it at home, and you can return it if you don’t like it.
    0:15:54 No questions asked, but I’m sure that you’ll love it.
    0:15:59 Go to 8Sleep.com slash Huberman to save up to $350 off your Pod 4 Ultra.
    0:16:03 8Sleep ships to many countries worldwide, including Mexico and the UAE.
    0:16:09 Again, that’s 8Sleep.com slash Huberman to save up to $350 off your Pod 4 Ultra.
    0:16:16 That’s a beautiful and, to me, completely novel description of the breakdown of different breeds.
    0:16:26 Not according to the dosing of wolf versus mastiff genes, which is what some of the more reductionist research papers on this really do.
    0:16:27 They have these charts.
    0:16:37 We’ll provide a link to one that was published in Science Magazine about 10 years back that had this sort of dosing of mastiff genes versus wolf genes.
    0:16:46 And what you just described beautifully breaks down what one observes if you go to a dog park or the beach.
    0:16:50 My bulldog mastiff, Costello, he was a mudded bulldog.
    0:16:53 So I always say, you know, no underbite.
    0:16:56 So it wasn’t this, it was this, right?
    0:17:03 So a proper bulldog before they inbred them so much that they have the underbite and the short snout, the brachycephalic, the breathing issues.
    0:17:12 But he neither stalked nor chased, nor was he interested in killing anything.
    0:17:15 He didn’t have that sense to try and harm.
    0:17:17 But he certainly liked to consume.
    0:17:20 So he was at the end of that behavioral description.
    0:17:23 And what were they bred for?
    0:17:28 So I’ll try and not take up too much time on this one because I want to learn from you.
    0:17:42 The original bulldog line was a cross between a mastiff, something like a mastiff, a strong, large, high pain tolerance, and a pug, short snout.
    0:17:47 And the gene cross there, and obviously the dog geneticists weren’t thinking about specific genes.
    0:17:57 They were thinking about traits, was the short snout was great for what’s called bull baiting because that short snout provides the kind of lever that when they bite down onto the nose of a bull,
    0:18:03 bull, which is what they were used for, it was a cruel practice, very hard to shake them loose.
    0:18:05 The bull could shake them and they’re not going to shake loose.
    0:18:10 Just think about trying to pick something up with long tongs, right, the physics of this versus a clamp, right, like a C-clamp.
    0:18:10 Yeah.
    0:18:23 The mutation that takes the pain receptors out of the face or reduces them is close by another gene that is involved in generating the tensile nature of the skin.
    0:18:26 So this is why they have the jowls, the folds.
    0:18:26 Oh, right.
    0:18:31 And you can, I don’t suggest anyone do this, but Costello, I’ll just give an example.
    0:18:35 Sometimes, unfortunately, would like get a fish hook through his jowl when he was playing at the ocean or something.
    0:18:41 And he’d come up to me bleeding, smiling, you know, basically you have to take this thing out.
    0:18:43 So his pain tolerance was quite high.
    0:18:46 Pain tolerance was very high in the front of the animal, in the face.
    0:18:54 And toward the rear of the animal, you touch his back toe and it’s, you know, so they have a gradient of pain receptors that runs high density in the back, low density of the front.
    0:18:56 So they were bred for bull baiting.
    0:18:56 Yeah.
    0:19:00 And the original line has been bred out.
    0:19:09 It’s people who care about the bulldog breed and bringing some more humane breeding practices to the bulldog because it’s a pretty brutal breed now.
    0:19:09 Yeah.
    0:19:18 Have tried to reestablish the original line, which, again, were elbows back, no strong underbite, as opposed to what you see now.
    0:19:21 So that’s the sort of brief history on the bulldog.
    0:19:25 They have to be born by cesarean because big shoulders, small hips.
    0:19:42 Anyway, the interesting thing about the bulldog, I always said, and this will take us back to behavior, was the contract that I felt I had with my bulldog was one of he would protect me to the death.
    0:19:45 You do notice that anytime they hear a noise or anything, they’re hypervigilant.
    0:19:54 But if there’s no impending threat, total relaxation, the most efficient use of energy of any species.
    0:20:00 So basically it was, I’ll die for you, Andrew, but unless your life is in danger, I’m not going to do anything.
    0:20:07 So maybe we could talk about temperament in dogs and how they experience their emotional life.
    0:20:16 I don’t know if we can make general statements about this, but you’ve spent a lot of your time thinking about the emotional life of animals.
    0:20:21 What does a dog need in order to feel calm and safe?
    0:20:23 Great question.
    0:20:50 Yeah, so in order to feel calm and safe, I think perhaps we should go to the core effect space, which I think is one of the three emotional models that I find very, very useful in understanding and providing a good environment for animals so that they can thrive, really.
    0:21:03 So the core effect space is one way of depicting or conceptualizing emotions where we have valence on the x-axis, so how pleasant or unpleasant something is, and we have arousal on the y-axis.
    0:21:28 So what you’re asking is, so low arousal and pleasant, so where they’re relaxed and they’re feeling safe and they’re sort of engaging socially with others and being sort of at ease, if you will.
    0:21:30 So how do we get there?
    0:21:37 And I think that some of the things to consider is then the absence of negative emotions.
    0:21:48 So again, if we’re in the core effect space in the quadrant four, with the high arousal unpleasant states, we’ll find things like fear, aggression.
    0:21:57 So helping reduce that will sort of automatically help animals move to the right in the matrix.
    0:22:09 And in the lower quadrant three, with the unpleasant low arousal state, where animals tend to end up if they’re sort of bored or depressed,
    0:22:22 is engaging them, providing an environment that’s stimulating, that they can sort of do interesting things to help them move into the right side of the core effect space.
    0:22:31 And also to the top in that quadrant one is the high arousal pleasant state.
    0:22:37 But that would be like seeking or foraging behavior, exploration, play, sex.
    0:22:48 But as to your question, how do we get into quadrant two with feeling safe and sort of that warm, fuzzy feeling?
    0:22:59 So some of the things to do might be to, if the animal enjoys it coming from you, and they often have to know you in order to really appreciate it,
    0:23:03 is like tactile stimulation, so petting, essentially.
    0:23:09 Something that might interfere is that we primates, we humans are primates and we’re huggers.
    0:23:13 We tend to sort of go like this when we want to interact with an animal that we really like.
    0:23:18 And to many animals, this is restraint and really scary.
    0:23:28 And so the type of body contact that we offer to animals that we should consider whether they really enjoy it or not,
    0:23:30 whether they tolerate it or enjoy it.
    0:23:34 And one way of doing that is to offer a consent test.
    0:23:40 So you might offer your hand and scratch a little bit, ideally in a place that the animal really enjoys.
    0:23:45 So most dogs don’t enjoy having a hand on top of their head, but rather perhaps here.
    0:23:46 On their neck.
    0:23:48 Or the upper chest, sort of, yeah.
    0:23:54 So you might do that for a few seconds and then you remove your hand to see, does the animal enjoy this?
    0:23:57 And will they then reinitiate that contact or not?
    0:23:58 Or will they move away?
    0:24:09 And I have this issue with my cat now that he is not very, he doesn’t sort of enjoy petting as much as I do petting him.
    0:24:14 So I have to be really mindful that I really offer him the chance to say no thanks.
    0:24:20 So we might consider just touching the animal as a, you’re calling it a consent test, like as a test.
    0:24:28 And then if they move toward you, then what is the pattern of tactile stimulation that dogs like?
    0:24:38 I’ve been reading up on this a little bit and somebody ran an experiment that I think is kind of interesting describing the differences between rates of petting.
    0:24:46 And it basically, the conclusion was that essentially they claim that all dogs are averse to very rapid touch.
    0:24:50 But that people tend to pat quickly, pet quickly.
    0:25:00 And they showed a beautiful example of just if one just deliberately strokes the animal very slowly, the animal’s eyelids just start to hood.
    0:25:05 And you basically just diffuse the tension very quickly.
    0:25:07 Which I think is interesting.
    0:25:09 You know, as humans, we think, oh, we want to pat the dog on its head.
    0:25:13 And for some reason, we associate patting with fast patting.
    0:25:13 Yeah.
    0:25:15 Or petting as a quick process.
    0:25:17 You’re going to scratch and pet this animal.
    0:25:23 It very well could be that all the dogs out there are just dying for some really nice, slow strokes.
    0:25:23 Yeah.
    0:25:38 And I also think that that nice, slow stroke, if you’re sort of in a calm emotional state yourself, then we might tap into another interesting emotion theory, which is the polyvagal theory and this concept of co-regulation.
    0:25:52 So if you’re really calm and relaxed, then you’re sort of sending out these cues, these subtle cues that other individuals are reading and picking up on.
    0:26:00 And it seems that we do that vis-a-vis also our dogs and certainly also horses, it seems.
    0:26:07 So that just being calm and relaxed yourself can really help relax the dog.
    0:26:12 And what you say about the fast petting or patting really makes sense to me.
    0:26:18 I know there is one study in horses that show that if you pat a horse, many horses find that aversive.
    0:26:21 So in other words, it’s something that they’ll work to avoid.
    0:26:28 And yet that is often how we try to reward them when they do something that we want.
    0:26:30 They do enjoy wither scratching.
    0:26:37 So back at the nape of the mane, if you scratch them there, they’ll typically enjoy that.
    0:26:48 But I would say that different animals, different individuals will have these individual preferences and just trying to see what they like.
    0:26:59 And perhaps also if you’re offering your hands like this, they might even scoot around to show you which body part they want scratched once they learn the rules of that communication.
    0:27:06 I feel like dogs want the part of their body scratched that they can’t access on their own.
    0:27:06 Yes.
    0:27:12 Like I’m yet to meet a dog that doesn’t like being scratched on its rump.
    0:27:14 Bump scratching is a big thing for many animals.
    0:27:14 Yeah.
    0:27:15 Of course it is.
    0:27:18 Like the top side of their back leg.
    0:27:18 Yeah.
    0:27:18 Right?
    0:27:19 Like right there.
    0:27:20 Yeah.
    0:27:21 It’s got to feel so good.
    0:27:21 Yeah.
    0:27:22 Because they can’t get to that.
    0:27:22 Yeah.
    0:27:27 As well as underneath their rear leg.
    0:27:28 Right?
    0:27:33 Like just kind of in the crook of the rear leg with that soft skin there.
    0:27:34 Yeah.
    0:27:34 Right?
    0:27:40 That – but, you know, having interacted with dogs that were more skittish versus more calm.
    0:27:40 Yeah.
    0:27:50 I totally agree that different animals, regardless of breed, just have a completely different relationship to touch.
    0:27:51 Yeah.
    0:27:53 And how quickly they want to interact.
    0:27:58 I’ve heard and I don’t know if it’s true that for dogs space is a big thing.
    0:28:01 I don’t know if this is true.
    0:28:04 I’m sure someone will refute this.
    0:28:16 But the idea that, you know, if your dog runs up to you when you walk in or to – a dog runs up to you and it’s a new dog you’re just meeting and they touch you or they jump up on your shin, that it’s their attempt to dominate you.
    0:28:18 Like this is my space.
    0:28:18 I’m controlling you.
    0:28:26 Because you wouldn’t necessarily walk up to a dog that you just met and just get right in their space without kind of them approaching you as well.
    0:28:30 What are your thoughts on this whole dominant submission thing on the basis of touch and space?
    0:28:33 That’s like Pandora’s box there, right there.
    0:28:33 Great.
    0:28:35 I don’t have any, you know, stake in this.
    0:28:41 I just would like to learn and I would like people to learn so that they can have better interactions with and for animals.
    0:28:42 Sure.
    0:28:42 Yeah.
    0:28:48 So first of all, I think that actually we often do walk up to strange dogs that we never met before.
    0:28:50 We’re like, hi, can I pet him?
    0:28:52 And then we start patting on top of the animal’s head.
    0:28:53 Guilty.
    0:28:54 So I think that we do do that.
    0:29:03 And then this whole discussion about dominance is really interesting because as an ethologist, how we define dominance is completely different.
    0:29:07 Different from how most people define it.
    0:29:14 And I actually, I looked into the encyclopedia to see how is dominance defined there.
    0:29:17 And I find that there’s like two lines of that definition.
    0:29:22 So one is the ethological definition of dominance and one is the sociological definition of dominance.
    0:29:35 And I think that what we’re doing often is that we’re misusing, we’re using the sociological definition on animals in a way that’s, I think, unfortunate.
    0:29:41 Because the ethological definition is about priority of access to resources.
    0:29:43 Here’s a resource.
    0:29:46 Here’s like five individuals coming up to it.
    0:29:47 There’s just one there.
    0:29:50 The dominant individual will have priority of access to that resource.
    0:29:53 The others simply have to wait or look elsewhere.
    0:29:59 And this reduces the risk of sort of confrontation and aggression and all the costs associated with that.
    0:30:16 So it’s just, it’s normal that animals who hang out together, who are like in a stable social group, will organize or have some sort of dominance hierarchy within them that allows this to take place, to reduce the risk of aggression.
    0:30:30 It tends to become exacerbated in captivity compared to in wild contexts because then the animals can disperse and there’s like, there’s a resource over there that they can go and get instead.
    0:30:41 But when we house them and we’re offering, specifically we’re offering like, here’s, you have two cats or three cats and here’s the food.
    0:30:47 You’re putting the animals in conflict because cats are solitary hunters.
    0:30:59 So they actually do, if you have several cats, you should feed them in sort of separate locations to reduce that sort of heightened arousal that goes with that type of feeding.
    0:31:04 Okay, there’s dominance among dogs or among dogs and other non-human animals.
    0:31:10 I’m thinking in terms of the relationship between human and dog and touch and space.
    0:31:13 I’ve heard that the dog touches you.
    0:31:15 It thinks it owns you.
    0:31:23 I’ve heard that if you move into a space that the dog is and it backs away, then it’s, you know, it thinks of you as dominant.
    0:31:30 I’ve also heard that if the dog moves into your space very quickly, that it sees itself as kind of the leader in this relationship.
    0:31:32 There are a lot of theories out there about this.
    0:31:43 And I’m realizing that all these theories about animals must be very contentious because they lack the language to tell us what we want to know.
    0:31:44 Yeah.
    0:31:46 And so we’re always sort of guessing when we’re doing ethology.
    0:31:51 I would not label any of those situations that you described as a dominance interaction, actually.
    0:32:03 I would rather, if the dog backs away when you confront them, I would sort of rather label that as perhaps a fearful reaction, not submissive, as in giving you priority of access to a resource.
    0:32:12 Typically, feral dogs in the wild will form linear dominance hierarchies with regards to the access to resources.
    0:32:16 And that might shift depending on what the resource is.
    0:32:19 So it’s not like it’s written in stone or anything.
    0:32:30 So it’s like fluid and variable, but there’s still typically some sort of like hierarchy when it comes to the priority of access to resources.
    0:32:35 Then we have another social role, which is the role as a leader.
    0:32:48 And when I, as an ethologist, say leader, I mean the one that leads, that sort of walks first in line from one location to another.
    0:32:56 I like to take the example of elephants that they, when they migrate, it’s typically one of the old females, the matriarch, who leads the way.
    0:33:01 So she’s the leader, so she’ll help them find, she knows where to go, essentially.
    0:33:05 And there’s other social roles as well.
    0:33:13 There might be the controller, who is the animal who tends to initiate a change in activity.
    0:33:18 So we see this in cows, for instance, that all the cows are standing up and they’re grazing.
    0:33:25 And then one cow, the controller, lies down and everybody else lies down also.
    0:33:25 Wow.
    0:33:26 And they start ruminating.
    0:33:31 They will often synchronize their behavior, but they’ll follow.
    0:33:38 It’s not that one individual is sort of imposing on the others, but rather they do that and the others follow suit.
    0:33:39 Interesting.
    0:33:39 Yeah.
    0:33:46 I have heard this, that when you walk your dog, that your dog should be next to you or behind you.
    0:33:50 Very few dog owners actually walk with their dog behind them.
    0:33:56 Just, I live in an area that is, you know, frequented by dogs and owners.
    0:34:07 It’s interesting to kind of interpret that as a question, which is, if the dog walks in front, does it mean that it somehow is the leader?
    0:34:11 I mean, are humans just completely wrong about all this stuff?
    0:34:12 I think so.
    0:34:12 Great.
    0:34:21 I think that we carry a lot of, and actually, we haven’t mentioned this, I think, but I have very little practical experience about dogs, with dogs.
    0:34:22 I haven’t lived with dogs.
    0:34:22 I haven’t trained dogs.
    0:34:26 But many of my students train dogs, and I help them.
    0:34:41 So, but that also means that I don’t carry any of these sort of assumptions that you’re supposed to have your dog behind you or beside you, that if you don’t, then so, which means that I can look at that type of statement and go, really?
    0:34:55 Because I think that there’s a lot of learning occurring, of course, that you teach the dog that if you stay at my side or behind me, then, you know, there won’t be any unpleasantness.
    0:34:57 But if you pull ahead, I’m going to yank you back.
    0:35:07 So there’ll be an unpleasant consequence to the pulling behavior, which will then influence the animal’s choice in staying next to you.
    0:35:19 But I think we very often, what we label as dominance can very often be just, if we just remove that label and we look at the animal’s behavior, we can explain it in other terms.
    0:35:27 And again, I would not use, for me, dominance as an ethologist has to do with the priority of access to resources.
    0:35:41 So along the lines of priority of access to resources, when I got my puppy, I was taught in the dog training course that I took with him that I should eat and then he should eat.
    0:35:51 Or that we could eat alongside one another different food, although I confess I often fed him steak.
    0:36:00 If it was appropriate food for a bulldog, I fed it to him, as opposed to letting him eat before me because of this access to resources thing.
    0:36:02 Is there any truth to that?
    0:36:07 This is taught in a lot of dog slash owner training because a lot of dog training is actually owner training.
    0:36:08 Yeah, yeah, yeah, sure.
    0:36:14 I mean, you have to set up the situation to work for you and the animal.
    0:36:18 But again, I would not frame that in terms of dominance.
    0:36:30 They form relationships with us, but as far as I know, from the ethological perspective, we have no role in a dominance hierarchy among dogs.
    0:36:33 They know that we are different and they will respond.
    0:36:39 They will learn to expect that if in this context, that will happen, in that context, that will happen.
    0:36:45 And so we can often reframe that from in a different learning system than dominance.
    0:37:02 That’s a novel perspective because I think that so much of what’s out there in terms of dog slash owner training is really about not so much dominance, but really trying to establish a relationship where it’s clear that you’re the caretaker to, quote unquote, make them feel safe.
    0:37:08 So that their job is very clear so they don’t feel the anxiety of needing to perform roles that perhaps are yours.
    0:37:12 There’s a lot like what you hear when you hear about parent-child training, basically.
    0:37:27 So maybe given the sort of pattern of your answers over the last couple of questions, I should ask the question, which is a really straightforward one, which is how do you think about animals?
    0:37:31 Like what is your view of animals when you think about them?
    0:37:42 I know you’re interested in their welfare and improving their well-being and conditions, but how do you – like when you see an animal, most people say, okay, well, that’s a dog, that’s a horse, that’s a parrot.
    0:37:44 Can I interact with it?
    0:37:46 Maybe I don’t want to or maybe I have a phobia.
    0:37:47 Who knows?
    0:37:48 But how do you think about animals?
    0:37:54 Like what’s driving this inquiry in terms of their emotional and their cognitive life?
    0:38:15 First of all, I think that we humans are also an animal species and that we tend to sort of put ourselves on a pedestal and thinking that we are one and then animals are like this – the other, as if it were homogeneous, which is – it really isn’t.
    0:38:27 So each animal species have their own – we have our own adaptations and each animal – all the other animal species that we surround ourselves with do as well.
    0:38:40 So I don’t know if that really answers your question, but I tend to – so the work I do is to sort of try to help animals live better lives with humans.
    0:38:58 And that very often starts with understanding how that animal species would live in the wild and the type of life that they have, whether they’re a predator, whether they’re a prey animal species, how they process the world, the type of information that they take in.
    0:39:10 So for instance, we might see a dog who’s wagging his tail, and we might think that it’s only happy dogs that wag their tails, but actually tail wagging is seen in many different contexts.
    0:39:29 And we might think of it as a visual communication thing, but actually it could be that they’re dispersing scent that the tail wag will sort of – that scent will waft over to you so you can take in information about my current emotional state.
    0:39:30 They definitely have scent glands back there.
    0:39:31 Oh, yeah.
    0:39:31 Yeah.
    0:39:32 Interesting.
    0:39:35 So can we interpret dog wags of different types?
    0:39:36 Is there a way to do that?
    0:39:44 So one very interesting thing is that the dog wagging with a predominant left wag –
    0:39:44 Left for the dog?
    0:39:45 Left for the dog.
    0:39:47 So he’s wagging on the left-hand side of his body.
    0:39:48 Mm-hmm.
    0:39:50 Tends to be associated with negative emotional states.
    0:39:54 And on the right tends to be associated with positive emotional states.
    0:40:06 And the same – cats tend to look at the world from the left when in a negative emotional state and from the right when in a positive emotional state.
    0:40:11 So looking from the left, meaning the left eye slightly forward.
    0:40:11 Yeah.
    0:40:13 The head tilted, so the right eye –
    0:40:14 So taking in that information with this eye.
    0:40:15 So –
    0:40:16 If you’re scary –
    0:40:17 Some people are just listening.
    0:40:19 They’re not watching, so they can’t see this.
    0:40:27 So what Carolina is describing is if the head is turned slightly to the side, so the left eye is forward, that’s a negative –
    0:40:32 So they’re looking at the stimulus with their left eye if that stimulus is fear-inducing.
    0:40:38 And the opposite to the right-hand side if it’s more attractive to them or –
    0:40:38 Yeah.
    0:40:39 So this is lateralized.
    0:40:40 Interesting.
    0:40:47 And then the tail wag, you said a dog wagging on the left-hand side, more negative right-hand side and more positive.
    0:40:48 What about full sweeps?
    0:40:49 Yeah, full sweeps.
    0:41:02 And I don’t know the details here, but certainly the type of tail wag, whether it’s sort of very low and fast or whether it’s high and sort of stiff, will communicate different emotional states.
    0:41:08 Do you think that over time we learn these signals without realizing that we learn these signals?
    0:41:09 Yes, absolutely.
    0:41:14 Because we associate it with our dog being in a particular circumstance or behaving in a certain way?
    0:41:23 So studies have shown that we humans are actually – we learn to read dogs by exposure, even passive exposure, just living in an environment.
    0:41:35 And apparently, if we live in a culture where dogs live close with humans, we get better in reading dogs than in cultures where dogs don’t interact that much with humans.
    0:41:37 So there’s that.
    0:41:47 And there’s also this – the issue that we are typically better at reading gross body language than we are at reading facial expressions.
    0:41:57 Apparently, one of the reasons being that dogs move different facial muscles when they make emotional facial expressions.
    0:42:01 They move different muscles than what humans do.
    0:42:04 What can you tell us about the facial expressions of dogs?
    0:42:13 Well, there’s been some studies in the last couple of years that have looked at which muscles are moving when, in which contexts.
    0:42:23 So they’ll expose the dog to different types of stimuli and they’ll look at – they’ll film the dog and look at what muscles are twitching where.
    0:42:26 Where is the face moving in response to these stimuli?
    0:42:39 So those types of studies have found that, you know, when you – when a dog is exposed to, let’s say, thunder or fireworks sounds, they will show a certain facial configuration.
    0:42:47 When their owner returns home after not being seen for several hours, they will show a different facial configuration and so on.
    0:42:50 So it seems that they do show facial expressions.
    0:42:58 It’s just that some of those facial expressions are – it’s not the same muscles that we show in the corresponding emotional state.
    0:43:06 So that would, I think, bias us to misreading dogs’ facial expressions from that perspective.
    0:43:13 But then again, if we live with dogs, we start – we won’t observe just the facial expression.
    0:43:15 We will observe the entire dog.
    0:43:20 And we’re often better off reading their body language than we are reading their facial expression.
    0:43:25 Even though I think that studies also show that the face is where we look first.
    0:43:36 Which behaviors in dogs are maintained from interactions with other dogs when they interact with humans?
    0:43:47 For instance, if one is going to take a dog out on a walk and it’s familiar with the sound of the leash coming off the hook or something like that,
    0:43:55 it’s not uncommon for a dog to go into that long, full front leg stretch that people call down dog in yoga.
    0:44:01 And some people will say that’s a kind of remnant of the puppy play kind of stance.
    0:44:03 Again, people say this stuff.
    0:44:07 People are often self-appointed dog experts.
    0:44:08 This is kind of interesting.
    0:44:17 And I’ve learned this from researching it online that the various camps of quote-unquote dog experts disagree vehemently with each other.
    0:44:20 I mean they write to me saying, you know, they’re evil.
    0:44:22 This person is cruel.
    0:44:28 You know, they blame each other of animal cruelty for different training tools.
    0:44:29 We’ll talk about that a little bit later.
    0:44:37 But dogs will do this down dog type movement, whatever it means, with other dogs and they’ll do it with humans.
    0:44:41 Do you think it means the same thing in those two different contexts?
    0:44:43 Most probably does.
    0:44:48 That play bow that you’re describing is what’s referred to as a meta signal for play.
    0:44:52 So it’s typically shown in a play context.
    0:44:54 And I haven’t seen it described.
    0:44:55 But then again, I’m not a dog owner.
    0:45:00 But I haven’t seen it described in the context of let’s go for a walk.
    0:45:09 But certainly in the play context, as far as I know, dogs play a bit differently with humans than they do with other dogs.
    0:45:10 But they do enjoy playing with humans.
    0:45:26 And sometimes I think we humans have a hard time knowing whether what we’re seeing is play or aggression because there will be elements from the aggressive repertoire within a play bow.
    0:45:31 But typically what we can do then is look for what’s referred to as MARS, M-A-R-S.
    0:45:33 So M being the meta signals.
    0:45:34 So those play bows.
    0:45:40 Or in other species, it will be other behaviors that are sort of indicating that I want to play.
    0:45:45 I know chimpanzees have like 30 or 50 different meta signals for play.
    0:45:50 M-A-A is for activity shift.
    0:45:52 So we’ll see different behaviors.
    0:45:53 They might be chasing.
    0:45:54 They might be pouncing.
    0:45:58 They might be wrestling, biting each other.
    0:46:01 But you’ll see these activity shifts.
    0:46:05 And it’s not in the same order as it would be if they were truly fighting.
    0:46:10 M-A-R-R is for role reversals.
    0:46:25 So you’ll see that the dogs, if they’re of different sizes or different sort of stamina or how big they are or how competent fighters they are, would be, that they’ll take turns winning and losing.
    0:46:26 Yeah, I’ve seen that.
    0:46:29 Yeah, because it’s not fun playing if you lose all the time.
    0:46:33 So in order to keep playing, the bigger dog needs to lose sometimes.
    0:46:39 So they need to, in order to keep this interaction going, that’s the way to do that.
    0:46:42 And the last one, S, is self-handicap.
    0:46:45 So the larger dog will self-handicap themselves.
    0:46:50 You might see them doing a tug of war and the large dog is just standing there and holding the thing.
    0:46:53 And the small dog is like pulling and really trying to get the thing.
    0:46:56 And the big dog is just standing there doing nothing.
    0:47:05 But then if a human takes over the toy and starts pulling, then the big dog will engage and start showing more of his strength and escalate that behavior.
    0:47:10 That’s a beautiful thing when you see animals adjusting their level of kind of vigor in play.
    0:47:11 Yeah, yeah.
    0:47:12 So that the play can continue.
    0:47:13 It’s very sweet.
    0:47:18 I mean, it speaks to a bigger question, which is, do dogs have empathy?
    0:47:20 Oh, I think so.
    0:47:20 Absolutely.
    0:47:26 I can’t say I’ve seen any studies on it, but just, yeah.
    0:47:36 I mean, I think many dog owners are familiar with when we’re grieving, a dog will often come closer as opposed to moving further away.
    0:47:41 I mean, I’ve seen some incredible moments.
    0:47:43 You know, we interpret these things, right?
    0:47:44 We anthropomorphize.
    0:47:53 But I had someone in my home years ago who was grieving a death in her family and Costello came and, you know, put a paw on her knee.
    0:47:58 And it’s hard to not interpret that as a meaningful moment of empathy.
    0:48:00 Who knows what he was experiencing?
    0:48:03 Maybe he was experiencing distress for all I know.
    0:48:08 But the more pleasant interpretation is that he wanted to extend comfort.
    0:48:31 I think it makes sense from the evolutionary perspective that social animals who live in a cohesive social group are good at reading each other’s emotional state and also good at sort of trying to buffer negative emotions if it’s possible to do that.
    0:48:38 And so I would expect it with any of the sort of more cognitively advanced species.
    0:48:40 I would expect some type of empathy.
    0:48:44 I’d like to take a quick break and acknowledge our sponsor, AG1.
    0:48:48 AG1 is a vitamin-mineral probiotic drink that also contains adaptogens.
    0:48:54 I started taking AG1 way back in 2012, long before I even knew what a podcast was.
    0:49:05 I started taking it, and I still take it every single day because it ensures that I meet my quota for daily vitamins and minerals, and it helps make sure that I get enough prebiotics and probiotics to support my gut health.
    0:49:18 Over the past 10 years, gut health has emerged as something that we realize is important not only for the health of our digestion, but also for our immune system and for the production of neurotransmitters and neuromodulators, things like dopamine and serotonin.
    0:49:21 In other words, gut health is critical for proper brain function.
    0:49:33 Now, of course, I strive to eat healthy whole foods from unprocessed sources for the majority of my nutritional intake, but there are a number of things in AG1, including specific micronutrients, that are hard or impossible to get from whole foods.
    0:49:47 So, by taking AG1 daily, I get the vitamins and minerals that I need, along with the probiotics and prebiotics for gut health, and in turn, brain and immune system health, and the adaptogens and critical micronutrients that are essential for all organs and tissues of the body.
    0:49:59 So, anytime somebody asks me if they were to only take one supplement, what that supplement should be, I always say AG1, because AG1 supports so many different systems in the brain and body that relate to our mental health, physical health, and performance.
    0:50:05 If you’d like to try AG1, you can go to drinkAG1.com slash Huberman.
    0:50:14 For this month only, April 2025, AG1 is giving away a free one-month supply of omega-3 fish oil, along with a bottle of vitamin D3 plus K2.
    0:50:25 As I’ve highlighted before in this podcast, omega-3 fish oil and vitamin D3 plus K2 have been shown to help with everything from mood and brain health to heart health and healthy hormone production, and much more.
    0:50:35 Again, that’s drinkAG1.com slash Huberman to get the free one-month supply of omega-3 fish oil, plus a bottle of vitamin D3 plus K2 with your subscription.
    0:50:38 Today’s episode is also brought to us by Juve.
    0:50:41 Juve makes medical-grade red light therapy devices.
    0:50:48 Now, if there’s one thing that I have consistently emphasized on this podcast, it is the incredible impact that light can have on our biology.
    0:51:07 Now, in addition to sunlight, red light and near-infrared light sources have been shown to have positive effects on improving numerous aspects of cellular and organ health, including faster muscle recovery, improved skin health and wound healing, improvements in acne, reduced pain and inflammation, even mitochondrial function, and improving vision itself.
    0:51:20 What sets Juve lights apart and why they’re my preferred red light therapy device is that they use clinically proven wavelengths, meaning specific wavelengths of red light and near-infrared light in combination to trigger the optimal cellar adaptations.
    0:51:28 Personally, I use the Juve whole body panel about three to four times a week, and I use the Juve handheld light both at home and when I travel.
    0:51:34 If you’d like to try Juve, you can go to Juve, spelled J-O-O-V-V dot com slash Huberman.
    0:51:40 Juve is offering an exclusive discount to all Huberman Lab listeners with up to $400 off Juve products.
    0:51:47 Again, that’s Juve, spelled J-O-O-V-V dot com slash Huberman to get up to $400 off.
    0:52:08 I’ve always been delighted and curious about the fact that if two animals of the same species both receive food or a treat, it seems, I don’t know, but it seems that they are paying attention to how much treat the other is getting.
    0:52:26 And as a sibling, I have an older sister who I get along very well with and always have, but when we were kids, I’ll never forget, like, if there was a treat, like a milkshake or something, she would point out that she had slightly more than I did.
    0:52:35 If there was a slice of cake or something, it was as much as we would look at the slice of cake being served to us, we were looking to see how much the other one got.
    0:52:40 And this was a reflexive thing, and we’re not competitive in any dimension, really.
    0:52:47 We’ve always respected each other’s strengths and weaknesses in a way that’s very complementary.
    0:52:55 But when it comes to treats, humans and dogs pay a lot of attention to who’s getting what.
    0:52:56 Fairness, yeah.
    0:53:08 There was this experiment done on capuchin monkeys by Franz Duval and his team, and apparently they did it, and they published a paper on it, and nobody read it.
    0:53:21 And then, like a decade later, in preparation for a presentation, they redid some of the experiment and filmed it, and he shared that on the presentation.
    0:53:30 I don’t know if you’ve seen it, but essentially it’s two capuchin monkeys, and they’re next to one another so they can each see what the other is getting, and they’re asked to do a task.
    0:53:41 Like, the researcher hands them a rock, and they hand it back to the researcher, and then they get a reinforcer, so a treat as payment for that behavior.
    0:54:00 And so the first monkey gets a piece of cucumber, and he’s happy he eats that cucumber, and then the researcher turns towards the second monkey and requests the same behavior, gets the same behavior, and feeds that animal a grape.
    0:54:09 And capuchins are not too enthusiastic about cucumbers, but they really love grapes.
    0:54:24 So when she then turns back to the first monkey again and repeats the behavior and again feeds that one a cucumber that he was happy to eat, like, 30 seconds ago, he actually throws a tantrum and throws it back at the researcher, sort of going,
    0:54:40 I saw that you fed the other guy a grape, and the audience is laughing, so it’s like I think we all recognize that situation that we take affront to somebody else getting paid better for the same quality of work.
    0:54:50 Yeah, I’m always interested in these studies that every few years, something – I didn’t know that one, so thank you for sharing that – where there’s something about resource allocation that’s revealed.
    0:55:06 And then for every one of those, there will be a study that shows, for instance – and I’m not going to get the details right here – but that crows will teach each other ways to open boxes so that another one can get food,
    0:55:10 even if they don’t have access to that food, even if they don’t have access to that food, just – it seems like an act of altruism.
    0:55:13 So we’ll see fairness, we’ll see altruism.
    0:55:14 Oh, yes.
    0:55:24 A very different picture than this whole notion of dominance hierarchies in every member of a species is just trying to get the most that they possibly can, even at the expense of others.
    0:55:34 It’s beautiful in a way, and we, again, have to be careful not to anthropomorphize, to not assume that members of a species are doing this because they’re benevolent.
    0:55:36 That’s a nice – I like that interpretation.
    0:55:44 But maybe, as you pointed out before, that having a happy group makes for more happiness for oneself.
    0:55:45 Absolutely.
    0:55:49 I think if the group is doing well, then everybody is better off.
    0:55:57 So there’s – we used to think that there was just sort of individual selection, but there is a certain amount of group selection also.
    0:56:05 So the individual selection is stronger, but certainly if there’s a group that collaborates better, that will do better than the group that isn’t collaborating as well.
    0:56:07 And it’s interesting.
    0:56:10 You’ve mentioned a few times now the risk of anthropomorphism.
    0:56:22 And I think that if we look at that as a sort of continuum from anthropomorphism, which we might then define as, you know, thinking that animals are just the same as humans.
    0:56:27 It’s only just that they have some fur, so they’re a bit different, but more or less the same.
    0:56:32 And on the other side is what we might refer to as anthropo-denial.
    0:56:47 That was a term coined also by Franz Duval, the one with the Capuchin experiment, where we don’t recognize that, in fact, there are commonalities between humans and other animal species.
    0:56:57 And I think that we – in our sort of fear of anthropomorphism, we have fallen into anthropo-denial.
    0:57:03 And I think that the answer is probably somewhere in the middle, that we do share lots of commonalities with animals.
    0:57:21 I think that, for instance, even though our perception of the world might be really different, how we process that information and the types of emotional and mood responses, changes in mood that we get in response to the environment are very much the same,
    0:57:32 although it will be different stimuli that different animal species pay attention to that are more or less relevant to them, depending on which species it is.
    0:57:45 But I think that we’ve fallen into – we’ve so avoided this topic of anthropomorphism, we’ve been so afraid of it, that we’ve fallen into the other trap, which is sort of denying that they have anything to do with us.
    0:57:53 Let’s talk about a species that can be divisive, cats.
    0:57:53 Oh.
    0:57:57 My sister has cats, and I don’t mind them.
    0:58:01 I can’t say I gravitate toward them, but I don’t dislike them.
    0:58:01 Yeah.
    0:58:03 You do own a cat.
    0:58:03 Yep.
    0:58:05 And you’re an animal ethologist.
    0:58:06 Mm-hmm.
    0:58:11 Tell us about cats from the perspective of an animal ethologist.
    0:58:20 When you look at a cat, what are you looking for to tell you something about whether or not it’s a friendly cat?
    0:58:26 I mean, obviously, if its hair is standing up on its back and it’s arching and it’s hissing, that’s obvious.
    0:58:33 But what are you looking at in the context of the way that cats evolved and their species in general?
    0:58:51 So the common house cat that we have today as a pet evolved as a solitary hunter, but that aggregates in social groups, loose social groups.
    0:58:58 So they sort of hang out together, but it’s not this really cohesive group.
    0:59:02 And they hunt on their own, so they’ll eat on their own also.
    0:59:07 And me as an ethologist, what I tend to do when I look at an animal species is I look at three things.
    0:59:08 I look at their social environment.
    0:59:26 So typically with cats, I would then say that they, you know, they should, if they are raised well, so they’ve had the opportunity of spending enough time with mom, typically it should be up to 14 weeks, which I think that we see that in Sweden nowadays.
    0:59:44 I don’t know how it is here in the US, but that seems to be long enough for the animal to actually learn how to be a cat so that they don’t get too emotionally disturbed by the separation once we wean them and sort of put them in a new environment.
    0:59:50 So, so just looking at the social bit is one thing that I do, the first thing that I do.
    0:59:52 The second thing that I do is I look at how do they get food.
    0:59:55 So again, cats are solitary hunters.
    1:00:04 So I would look into ways of, and, and they, as opposed to dogs, cats typically retain the whole hunting sequence.
    1:00:15 Sometimes the killing bite isn’t quite there, but certainly the grab bite and the fact that some cats will, if there, it’s an outdoor cat that they might,
    1:00:34 bring their prey back home is to me, it’s simply, it’s not that they want to gift you with their, their, their kill, but rather that they feel safe in, so they’re simply bringing, bringing their, their prey to a place where they feel safe.
    1:00:35 So it’s not a gift.
    1:00:36 We can put that one to rest.
    1:00:39 I wouldn’t say, I would not call that a gift now.
    1:00:48 I had a girlfriend in graduate school and her cat would catch these very large mice and put them in our shoes at night.
    1:00:50 It was dreadful.
    1:00:55 Would the cat put them in the shoes or would the mice hide in the shoes?
    1:00:57 Well, they were dead when we found them.
    1:01:01 So I’m assuming that the cat would put them in the shoes.
    1:01:07 The cat also loved to retrieve tinfoil balls, little tinfoil balls.
    1:01:09 I’ve never seen a cat retrieve.
    1:01:10 Oh, yeah, yeah.
    1:01:10 At first I didn’t.
    1:01:11 You can learn that.
    1:01:12 I wasn’t too enthusiastic about the cat.
    1:01:15 And then I developed a really close relationship with it.
    1:01:17 At least from my side, I thought it was a close relationship.
    1:01:24 And he would catch mice, put them in our shoes at night while we slept.
    1:01:25 It was pretty unpleasant.
    1:01:26 You had to check your shoes in the morning.
    1:01:28 So those weren’t gifts.
    1:01:30 I would not assume that they were gifts.
    1:01:31 No, no.
    1:01:41 From what I know, cats will sort of bring back what they, what they catch to a place where they feel safe.
    1:01:44 And then they often lose interest if it’s not moving anymore.
    1:01:53 So, so, and if, obviously if, if your cat or that cat killed the mice, they had, that cat had progressed to the actual killing bite.
    1:01:54 Many cats don’t do that.
    1:01:55 They only have the grab bites.
    1:02:00 So they’ll, they’ll just let the, the little rhodod go to run off.
    1:02:00 I’ve seen that.
    1:02:02 Well, they’ll play with them, right, Dale?
    1:02:02 Yeah.
    1:02:13 So, so they’ll let it go and if the mouse is still, they can actually sort of escape attention because the animal, the cat might grow bored and walk away.
    1:02:20 But the moment they start moving it again, then they’re sort of restarting the whole predatory sequence again.
    1:02:26 But back to your question about how to interact with cats or whether, how to read them.
    1:02:34 So that would be the third thing that I’m looking at is how do the animal species in front of me, how do they respond to perceived threat?
    1:02:40 And I’m saying perceived threat here because sometimes we are well-intended.
    1:02:47 We’re like, hi, and we want to, we want to hug them because we’re primates and they really don’t like that.
    1:02:50 So, so they will respond to us as if we were a predator.
    1:03:03 And I think that, again, comes down very much to the types of interactions, social interactions, the type of learning that the, the animal has had when they’re really young.
    1:03:14 So, for instance, there’s a study showing that if you handle young kittens between the ages of like two and eight weeks for at least an hour a day.
    1:03:21 And, and when I say handle, I just mean that sort of interact with them and, and play and have them sort of on your lap and so on.
    1:03:24 They will become very social as adults.
    1:03:28 So they will be the type of cat that will jump up into your lap and fall asleep purring.
    1:03:41 If you interact with that young kitten less than like 15 minutes a day, they won’t be fearful of humans, but they’ll be more like walking up to you and saying hi and then walking away.
    1:03:43 The aloof cat.
    1:03:44 The aloof cat.
    1:03:44 Yeah.
    1:03:56 So, so I think the early life experiences can really shape the type of temperament, if you will, or how sort of vigorously animals respond to changes in the environment.
    1:04:04 What is this behavior of bumping, where the cat bumps its head against you or your arm?
    1:04:07 Is it to spread smell?
    1:04:09 Yeah, I would say that is scent marking.
    1:04:09 Yeah.
    1:04:13 So, and when they’re scent marking you, why are they scent marking?
    1:04:18 I would think that it’s, it’s like something you do in your group.
    1:04:23 You do mutual scent marking, which means that everybody in the group smells more or less the same.
    1:04:29 So it’s a, it’s a way of sort of greeting and incorporating the others in the group.
    1:04:36 So there’ll be a lot of scent exchange within this type of species living in a group.
    1:04:38 That would be my guess as to why they do that.
    1:04:41 So is scent marking about territory as well?
    1:04:45 Like if a cat, you know, scent marks in corners and…
    1:04:45 Oh yeah.
    1:04:53 They, but that’s a different, that’s typically not the, because they have like multiple scent glands in the face that are,
    1:05:01 and one of them is used to scent mark sort of the inner territory and this is where they feel really safe.
    1:05:07 And then they usually have this urine scent marking, which is in the out, sort of the outskirts of the territory.
    1:05:20 And you might see this if you, if for instance, you have an indoor cat and they start peeing and you bring out a piece of paper and a layout of your house or apartment,
    1:05:28 and you start sort of putting a little ring to where you find the pee, that will give you a lot of information.
    1:05:35 Because if it’s a territorial thing, it will typically be at the edges of sort of at the windows or doors.
    1:05:42 If it’s a, an elimination problem that the cat has sort of, maybe perhaps it hurts when he pees.
    1:05:46 So then he learns to associate pain with going in the box.
    1:05:51 And so the box starts representing painful experiences.
    1:05:53 So he’ll start going outside of the box.
    1:05:57 But that type of behavior will be seen in that context instead.
    1:05:58 Interesting.
    1:06:03 So if your cat is urinating inside, you now have a, an experiment to run.
    1:06:07 The use of a litter box is a pretty interesting one to me.
    1:06:09 It’s not one I spent a lot of time thinking about.
    1:06:13 But if you sort of step back and you say, okay, here’s this animal that we’ve domesticated.
    1:06:25 And it readily learns how to cover its waste, which is very different than a dog, which can be trained to withhold until you go out on a walk.
    1:06:28 That’s basically the two different strategies there.
    1:06:34 And I don’t know what it is if you own a monkey or something else.
    1:06:39 But what is it about the covering of waste behavior?
    1:06:41 Is that something in cats?
    1:06:43 Is that a natural behavior they do in the wild?
    1:06:47 And if they roam, why do they bother?
    1:06:58 Is it, and then sort of tacked to this is that with dogs, oftentimes after they eliminate waste, they’ll step away from it and kick dirt in the general direction.
    1:07:00 And I’ve heard it interpreted two ways.
    1:07:03 One is that they’re trying to spread scent and the other is that they’re trying to cover waste.
    1:07:11 So, again, this is why I was interested in talking to an animal ethologist as opposed to a pet behavioral trainer, right?
    1:07:21 I’m also interested in that, but I think we have to, again, acknowledge that much of the interpretation that we have about animals’ behavior is just human interpretation.
    1:07:21 Yeah, certainly.
    1:07:24 So, what is this covering of waste?
    1:07:27 Do we know what it’s for in the wild, in cats?
    1:07:32 The covering of waste is a way to sort of reduce the risk of infection.
    1:07:38 I would assume that they also don’t eliminate close to where they eat.
    1:07:47 So, if we have a cat in our house, we shouldn’t have the litter box next to the food, which I wish I had known when I had my first cat 20 years ago.
    1:07:51 She had that very set up with the food right next to the litter box.
    1:08:02 And I would also assume that the behavior of dogs when they sort of kick at their poop typically, right, not pee, that it’s a way of spreading scent.
    1:08:07 Because if it were covering scent, the behavior would look very different, I think.
    1:08:12 But I haven’t seen any sort of – any scientific study on that topic.
    1:08:13 Okay.
    1:08:18 So, cat owners take note, separate the food from the litter box by some distance.
    1:08:33 I was always somewhat surprised, although less so over time, how much determination and effort my bulldog would put into peeing on things, on walks.
    1:08:35 I feel like it was one of his great joys in life.
    1:08:38 There I go again, anthropomorphizing.
    1:08:46 But to smell something and then pee there, he seemed to have an endless supply of urine for this.
    1:08:48 It was really remarkable.
    1:08:49 Yeah.
    1:08:56 You know, as a scientist and someone who loves dogs and loved him, you know, more than words, I just was like, this is amazing.
    1:08:58 Like, he loves this behavior.
    1:08:58 Yeah.
    1:09:02 And he’s also reading the pee mail from the other dogs in the neighborhood.
    1:09:05 So, the urine tells a lot of information to the other animal.
    1:09:13 It tells what gender, what, you know, reproductive state, perhaps also something about the animal’s emotional state or mental state.
    1:09:18 So, I wouldn’t hesitate to say that that was one of the joys of life for dogs.
    1:09:21 That they – that’s – after all, that’s how they communicate.
    1:09:27 So, it’s – and they spend a lot of time doing it and they’re willing to work to get access to that opportunity.
    1:09:34 So, absolutely, I would think that it gives them positive emotional experiences doing that.
    1:09:44 So, there’s some innate drive in dogs, it seems, to read the emotional and hormonal states of other dogs that have been there.
    1:09:47 To me, it felt like their form of social media.
    1:09:47 Yeah, yeah.
    1:09:49 Like, I’m going to post here.
    1:09:50 What are other people posting here?
    1:09:51 What’s going on?
    1:09:52 Yeah, yeah.
    1:09:56 I mean, clearly, there’s some brain real estate devoted to this behavior.
    1:09:58 I’m not being facetious.
    1:10:05 Because, I mean, I look at – you know, you get a human brain, 40 percent of that real estate is for vision.
    1:10:11 Another 40 percent, it’s mixed in there with other stuff, is for motor behavior.
    1:10:15 We have neural real estate for smelling and certainly for touch.
    1:10:34 But even if you’re a massage therapist or you do, you know, touch-based work, even if you’re a braille reader, the amount of neural real estate for these other things is vastly larger, except for the blind person where the visual stuff is taken over by the tactile stuff and auditory.
    1:10:37 So, amount of real estate correlates.
    1:10:43 So, when I see a behavior that’s like, this is what – this is one of the main things dogs do.
    1:10:43 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
    1:10:44 Yeah.
    1:10:45 It’s pretty striking.
    1:10:45 Yeah.
    1:10:49 So, dogs descended from – they were domesticated from wolves correctly.
    1:10:52 Did that happen at independent locations around the earth?
    1:10:54 Don’t really know the answer to that question.
    1:10:57 But it seems that they domesticated themselves.
    1:11:13 That it was sort of wolves that started hanging out next to human habitation and that it was sort of the least fearful and the sort of most explorative wolves that dared do this.
    1:11:18 So, it wasn’t that we caught wolves and said, aha, I’m going to breed you now.
    1:11:24 But it was rather that – it was like a symbiotic relationship that developed over time.
    1:11:25 Interesting.
    1:11:33 I don’t know of any other species that does that except maybe like certain fish or dolphins that follow fishing boats so they can get some of the catch.
    1:11:43 But that’s different because, you know, I see these Instagram videos of like an otter jumping on a kayak and there’s some interaction that’s regular.
    1:11:45 You know, that the person goes out on their kayak.
    1:11:47 They interact with this otter.
    1:11:48 So, animals will do this.
    1:11:55 But usually there’s some sort of food – it just sounds like food payoff and safety is really the key.
    1:12:01 Does that mean that animals at a very basic level are looking to optimize food intake and safety?
    1:12:03 And what does that tell us about zoos?
    1:12:13 I personally have a pretty strong visceral reaction to zoos that have large carnivores.
    1:12:16 I realize we could have a discussion about elephants too.
    1:12:21 But I feel like large carnivores housed in zoos creates some issues for me.
    1:12:23 I won’t go into what this is.
    1:12:31 But I’m also hearing that zoos have positive breeding programs, endangered species protection programs.
    1:12:34 What’s your take on zoos?
    1:12:37 When we talk about zoos, it’s perhaps good to talk about the evolution of zoos.
    1:12:43 Because back in the day, like 150 years ago, it used to be more or less a menagerie.
    1:12:46 You know, here’s a lion and here’s an elephant and here’s a zebra.
    1:12:49 And they were in little small cages.
    1:12:52 And the only thing that you did was see the animal, really.
    1:13:00 Zoos today tend to have the purpose of doing a lot of conservation work.
    1:13:10 So there’s what’s referred to as in-situ conservation, where you work to preserve wild habitats and creating national parks, etc.
    1:13:16 And sort of giving the opportunities for reintroduction of species and so on.
    1:13:25 And there’s ex-situ conservation, which is then housing those animal species that are threatened with extinction in an environment.
    1:13:35 And ideally, that environment should then be good enough to promote species-typical behavior and so on.
    1:13:39 So I’m, I mean, I’m conflicted.
    1:13:47 I think that many zoos are sort of doing a lot of, a lot of good in, in, in this effort and also educating the public.
    1:14:01 And many, I think that many people who go to zoos, that might awaken in them an interest in animals, which I think is a good thing that we, that we care about animals.
    1:14:07 But also that sometimes the housing isn’t optimal.
    1:14:13 And certainly some species are a lot more difficult to keep in captivity compared to others.
    1:14:20 So polar bears are really difficult to keep because they’re, they’re, they’re ranging carnivores.
    1:14:23 They walk miles and miles and miles.
    1:14:38 And it’s really difficult to, to provide those species-specific opportunities in captivity compared to other carnivores who have more of a, a different type of approach to, to predation.
    1:14:54 One of the things that really turned me on to just how more sophisticated cat species are than I ever assumed was something that happened when I was a postdoc at, also at Stanford.
    1:14:56 I was a member of the San Francisco Zoo.
    1:15:05 The San Francisco Zoo is an outdoor zoo by comparison to most other zoos I’ve been to, and I haven’t been to that many, but it’s a pretty nice landscape.
    1:15:13 There’s an outdoor lemur, I call it an exhibit, but you know, indoor, outdoor lemur thing.
    1:15:14 That’s really amazing.
    1:15:16 There’s some giraffes, all this.
    1:15:22 Well, around the time I was in, when I was a postdoc, I was briefly tell this story.
    1:15:27 I was at the movies in San Francisco and I, I stepped out to get something to drink.
    1:15:32 And the, the kid behind the counter said that a tiger escaped from the San Francisco Zoo and is killing people.
    1:15:36 And I thought, what, like, that’s crazy.
    1:15:38 It turns out that was only partially true.
    1:15:46 What had happened is there was a tiger there, Tatiana, who, they used to have these moats around the tiger enclosure.
    1:15:48 And it was very close to Christmas.
    1:15:49 People can look this up and get the details.
    1:15:56 And there were a couple of kids who were throwing either pine cones or, or throwing something at the tigers.
    1:15:57 Okay.
    1:15:59 The zoo was near shutting down.
    1:16:04 Tatiana either ran up or jumped the moat.
    1:16:06 I don’t know how she did it.
    1:16:10 Got out and moved through the crowd.
    1:16:13 This is the, to me, the interesting part.
    1:16:17 Moved through the crowd, completely ignoring most of the people that were around.
    1:16:20 Centered in on and killed one of the kids.
    1:16:22 Then moved to the second kid.
    1:16:26 Worked him pretty well.
    1:16:28 The authorities showed up.
    1:16:30 Killed Tatiana.
    1:16:35 This opened up a whole discussion in the zoo community.
    1:16:42 Raised a lot of, kind of, complicated questions about enclosures, et cetera.
    1:16:44 The enclosures there, by the way, now are very different.
    1:16:46 They have these high glass as well.
    1:16:49 And, of course, the ending was sad for everybody.
    1:16:52 I took a break from my membership there.
    1:16:54 I reactivated it a few years later.
    1:16:57 They know, I don’t, that tiger, you know, obviously is gone.
    1:17:02 But I still am conflicted about this whole picture.
    1:17:06 What’s interesting to me is the intentionality of the tiger.
    1:17:11 So this was not a bloodthirsty tiger that just wanted to kill humans or eat humans.
    1:17:16 It was those two humans that pissed her off and those two humans were going to pay.
    1:17:17 And they paid.
    1:17:22 The family sued the zoo and then it was a whole thing.
    1:17:25 I don’t know how it ended up with the lawsuit.
    1:17:25 But it was a whole thing.
    1:17:27 So people can look this up online.
    1:17:36 When you hear that, that a tiger did that, as opposed to just going into a frenzy the way
    1:17:41 humans sometimes go into a frenzy, attacking whoever and as many people as possible.
    1:17:42 What do you think?
    1:17:46 What does it tell us about tigers and their consciousness?
    1:17:50 I think we often don’t give animals enough credit.
    1:18:01 To me, it’s not surprising that she experienced something really unpleasant that she came to
    1:18:10 associate with two individuals and that generated a negative emotional state and aggressive behavior
    1:18:15 that she then carried out, directed towards those two people.
    1:18:18 Does it surprise you how directed it was?
    1:18:18 No.
    1:18:25 As opposed to just, I mean, there were plenty of people around that were an easier kill.
    1:18:30 I would think that a fearful animal might lash out at anyone.
    1:18:37 But an animal that is angry tends to be more premeditated in a way.
    1:18:39 Calculate it in a way.
    1:18:45 So I would expect that if you had scared the tiger, she might show defensive aggression,
    1:18:48 which is just lashing out at whoever is closest.
    1:18:51 But this was offensive aggression.
    1:18:54 And so that is premeditated.
    1:18:58 I’d like to take a quick break and acknowledge one of our sponsors, Function.
    1:19:03 Last year, I became a Function member after searching for the most comprehensive approach
    1:19:03 to lab testing.
    1:19:09 Function provides over 100 advanced lab tests that give you a key snapshot of your entire
    1:19:10 bodily health.
    1:19:15 This snapshot offers you with insights on your heart health, hormone health, immune functioning,
    1:19:17 nutrient levels, and much more.
    1:19:22 They’ve also recently added tests for toxins such as BPA exposure from harmful plastics and
    1:19:24 tests for PFASs or forever chemicals.
    1:19:29 Function not only provides testing of over 100 biomarkers key to your physical and mental
    1:19:34 health, but it also analyzes these results and provides insights from top doctors who are
    1:19:36 expert in the relevant areas.
    1:19:40 For example, in one of my first tests with Function, I learned that I had elevated levels
    1:19:41 of mercury in my blood.
    1:19:46 Function not only helped me detect that, but offered insights into how best to reduce my mercury
    1:19:48 levels, which included limiting my tuna consumption.
    1:19:52 I’d been eating a lot of tuna while also making an effort to eat more leafy.
    1:19:57 greens and supplementing with NAC and acetylcysteine, both of which can support glutathione production
    1:19:58 and detoxification.
    1:20:02 And I should say, by taking a second Function test, that approach worked.
    1:20:04 Comprehensive blood testing is vitally important.
    1:20:09 There’s so many things related to your mental and physical health that can only be detected
    1:20:10 in a blood test.
    1:20:13 The problem is blood testing has always been very expensive and complicated.
    1:20:18 In contrast, I’ve been super impressed by Function’s simplicity and at the level of cost.
    1:20:19 It is very affordable.
    1:20:24 As a consequence, I decided to join their scientific advisory board, and I’m thrilled that they’re
    1:20:25 sponsoring the podcast.
    1:20:29 If you’d like to try Function, you can go to functionhealth.com slash Huberman.
    1:20:35 Function currently has a wait list of over 250,000 people, but they’re offering early access to
    1:20:36 Huberman podcast listeners.
    1:20:42 Again, that’s functionhealth.com slash Huberman to get early access to Function.
    1:20:50 Can we talk a little bit about the prey and stalking and capture and killing sequence?
    1:20:58 One of the things that I’ve always been fascinated by is when a, let’s just use a cat as an example,
    1:21:05 could be large cat, could be small cat, is in its stalking mode that it essentially gets one
    1:21:11 ballistic strike opportunity before the chase is on or the animal gets away or it gets caught, right?
    1:21:21 And we’ll see the, we had a cat when I was a kid that would like stalk and, you know,
    1:21:23 so obviously like creep up.
    1:21:30 And then right before it would leap at the prey, it would start shattering its teeth.
    1:21:35 I’m assuming that was behavioral suppression or something leaking through.
    1:21:40 What’s going on when, when a animal does that very deliberate stalking, that calculation
    1:21:45 and the like teeth chatters or like twitching is starting to occur.
    1:21:45 What is that?
    1:21:52 My guess would be perhaps some sort of, sort of displacement behavior that there’s motivation
    1:21:56 to move on in the sequence of behaviors to the next behavior, but it’s not quite time yet.
    1:22:02 And so that sort of activation then gets an outlet through that behavior, but I really
    1:22:02 don’t know.
    1:22:02 I don’t know.
    1:22:03 I haven’t seen this discussed.
    1:22:06 So it’s almost like a, like a hydraulic pressure or something.
    1:22:07 Maybe.
    1:22:07 Yeah.
    1:22:08 Interesting.
    1:22:09 Interesting.
    1:22:11 We’ve talked about dogs.
    1:22:13 We’ve talked about cats.
    1:22:15 Let’s talk about birds.
    1:22:15 Okay.
    1:22:17 I had parrots when I was a kid.
    1:22:22 They were domestically bred, little gray cheek dwarf parrots.
    1:22:23 It didn’t turn out poorly.
    1:22:24 It didn’t turn out great.
    1:22:29 They were, um, I didn’t clip their wings cause I couldn’t bring myself to.
    1:22:34 And they flew around my room a lot and shit around the room a lot and threw a lot of food
    1:22:35 on the ground a lot.
    1:22:39 And eventually made sense to give them to somebody who had a, an aviary.
    1:22:42 Um, parrots are smart.
    1:22:42 Yeah.
    1:22:43 Yeah.
    1:22:45 What are parrots thinking about?
    1:22:49 I think what, what all animals are thinking about, where their next meal is coming, come
    1:22:53 going to come from, uh, social interactions and whether there’s any threat anywhere.
    1:22:57 Is that really their, like 90% of their conscious life?
    1:23:04 I would say, I would say that, um, uh, if the animal doesn’t feel safe, then it’s very
    1:23:08 hard to engage the animal in any type of sort of view.
    1:23:12 If an animal is fearful and you try to feed them, they often won’t take food, for instance.
    1:23:18 So the sense of safety has a very high priority because if you don’t feel safe, you could die
    1:23:18 essentially.
    1:23:23 So if you’re in a situation where you don’t feel safe, it’s because that situation is potentially
    1:23:23 dangerous.
    1:23:27 There could be predators around and then you must focus your attention on those predators
    1:23:30 because otherwise you’re going to die.
    1:23:36 And that of course depends on the species, but some species are sort of aggregate in big
    1:23:41 flocks if we’re talking birds and some are, um, pair bonding species.
    1:23:49 But the social environment is really important, both with regards to, uh, uh, you know, um,
    1:23:50 parenting behavior.
    1:23:54 So sexual behavior, parenting behavior, raising young and so on.
    1:23:58 All of that also has high priority because it’s essentially about, um, furthering your
    1:24:00 genes into the next generation.
    1:24:04 Um, and then, uh, and then foraging behaviors.
    1:24:06 Where am I going to get my next meal?
    1:24:07 We feed them on a plate.
    1:24:10 We’re thinking like, we, we think that we’re doing them a service.
    1:24:12 Like here’s, here’s your food on the plate.
    1:24:13 You don’t have to do anything.
    1:24:20 But they come equipped to actually show their food getting repertoire of behaviors.
    1:24:25 So typically if we don’t allow them to show those behaviors, we might see some problem behaviors
    1:24:33 popping up instead because they will redirect that, that energy, that intention into, I don’t
    1:24:33 know.
    1:24:38 Did you have any problems with the animals, sort of, the birds, you know, ripping your
    1:24:40 carpet or, or doing something?
    1:24:40 Oh, they destroyed everything.
    1:24:46 I mean, they destroyed, I mean, that they took great pleasure in ripping everything.
    1:24:48 Books, books, covers, yeah.
    1:24:51 So I would, I would think that is like, like foraging behavior directed towards the wrong
    1:24:52 thing.
    1:24:52 Mm-hmm.
    1:24:52 Yeah.
    1:24:55 I don’t recommend anyone own parrots, frankly.
    1:24:57 That was an experiment gone wrong.
    1:24:59 Uh, luckily they’re, I think they’re still alive.
    1:25:00 They live a very long time.
    1:25:00 Oh.
    1:25:04 And people can look up the Ecuadorian gray cheek, uh, dwarf parrots.
    1:25:08 They have this beautiful, um, orange under their wings.
    1:25:11 They have little gray cheeks and they, they were called pocket parrots.
    1:25:16 Uh, you know, the, the, the excitement for me at that, I was young, I was probably 11, was
    1:25:18 that I’d be able to like carry them around in my pocket.
    1:25:20 They didn’t want to do that at all.
    1:25:20 Yeah.
    1:25:27 Um, anyway, um, it’s interesting to think about this need for animals to express their natural
    1:25:29 repertoire of behaviors.
    1:25:34 For dog owners, um, I think the, the common practice is to, you know, put out a bowl of
    1:25:34 food.
    1:25:39 Uh, would we be better off bringing the food to a park and, and going to the park and then
    1:25:40 having them eat there?
    1:25:48 Um, or somehow incorporating the, the, the roaming and, and, um, prey seeking, uh, behavior.
    1:25:53 I mean, how would one incorporate that into a more, uh, pleasant experience for, for the
    1:25:53 dog?
    1:25:56 Because what you’re saying makes total sense that they need to express these behaviors.
    1:26:01 They’re not, if they’re, if they can’t, um, they’re, it’s going to come out some other
    1:26:03 way and maybe the destructive to them or the environment.
    1:26:03 Yeah.
    1:26:09 Essentially, I think that for dog owners, that what we can do is we can try to promote the
    1:26:14 different aspects of the predatory sequence that, that particular dog in front of us enjoys
    1:26:21 doing, uh, I, I mentioned nose work as being one of the things that, that many dogs really
    1:26:21 enjoy.
    1:26:27 And interestingly, and this is, this is just sort of the early days of scientific studies
    1:26:32 on the effects of nose work, uh, are really promising that, that one of the effects of nose
    1:26:32 work seems to be.
    1:26:37 So if you, if you’re not familiar with it, it’s essentially that the animal has learned
    1:26:41 that he needs to find a specific scent in an area.
    1:26:46 And so he sniffs the area, he roams the area and he follows the scent and he’ll, he’ll stop
    1:26:49 and mark when he finds the scent and then he gets a reinforcer.
    1:26:51 So he gets rewarded for, for doing that.
    1:26:53 So that’s, that’s essentially more or less a setup.
    1:27:00 And it seems that it helps regulate arousal so that animals who are sort of highly strong
    1:27:07 and almost, uh, um, have generalized anxiety get calmed down and the ones that are sort
    1:27:16 of, uh, semi-depressed get, um, sort of, uh, more, um, more enthusiastic about life.
    1:27:21 And, and also, and, um, if we’re back in core effect space, again, we have this shift to the
    1:27:23 right-hand side of the core effect space.
    1:27:25 So we have positive valence associated with that.
    1:27:32 Uh, and it seems really interesting, um, early days still, because this, this, um, dog sport
    1:27:36 is like just, I don’t know, 15 years old or something.
    1:27:37 It’s not very, not very old.
    1:27:43 So essentially what we can do is we can, um, every dog could do nose work.
    1:27:48 I think that would be an interesting sort of an, an outlet for that very first part of the
    1:27:49 behavior sequence.
    1:27:58 And then I know that some, some, um, um, trainers are working specifically to, to help dogs who
    1:28:00 chase wildlife, for instance.
    1:28:07 And it’s about teaching the dog to stay in the first parts of the predatory sequence, to
    1:28:14 do the sniffing, the, the, uh, the pointing and the, um, the eyeing behavior.
    1:28:19 And then getting reinforced for that so many times so that it becomes like a feedback loop
    1:28:24 that they, they see a, they see a deer running across the road and they go, mom, I saw a deer.
    1:28:26 And then they get reinforced for that.
    1:28:32 So, and other dogs like greyhounds love chasing that you allow them to do that.
    1:28:40 And then, uh, other dogs that really allow sort of, uh, um, that really enjoy, uh, carrying things
    1:28:42 that you allow them to do that.
    1:28:48 And then give your poodle, uh, an old, um, something to rip apart, you know.
    1:28:50 Is that what poodles like to do?
    1:28:51 Disembowel things.
    1:28:51 Yeah.
    1:28:55 Poodles like to, to, to kill and to, to, to, to, to, the post kill ripping apart.
    1:28:55 Yeah.
    1:28:56 Ripping apart.
    1:29:01 Gosh, the, the name and the look of a poodle suggests a much, a much more docile animal.
    1:29:03 So they really like to rip bodies apart.
    1:29:03 Yeah.
    1:29:04 As far as I understand.
    1:29:05 Yes.
    1:29:06 That makes sense.
    1:29:08 Um, given what I understand about the dosing of different genes.
    1:29:13 And then also I would, you know, rather than serving food on the plate, you might try scatter
    1:29:14 feeding.
    1:29:19 So just, uh, or, or feeding it in a way that the animal actually has to work for it.
    1:29:23 So do some behavior, like, um, one of these snuffle mats, you hide the food in there.
    1:29:29 So they have to actually spend some time looking for the food before consuming it.
    1:29:33 Because otherwise, if you serve it in a bowl, the animal, some animals simply, you know, they
    1:29:34 inhale it.
    1:29:36 It takes like 30 seconds and they’re done.
    1:29:37 Costello ate like a seagull.
    1:29:38 Yeah.
    1:29:39 Yeah.
    1:29:39 Really?
    1:29:40 He wouldn’t chew his food.
    1:29:40 Yeah.
    1:29:41 It’s interesting.
    1:29:48 The, um, the, the dog food, uh, training, uh, animal health world sells lots of things
    1:29:51 where you can put food inside of an object where they have to really work hard at it.
    1:29:52 Yeah.
    1:29:58 I had mixed, uh, you know, sort of mixed results with that because I, I, I have heard that in
    1:30:05 addition to exercise and wanting your proximity that animals, dogs in particular, perhaps really
    1:30:12 need that cognitive work that they, they get bored and they really need the challenge of,
    1:30:17 of working their mind so much so that on rainy days when you like, if weather’s really bad
    1:30:22 and you can’t go out, that they need an immense amount of kind of like search and forage type
    1:30:23 behavior.
    1:30:25 So I would, I, I strive to do that.
    1:30:29 Um, and I know some people might hear this and just think, this is crazy.
    1:30:32 Like my dog just wants to curl up at my feet and it just wants to fetch the ball, but that’s
    1:30:33 for fetching breeds.
    1:30:39 If I threw a, a, a ball to Costello, he would go to it and then just sit on top of it.
    1:30:43 He had no interest whatsoever in doing anything with that in terms of retrieving it,
    1:30:47 but he loved to just love to tug.
    1:30:51 So just, you know, if I tied a, a rope to a tree, for instance, he would jump on, on there
    1:30:56 and hold on and I could swing him by his body weight, you know, 90 pounds and he’d stay up
    1:30:58 there for 10 minutes.
    1:31:02 Like the, the pleasure of chewing was clearly the strongest innate drive.
    1:31:07 So I think what I’m realizing is that understanding the sequence of natural behaviors, but also
    1:31:10 where in that sequence a particular breed really leans to.
    1:31:11 Absolutely.
    1:31:11 Yeah.
    1:31:16 So sometimes it can be hard to know where your dog is on that scale, especially if it’s like
    1:31:17 a mixed breed of some type.
    1:31:22 And then you can often actually just look at the confirmation of the dog.
    1:31:30 So those very lean, I’m thinking greyhound now, the, the lean dog with, with not much muscle
    1:31:39 and very pointy snout tends to be the chasers and the, the ones with more muscles, front muscles
    1:31:44 and, and bigger jaws tend to be the, the ones that rip things apart.
    1:31:46 Bulldogs, Rottweilers, Mastiffs.
    1:31:51 And some of the smaller ones, the pugs, the French bulldogs, I think people don’t appreciate
    1:31:56 how the, the breeding down because people now, you know, a lot of people have dogs who
    1:31:58 live in apartments, you know, smaller dogs.
    1:32:03 Although there’s this weird thing, you know, you talk to a vet, I have a family member who’s
    1:32:05 a vet, you say, what’s a great like apartment dog?
    1:32:09 And they’ll say great Dane because they don’t need a ton of space to roam, but you have to
    1:32:14 walk them, but they don’t need long walks compared to like a little terrier sometimes needs
    1:32:15 to just go, go, go, go, go.
    1:32:17 I mean, needs two hours or more of activity.
    1:32:21 I think you need to pay a lot of attention to the type of life that you’re going to offer,
    1:32:27 whether it’s, you know, living in an apartment in a busy city or whether it’s, you know, you’re
    1:32:33 on a farm somewhere, which, which breed of dog is going to adapt best to that lifestyle.
    1:32:35 Do you think dogs like cities?
    1:32:43 I think many dogs get very stressed in cities because of the constant bombardment of sensory
    1:32:45 information.
    1:32:46 So there’s noise, there’s dogs.
    1:32:51 So if you’re out walking on the street, there’s constantly meeting strangers.
    1:32:56 And for many animal species, meeting strangers, A, doesn’t happen very often.
    1:33:03 And B, causes an increase in arousal because it could be, you know, a friend or foe.
    1:33:06 It could be some, someone that you want to fight with.
    1:33:08 It could be someone you want to have sex with.
    1:33:10 You need to assess the situation.
    1:33:16 And I think that dogs are quite unique in that respect and that they have a high tolerance
    1:33:19 for strangers because many other animal species do not.
    1:33:26 And I think that we tend to forget that sometimes that we introduce animals to animals that they
    1:33:26 don’t know.
    1:33:28 We expect them to get along and they don’t.
    1:33:32 That type of introduction needs to be done really carefully.
    1:33:38 Typically, we might start with just exchanging scents.
    1:33:44 So if you have one cat and want to get a second cat, for instance, they typically won’t just
    1:33:46 accept the other the way that two dogs might do, for instance.
    1:33:51 So then you might have them in different rooms and you might rub one cat with one towel and
    1:33:54 rub the other cat with another towel and then exchange towels.
    1:34:01 And then you might want to gradually incorporate other sensory modalities, too, so that they’ll
    1:34:02 start hearing each other.
    1:34:04 And finally, that they start seeing each other.
    1:34:08 And then at the end, the tactile, so the actual physical contact.
    1:34:12 And if you do it that way, you reduce the risk that they’ll actually start fighting when
    1:34:13 you do the introduction.
    1:34:17 Because if you just put them together, they might just escalate to aggression right away.
    1:34:25 But if you do it gradually, that exchange of information will help them sort of figure out
    1:34:27 who the other is and reduce the risk of aggression.
    1:34:33 One thing I’ve always been fascinated by, and there’s a little bit of data starting to emerge
    1:34:39 on this as to what the mechanisms might be, is self versus other species recognition.
    1:34:47 Most notably that dogs, unless it’s a dominance behavior, don’t try to mate with cats.
    1:34:50 For instance, they might hump, but that’s a separate thing.
    1:34:51 They’re actually separate circuits.
    1:34:57 My colleague, David Anderson at Caltech, did a really beautiful study.
    1:35:02 Can I just, the takeaway shows that there are separate circuits in the brain for mounting
    1:35:05 behavior for sex versus mounting behavior for dominance.
    1:35:05 Oh, interesting.
    1:35:11 And the mounting behavior for dominance circuits exist in males and females of a species where
    1:35:13 only the male mounts for purposes of reproduction.
    1:35:19 So this notion of mounting as a dominance behavior is a very real thing, even in mice.
    1:35:27 In any case, setting mounting for dominance behavior aside, aka humping, it’s remarkable.
    1:35:29 Like a horse doesn’t try and mate with a dog.
    1:35:33 Different species of animals seem to know self versus other.
    1:35:38 They don’t have to learn it from their mom or dad or us.
    1:35:39 It’s innate.
    1:35:52 For most species, there’s actually a few exceptions being what comes to mind is certain waterfowl birds
    1:36:00 where female, and I can’t say which species now, but some species of water bird.
    1:36:10 The female recognizes the male innately, but the male learns through sexual imprinting when
    1:36:17 they’re young to sort of be attracted to females that resemble the female that reared them.
    1:36:23 And essentially, this is because in those species, the males are typically very ornamented
    1:36:27 and sort of really fabulous looking, and the females are cryptic.
    1:36:28 They’re like camouflaged.
    1:36:32 So they’re like brown.
    1:36:39 So the males need to learn what mom looks like, and when they grow up, they’ll start courting
    1:36:41 females that look like mom.
    1:36:48 And so if you raise such a male with the wrong species, they’ll start courting the wrong female.
    1:36:56 And of course, she won’t be interested because he doesn’t look like her golden standard of
    1:36:58 what a male of that species is supposed to look like.
    1:37:00 It’s so interesting.
    1:37:03 As a kid who had aquaria, you can tell I’ve had a lot of different animals.
    1:37:10 You know, I never successfully bred fish in captivity.
    1:37:15 I tried to breed cuttlefish in captivity in my lab.
    1:37:17 That didn’t work, although I successfully raised them.
    1:37:23 But I got really into freshwater discus for a while and tried very hard to get a breeding
    1:37:24 tank going.
    1:37:25 It’s very difficult.
    1:37:31 But occasionally, you know, someone in the aquarium community that I was a part of would
    1:37:35 succeed in getting, you know, breeding between discus fish.
    1:37:41 But you never, ever, ever see an instance of like a discus fish trying to fertilize the
    1:37:44 eggs of a different species of fish.
    1:37:45 They just know.
    1:37:46 Yeah.
    1:37:50 And it’s got to be for them odorant or presumably mixed sensory.
    1:37:55 It’s really a striking aspect of, even in, I have friends who study flies.
    1:38:03 So if they study Drosophila of one particular type, the one type of fruit fly will not try to
    1:38:05 mate with another type of fruit fly.
    1:38:08 And they look very similar to you and me.
    1:38:11 So there’s something really powerful there.
    1:38:17 Yeah, I think that sort of there’s inbreeding avoidance is sort of a mechanism that prevents
    1:38:23 many animal species from mating with someone who’s too genetically similar to yourself since
    1:38:25 we get this inbreeding depression.
    1:38:31 But there’s also sort of don’t waste your time mating with someone that’s like you can’t
    1:38:33 even produce offspring.
    1:38:37 However, one other exception that came to mind was ungulates.
    1:38:47 Sometimes, and I have this memory of being, I was in Africa back in 1995 at the Chumfunji
    1:38:54 Wildlife Orphanage, walking chimps into the forest to sort of rehabilitate them.
    1:39:11 And they had a young diker there, which is a very small, like, yay, hi, antelope kind of thing, who had been orphaned and raised, bottle raised and sexually imprinted on humans.
    1:39:19 So he came up and started, you know, humping me, more or less thinking that I was his kind.
    1:39:29 So that type of sexual imprinting is when predominantly, I think, males learn, they imprint sexually on the type of individual that raised them.
    1:39:33 So that’s the type of individual that they will then later also try to court.
    1:39:51 I think Conrad Lawrence had also in his, one of his books, he described some sort of corvid species who he also raised from young and who started courting his, like, secretary or someone.
    1:40:08 And the interesting story there was the courting behavior in this bird is vomiting, you know, leaving like a present and offering food in any open surface or orifice.
    1:40:12 So he would try to sort of get her to open her mouth.
    1:40:16 And when she didn’t, he would go and leave the present in her ear instead.
    1:40:32 Disgusting, people can offset their disgust by, we’ll provide a link to the now very famous picture of Conrad Lorenz, who won the Nobel Prize, I believe, for his discoveries about imprinting where the geese would imprint on him.
    1:40:38 It’s him swimming in a lake with the trail of baby geese behind him, the goslings behind him.
    1:40:40 So that’s the other type of imprinting you’re talking about.
    1:40:41 That’s filial imprinting.
    1:40:42 So there are two types.
    1:40:52 There’s the sexual imprinting, where you learn who to mate with, and there’s the filial imprinting, where you sort of learn who to feel safe with, and they start following that individual.
    1:40:54 Which is what dogs do with us.
    1:41:00 Actually, I would say that dogs don’t imprint on humans.
    1:41:03 They grow attachment bonds to humans.
    1:41:04 What’s the difference?
    1:41:07 So imprinting is typically a very fast process.
    1:41:10 It occurs within, you know, minutes or hours.
    1:41:13 Attachment takes longer and involves more senses.
    1:41:15 So imprinting tends to be, I think, visual.
    1:41:16 If I’m not mistaken.
    1:41:18 Perhaps olfactory in some species.
    1:41:24 And attachment has previously mostly been studied in humans.
    1:41:29 So this bond that grows between caregiver and offspring.
    1:41:45 What’s interesting also is that attachment bond will grow in different ways, depending on how the caregiver responds to the young one’s needs, essentially.
    1:41:56 So you can have a secure attachment bond, where the caregiver is very reliably responds to the needs of the young one.
    1:42:04 So that if they find themselves alone, they can self-regulate better.
    1:42:14 So their nervous system can more easily calm down again after a stressor than if they are insecurely attached.
    1:42:21 And so it seems that dogs form, rather than imprinting on humans, they form a type of attachment bond.
    1:42:27 And they can also be securely or insecurely attached to their persons.
    1:42:48 That’s going to open up a whole set of ideas for people, because this whole notion of secure, insecure, and then the D-babies and the classic Bowlby experiments that we’ve talked about before on this podcast, where this kind of disorganized response is something that is thrown around a lot nowadays in dating culture, relationship, pop psychology culture.
    1:42:51 Like, are people, is he or she securely attached?
    1:42:52 Is he or she avoidant?
    1:42:54 Is he or she anxious attached?
    1:42:55 Guess what, folks?
    1:42:56 It’s also in your pets.
    1:42:59 So now you can start to get into that.
    1:43:09 In those classic experiments of Bowlby, just to summarize very briefly, mother and – it was typically mother, although other caretakers now have been tested, but mother and child are separated.
    1:43:14 There’s a predictable, understandable, and healthy anxiety response that occurs.
    1:43:21 If the conditions are right, the kid eventually comes to play and relax a bit.
    1:43:22 If the conditions aren’t right, they don’t.
    1:43:23 That’s all healthy.
    1:43:27 But the real test is on reunion with mom.
    1:43:27 Yeah.
    1:43:29 And also how they respond to a stranger.
    1:43:30 Right.
    1:43:31 The strange situation test.
    1:43:32 Yeah, the strange situation.
    1:43:36 Do they feel comforted, and how do they approach mom when mom comes back?
    1:43:38 Is it eager to see and relax?
    1:43:39 Is it uncertain?
    1:43:41 Is it avoidant?
    1:43:43 That’s what this test is about.
    1:43:44 Yeah, yeah.
    1:43:45 Or clingy also.
    1:43:46 Yeah.
    1:43:54 So the same types of experiments have been done on dogs, and it’s been found that certain dogs are sort of insecurely attached.
    1:44:00 They’ll be clingy or avoidant, and some are securely attached.
    1:44:03 So they’ll be sort of more explorative.
    1:44:07 They’ll recover quicker from the separation.
    1:44:08 So this is great.
    1:44:16 So if people drop off their dog at the dog sitter when they travel and then come back, the reunion tells you a lot about how that dog feels.
    1:44:33 Sadly, I think that – and I’m not sure that I have any backup in any scientific studies here, but I suspect at least that probably early weaning predispose dogs to insecure attachment.
    1:44:41 In this country, the typical idea is that puppies can be separated from their mother at about eight weeks.
    1:44:43 Do you feel that’s too early?
    1:45:00 Yeah, as an ethologist, sort of looking at how the species live in the wild, what type of social interactions they have, and how can we best provide an environment to sort of promote natural behavior, for me, eight weeks is way too early.
    1:45:20 So we have some studies from the, I don’t know, 60s or something, where I think two researchers called Scott and Fuller did some separation studies, but that was with dogs aged like three, four, five, six weeks, and they found that that type of early separation was really detrimental.
    1:45:21 Sure.
    1:45:37 But as far as I know, there’s been very few studies done beyond eight weeks, and of course, many people would then say that, okay, well, we have to do all that socialization stuff where the animal learns to sort of accept life with humans.
    1:45:44 So that would then have to occur at the breeders rather than in the new environment.
    1:46:00 But actually, I’m not so sure, because it seems that if you have secure attachment, you’re better able to self-regulate after, you know, being exposed to something that will dysregulate.
    1:46:12 So you have an event happening, you get anxious and sort of fearful, and that then your nervous system is able to calm down again.
    1:46:29 And so I think that if we are, if we simply allow dogs to have secure attachment, then perhaps the need for this, sometimes this socialization procedures are very elaborate.
    1:46:46 There’s like a list of 100 things that the dog needs to be exposed to, you know, men with beards and children aged 12 and people with shoes, you know, certain types of shoes and, you know, the vacuum cleaner and so on and so on.
    1:46:48 There’s a whole list of things that you need to expose an animal to.
    1:47:00 And I would think that if the animal is securely attached so that they have learned self-regulation, being exposed to those things will not be such a big deal.
    1:47:04 But I don’t think that we have the research to back up that assertion quite yet.
    1:47:17 I love this notion because we can’t prepare humans, including ourselves, or animals for every circumstance, but we can train up neural circuits.
    1:47:19 I’m a neurobiologist after all.
    1:47:25 And so I like to think of this more as opposed to preparing for events, you prepare for processes.
    1:47:32 So, you know, much has been said on this podcast and others about like deliberate cold exposure, you know, why take a cold shower?
    1:47:35 It’s not about the specific benefits of the cold shower.
    1:47:41 It teaches you how to navigate having high adrenaline in your body, which is the universal generic response to stress.
    1:47:47 So, you can export self-regulation from one situation to the other.
    1:47:55 What you’re describing is a much more important life stage example than deliberate cold exposure.
    1:48:02 It’s about, as you said, being able to navigate attachments that are there, then gone, then there again.
    1:48:04 This is one of my major concerns.
    1:48:12 We don’t want to go off on a tangent too far here, but since humans are animals, as you pointed out, about texting.
    1:48:16 You know, oftentimes texting can be a wonderful tool.
    1:48:21 It also can be a way that people don’t learn to ever deal with, to self-regulate.
    1:48:24 You see this as the plane lands or the planes taking off.
    1:48:29 People, you know, frantically texting, which can be about, hey, my plane just arrived.
    1:48:37 It can also be about an inability to just deal with the real-life uncertainty that you’re not in charge up there, the pilots and the weather conditions are.
    1:48:43 So, in any case, I have a probably controversial question.
    1:48:44 Okay.
    1:48:48 But we’ve opened up some Pandora’s boxes, so why not?
    1:48:52 I opted to neuter my dog.
    1:48:53 Yeah.
    1:48:55 I did that when he was about six months old.
    1:48:59 I did that, honestly, reluctantly.
    1:49:07 People say, well, you know, men with their dogs and they don’t want to neuter their dogs and it’s for these, you know, whatever, Y-chromosome-related reasons or something.
    1:49:07 Perhaps it is.
    1:49:15 But really the reason I was reluctant was, A, I thought I might want to breed Costello at some point.
    1:49:30 The other is I spent two years of my life studying and researching and eventually publishing papers on the effects of early androgens on – I had a minor role in that study, but effects of early androgens on brain development.
    1:49:43 And you don’t have to spend long in that field of hormones and development to know that hormones, testosterone and estrogen, have a powerful, powerful organizing effect on the brain of males and females.
    1:49:47 And that also occurs during adolescence.
    1:49:47 Right.
    1:49:52 And then there’s the surge of hormone that comes – so, right, it happens in utero.
    1:49:52 Yeah.
    1:49:52 And then –
    1:50:06 And then those are the organizing effects and then there are the activating effects, as you’re pointing out, of hormones that then during puberty, the ovaries in females or the testes in males, produce hormones that then act on this kind of template that was laid down.
    1:50:20 And so I knew that whatever testosterone, estrogen, et cetera, Costello had seen in utero, he’d seen, and that by removing his testicles – let’s be honest, what neutering is, all the men are cringing and the women are like, okay, got it.
    1:50:23 But if I said remove ovaries, they might have a different response.
    1:50:32 So by removing his testes, that he would not experience the activating effects of hormones.
    1:50:37 Okay, to make a long story short, it seemed he had a great life.
    1:50:39 He was a wonderful dog.
    1:50:42 When he got to be about nine years old, he had a lot of joint aching and pain.
    1:50:46 He had some extensive nail growth that was really, really fast.
    1:50:47 Some things were odd.
    1:50:56 I opted to do an experiment and I started injecting him with 50 milligrams of testosterone per week.
    1:50:59 The response was incredible.
    1:51:09 His vigor returned, his joint pain, at least in terms of his willingness to go down the stairs quickly, to stand up quickly, incredible.
    1:51:14 He got two more years of what I thought was a great life.
    1:51:16 I hope it was.
    1:51:25 And what’s interesting is that when I talked about this publicly on a few other podcasts, I injected my bulldog with testosterone after neutering him.
    1:51:30 I thought I was going to get a tsunami of criticism from the veterinary community.
    1:51:30 Okay.
    1:51:34 Instead, I received hundreds of emails saying, thank you.
    1:51:44 We actually actively discourage people from neutering their animals unless they’re in a circumstance where that dog can get out and mate because we don’t need more strays.
    1:51:51 And there are a number of health, positive health benefits to keeping hormones intact.
    1:51:51 Yeah.
    1:51:57 And I’m going to start doing what you did with some of my, with some of my patient dogs.
    1:51:58 Yeah.
    1:51:59 Not one vet.
    1:52:01 Mind you, I have no training as a vet.
    1:52:03 Not one vet said, hey, you were out of line doing that.
    1:52:05 You shouldn’t have been doing that.
    1:52:09 And I’ll tell you, if I get another dog and it’s a male dog, I’ll be very careful to not let him out.
    1:52:12 And I’ll be very careful with the training so he’s not excessively aggressive.
    1:52:15 But I’m not going to neuter him.
    1:52:16 Yeah.
    1:52:18 And I know this is going to activate some people.
    1:52:28 But I’d love your thoughts on neutering in male and female dogs in particular, given everything that you and I know about hormones and what we just talked about.
    1:52:28 Yeah.
    1:52:31 You’re touching on several different things that I think are interesting.
    1:52:33 One, that it’s very much a cultural phenomenon.
    1:52:39 That in Norway, I know that you’re not allowed to neuter dogs unless for medical reasons.
    1:52:39 Really?
    1:52:40 Yeah.
    1:52:48 And in Western Australia, you’re not allowed not to neuter dogs unless for medical reasons or if you want to breed them.
    1:52:55 So it’s like very cultural whether neutering is something that you do or not in any given location.
    1:52:56 That’s one.
    1:53:03 The second thing is that you said that neutering is about removing testicles.
    1:53:10 Actually, there’s other procedures that can be done, which is essentially just snipping the connection.
    1:53:19 So not removing testicles so that they continue producing all the stuff that they produce.
    1:53:25 But they can’t reproduce sexually.
    1:53:25 Yeah.
    1:53:26 Why don’t we just give them vasectomies?
    1:53:27 Yeah.
    1:53:28 So vasectomies.
    1:53:34 And for females, the corresponding procedure would then be to sort of whatever it is.
    1:53:35 Tie the tubes.
    1:53:35 Yeah.
    1:53:35 Tie the tubes.
    1:53:36 So to speak.
    1:53:36 Whatever it is.
    1:53:36 Yeah.
    1:53:41 And there’s also a third option, which is chemical castration.
    1:53:43 That’s reversible.
    1:53:51 That you can try to see what behavioral effects you get from a change of hormonal status.
    1:54:04 There’s also this interesting thing that the knowledge of the effects of castration or neutering has really changed a lot in the last 20 years or so.
    1:54:13 It used to be in the 1990s that it used to be recommended because they wouldn’t reproduce and there’d be less humping.
    1:54:22 And so it was sort of promoted with regards to certain behavioral changes.
    1:54:34 Later studies have shown, and there’s like more than 20 in the last 20 years or so, have shown that quite consistently that some of the effects of neutering might be, particularly in males, apparently.
    1:54:37 And it depends on the age at which this is done also.
    1:54:41 And it has to do with this, the activation process, of course.
    1:54:49 Is that you see an increase in fear, an increase in reactivity, aggressive behavior.
    1:54:58 You might see an increase in noise, sensitivity, and so on.
    1:55:09 So it seems that, as you were touching on, the change in hormonal status not only has this physiology, the physical effects on the body, but also behavioral effects.
    1:55:22 Now there’s also an increase in risk of certain cancers or certain physical problems and a decrease in others.
    1:55:32 So I would suggest that once you do get your other, your next dog, that you discuss with a veterinarian the best option for that particular breed and that particular individual.
    1:55:39 Because it’s going to be very breed specific, it’s gender specific, and it’s also the age at which these procedures are done.
    1:55:46 Okay, so to me it’s very interesting that in Norway, dogs are not allowed to be fixed except for medical reasons.
    1:55:50 In Australia, they have to be, at least in Western Australia.
    1:55:57 So this idea of keeping dogs intact, so to speak, is not such a heretical one.
    1:56:01 But I think in the United States, a lot of this is still getting worked out.
    1:56:09 And I think the statistics say that the number of people with pets in the home now in the United States is like almost every home.
    1:56:10 Yeah.
    1:56:13 I think it’s 40% of Americans own a dog.
    1:56:15 And I think in Norway, it’s like 15.
    1:56:32 So probably this ties in a lot to why the cultures have emerged so differently, because there’s a lot less sort of backyard breeding and so on, and feral populations in Scandinavia of dogs.
    1:56:40 So we don’t have this huge problem with overpopulation that you’ll see in some other countries.
    1:56:56 So, and I think that here, a lot of the neutering is done to control the population predominantly as a way to sort of try to reduce the number of animals that are going to shelters and so on.
    1:56:58 Well, certainly there are a lot of dogs in shelters now.
    1:57:01 During the pandemic, people were adopting them like crazy.
    1:57:04 So it was actually hard to get dogs and cats during that time.
    1:57:06 I don’t know what the state of things is now.
    1:57:07 Someone can put that in the comments.
    1:57:21 I really have one last category of questions, but it’s one that you’ve sort of touched on from various sides throughout today’s conversation, and that relates to humans as animals.
    1:57:39 You know, I don’t think one can be an animal ethologist or a neurobiologist for that matter, who, you know, reads papers and does studies on other animals without at some point stepping back and making this realization, like, we’re old world primates.
    1:57:46 We’re the best at technology development, you know, among all of the species.
    1:57:48 I mean, I don’t think that’s too much of a leap.
    1:57:56 We’re certainly not as good at natural camouflage, catching and killing things with our hands.
    1:57:57 We need tools to do this.
    1:57:58 So we have our strengths.
    1:58:01 We have our limitations with respect to the other species.
    1:58:16 Is there anything in your training as an animal ethologist that, you know, causes you to reflect on human beings as, you know, particularly, I don’t know, spectacular and particularly deficient in some way?
    1:58:22 Like, or just any kind of musings about the human species, because that’s a species we haven’t talked about today.
    1:58:38 But I think a lot of what you’re describing in terms of the breakdown of these sequence of behaviors, what makes us feel safe, you know, one can’t help but wonder, like, what are some aspects of ourselves that perhaps if we thought about a little bit more deeply, we could really benefit from?
    1:58:46 One thing that leaps to mind is the extent to which cultural learning occurs in humans.
    1:58:52 For other animal species, they learn from, you know, trial and error.
    1:58:54 If I do this, that happens.
    1:58:56 First that happens, then that other thing happens.
    1:59:03 So classical conditioning and operant conditioning tie into sort of forming the animal’s behavior.
    1:59:05 They also have social learning.
    1:59:07 They watch someone else and look at what they do.
    1:59:13 You know, in this situation, I’m feeling a bit concerned, disconcerted, watching you to see how you react.
    1:59:15 Oh, you don’t seem to be that upset.
    1:59:17 Okay, I guess I don’t have to be that either.
    1:59:20 Or you’re interacting with that thing in that way.
    1:59:21 I guess I’ll do the same.
    1:59:30 But it’s like the influence is from the animals that are closest to you and from your own personal experience.
    1:59:43 And we sort of stand on the shoulders of giants, we humans, because we can read people’s thoughts that are thousands of years old, literally.
    1:59:57 And so I think that’s one of the biggest differences, I think, in our learning is that we used to be called man the toolmaker, as if toolmaking would be the thing that set us apart from other animals.
    2:00:14 Until Jane Goodall reported that she’d seen chimpanzees making tools to, you know, the termite fishing behavior that she saw where they would break off a twig and take all the leaves off and then sharpen it so that they could insert it into a termite mound.
    2:00:20 And the termites would climb onto it and they could carefully extract it and eat the termites.
    2:00:23 So they made these tools.
    2:00:32 So, yeah, that would be, I guess, my first spontaneous reflection to your question.
    2:00:34 That’s a great one, frankly.
    2:00:43 This idea that, you know, in addition to our ability to build sophisticated tools, that our ability to stamp down knowledge.
    2:00:45 And, I mean, knowledge is always shifting.
    2:00:53 So some of the things that we’ve been discussing today and that I’ve said with great conviction might be proven completely false a year from now.
    2:00:59 So that’s, I think, the interesting thing about science is that we’re always having to question our assumptions.
    2:01:00 All right.
    2:01:04 I appreciate you reminding us of that, that this is all a dynamic process.
    2:01:11 You know, we can only do so much with this piece of meat in our skulls in terms of trying to decipher the world around us.
    2:01:26 But I do think that this idea of this insight that we’re unique in our ability to learn from things long ago has stamped down things now that people could potentially learn from not just in the present but in the future.
    2:01:27 Yeah.
    2:01:36 It’s incredible and in many ways appropriate for where we’re at now, which is you sitting here educating us about the different species.
    2:01:42 And I want to, I really want to extend my gratitude for the work that you do is very unique.
    2:01:43 People by now will realize that.
    2:01:50 You’re animal ethologist, but you pay attention to real world experiments run in a diverse range of settings.
    2:01:57 And it’s clear that you have great care for all the species on the planet and how they interact.
    2:02:09 And you’ve also offered us some wonderful tools of how to improve the lives of our cats, our dogs, and to really hopefully make people somewhat of ethologists of themselves and of their interactions with animals.
    2:02:24 I think that’s, for me, one of the biggest takeaways today is to really, people listening to this and watching this should really reflect not just on does the dog like to be pet here or there, but, you know, how is it that a certain behavior is showing up in an animal?
    2:02:31 What does that reflect because of its natural lineage and our own and to really think about those relationships and trying to improve them?
    2:02:36 So you’ve given us tremendous knowledge for its own sake, practical knowledge.
    2:02:41 And, again, there’s just so much care woven into everything you do that you’ve shared.
    2:02:44 So thank you for traveling such a long way to share with us.
    2:02:45 Thank you for having me.
    2:02:47 It’s been a great discussion, I think.
    2:02:48 Thank you so much.
    2:02:48 Thank you.
    2:02:52 Thank you for joining me for today’s discussion with Dr. Carolina Westland.
    2:02:59 To learn more about her work and to find links to the various resources discussed during today’s episode, please see the show note captions.
    2:03:03 If you’re learning from and or enjoying this podcast, please subscribe to our YouTube channel.
    2:03:05 That’s a terrific zero-cost way to support us.
    2:03:10 In addition, please follow the podcast by clicking the follow button on both Spotify and Apple.
    2:03:14 And on both Spotify and Apple, you can leave us up to a five-star review.
    2:03:17 And you can now leave us comments at both Spotify and Apple.
    2:03:21 Please also check out the sponsors mentioned at the beginning and throughout today’s episode.
    2:03:23 That’s the best way to support this podcast.
    2:03:30 If you have questions for me or comments about the podcast or guests or topics that you’d like me to consider for the Huberman Lab podcast,
    2:03:32 please put those in the comments section on YouTube.
    2:03:34 I do read all the comments.
    2:03:37 For those of you that haven’t heard, I have a new book coming out.
    2:03:38 It’s my very first book.
    2:03:42 It’s entitled Protocols, an Operating Manual for the Human Body.
    2:03:44 This is a book that I’ve been working on for more than five years.
    2:03:48 And that’s based on more than 30 years of research and experience.
    2:03:56 And it covers protocols for everything from sleep to exercise to stress control, protocols related to focus and motivation.
    2:04:01 And of course, I provide the scientific substantiation for the protocols that are included.
    2:04:05 The book is now available by presale at protocolsbook.com.
    2:04:07 There you can find links to various vendors.
    2:04:09 You can pick the one that you like best.
    2:04:13 Again, the book is called Protocols, an Operating Manual for the Human Body.
    2:04:19 And if you’re not already following me on social media, I am Huberman Lab on all social media platforms.
    2:04:22 So that’s Instagram, X, Threads, Facebook, and LinkedIn.
    2:04:32 And on all those platforms, I discuss science and science-related tools, some of which overlaps with the content of the Huberman Lab podcast, but much of which is distinct from the information on the Huberman Lab podcast.
    2:04:36 Again, it’s Huberman Lab on all social media platforms.
    2:04:52 And if you haven’t already subscribed to our Neural Network newsletter, the Neural Network newsletter is a zero-cost monthly newsletter that includes podcast summaries, as well as what we call protocols in the form of one-to-three-page PDFs that cover everything from how to optimize your sleep, how to optimize dopamine, deliberate cold exposure.
    2:04:57 We have a foundational fitness protocol that covers cardiovascular training and resistance training.
    2:05:00 All of that is available completely zero-cost.
    2:05:06 You simply go to HubermanLab.com, go to the menu tab in the top right corner, scroll down to newsletter, and enter your email.
    2:05:09 And I should emphasize that we do not share your email with anybody.
    2:05:14 Thank you once again for joining me for today’s discussion with Dr. Carolina Westland.
    2:05:18 And last, but certainly not least, thank you for your interest in science.
    Xin chào mừng bạn đến với Podcast Huberman Lab, nơi chúng ta thảo luận về khoa học và các công cụ dựa trên khoa học cho cuộc sống hàng ngày. Tôi là Andrew Huberman, và tôi là giáo sư sinh học thần kinh và nhãn khoa tại trường Y Stanford. Khách mời hôm nay của tôi là Tiến sĩ Carolina Westland. Tiến sĩ Carolina Westland là một nhà sinh thái động vật và chuyên gia về hành vi động vật. Tiến sĩ Westland và tôi thảo luận về mối quan hệ giữa con người và những con vật nuôi đã thuần hóa, với trọng tâm là các giao thức dựa trên bằng chứng để tối ưu hóa sức khỏe tinh thần và thể chất cho thú cưng của chúng ta. Tiến sĩ Westland giải thích cách tốt nhất để tương tác với các loài động vật của chúng ta.
    Bây giờ, chúng ta có thể cho rằng cách chúng ta vuốt ve thú cưng, tập thể dục và cho chúng ăn sẽ khiến chúng thật sự hạnh phúc. Nhưng như cô ấy chỉ ra, nhiều điều mà mọi người cho là đúng hóa ra lại sai khi đề cập đến thú cưng của chúng ta và những bản năng cơ bản của chúng. Cô ấy dạy chúng ta những điều rất cơ bản nhưng mạnh mẽ mà chúng ta có thể làm để thỏa mãn những bản năng đó, tất nhiên là vì lợi ích của động vật và cũng để cải thiện mối quan hệ của chúng ta với chúng.
    Chúng tôi cũng thảo luận về những yêu cầu thần kinh và sinh lý độc đáo của các giống chó khác nhau. Đó là một cuộc trò chuyện thú vị bắt nguồn từ nguồn gốc của chúng từ loài sói. Và chúng tôi sẽ cho bạn biết liệu giống chó cụ thể của bạn, ngay cả khi đó là một con hỗn hợp, có nên được tập thể dục theo một cách cụ thể hay không, liệu nó có cần thêm các hình thức kích thích mà bạn chưa cung cấp không, và nhiều điều khác nữa.
    Và vì chúng tôi cũng nhận ra rằng vẫn có những người nuôi mèo ngoài kia, chúng tôi thảo luận về những tín hiệu giao tiếp thường bị hiểu lầm và nhu cầu xã hội của mèo. Như bạn có thể biết, có rất nhiều cuộc tranh luận xung quanh việc huấn luyện và thực hành tốt nhất để chăm sóc cho chó và các động vật khác. Và rất nhiều điều trong số đó xuất phát từ suy đoán và kết quả huấn luyện, điều mà rõ ràng rất quan trọng.
    Cuộc trò chuyện hôm nay với Tiến sĩ Westland tiếp cận sức khỏe và phúc lợi động vật qua lăng kính của sinh thái học và các loài mà thú cưng của chúng ta đã tiến hóa từ đó, nhằm cung cấp các giao thức có thể thực hiện ngay lập tức và có căn cứ khoa học mà bạn có thể áp dụng ngay để cải thiện sự an lành của thú cưng. Vì vậy, nếu bạn là một chủ nuôi thú cưng, tập phim này sẽ mang lại giá trị vô cùng to lớn cho bạn. Nếu bạn không phải là chủ nuôi thú cưng, bạn vẫn sẽ học được rất nhiều về sinh học và tâm lý động vật, bao gồm cả của chính bạn.
    Trước khi bắt đầu, tôi muốn nhấn mạnh rằng podcast này tách biệt khỏi vai trò giảng dạy và nghiên cứu của tôi tại Stanford. Tuy nhiên, nó cũng là một phần trong mong muốn và nỗ lực của tôi để mang lại thông tin miễn phí cho công chúng về khoa học và các công cụ liên quan đến khoa học. Theo chủ đề đó, tập này có bao gồm các nhà tài trợ. Giờ đây, hãy cùng lắng nghe cuộc thảo luận của tôi với Tiến sĩ Carolina Westland. Tiến sĩ Carolina Westland, chào mừng bạn. Cảm ơn bạn. Tôi rất hào hứng cho cuộc trò chuyện này. Vâng, tôi cũng vậy. Tôi không thể kiềm chế nổi. Tôi nghĩ chúng ta có rất nhiều điều để học hỏi từ động vật, và tôi nghĩ chúng ta có rất nhiều điều cần khám phá từ mối quan hệ của chúng ta với động vật. Tôi cũng tin rằng chúng ta có đủ loại ý tưởng về những gì động vật trải nghiệm, những gì chúng nghĩ về chúng ta, và mối quan hệ mà chúng ta cho rằng mình có với chúng.
    Ôi, đúng vậy. Hôm nay, bạn sẽ làm sáng tỏ mọi thứ. Để bắt đầu, bạn có thể liệt kê một vài loài động vật mà sinh viên của bạn đã làm việc và nghiên cứu không? Hầu hết sinh viên của tôi giống như những người bảo vệ động vật. Họ có thể là những chủ nuôi chó, huấn luyện viên ngựa hoặc có thể là bác sĩ thú y. Một số người làm việc trong sở thú với tư cách là người chăm sóc động vật hoặc huấn luyện viên động vật, và cứ thế. Sinh viên của tôi thực sự rất đa dạng. Và trình độ kiến thức của họ cũng rất phong phú, từ những người có con chó đầu tiên ở tuổi 40 đến những người đã huấn luyện động vật trong 30 năm. Tôi lớn lên bên cạnh một số người nuôi ngựa, bạn gái đầu tiên của tôi có một con ngựa, và điều đó thật đáng kinh ngạc khi thấy và có được một sự hiểu biết ngoại vi về mối quan hệ giữa con người và động vật thông qua việc quan sát điều đó.
    Tôi nghĩ trong tất cả các mối quan hệ giữa động vật và con người, mối quan hệ giữa con người và ngựa có vẻ như có nhiều mối liên hệ thể chất nhất, đúng không? Bạn cưỡi một con ngựa, bạn học cách đọc ý định của nó, và nó học cách đọc ý định của bạn thông qua những cú siết chân nhẹ nhàng hoặc những cú đá, không phải đá mạnh, mà chỉ như một cú thúc nhẹ vào gót, một cú kéo nhẹ vào dây cương. Thật sự rất đáng chú ý. Ngựa trải nghiệm thế giới như thế nào? Tôi đã nghe nói rằng chúng thường có những “quả cầu” nhận thức xung quanh và chúng chú ý đến những điều trên chân trời, đồng thời cũng rất chú ý đến những gì gần gũi với cơ thể của chúng. Nhưng nếu bạn có thể đưa chúng ta vào tâm trí của một con ngựa, tốt nhất là bạn có thể, thì việc ngựa trải nghiệm thế giới như thế nào, như một con ngựa hoang và với một người cưỡi trên lưng cố gắng điều khiển nó theo một hướng nhất định với một tốc độ cụ thể?
    Là một nhà sinh thái học, tôi có xu hướng lùi lại một bước và nhìn vào các loài nói chung. Ngựa là động vật con mồi. Chúng cũng là động vật sống theo bầy. Tôi nghĩ là con người chúng ta thường không thực sự hiểu được các loài động vật khác nhau có thể khác biệt như thế nào so với bản thân chúng ta trong cách chúng nhận thức thế giới và những gì quan trọng với chúng. Vì vậy, ngựa là động vật con mồi có nghĩa là chúng thường rất cảnh giác. Chúng chú ý rất nhiều đến thế giới xung quanh và tầm nhìn của chúng rất rộng, vì vậy chúng có thể thấy được những gì đang xảy ra ở phía sau. Vấn đề mà tôi thấy trong cách chúng ta nuôi dưỡng và giữ ngựa ngày nay, với tư cách là một nhà sinh thái học nhìn vào cách mà động vật sống đời sống hoang dã, là chúng ta nuôi chúng theo cách mà thách thức chúng ở nhiều khía cạnh.
    Chúng ta thường tách chúng khá sớm khỏi mẹ, mặc dù trong tự nhiên, chúng sẽ ở với mẹ trong một khoảng thời gian rất dài. Vì vậy, tôi nghĩ một số mối quan tâm mà tôi có với tư cách là một nhà sinh thái học về cách chúng ta nuôi ngựa là việc cai sữa quá sớm mà chúng ta đôi khi thấy, cũng như việc nuôi nhốt đơn lẻ một loài động vật sống theo bầy.
    Và cũng như vậy, trong tự nhiên, chúng sẽ kiếm ăn lên đến 16 giờ mỗi ngày. Khi chúng ta đưa chúng vào tình trạng nuôi nhốt, chúng ta thường cho chúng ăn theo cách khuyến khích việc ăn rất nhanh, chỉ trong một phần nhỏ thời gian đó. Điều này có thể dẫn đến các hành vi vấn đề. Vì vậy, đối với tôi, tôi nghĩ rằng ngựa có lẽ là một trong những loài động vật bị giam cầm mà đối với nhiều cá thể ngựa, kiểu cuộc sống mà chúng ta đang cung cấp thực sự không tốt chút nào.
    Thú vị ghê. Tôi biết chó thì rất nhạy cảm với mùi. Chúng trải nghiệm thế giới có lẽ chủ yếu, nhưng chắc chắn là khá nhiều thông qua mũi của chúng. Chúng có thể cảm nhận mùi thay vì khoảng cách và chắc chắn là ở gần. Chúng thích đưa mũi vào các vật và ngửi, thậm chí ngửi sâu. Và chúng luôn luôn thu thập thông tin bằng mũi của mình. Có một loạt các giống chó khổng lồ. Và tôi nghĩ rằng bất kỳ cuộc thảo luận nào về chó đều yêu cầu chúng ta trước tiên phải tách ra một số điểm khác biệt chính, ít nhất là về các phiên bản thuần chủng của chúng. Khi tôi thấy một con mastiff so với một con chihuahua so với một con chó đánh hơi, tôi đang nhìn vào những gì với tôi là những loài động vật rất khác nhau.
    Có đúng là một số chú chó phụ thuộc vào khứu giác của chúng nhiều hơn những chú chó khác không? Nếu đúng như vậy, có phải những con chó phụ thuộc vào mũi của chúng thì không chú ý đến những gì chúng đang nhìn trừ khi bạn khăng khăng? Ý tôi là, phiên bản khác của câu hỏi này là chúng ta nên tương tác với chó khác nhau tùy thuộc vào giống chó mà chúng là gì?
    Ừ. Tôi nghĩ rằng tôi không thể thực sự trả lời phần đầu tiên của câu hỏi đó. Tôi không biết mức độ mà các giống chó khác nhau, khả năng cảm giác của chúng khác nhau như thế nào. Tuy nhiên, cách tương tác với các giống chó khác nhau, tôi nghĩ đó thực sự là một câu hỏi thú vị. Bởi vì trong suốt quá trình thuần hóa và chỉ trong một vài trăm năm qua, chúng tôi thực sự đã bắt đầu chọn lọc cho những khả năng khác nhau ở những con chó khác nhau mà chúng tôi cần cho những nhiệm vụ khác nhau.
    Nếu chúng ta nhìn vào một chuỗi săn lùng của sói, những gì chúng sẽ làm là thực hiện một phản ứng định hướng nơi chúng ngửi và chúng đang tìm kiếm một con mồi. Sau đó, chúng sẽ thực hiện một số hành vi nhìn ngó và rình rập. Chúng sẽ tập trung và thực hiện hành vi rình rập và sau đó sẽ chạy đuổi và sau đó sẽ cắn bắt, cắn giết. Sau đó chúng sẽ mổ xẻ và ăn con mồi. Vì vậy, chúng ta có cả một chuỗi hành vi săn mồi mà chúng ta thấy ở sói. Điều đã xảy ra trong quá trình thuần hóa là chúng ta đã chọn lọc cho một số khía cạnh của chuỗi đó trong các giống khác nhau. Vì vậy, chúng ta sẽ có những chú chó săn chuyên ngửi, những con chó săn rất giỏi trong việc này. Và tôi đoán, có thể điều đó trả lời câu hỏi đầu tiên của bạn.
    Tôi nghĩ rằng có lẽ tất cả các giống chó đều thích ngửi. Đây là một trong những điều lớn mà mọi người đang khám phá rất nhiều bây giờ là công việc bằng mũi. Nhưng dù sao, quay lại với quá trình thuần hóa này. Và sau đó chúng ta có những chú chó chỉ điểm mà chúng tôi đã chọn lọc rất kỹ cho hành vi đó. Bạn biết đấy, trong một lứa chó con, chúng tôi sẽ chọn con nào có xu hướng dễ thực hiện hành vi đó nhất. Và vì vậy qua nhiều thế hệ, chúng tôi thực sự đã sculpted (điêu khắc) cái ngách đó, có thể nói như vậy. Một con chỉ điểm thường sẽ không tiến hành đến hành vi tiếp theo của chuỗi săn mồi.
    Và sau đó chúng ta có những chú chó chăn gia súc như chó border collie, những chú chó đó có thể thực hiện một số việc rượt đuổi hoặc nhìn ngó và rình rập và một chút chạy đuổi, nhưng lý tưởng là không cắn bắt. Và chúng ta có những con chỉ chuyên chạy đuổi, chẳng hạn như greyhound. Và sau đó chúng ta có những con cắn bắt, là các giống chó retriever. Và chúng ta có những con giết mồi, là terrier. Người ta, tôi đoán, mong đợi bạn sẽ nói về pit bull hoặc Doberman. Nhưng bất kỳ ai đã sở hữu một con terrier sẽ biết rằng chúng là những chú chó rất thích săn chuột. Chúng được lai tạo để tiêu diệt các loài gặm nhấm nhỏ như chuột và những thứ tương tự.
    Bất kỳ ai đã thấy một con Westie, những chú chó tiểu West Highland Terrier dễ thương, những chú chó nhỏ trắng đó, thực sự rất dễ thương. Nếu một trong số đó nghe hoặc cảm nhận thấy một con gặm nhấm trong tường, tôi đã thấy một con rình rập nó trong vài ngày. Nó sẽ di chuyển dọc theo đó. Chúng tôi đã từng gọi là TV chuột. Con Westie sẽ cảm nhận khi nào và nơi nào con gặm nhấm đó ở đó với sự chú ý tuyệt đối. Và nếu có bất kỳ cách nào để vào tường đó và giết con gặm nhấm, nó sẽ ra ngoài với con gặm nhấm trong miệng. Thật đáng ngạc nhiên. Mức độ cống hiến thật sự nổi bật. Và tất cả chỉ là về việc giết con chuột ấy.
    Vì vậy, chúng tôi đã chọn lọc một cách có hệ thống, có chủ ý cho điều đó khoảng vài trăm năm trước. Và sau đó chúng ta có những con không thể hiện nhiều chuỗi săn mồi nào, chỉ đơn giản là chủ yếu chỉ ăn, đó là những cái gì bạn gọi chúng? Những con giúp bảo vệ gia súc. Chúng vẫn thích ngửi. Vì vậy, chúng có xu hướng giữ lại phần ngửi và sau đó, các giống cụ thể sẽ có một hoặc có thể một vài hành vi từ chuỗi săn lùng. Vì vậy, tôi nghĩ nếu chúng ta muốn mang lại cho chó một cuộc sống tốt, chúng ta nên hiểu chúng đang ở đâu trong thang đó.
    Và cũng như vậy, những con chó làm việc đi kèm với cái ba lô tiến hóa này, cái ba lô di truyền của chúng sẽ khuyến khích chúng thực sự muốn thực hiện công việc đó. Và sau đó chúng ta cũng có những loại – tôi nghĩ chúng đôi khi được gọi là giống chó đồ chơi, những con mà là chó lap không thực sự quan tâm đến bất kỳ hành vi chó làm việc nào. Vì vậy, tôi nghĩ rằng – chúng ta cần – đối với các giống khác nhau, chúng ta cần thực sự hiểu mục đích mà chúng được lai tạo ra, tôi nghĩ vậy.
    Tôi muốn nghỉ một chút và công nhận nhà tài trợ của chúng ta, Our Place. Our Place làm ra những nồi, chảo và dụng cụ nấu nướng mà tôi yêu thích. Thật ngạc nhiên, các hợp chất độc hại như PFAS hoặc “hóa chất vĩnh cửu” vẫn được tìm thấy trong 80% các chảo chống dính, cùng với dụng cụ, thiết bị và vô số sản phẩm nhà bếp khác. Như tôi đã đề cập trước đây trong podcast này, những PFAS hoặc hóa chất vĩnh cửu như Teflon đã được liên kết với các vấn đề sức khỏe lớn như rối loạn hormone, rối loạn microbiome đường ruột, vấn đề sinh sản và nhiều vấn đề sức khỏe khác. Vì vậy, thật sự quan trọng để cố gắng tránh xa chúng. Đó là lý do tại sao tôi là một fan hâm mộ lớn của Our Place.
    Sản phẩm của Our Place được làm từ những nguyên liệu chất lượng cao nhất và hoàn toàn không chứa PFAS và độc tố. Tôi đặc biệt yêu thích chảo Titanium Always Pan Pro của họ. Đây là chiếc chảo chống dính đầu tiên được sản xuất mà không dùng hóa chất hay lớp phủ nào. Thay vào đó, nó được làm hoàn toàn từ titan nguyên chất. Điều này có nghĩa là nó không chứa hóa chất độc hại và không bị suy giảm hay mất tác dụng chống dính theo thời gian. Nó cũng rất đẹp mắt. Tôi nấu trứng trong chảo Titanium Always Pan Pro của mình hầu như mỗi sáng. Thiết kế cho phép trứng chín hoàn hảo mà không bị dính vào chảo. Tôi cũng nấu bánh hamburger và bít tết trong đó, và chảo tạo ra một lớp se rất đẹp trên thịt. Nhưng một lần nữa, không có gì dính vào nó, vì vậy việc vệ sinh rất dễ dàng, và nó cũng an toàn để rửa bằng máy rửa chén. Tôi rất thích nó và gần như sử dụng liên tục. Hiện tại, Our Place đã có một dòng sản phẩm nồi chảo Titanium Pro hoàn chỉnh, ứng dụng công nghệ chống dính titan độc quyền của họ. Vậy nếu bạn đang tìm kiếm những nồi chảo không độc hại, bền lâu, hãy truy cập từ ourplace.com/slash Huberman và sử dụng mã Huberman khi thanh toán. Hiện tại, Our Place đang có chương trình giảm giá lớn nhất trong mùa này. Bạn có thể giảm tới 30% cho tất cả các sản phẩm từ bây giờ đến ngày 12 tháng 5 năm 2025. Với thử nghiệm miễn phí 100 ngày, miễn phí vận chuyển và hoàn trả miễn phí, bạn có thể dùng thử Our Place mà không có rủi ro và xem tại sao hơn 1 triệu người đã chuyển sang sử dụng đồ dùng nhà bếp của Our Place. Một lần nữa, đó là từ ourplace.com/slash Huberman để giảm tới 30%.
    Tập hôm nay cũng được tài trợ bởi 8Sleep. 8Sleep chế tạo các lớp đệm thông minh có khả năng làm mát, sưởi ấm và theo dõi giấc ngủ. Tôi đã nói trước đây trên podcast này về nhu cầu thiết yếu của chúng ta là có đủ giấc ngủ chất lượng mỗi đêm. Một trong những cách tốt nhất để đảm bảo một giấc ngủ ngon là đảm bảo nhiệt độ của môi trường ngủ là đúng. Bởi vì để có thể dễ dàng rơi vào giấc ngủ sâu và duy trì nó, nhiệt độ cơ thể của bạn cần phải giảm khoảng 1 đến 3 độ. Và để thức dậy cảm thấy sảng khoái và tràn đầy năng lượng, nhiệt độ cơ thể của bạn cần phải tăng khoảng 1 đến 3 độ. 8Sleep tự động điều chỉnh nhiệt độ của giường bạn suốt đêm theo nhu cầu riêng của bạn. Tôi cảm thấy điều này rất hữu ích vì tôi thích làm giường thực sự mát vào đầu đêm, lạnh hơn giữa đêm và ấm lên khi tôi thức dậy. Điều đó cho tôi giấc ngủ sóng chậm và giấc ngủ mắt nhanh nhiều nhất. Và tôi biết điều đó bởi vì 8Sleep có một công cụ theo dõi giấc ngủ tuyệt vời cung cấp thông tin về cách tôi đã ngủ và các loại giấc ngủ mà tôi nhận được suốt đêm. Tôi đã ngủ trên một lớp đệm 8Sleep được bốn năm nay và nó đã hoàn toàn biến đổi và cải thiện chất lượng giấc ngủ của tôi. Mẫu mới nhất của họ, Pod 4 Ultra, cũng có khả năng phát hiện tiếng ngáy, sẽ tự động nâng đầu bạn lên một vài độ để cải thiện lưu thông khí và ngăn bạn ngáy. Nếu bạn quyết định thử 8Sleep, bạn có 30 ngày để thử tại nhà và có thể trả lại nếu bạn không thích. Không hỏi lý do, nhưng tôi chắc chắn bạn sẽ thích nó. Truy cập 8Sleep.com/slash Huberman để tiết kiệm tới 350 đô la cho Pod 4 Ultra của bạn. 8Sleep vận chuyển tới nhiều quốc gia trên thế giới, bao gồm Mexico và UAE. Một lần nữa, đó là 8Sleep.com/slash Huberman để tiết kiệm tới 350 đô la cho Pod 4 Ultra của bạn.
    Đó là một mô tả đẹp và, đối với tôi, hoàn toàn mới lạ về việc phân loại các giống chó khác nhau. Không phải theo tỷ lệ gen giữa chó sói và chó mastiff, điều mà một số nghiên cứu giảm thiểu hơn thực sự làm. Họ có những biểu đồ này. Chúng tôi sẽ cung cấp liên kết đến một biểu đồ đã được công bố trên Tạp chí Khoa học khoảng 10 năm trước có tỷ lệ gen giữa chó mastiff và chó sói. Và những gì bạn vừa mô tả thật đẹp mắt đã phân tích chính xác những gì bạn quan sát được nếu bạn đến công viên chó hoặc bãi biển. Chó bulldog mastiff của tôi, Costello, là một chú bulldog bị biến hình. Vì vậy, tôi luôn nói rằng, bạn biết đấy, không có cằm hếch. Thế nên nó không phải như thế này mà là như thế này, đúng không? Do đó, một chú bulldog đúng nghĩa trước khi họ lai tạp nhiều đến mức có cằm hếch và mõm ngắn, chứng phát triển hàm và các vấn đề hô hấp. Nhưng con chó này không săn đuổi cũng không cố gắng giết hại bất cứ thứ gì. Nó không có ý định gây hại. Nhưng nó chắc chắn thích tiêu thụ. Vì vậy, nó nằm ở cuối mô tả hành vi đó. Họ đã được lai tạo để làm gì? Tôi sẽ cố gắng không chiếm quá nhiều thời gian vào vấn đề này vì tôi muốn học hỏi từ bạn. Dòng bulldog ban đầu là sự lai giữa một con mastiff, thứ gì đó giống như một con mastiff, mạnh mẽ, lớn, và có sức chịu đựng cao với một con pug, mõm ngắn. Và việc kết hợp gen ở đây, chắc chắn các nhà di truyền học chó không suy nghĩ về những gen cụ thể. Họ chỉ suy nghĩ về các đặc điểm, là phần mõm ngắn rất hữu ích cho cái gọi là bull baiting vì phần mõm ngắn cung cấp lực đòn bẩy khi chúng cắn vào mũi của một con bò, mà chúng đã được sử dụng cho, đó là một hành động tàn ác và rất khó để chúng bị đánh bật. Con bò có thể lắc chúng nhưng nó sẽ không tách rời. Chỉ cần nghĩ về việc cố gắng nhấc một cái gì đó bằng kẹp dài, đúng không, vật lý của điều này so với một cái kẹp, giống như cái kẹp C. Đúng. Đột biến mà loại bỏ các thụ thể đau đớn khỏi mặt hoặc làm giảm chúng gần với một gen khác liên quan đến việc tạo ra tính đàn hồi của da. Đây là lý do tại sao họ có phần má lớn, những nếp gấp. Ồ, đúng. Và bạn có thể, tôi không đề xuất ai làm điều này, nhưng Costello, tôi chỉ đưa ra một ví dụ. Đôi khi, không may, nó đã bị một cái lưới câu qua má khi nó đang chơi ở đại dương hoặc gì đó. Và nó đến gần tôi với những vết thương chảy máu, cười, bạn biết đấy, cơ bản là bạn phải lấy cái đó ra. Vì vậy, ngưỡng đau của nó khá cao. Ngưỡng đau rất cao ở phía trước của con vật, trên mặt.
    Và về phía sau của con vật, bạn chạm vào ngón chân ở phía sau của nó và bạn biết đấy, họ có một gradient của các thụ thể đau, mật độ cao ở phía sau, mật độ thấp ở phía trước.
    Vì vậy, chúng đã được nhân giống để đấu bò.
    Đúng.
    Và dòng giống ban đầu đã bị loại bỏ.
    Có những người quan tâm đến giống chó bulldog và đang cố gắng áp dụng những phương pháp nhân giống nhân đạo hơn cho bulldog, bởi vì bây giờ nó là một giống chó khá tàn bạo.
    Đúng.
    Họ đã cố gắng tái thiết lập dòng giống ban đầu, mà một lần nữa, là đầu khuỷu tay quay lại, không có sự cắn mạnh ở hàm dưới, trái ngược với những gì bạn thấy bây giờ.
    Vì vậy, đó là một cái nhìn tổng quan ngắn gọn về bulldog.
    Chúng phải được sinh ra bằng phương pháp sinh mổ vì vai rộng, hông nhỏ.
    Dù sao, điều thú vị về bulldog, tôi luôn nói, và điều này sẽ đưa chúng ta trở lại với hành vi, là hợp đồng mà tôi cảm thấy mình có với bulldog của tôi là nó sẽ bảo vệ tôi đến chết.
    Bạn sẽ nhận thấy rằng bất cứ khi nào chúng nghe một tiếng ồn hay bất cứ điều gì, chúng đều rất cảnh giác.
    Nhưng nếu không có mối đe dọa nào đang đến gần, sự thư giãn hoàn toàn, sử dụng năng lượng hiệu quả nhất trong tất cả các loài.
    Vì vậy, về cơ bản, đó là, tôi sẽ chết vì bạn, Andrew, nhưng trừ khi cuộc sống của bạn gặp nguy hiểm, tôi sẽ không làm gì cả.
    Vậy nên có thể chúng ta có thể nói về tính khí ở chó và cách chúng trải nghiệm cuộc sống cảm xúc của chúng.
    Tôi không biết liệu chúng ta có thể đưa ra những tuyên bố chung về điều này hay không, nhưng bạn đã dành rất nhiều thời gian của mình để suy nghĩ về cuộc sống cảm xúc của động vật.
    Chó cần gì để cảm thấy bình tĩnh và an toàn?
    Câu hỏi tuyệt vời.
    Vì vậy, để cảm thấy bình tĩnh và an toàn, tôi nghĩ có thể chúng ta nên đi đến không gian cảm xúc cốt lõi, mà tôi nghĩ là một trong ba mô hình cảm xúc rất hữu ích để hiểu và cung cấp một môi trường tốt cho động vật để chúng thực sự có thể phát triển.
    Không gian cảm xúc cốt lõi là một cách để hình dung hoặc khái niệm hóa cảm xúc, trong đó chúng ta có giá trị trên trục x, vì vậy mức độ dễ chịu hoặc khó chịu của một cái gì đó, và chúng ta có sự kích thích trên trục y.
    Vì vậy, những gì bạn đang hỏi là, có sự kích thích thấp và dễ chịu, tức là khi chúng thư giãn và cảm thấy an toàn và đang giao tiếp xã hội với người khác và cảm thấy thoải mái, nếu bạn muốn.
    Vậy làm thế nào để chúng ta đến đó?
    Và tôi nghĩ rằng một số điều cần xem xét là sự vắng mặt của những cảm xúc tiêu cực.
    Vì vậy, một lần nữa, nếu chúng ta ở trong không gian cảm xúc cốt lõi ở phần tứ giác bốn, với những trạng thái khó chịu có sự kích thích cao, chúng ta sẽ tìm thấy những thứ như sợ hãi, hành vi hung hăng.
    Vì vậy, giúp giảm thiểu điều đó sẽ tự động giúp động vật di chuyển sang bên phải trong ma trận.
    Và ở phần tứ giác ba dưới cùng, với trạng thái khó chịu có sự kích thích thấp, nơi động vật thường kết thúc nếu chúng cảm thấy chán hoặc trầm cảm, là kích thích chúng, cung cấp một môi trường đầy cảm hứng, nơi chúng có thể làm những việc thú vị giúp chúng di chuyển vào bên phải của không gian cảm xúc cốt lõi.
    Và cũng ở trên cùng trong tứ giác một là trạng thái dễ chịu có sự kích thích cao.
    Nhưng điều đó giống như việc tìm kiếm hoặc tìm kiếm thức ăn, khám phá, chơi, tình dục.
    Nhưng về câu hỏi của bạn, làm thế nào để chúng ta bước vào tứ giác hai với cảm giác an toàn và cảm giác ấm áp, dễ chịu?
    Vì vậy, một số điều cần làm có thể là, nếu động vật thích điều đó từ bạn, và chúng thường phải biết bạn để thực sự đánh giá cao điều đó, là kích thích xúc giác, vì vậy là vuốt ve, về cơ bản.
    Một điều có thể ảnh hưởng là chúng ta, những loài linh trưởng, chúng ta là linh trưởng và chúng ta thích ôm.
    Chúng ta có xu hướng làm như thế này khi chúng ta muốn tương tác với một con vật mà chúng ta thực sự thích.
    Và đối với nhiều động vật, điều này là sự kiềm chế và thực sự đáng sợ.
    Vì vậy, loại tiếp xúc thân thể mà chúng ta cung cấp cho động vật mà chúng ta nên xem xét liệu chúng thực sự thích điều đó hay không, liệu chúng chỉ chịu đựng hay thích thú.
    Và một cách để làm điều đó là cung cấp một bài kiểm tra đồng ý.
    Vì vậy, bạn có thể đưa tay ra và gãi một chút, lý tưởng là ở một nơi mà động vật thực sự thích.
    Vì vậy, hầu hết chó không thích có tay ở trên đầu của chúng, mà có thể là ở đây.
    Trên cổ của chúng.
    Hoặc vùng ngực trên, kiểu như vậy.
    Vì vậy, bạn có thể làm điều đó trong vài giây và sau đó bạn gỡ tay ra để xem, liệu động vật có thích điều này không?
    Và liệu chúng có tái khởi động liên lạc đó hay không?
    Hay chúng sẽ rời đi?
    Và tôi có vấn đề này với con mèo của tôi bây giờ, rằng nó không thực sự, nó không thích việc được vuốt ve nhiều như tôi thích vuốt ve nó.
    Vì vậy, tôi phải rất chú ý rằng tôi thực sự cung cấp cho nó cơ hội để từ chối.
    Vì vậy, chúng ta có thể xem xét chỉ chạm vào động vật như một bài kiểm tra đồng ý, như một bài kiểm tra.
    Và sau đó, nếu chúng di chuyển về phía bạn, thì loại kích thích xúc giác mà chó thích là gì?
    Tôi đã đọc một chút về điều này và có ai đó đã tiến hành một thí nghiệm mà tôi nghĩ là khá thú vị khi mô tả sự khác biệt giữa các tỷ lệ vuốt ve.
    Và kết luận chủ yếu là họ khẳng định rằng về cơ bản tất cả chó đều có ác cảm với sự chạm nhanh.
    Nhưng con người thường có xu hướng vuốt ve nhanh, vuốt ve nhanh.
    Và họ đã cho thấy một ví dụ tuyệt vời rằng nếu một người chỉ vuốt ve con vật rất chậm rãi, thì mí mắt của con vật bắt đầu nhắm lại.
    Và bạn cơ bản chỉ đơn giản hóa căng thẳng rất nhanh chóng.
    Điều này thật thú vị.
    Bạn biết đấy, với tư cách là con người, chúng ta nghĩ, ôi, chúng ta muốn vuốt ve chó trên đầu nó.
    Và bằng một lý do nào đó, chúng ta liên kết vuốt ve với việc vuốt nhanh.
    Đúng.
    Hoặc vuốt ve như một quá trình nhanh chóng.
    Bạn sẽ gãi và vuốt ve con vật này.
    Có thể tất cả các con chó ở đó đều rất thèm muốn những cú vuốt chậm rãi, thoải mái.
    Đúng.
    Và tôi cũng nghĩ rằng những cú vuốt chậm rãi đó, nếu bạn ở trong một trạng thái cảm xúc bình tĩnh, thì chúng ta có thể chạm vào một lý thuyết cảm xúc thú vị khác, đó là lý thuyết polyvagal và khái niệm về đồng điều chỉnh.
    Vì vậy, nếu bạn thực sự bình tĩnh và thư giãn, thì bạn như đang gửi ra những dấu hiệu, những tín hiệu tinh tế mà những cá thể khác đang đọc và tiếp nhận.
    Và có vẻ như chúng ta làm điều đó qua lại với cả chó của chúng ta và rõ ràng cũng với ngựa, có vẻ như vậy.
    Để việc giữ bình tĩnh và thư giãn của bản thân thực sự có thể giúp làm cho chó trở nên thoải mái. Và những gì bạn nói về việc vuốt ve hoặc vỗ vào chó một cách nhanh chóng thực sự có ý nghĩa với tôi. Tôi biết có một nghiên cứu về ngựa cho thấy rằng nếu bạn vỗ vào một con ngựa, nhiều con ngựa sẽ coi đó là một điều khó chịu. Nói cách khác, đó là điều mà chúng sẽ tìm cách tránh. Nhưng đó thường là cách mà chúng ta cố gắng thưởng cho chúng khi chúng làm điều gì đó mà chúng ta mong muốn. Chúng thực sự thích khi được gãi ở vùng cổ. Vì vậy, nếu bạn gãi ở phần gáy của bờm, chúng thường thích điều đó. Nhưng tôi nghĩ rằng các loài vật khác nhau và từng cá thể sẽ có những sở thích cá nhân riêng và chỉ cần cố gắng xem điều gì mà chúng thích. Có thể nếu bạn đưa tay ra như thế này, chúng thậm chí có thể di chuyển quanh bạn để cho bạn biết bộ phận nào trên cơ thể mà chúng muốn được gãi khi chúng học cách giao tiếp đó. Tôi có cảm giác như chó muốn được gãi vào những phần cơ thể mà chúng không thể tự tiếp cận. Đúng vậy. Như tôi chưa gặp con chó nào không thích được gãi vào phần mông của nó. Việc gãi vào mông là một điều lớn đối với nhiều loài động vật. Đúng vậy. Chắc chắn rồi. Như phía trên của chân sau. Đúng vậy. Đúng không? Như ngay tại đó. Đúng vậy. Phải thật sự thoải mái. Đúng vậy. Bởi vì chúng không thể tự động chạm vào được. Đúng vậy. Cũng như dưới chân sau của chúng. Đúng không? Như ở ngay khuỷu chân sau với làn da mềm mại ở đó. Đúng không? Tuy nhiên, bạn biết đấy, từ những tương tác với những con chó nhút nhát so với những con chó bình tĩnh hơn. Đúng vậy. Tôi hoàn toàn đồng ý rằng các loài động vật khác nhau, bất kể giống loài, đều có một mối quan hệ hoàn toàn khác với việc bị chạm vào. Đúng vậy. Cũng như mức độ nhanh chóng mà chúng muốn tương tác. Tôi đã nghe và không biết điều này có đúng không, rằng đối với chó, không gian là một điều lớn. Tôi không biết điều này có đúng không. Chắc chắn sẽ có ai đó phản bác lại điều này. Nhưng ý tưởng rằng, nếu chú chó của bạn chạy lại khi bạn bước vào hoặc đến – một con chó chạy lại khi bạn gặp lần đầu và chạm vào bạn hoặc nhảy lên chân bạn, đó là nỗ lực của nó để thống trị bạn. Như đây là không gian của tôi. Tôi đang kiểm soát bạn. Bởi vì bạn sẽ không đi đến gần một con chó mà bạn vừa mới gặp và xâm nhập vào không gian của nó mà không để nó cũng tiến lại gần bạn. Bạn nghĩ sao về toàn bộ chuyện thống trị và phục tùng này dựa trên việc chạm và không gian? Đó giống như cái hộp Pandora ngay tại đó. Tuyệt vời. Tôi không có bất kỳ cổ phần nào trong điều này. Tôi chỉ muốn học và tôi muốn mọi người cũng học để có thể có những tương tác tốt hơn với và cho động vật. Chắc chắn. Vâng. Đầu tiên, tôi nghĩ rằng thực tế là chúng ta thường đi đến gần những con chó lạ mà chúng ta chưa từng gặp trước đây. Chúng ta như kiểu, chào, tôi có thể vuốt ve chúng không? Và rồi chúng ta bắt đầu vỗ vào đầu của con vật. Tôi cảm thấy có lỗi. Vì vậy, tôi nghĩ rằng chúng ta đã làm như vậy. Và rồi cuộc thảo luận này về sự thống trị thực sự rất thú vị bởi vì dưới góc độ là một nhà động vật học, cách mà chúng ta định nghĩa sự thống trị hoàn toàn khác. Khác với cách mà hầu hết mọi người định nghĩa. Và thực tế là, tôi đã tra cứu trong bách khoa toàn thư để xem sự thống trị được định nghĩa như thế nào ở đó. Và tôi thấy có hai dòng định nghĩa. Một là định nghĩa về mặt động vật học và một là định nghĩa về mặt xã hội học về sự thống trị. Và tôi nghĩ rằng những gì chúng ta thường làm là sử dụng sai, chúng ta sử dụng định nghĩa về mặt xã hội học đối với động vật theo cách mà tôi nghĩ là không may. Bởi vì định nghĩa về mặt động vật học liên quan đến quyền ưu tiên tiếp cận tài nguyên. Đây là một tài nguyên. Đây là năm cá thể tiến tới đó. Chỉ có một cá thể ở đó. Cá thể thống trị sẽ có quyền ưu tiên tiếp cận tài nguyên đó. Những cá thể khác chỉ có thể chờ hoặc tìm tài nguyên khác. Và điều này giảm thiểu nguy cơ xung đột và sự hung hăng cùng với tất cả những chi phí liên quan. Vì vậy, thật bình thường rằng các loài động vật sống cùng nhau, ở trong một nhóm xã hội ổn định, sẽ tổ chức hoặc có một dạng thứ bậc thống trị trong đó giúp điều này diễn ra, giảm thiểu nguy cơ hung hăng. Điều này có xu hướng trở nên trầm trọng hơn trong môi trường giam giữ so với trong môi trường hoang dã bởi vì khi đó các động vật có thể phân tán và tìm kiếm tài nguyên ở một nơi khác mà chúng có thể lấy. Nhưng khi chúng ta nuôi nhốt chúng và chúng ta cung cấp, đặc biệt là chúng ta cung cấp như, đây, bạn có hai con mèo hoặc ba con mèo và đây là thức ăn. Bạn đang đưa những con vật vào xung đột vì mèo là những thợ săn đơn độc. Vì vậy, nếu bạn có nhiều mèo, bạn nên cho chúng ăn ở những địa điểm riêng biệt để giảm thiểu sự hưng phấn cao độ đi kèm với kiểu cho ăn đó.
    Được rồi, có sự thống trị giữa chó hoặc giữa chó với các động vật không phải con người khác. Tôi đang nghĩ về mối quan hệ giữa con người và chó và việc chạm và không gian. Tôi đã nghe rằng nếu chó chạm vào bạn, nó nghĩ rằng nó sở hữu bạn. Tôi đã nghe rằng nếu bạn di chuyển vào không gian của chó và nó lùi lại, thì nó nghĩ rằng bạn là người thống trị. Tôi cũng đã nghe rằng nếu chó di chuyển vào không gian của bạn một cách nhanh chóng, thì nó xem mình là người lãnh đạo trong mối quan hệ này. Có rất nhiều lý thuyết về điều này. Và tôi nhận ra rằng tất cả những lý thuyết này về động vật chắc chắn gây tranh cãi vì chúng thiếu ngôn ngữ để cho chúng ta biết những gì chúng ta muốn biết. Đúng vậy. Vì vậy, chúng ta luôn như đang đoán mò khi thực hiện nghiên cứu về động vật học. Thực sự, tôi sẽ không gán nhãn bất kỳ tình huống nào mà bạn mô tả là một tương tác thống trị. Trên thực tế, nếu chó lùi lại khi bạn đối diện chúng, tôi sẽ muốn gán nhãn đó là một phản ứng sợ hãi, không phải phục tùng, như trong việc để bạn có quyền ưu tiên tiếp cận tài nguyên. Thông thường, những con chó hoang trong tự nhiên sẽ hình thành các hệ thống thứ bậc thống trị tuyến tính liên quan đến quyền tiếp cận tài nguyên. Và điều này có thể thay đổi tùy thuộc vào loại tài nguyên là gì. Vì vậy, điều đó không giống như nó được khắc trên đá hay bất cứ điều gì.
    Vậy nên điều đó giống như là lỏng lẻo và thay đổi, nhưng vẫn thường có một kiểu thứ bậc nào đó khi nói đến quyền truy cập vào tài nguyên. Sau đó, chúng ta có một vai trò xã hội khác, đó là vai trò của một nhà lãnh đạo. Và khi tôi, với tư cách là một nhà nghiên cứu hành vi động vật, nói về nhà lãnh đạo, tôi có ý đề cập đến người dẫn dắt, người đi đầu trong hàng từ địa điểm này đến địa điểm khác. Tôi thích lấy ví dụ về những con voi, khi chúng di cư, thường thì một trong những con cái già, con mẹ, là người dẫn đường. Vì vậy, cô ấy là nhà lãnh đạo, cô ấy sẽ giúp chúng tìm đường, cô ấy biết đi đâu, thực tế là như vậy. Và cũng có những vai trò xã hội khác. Có thể có người kiểm soát, là con vật có xu hướng khởi xướng một sự thay đổi trong hoạt động. Chúng ta thấy điều này ở những con bò, chẳng hạn, khi tất cả bò đứng lên và đang gặm cỏ. Sau đó, một con bò, người kiểm soát, nằm xuống và tất cả những con bò khác cũng nằm xuống. Wow. Và chúng bắt đầu nhai lại. Chúng thường đồng bộ hóa hành vi của mình, nhưng chúng sẽ đi theo. Không phải là một cá nhân đang áp đặt lên những cá thể khác, mà thay vào đó là chúng làm điều đó và những con khác thì làm theo. Thú vị. Vâng. Tôi đã nghe rằng khi bạn dắt chó đi dạo, chó của bạn nên ở bên cạnh bạn hoặc sau lưng bạn. Rất ít chủ chó thực sự dắt chó đi sau lưng họ. Chỉ là, tôi sống ở một khu vực có nhiều chó và chủ chó. Thật thú vị khi diễn giải điều đó như một câu hỏi, đó là, nếu chó đi trước, có nghĩa là nó theo cách nào đó là lãnh đạo? Ý tôi là, con người có hoàn toàn sai về tất cả những điều này không? Tôi nghĩ là có. Tuyệt. Tôi nghĩ rằng chúng ta mang rất nhiều, và thực sự, chúng ta chưa đề cập đến điều này, tôi nghĩ, nhưng tôi có rất ít kinh nghiệm thực tiễn về chó. Tôi đã không sống với chó. Tôi đã không huấn luyện chó. Nhưng nhiều sinh viên của tôi huấn luyện chó, và tôi giúp họ. Nhưng điều đó cũng có nghĩa là tôi không mang theo bất kỳ giả định nào về việc bạn nên có chó ở sau lưng hoặc bên cạnh bạn, rằng nếu bạn không, thì sao, điều đó có nghĩa là tôi có thể nhìn vào loại tuyên bố đó và nói, thật sao? Bởi vì tôi nghĩ rằng có rất nhiều việc học đang xảy ra, tất nhiên, rằng bạn dạy chó rằng nếu bạn ở bên cạnh tôi hoặc sau lưng tôi, thì, bạn biết đấy, sẽ không có bất kỳ điều gì không dễ chịu. Nhưng nếu bạn vượt lên trước, tôi sẽ kéo bạn lại. Vì vậy, sẽ có một hậu quả không dễ chịu đối với hành vi kéo, điều này sẽ ảnh hưởng đến sự chọn lựa của con vật trong việc ở bên cạnh bạn. Nhưng tôi nghĩ rằng rất thường xuyên, những gì chúng ta gán nhãn là sự thống trị có thể rất thường là chỉ cần, nếu chúng ta loại bỏ nhãn đó và nhìn vào hành vi của con vật, chúng ta có thể giải thích nó theo các thuật ngữ khác. Và một lần nữa, tôi sẽ không sử dụng, đối với tôi, sự thống trị như một nhà nghiên cứu hành vi động vật liên quan đến quyền ưu tiên truy cập vào tài nguyên. Vì vậy, theo hướng quyền ưu tiên truy cập vào tài nguyên, khi tôi có chú cún con, tôi được dạy trong khóa huấn luyện chó mà tôi tham gia cùng với nó rằng tôi nên ăn trước và sau đó thì nó nên ăn. Hoặc chúng tôi có thể ăn bên cạnh nhau những món ăn khác nhau, mặc dù tôi thú nhận rằng tôi thường cho nó ăn bò bít tết. Nếu đó là thức ăn phù hợp cho một chú chó Bulldog, tôi đã cho nó ăn, trái ngược với việc để nó ăn trước tôi vì điều này liên quan đến quyền truy cập vào tài nguyên. Liệu có chút sự thật nào trong điều đó không? Điều này được dạy trong nhiều khóa huấn luyện chó/chủ chó vì nhiều khóa huấn luyện chó thực sự là huấn luyện chủ chó. Vâng, vâng, vâng, chắc chắn. Ý tôi là, bạn phải thiết lập tình huống để hoạt động có lợi cho bạn và con vật. Nhưng một lần nữa, tôi sẽ không định dạng điều đó theo khái niệm thống trị. Chúng hình thành mối quan hệ với chúng ta, nhưng theo những gì tôi biết, từ quan điểm sinh thái học, chúng ta không có vai trò trong một hệ thống thứ bậc thống trị giữa các con chó. Chúng biết rằng chúng ta khác biệt và chúng sẽ phản ứng. Chúng sẽ học để mong đợi rằng nếu trong ngữ cảnh này, điều đó sẽ xảy ra, trong ngữ cảnh kia, điều đó sẽ xảy ra. Và vì vậy, chúng ta có thể thường xuyên định nghĩa lại điều đó từ một hệ thống học tập khác ngoài sự thống trị. Đó là một góc nhìn mới vì tôi nghĩ rằng rất nhiều những gì tồn tại trong việc huấn luyện chó/chủ chó thực sự không phải về sự thống trị, mà thực sự là cố gắng thiết lập một mối quan hệ nơi mà rõ ràng bạn là người chăm sóc, để, nói cách khác, làm cho chúng cảm thấy an toàn. Vì vậy, công việc của chúng rất rõ ràng để chúng không cảm thấy lo lắng khi phải thực hiện những vai trò có thể là của bạn. Có rất nhiều điều giống như những gì bạn nghe thấy khi bạn nghe về huấn luyện cha mẹ-con cái, về cơ bản. Vậy nên có lẽ, với mẫu câu trả lời của bạn trong vài câu hỏi gần đây, tôi nên hỏi một câu hỏi rất đơn giản, đó là bạn nghĩ về động vật như thế nào? Giống như, quan điểm của bạn về động vật khi bạn nghĩ về chúng là gì? Tôi biết bạn quan tâm đến phúc lợi của chúng và cải thiện điều kiện sống của chúng, nhưng bạn như thế nào – như khi bạn thấy một con vật, hầu hết mọi người sẽ nói, được rồi, đó là một con chó, đó là một con ngựa, đó là một con vẹt. Tôi có thể tương tác với nó không? Có thể tôi không muốn hoặc có thể tôi có một nỗi ám ảnh. Ai biết được? Nhưng bạn nghĩ về động vật như thế nào? Điều gì đang thúc đẩy sự tìm hiểu này liên quan đến cuộc sống cảm xúc và nhận thức của chúng? Trước hết, tôi nghĩ rằng chúng ta, con người cũng là một loài động vật và chúng ta có xu hướng tự đặt mình trên một bệ cao và nghĩ rằng chúng ta là một và sau đó động vật thì ở bên ngoài, như thể chúng đồng nhất, nhưng thực sự không phải vậy. Mỗi loài động vật có những thích ứng riêng của chúng và tất cả các loài động vật khác mà chúng ta bao quanh cũng vậy. Vì vậy, tôi không biết điều đó có thực sự trả lời câu hỏi của bạn không, nhưng tôi có xu hướng – vì vậy công việc mà tôi làm là cố gắng giúp động vật sống cuộc sống tốt hơn với con người. Và điều đó thường bắt đầu bằng việc hiểu cách mà loài động vật đó sẽ sống trong tự nhiên và loại cuộc sống mà chúng có, liệu chúng có phải là loài săn mồi, liệu chúng có phải là loài con mồi, cách chúng xử lý thế giới, loại thông tin mà chúng tiếp nhận.
    Dưới đây là bản dịch văn bản sang tiếng Việt:
    Chẳng hạn, chúng ta có thể thấy một con chó đang vẫy đuôi, và có thể chúng ta nghĩ rằng chỉ những con chó hạnh phúc mới vẫy đuôi, nhưng thực tế việc vẫy đuôi lại diễn ra trong nhiều bối cảnh khác nhau. Chúng ta có thể nghĩ rằng đó là một hình thức giao tiếp trực quan, nhưng thực tế có thể là chúng đang phát tán mùi hương mà cái đuôi vẫy sẽ – mùi hương đó sẽ bay tới bạn để bạn có thể cảm nhận thông tin về trạng thái cảm xúc hiện tại của tôi. Chúng chắc chắn có các tuyến mùi ở phía sau.
    Ồ, đúng rồi.
    Thú vị thật.
    Vậy có thể diễn giải các kiểu vẫy đuôi của chó không? Có cách nào để làm điều đó không? Một điều rất thú vị là cái đuôi của chó vẫy nhiều về bên trái –
    Bên trái đối với chó?
    Bên trái đối với chó.
    Vậy là nó vẫy ở bên trái cơ thể của nó.
    Ừm.
    Thường thì điều này liên quan đến trạng thái cảm xúc tiêu cực. Còn bên phải thường liên quan đến trạng thái cảm xúc tích cực. Cũng tương tự – mèo có xu hướng nhìn thế giới từ bên trái khi ở trong trạng thái cảm xúc tiêu cực và từ bên phải khi ở trong trạng thái cảm xúc tích cực.
    Vậy nhìn từ bên trái, có nghĩa là mắt trái hơi hướng về phía trước.
    Đúng.
    Cái đầu nghiêng, vì vậy mắt phải –
    Vậy là tiếp nhận thông tin bằng mắt này.
    Vậy –
    Nếu bạn đáng sợ –
    Có những người chỉ đang lắng nghe. Họ không nhìn, vì vậy họ không thể thấy điều này.
    Vậy điều mà Carolina mô tả là nếu cái đầu được nghiêng một chút sang bên, như mắt trái hướng về phía trước, đó là trạng thái tiêu cực –
    Vì vậy chúng đang nhìn vào kích thích bằng mắt trái nếu kích thích đó gây ra nỗi sợ hãi. Và ngược lại bên phải nếu nó thu hút hơn đối với chúng hoặc –
    Ừm.
    Vậy điều này là phân chia bên.
    Thú vị thật.
    Và rồi cái đuôi vẫy, bạn nói một con chó vẫy bên trái thì thường tiêu cực, bên phải thì tích cực hơn.
    Còn về những cú vẫy toàn bộ thì sao?
    Ừ, cú vẫy toàn bộ.
    Và tôi không biết chi tiết về điều này, nhưng chắc chắn loại vẫy đuôi, liệu nó có rất thấp và nhanh hay cao và cứng thì sẽ truyền đạt các trạng thái cảm xúc khác nhau.
    Bạn có nghĩ rằng theo thời gian chúng ta học những tín hiệu này mà không nhận ra rằng mình đang học không?
    Có, hoàn toàn.
    Bởi vì chúng ta liên kết nó với việc chú chó của chúng ta ở trong một hoàn cảnh cụ thể hoặc cư xử theo một cách nào đó?
    Vì các nghiên cứu đã chỉ ra rằng chúng ta, những người có kinh nghiệm, thực sự – chúng ta học cách đọc chó qua sự tiếp xúc, thậm chí là tiếp xúc thụ động, chỉ đơn giản sống trong một môi trường.
    Và rõ ràng, nếu chúng ta sống trong một nền văn hóa mà chó sống gần gũi với con người, chúng ta sẽ giỏi hơn trong việc đọc chó hơn so với các nền văn hóa mà chó không tương tác nhiều với con người.
    Vậy thì có điều đó. Và cũng có một điểm – vấn đề rằng chúng ta thường tốt hơn trong việc đọc ngôn ngữ cơ thể tổng thể hơn là đọc biểu cảm khuôn mặt.
    Rõ ràng, một lý do là chó cử động các cơ mặt khác nhau khi chúng tạo ra biểu cảm khuôn mặt cảm xúc. Chúng cử động các cơ khác với những gì con người làm.
    Bạn có thể cho chúng tôi biết về biểu cảm khuôn mặt của chó không?
    Chà, đã có một số nghiên cứu trong vài năm qua xem xét các cơ nào đang cử động khi, trong các bối cảnh nào.
    Vì vậy họ sẽ cho chó tiếp xúc với các loại kích thích khác nhau và họ sẽ quay phim chó và xem các cơ nào đang co giật ở đâu. Mặt mũi đang di chuyển như thế nào phản ứng lại các kích thích này?
    Vì vậy các loại nghiên cứu đó đã phát hiện rằng, bạn biết đấy, khi bạn – khi một con chó tiếp xúc với, giả sử, âm thanh của sấm sét hoặc pháo nổ, chúng sẽ thể hiện một cấu hình khuôn mặt nhất định. Khi chủ của chúng trở về nhà sau khi không thấy trong vài giờ, chúng sẽ thể hiện một cấu hình khuôn mặt khác và nhiều thứ khác nữa.
    Vì vậy có vẻ như chúng thực sự thể hiện biểu cảm khuôn mặt. Chỉ là một số trong số đó không phải là những cơ giống như chúng ta thể hiện trong trạng thái cảm xúc tương ứng.
    Vì vậy điều đó sẽ, tôi nghĩ, khiến chúng ta dễ mắc sai lầm khi đọc biểu cảm khuôn mặt của chó từ góc độ đó.
    Nhưng một lần nữa, nếu chúng ta sống cùng chó, chúng ta bắt đầu – chúng ta sẽ không chỉ quan sát biểu cảm khuôn mặt. Chúng ta sẽ quan sát toàn bộ con chó.
    Và chúng ta thường tốt hơn trong việc đọc ngôn ngữ cơ thể của chúng hơn là đọc biểu cảm khuôn mặt của chúng.
    Mặc dù tôi nghĩ rằng các nghiên cứu cũng cho thấy mặt là nơi chúng ta nhìn đầu tiên.
    Những hành vi nào ở chó được duy trì từ các tương tác với chó khác khi chúng tương tác với con người?
    Chẳng hạn, nếu một ai đó dự định đưa một con chó đi dạo và nó quen thuộc với âm thanh của dây xích được tháo khỏi móc hoặc một điều gì đó như vậy, thì không phải hiếm khi một con chó vào tư thế kéo dài chân trước dài, mà mọi người gọi là “down dog” trong yoga.
    Và một số người sẽ nói đó là một loại di sản của tư thế chơi của chó con.
    Một lần nữa, mọi người nói những điều này.
    Mọi người thường tự phong mình là chuyên gia về chó.
    Điều này khá thú vị.
    Và tôi đã học điều này từ việc nghiên cứu trực tuyến rằng những trại khác nhau của những “chuyên gia” về chó không ngừng tranh cãi kịch liệt với nhau.
    Ý tôi là họ viết cho tôi nói rằng, bạn biết đấy, họ thật tồi tệ. Người này thì tàn nhẫn. Bạn biết đấy, họ đổ lỗi cho nhau về tội tàn nhẫn với động vật vì các công cụ huấn luyện khác nhau.
    Chúng ta sẽ nói về điều đó một chút sau.
    Nhưng chó sẽ thực hiện động tác kiểu “down dog”, dù điều đó có nghĩa là gì, với những con chó khác và chúng cũng sẽ làm điều đó với con người.
    Bạn có nghĩ rằng nó có nghĩa giống nhau trong hai bối cảnh khác nhau đó không?
    Có lẽ là có.
    Cái động tác chơi mà bạn mô tả là cái được gọi là tín hiệu meta cho việc chơi.
    Vì vậy nó thường được thể hiện trong bối cảnh chơi.
    Và tôi chưa thấy nó được mô tả. Nhưng một lần nữa, tôi không phải là người nuôi chó.
    Nhưng tôi chưa thấy nó được mô tả trong bối cảnh “chúng ta đi dạo nhé”.
    Nhưng chắc chắn trong bối cảnh chơi, theo như tôi biết, chó chơi hơi khác với con người hơn là với những con chó khác.
    Nhưng chúng thực sự thích chơi với con người.
    Và đôi khi tôi nghĩ chúng ta, những người, gặp khó khăn trong việc biết liệu những gì mình thấy là chơi hay là hành vi tấn công, vì sẽ có các yếu tố từ hành vi tấn công trong tư thế chơi.
    Nhưng thường thì điều chúng ta có thể làm là tìm kiếm những gì được gọi là MARS, M-A-R-S.
    So M là tín hiệu meta.
    Đó là những cú cúi chào chơi.
    Hoặc ở những loài khác, sẽ có những hành vi khác mà kiểu như chỉ ra rằng tôi muốn chơi.
    Tôi biết tinh tinh có khoảng 30 hoặc 50 tín hiệu meta khác nhau để chơi.
    M-A-A là để chuyển đổi hoạt động.
    Vì vậy, chúng ta sẽ thấy những hành vi khác nhau.
    Chúng có thể đang đuổi nhau.
    Chúng có thể nhảy bổ.
    Chúng có thể đang vật lộn, cắn nhau.
    Nhưng bạn sẽ thấy những sự chuyển đổi hoạt động này.
    Và nó không theo cùng một thứ tự giống như khi chúng thực sự đang đánh nhau.
    M-A-R-R là để đảo vai.
    Vì vậy, bạn sẽ thấy rằng những con chó, nếu chúng có kích cỡ khác nhau hoặc sức bền khác nhau hoặc to lớn hơn hoặc khả năng chiến đấu của chúng, sẽ thay phiên nhau thắng và thua.
    Vâng, tôi đã thấy điều đó.
    Vâng, vì không có gì vui nếu bạn thua liên tục khi chơi.
    Vì vậy, để tiếp tục chơi, chú chó to hơn cần phải thua đôi khi.
    Vì vậy, chúng cần, để duy trì sự tương tác này, đó là cách để làm điều đó.
    Và cái cuối cùng, S, là tự tước bỏ khả năng bản thân.
    Vì vậy, con chó lớn sẽ tự tước bỏ khả năng của chính nó.
    Bạn có thể thấy chúng đang chơi kéo co và con chó lớn chỉ đứng đó giữ đồ vật.
    Và con chó nhỏ thì kéo và thực sự cố gắng lấy nó.
    Và con chó lớn thì chỉ đứng đó không làm gì cả.
    Nhưng nếu một người nào đó lấy đồ chơi và bắt đầu kéo, thì con chó lớn sẽ tham gia và bắt đầu thể hiện sức mạnh của nó và gia tăng hành vi đó.
    Đó là một điều đẹp khi bạn thấy động vật điều chỉnh mức độ nhiệt huyết trong trò chơi.
    Vâng, vâng.
    Để trò chơi có thể tiếp tục.
    Thật ngọt ngào.
    Ý tôi là, điều đó nêu lên một câu hỏi lớn hơn, đó là, chó có lòng đồng cảm không?
    Ôi, tôi nghĩ là có.
    Chắc chắn rồi.
    Tôi không thể nói tôi đã thấy bất kỳ nghiên cứu nào về điều đó, nhưng chỉ là, vâng.
    Ý tôi là, tôi nghĩ nhiều chủ chó quen thuộc với việc khi chúng ta buồn, một con chó thường lại đến gần thay vì lùi xa.
    Tôi đã thấy một số khoảnh khắc đáng kinh ngạc.
    Bạn biết đấy, chúng ta diễn giải những điều này, đúng không?
    Chúng ta nhân cách hóa.
    Nhưng tôi có một người ở trong nhà của tôi nhiều năm trước, người đang buồn vì cái chết trong gia đình, và Costello đã đến và, bạn biết đấy, để một bàn chân lên đầu gối của cô ấy.
    Và thật khó để không diễn giải điều đó như một khoảnh khắc đồng cảm có ý nghĩa.
    Ai mà biết được nó đang trải nghiệm điều gì?
    Có thể nó đang cảm thấy lo lắng, ai mà biết.
    Nhưng cách giải thích tích cực hơn là nó muốn thể hiện sự an ủi.
    Tôi nghĩ rằng nó có lý từ góc độ tiến hóa rằng những loài động vật xã hội sống trong một nhóm xã hội gắn bó sẽ giỏi trong việc đọc trạng thái cảm xúc của nhau và cũng giỏi trong việc cố gắng giảm thiểu cảm xúc tiêu cực nếu có thể làm điều đó.
    Và vì vậy tôi sẽ mong đợi điều này ở bất kỳ loài nào thuộc dạng tiến hóa cao hơn.
    Tôi nghĩ rằng sẽ có một số loại đồng cảm.
    Tôi muốn tranh thủ một chút thời gian và ghi nhận nhà tài trợ của chúng tôi, AG1.
    AG1 là một loại đồ uống vitamin-khoáng-probiotic mà cũng chứa những chất thích ứng.
    Tôi bắt đầu dùng AG1 từ năm 2012, lâu trước khi tôi thậm chí biết podcast là gì.
    Tôi bắt đầu dùng nó, và tôi vẫn dùng mỗi ngày vì nó đảm bảo rằng tôi đáp ứng đủ lượng vitamin và khoáng chất hàng ngày, và giúp đảm bảo rằng tôi nhận đủ prebiotics và probiotics để hỗ trợ sức khỏe đường ruột của tôi.
    Trong suốt 10 năm qua, sức khỏe đường ruột đã xuất hiện như một điều mà chúng ta nhận ra là quan trọng không chỉ cho sức khỏe tiêu hóa của chúng ta, mà còn cho hệ miễn dịch và cho sự sản xuất neurotransmitter và neuromodulator, những thứ như dopamine và serotonin.
    Nói cách khác, sức khỏe đường ruột rất quan trọng cho chức năng não bộ thích hợp.
    Bây giờ, tất nhiên, tôi cố gắng ăn thực phẩm nguyên chất lành mạnh từ các nguồn không chế biến cho phần lớn chế độ dinh dưỡng của tôi, nhưng vẫn có một số thứ trong AG1, bao gồm các vi chất dinh dưỡng cụ thể, rất khó hoặc không thể có được từ thực phẩm nguyên chất.
    Vì vậy, bằng cách dùng AG1 hàng ngày, tôi nhận được các vitamin và khoáng chất mà tôi cần, cùng với probiotics và prebiotics cho sức khỏe đường ruột, và lần lượt, sức khỏe não bộ và hệ miễn dịch, cùng với các chất thích ứng và vi chất dinh dưỡng cần thiết cho tất cả các cơ quan và mô của cơ thể.
    Vì vậy, bất cứ khi nào ai đó hỏi tôi nếu họ chỉ nên dùng một loại thực phẩm bổ sung, loại thực phẩm bổ sung đó nên là gì, tôi luôn nói AG1, vì AG1 hỗ trợ rất nhiều hệ thống khác nhau trong não bộ và cơ thể liên quan đến sức khỏe tâm lý, sức khỏe thể chất và hiệu suất của chúng ta.
    Nếu bạn muốn thử AG1, bạn có thể vào trang drinkAG1.com slash Huberman.
    Trong tháng này thôi, tháng 4 năm 2025, AG1 đang tặng một tháng cung cấp omega-3 miễn phí, cùng với một chai vitamin D3 cộng với K2.
    Như tôi đã nhấn mạnh trước đây trong podcast này, omega-3 và vitamin D3 cộng với K2 đã được chứng minh là giúp với mọi thứ từ tâm trạng và sức khỏe não bộ đến sức khỏe tim mạch và sản xuất hormone lành mạnh, và nhiều hơn nữa.
    Một lần nữa, đó là drinkAG1.com slash Huberman để nhận tháng cung cấp omega-3 miễn phí, cùng với một chai vitamin D3 cộng với K2 khi bạn đăng ký.
    Tập hôm nay cũng được mang đến cho chúng ta bởi Juve.
    Juve chế tạo các thiết bị liệu pháp ánh sáng đỏ y tế.
    Bây giờ, nếu có một điều tôi đã nhấn mạnh liên tục trong podcast này, đó là tác động tuyệt vời mà ánh sáng có thể có đối với sinh học của chúng ta.
    Ngoài ánh sáng mặt trời, ánh sáng đỏ và ánh sáng gần hồng ngoại đã được chứng minh là có tác động tích cực đến việc cải thiện nhiều khía cạnh của sức khỏe tế bào và cơ quan, bao gồm phục hồi cơ bắp nhanh chóng hơn, cải thiện sức khỏe da và lành vết thương, cải thiện mụn trứng cá, giảm đau và viêm, thậm chí chức năng ti thể, và cải thiện cả thị lực.
    Điều khiến đèn Juve khác biệt và tại sao chúng là thiết bị liệu pháp ánh sáng đỏ mà tôi ưa thích là vì chúng sử dụng các bước sóng đã được chứng minh lâm sàng, nghĩa là các bước sóng cụ thể của ánh sáng đỏ và ánh sáng gần hồng ngoại kết hợp để kích thích các thích nghi tế bào tối ưu.
    Cá nhân tôi, tôi sử dụng bàn Juve toàn thân khoảng ba đến bốn lần mỗi tuần, và tôi sử dụng đèn cầm tay Juve cả ở nhà và khi tôi đi du lịch.
    Nếu bạn muốn thử Juve, bạn có thể vào trang Juve, đánh vần là J-O-O-V-V dot com slash Huberman.
    Juve đang cung cấp một ưu đãi độc quyền cho tất cả thính giả của Huberman Lab với mức giảm lên đến 400 đô la cho các sản phẩm của Juve. Một lần nữa, đó là Juve, đánh vần là J-O-O-V-V, truy cập vào trang web juve.com slash Huberman để nhận ưu đãi giảm giá lên đến 400 đô la.
    Tôi luôn cảm thấy thích thú và tò mò về thực tế rằng nếu hai con vật cùng loài nhận thức ăn hoặc phần thưởng, thì dường như, tôi không biết, nhưng có vẻ như chúng đang chú ý đến việc con kia nhận được bao nhiêu phần thưởng. Và trong vai trò là một người em, tôi có một chị gái mà tôi rất hòa hợp với chị và luôn như vậy, nhưng khi còn nhỏ, tôi sẽ không bao giờ quên, như là, nếu có một phần thưởng, như là một cốc milkshake hoặc gì đó, chị ấy sẽ chỉ ra rằng chị ấy có một chút nhiều hơn tôi. Nếu có một miếng bánh hay gì đó, khoảng thời gian chúng tôi nhìn vào miếng bánh được phục vụ cho chúng tôi, chúng tôi đang cố gắng xem người kia nhận được bao nhiêu. Và điều này là một phản xạ, và thực sự chúng tôi không cạnh tranh trong bất kỳ khía cạnh nào. Chúng tôi luôn tôn trọng điểm mạnh và điểm yếu của nhau theo cách rất bổ sung cho nhau. Nhưng khi nói đến phần thưởng, cả con người và chó đều chú ý rất nhiều đến việc ai nhận được cái gì. Công bằng, đúng vậy.
    Có một thí nghiệm được thực hiện trên khỉ capuchin bởi Franz Duval và nhóm của ông ấy, và rõ ràng họ đã thực hiện nó, và họ đã công bố một bài báo về nó, nhưng không ai đọc. Sau đó, như một thập kỷ sau, chuẩn bị cho một buổi thuyết trình, họ đã làm lại một số thí nghiệm và quay phim, và ông ấy đã chia sẻ điều đó trong buổi thuyết trình. Tôi không biết bạn đã xem chưa, nhưng về cơ bản, đó là hai con khỉ capuchin, và chúng ở bên cạnh nhau để mỗi con có thể nhìn thấy những gì con kia nhận được, và chúng được yêu cầu làm một nhiệm vụ. Như là, nhà nghiên cứu đưa cho chúng một viên đá, và chúng đưa trả lại cho nhà nghiên cứu, và sau đó chúng nhận được một phần thưởng, như là một phần thưởng cho hành vi đó. Vì vậy, con khỉ đầu tiên nhận được một miếng dưa chuột, nó vui vẻ ăn miếng dưa chuột đó, và sau đó nhà nghiên cứu quay sang con khỉ thứ hai và yêu cầu hành vi tương tự, nhận được hành vi tương tự, và cho con đó một trái nho. Và khỉ capuchin không quá thích dưa chuột, nhưng chúng rất thích nho. Vì vậy, khi cô ấy quay lại với con khỉ đầu tiên và lặp lại hành vi và lại cho nó một miếng dưa chuột mà nó đã vui vẻ ăn cách đây khoảng 30 giây, nó thực sự nổi cơn tam bành và ném lại viên dưa chuột về phía nhà nghiên cứu, kiểu như, “Tôi thấy bạn cho thằng kia ăn trái nho,” và khán giả thì đang cười, vì vậy tôi nghĩ tất cả chúng ta đều nhận thấy rằng tình huống này khiến chúng ta cảm thấy bực bội khi người khác nhận được phần thưởng tốt hơn cho cùng một chất lượng công việc. Vâng, tôi luôn quan tâm đến những nghiên cứu mà vài năm một lần, có điều gì đó – tôi không biết điều này, vì vậy cảm ơn bạn đã chia sẻ – mà tiết lộ thông tin về phân bổ tài nguyên.
    Và sau mỗi một trong số đó, sẽ có một nghiên cứu cho thấy, ví dụ – và tôi sẽ không nêu chi tiết chính xác ở đây – nhưng rằng chim quạ sẽ dạy nhau cách mở hộp để con khác có thể lấy thức ăn, ngay cả khi chúng không có quyền truy cập vào thức ăn đó, dù chúng không có quyền truy cập vào thức ăn đó, chỉ – có vẻ như là một hành động vị tha. Vì vậy, chúng ta sẽ thấy sự công bằng, chúng ta sẽ thấy lòng vị tha. Ồ, đúng vậy. Một bức tranh rất khác so với toàn bộ khái niệm về cấp bậc thống trị trong mỗi thành viên của một loài chỉ đang cố gắng lấy được nhiều nhất có thể, thậm chí có thể gây hại cho người khác. Điều đó thật đẹp theo một cách nào đó, và chúng ta, một lần nữa, phải cẩn thận không nhân cách hóa, không giả định rằng các thành viên của một loài làm điều này chỉ vì họ từ bi. Đó là một cách giải thích hay – tôi thích cách giải thích đó. Nhưng có lẽ, như bạn đã chỉ ra trước đó, việc có một nhóm hạnh phúc sẽ mang lại sự hạnh phúc hơn cho bản thân. Chắc chắn rồi. Tôi nghĩ nếu nhóm đang làm tốt, thì tất cả mọi người sẽ tốt hơn.
    Vì vậy, chúng tôi từng nghĩ rằng chỉ có việc lựa chọn cá nhân, nhưng cũng có một lượng nhất định về lựa chọn nhóm. Vì vậy, lựa chọn cá nhân là mạnh hơn, nhưng chắc chắn nếu có một nhóm hợp tác tốt hơn, thì nhóm đó sẽ làm tốt hơn so với nhóm không hợp tác tốt. Và điều đó thật thú vị. Bạn đã đề cập vài lần về nguy cơ nhân cách hóa. Và tôi nghĩ rằng nếu chúng ta nhìn nhận điều đó như một loại tiếp nối từ nhân cách hóa, mà chúng ta có thể định nghĩa rằng, bạn biết đấy, nghĩ rằng động vật cũng giống như con người. Chúng chỉ có một lớp lông, vì vậy chúng khác một chút, nhưng nói chung là khá giống nhau. Và ở bên kia là điều mà chúng ta có thể gọi là sự phủ nhận nhân cách. Đó là một thuật ngữ cũng được Franz Duval sáng tạo, người có thí nghiệm khỉ Capuchin, nơi mà chúng ta không nhận ra rằng thực tế có những điểm chung giữa con người và các loài động vật khác. Và tôi nghĩ rằng trong nỗi sợ hãi về nhân cách hóa, chúng ta đã rơi vào sự phủ nhận nhân cách. Và tôi nghĩ rằng câu trả lời có lẽ ở đâu đó ở giữa, rằng chúng ta có nhiều điểm chung với động vật. Tôi nghĩ rằng, ví dụ, mặc dù cách chúng ta cảm nhận thế giới có thể rất khác nhau, cách chúng ta xử lý thông tin đó và các loại phản ứng cảm xúc và tâm trạng, những thay đổi trong tâm trạng mà chúng ta nhận được để đáp lại môi trường đều rất giống nhau, mặc dù sẽ có những kích thích khác nhau mà các loài động vật khác nhau chú ý đến, mà có liên quan nhiều hay ít đến chúng, tùy thuộc vào loài nào. Nhưng tôi nghĩ rằng chúng ta đã rơi vào – chúng ta đã tránh chủ đề nhân cách này đến mức, chúng ta đã rất sợ hãi nó, đến mức đã rơi vào cái bẫy khác, đó là phủ nhận rằng chúng không có gì liên quan đến chúng ta.
    Hãy nói về một loài có thể gây chia rẽ, đó là mèo. Ồ. Chị gái tôi nuôi mèo, và tôi không phản đối chúng. Tôi không thể nói rằng tôi hợp với chúng, nhưng tôi cũng không ghét chúng. Vâng. Bạn có một con mèo. Đúng. Và bạn là một nhà nghiên cứu động vật học. Vâng. Hãy cho chúng tôi biết về mèo từ góc nhìn của một nhà nghiên cứu động vật.
    Khi bạn nhìn vào một con mèo, bạn đang tìm kiếm điều gì để cho biết liệu nó có phải là một con mèo thân thiện hay không? Ý tôi là, rõ ràng, nếu lông của nó dựng đứng lên, nó đang uốn cong người và khè khè, điều đó hiển nhiên. Nhưng bạn đang nhìn vào điều gì trong bối cảnh cách mà mèo tiến hóa và loài của chúng nói chung?
    Con mèo nhà mà chúng ta có ngày nay như một thú cưng đã tiến hóa như một thợ săn đơn độc, nhưng thường tụ tập thành các nhóm xã hội lỏng lẻo. Chúng tụ tập cùng nhau, nhưng không phải là một nhóm thực sự gắn bó. Và chúng săn mồi một mình, vì vậy chúng cũng sẽ ăn một mình.
    Là một nhà động vật học, những gì tôi thường làm khi nhìn vào một loài động vật là tôi xem xét ba điều. Tôi xem xét môi trường xã hội của chúng. Thông thường với mèo, tôi sẽ nói rằng nếu chúng được nuôi dưỡng tốt, tức là có cơ hội dành đủ thời gian với mẹ, thường là lên đến 14 tuần, mà tôi nghĩ rằng chúng ta thấy điều đó ở Thụy Điển ngày nay. Tôi không biết tình hình như thế nào ở Mỹ, nhưng có vẻ như đó là khoảng thời gian đủ dài để con vật thực sự học cách làm mèo, để chúng không bị ảnh hưởng quá nhiều về mặt cảm xúc bởi sự cách ly khi chúng ta cai sữa cho chúng và đưa chúng vào một môi trường mới.
    Vì vậy, chỉ cần nhìn vào khía cạnh xã hội là điều đầu tiên mà tôi làm. Điều thứ hai mà tôi làm là nhìn xem chúng kiếm thức ăn như thế nào. Một lần nữa, mèo là những thợ săn đơn độc. Vì vậy, tôi sẽ tìm hiểu về cách mà chúng, và trái ngược với chó, mèo thường giữ nguyên toàn bộ chuỗi săn mồi. Đôi khi cú cắn giết không hoàn chỉnh, nhưng chắc chắn rằng cú cắn giữ và thực tế là một số con mèo, nếu đó là mèo đi ra ngoài, có thể mang con mồi về nhà cũng với tôi, đó chỉ đơn giản là vì chúng cảm thấy an toàn, vì vậy chúng chỉ mang con mồi về một nơi mà chúng cảm thấy an toàn. Vì vậy, đó không phải là một món quà. Chúng ta có thể không nghĩ về điều đó như một món quà.
    Tôi không nói rằng đó là một món quà. Tôi đã có một bạn gái trong trường sau đại học và con mèo của cô ấy thường bắt những con chuột lớn và bỏ chúng vào giày của chúng tôi vào ban đêm. Thật kinh khủng. Liệu con mèo có bỏ chúng vào giày hay là những con chuột ẩn nấp trong giày? À, chúng đã chết khi chúng tôi tìm thấy chúng. Vì vậy, tôi giả định rằng con mèo đã bỏ chúng vào giày. Con mèo cũng thích nhặt những quả bóng nhôm nhỏ. Tôi chưa bao giờ thấy một con mèo nhặt. Ồ, đúng rồi. Ban đầu tôi không. Bạn có thể học điều đó. Tôi không quá nhiệt tình về con mèo. Và rồi tôi đã phát triển một mối quan hệ rất thân thiết với nó. Ít nhất từ phía tôi, tôi nghĩ đó là một mối quan hệ thân thiết. Và nó sẽ bắt chuột, bỏ chúng vào giày của chúng tôi vào ban đêm khi chúng tôi đang ngủ. Thật không dễ chịu chút nào. Bạn phải kiểm tra giày của mình vào buổi sáng. Vì vậy, những điều đó không phải là những món quà. Tôi sẽ không cho rằng chúng là những món quà. Không, không. Theo những gì tôi biết, mèo sẽ mang những gì chúng bắt trở lại một nơi mà chúng cảm thấy an toàn. Và sau đó chúng thường mất hứng thú nếu không còn chuyển động nữa.
    Và nếu, rõ ràng, nếu con mèo của bạn hoặc con mèo đó đã giết những con chuột, thì con mèo đó đã tiến rất gần đến cú cắn giết thực sự. Nhiều con mèo không làm điều đó. Chúng chỉ có cú cắn giữ. Vì vậy, chúng sẽ chỉ để cho con chuột nhỏ chạy đi. Tôi đã thấy điều đó. Ồ, chúng sẽ chơi với chúng, phải không, Dale? Vâng. Vì vậy, chúng sẽ để cho nó đi và nếu con chuột vẫn đứng yên, chúng thực sự có thể thoát khỏi sự chú ý vì con vật, con mèo có thể sẽ thấy chán và đi ra ngoài. Nhưng khoảnh khắc chúng bắt đầu di chuyển nó một lần nữa, thì chúng như đang khởi động lại toàn bộ chuỗi săn mồi.
    Nhưng quay trở lại câu hỏi của bạn về cách tương tác với mèo hoặc cách đọc chúng. Vì vậy, điều thứ ba mà tôi đang quan tâm là các loài động vật trước mặt tôi, chúng phản ứng như thế nào trước mối đe dọa mà chúng cảm nhận? Và tôi nói rằng đe dọa cảm nhận ở đây bởi vì đôi khi chúng ta có ý định tốt. Chúng ta như, chào, và chúng ta muốn ôm chúng bởi vì chúng ta là loài primates và chúng thực sự không thích điều đó. Vì vậy, chúng sẽ phản ứng với chúng ta như thể chúng ta là một kẻ săn mồi. Và tôi nghĩ rằng điều đó, một lần nữa, liên quan rất nhiều đến các loại tương tác, tương tác xã hội, loại học tập mà động vật đó đã trải qua khi chúng thực sự còn nhỏ.
    Vì vậy, chẳng hạn, có một nghiên cứu cho thấy nếu bạn xử lý những con mèo con khi chúng từ hai đến tám tuần tuổi ít nhất một giờ mỗi ngày. Và khi tôi nói xử lý, tôi chỉ có nghĩa là tương tác với chúng và chơi đùa và để chúng ở trong lòng bạn, v.v. Chúng sẽ trở nên rất xã hội khi trưởng thành. Vì vậy, chúng sẽ là loại mèo nhảy lên đùi bạn và ngủ gật trong tiếng rừ rừ. Nếu bạn tương tác với những con mèo con đó ít hơn 15 phút mỗi ngày, chúng sẽ không sợ người, nhưng chúng sẽ giống như đi đến bạn và chào và sau đó đi xa.
    Con mèo xa lạ. Con mèo xa lạ. Vâng. Vì vậy, tôi nghĩ rằng những trải nghiệm trong cuộc sống sớm có thể thực sự định hình loại tính cách, nếu bạn muốn, hoặc cách mà động vật phản ứng một cách mạnh mẽ đối với những thay đổi trong môi trường.
    Hành vi va chạm này, khi con mèo đụng đầu vào bạn hoặc cánh tay của bạn là gì? Phải chăng để phát tán mùi? Vâng, tôi sẽ nói rằng đó là đánh dấu mùi. Vâng. Vì vậy, khi chúng đang đánh dấu mùi cho bạn, tại sao chúng lại đánh dấu mùi? Tôi nghĩ rằng đó là, giống như một hành động mà bạn làm trong nhóm của bạn. Bạn thực hiện đánh dấu mùi lẫn nhau, có nghĩa là mọi người trong nhóm sẽ có mùi gần như giống nhau. Vì vậy, đó là một cách để chào hỏi và kết hợp những người khác trong nhóm. Sẽ có nhiều sự trao đổi mùi trong loại loài sống trong một nhóm này. Đó sẽ là suy đoán của tôi về lý do tại sao chúng làm điều đó.
    Vậy việc đánh dấu mùi cũng liên quan đến lãnh thổ không? Như nếu một con mèo, bạn biết đấy, đánh dấu mùi ở các góc và… Ồ, đúng rồi.
    Họ, nhưng đó là một câu chuyện khác, thường không phải như vậy, vì chúng có nhiều tuyến mồ hôi trên mặt, và một trong số đó được sử dụng để đánh dấu mùi lãnh thổ bên trong, đây là nơi mà chúng cảm thấy thực sự an toàn. Và sau đó chúng thường có dấu hiệu đánh dấu bằng nước tiểu, mà thường nằm ở rìa lãnh thổ. Bạn có thể thấy điều này nếu bạn, chẳng hạn, có một con mèo ở trong nhà và chúng bắt đầu đi tiểu, khi bạn lấy một mảnh giấy và vẽ sơ đồ ngôi nhà hoặc căn hộ của bạn, và bạn bắt đầu đánh dấu một vòng tròn nơi bạn tìm thấy nước tiểu, điều đó sẽ cung cấp cho bạn rất nhiều thông tin. Bởi vì nếu đó là vấn đề lãnh thổ, nó thường ở rìa, ở những nơi gần cửa sổ hoặc cửa ra vào. Nếu đó là một vấn đề về việc bài tiết mà con mèo gặp phải, có thể là nó đau khi đi tiểu. Vậy nên nó học cách liên kết cơn đau với việc đi vào hộp. Và vì vậy, hộp bắt đầu đại diện cho những trải nghiệm đau đớn. Vì vậy, nó sẽ bắt đầu đi ra ngoài hộp. Nhưng kiểu hành vi đó sẽ được thấy trong ngữ cảnh đó. Thú vị đấy. Vì vậy, nếu mèo của bạn đi tiểu ở trong nhà, bạn có một thí nghiệm để tiến hành. Việc sử dụng hộp cát thật sự thú vị với tôi. Đây không phải là một điều tôi đã suy nghĩ nhiều. Nhưng nếu bạn lùi lại một chút và nói, được rồi, đây là một loài động vật mà chúng ta đã thuần hóa. Và nó dễ dàng học cách che giấu chất thải của mình, điều này rất khác biệt so với một con chó, mà có thể được huấn luyện để nhịn đi cho đến khi bạn ra ngoài đi dạo. Đó là hai chiến lược khác nhau. Và tôi không biết điều gì xảy ra nếu bạn nuôi một con khỉ hay một loài khác. Nhưng điều gì về hành vi che giấu chất thải? Có phải đó là điều gì đó ở mèo? Có phải đó là một hành vi tự nhiên mà chúng làm trong tự nhiên? Và nếu chúng lang thang, tại sao lại bận tâm? Cũng có liên quan đến điều này là với chó, thường sau khi chúng bài tiết, chúng sẽ bước đi khỏi đó và đá đất về hướng chung chung. Và tôi đã nghe hai cách giải thích về điều này. Một là chúng đang cố gắng lan tỏa mùi, và cái khác là chúng đang cố gắng che giấu chất thải. Vì vậy, một lần nữa, đây là lý do tại sao tôi quan tâm đến việc nói chuyện với một nhà động vật học hành vi hơn là một huấn luyện viên hành vi thú cưng, đúng không? Tôi cũng quan tâm đến điều đó, nhưng tôi nghĩ chúng ta phải, một lần nữa, thừa nhận rằng phần lớn cách giải thích mà chúng ta có về hành vi của động vật chỉ là sự giải thích của con người. Đúng vậy, chắc chắn rồi. Vậy điều này, việc che giấu chất thải, là gì? Chúng ta có biết nó có tác dụng gì trong tự nhiên, ở mèo không? Việc che giấu chất thải là một cách để giảm nguy cơ nhiễm trùng. Tôi giả sử rằng chúng cũng không bài tiết gần nơi mà chúng ăn. Vì vậy, nếu chúng ta có một con mèo trong nhà, chúng ta không nên đặt hộp cát bên cạnh thức ăn, mà tôi ước rằng tôi đã biết điều này khi tôi có con mèo đầu tiên cách đây 20 năm. Nó đã có sự sắp xếp rất rõ ràng với thức ăn ngay bên cạnh hộp cát. Và tôi cũng giả sử rằng hành vi của chó khi chúng đá vào phân của chúng thường thì, đúng, không phải nước tiểu, là một cách để lan tỏa mùi. Bởi vì nếu đó là việc che giấu mùi, hành vi sẽ trông rất khác, tôi nghĩ vậy. Nhưng tôi chưa thấy bất kỳ nghiên cứu khoa học nào về chủ đề đó. Được rồi. Vì vậy, những người nuôi mèo hãy chú ý, hãy tách thức ăn ra khỏi hộp cát một khoảng cách. Tôi luôn cảm thấy ngạc nhiên, mặc dù càng ít hơn theo thời gian, về việc con chó bulldog của tôi đặt bao nhiêu quyết tâm và nỗ lực vào việc đi tiểu lên mọi thứ khi đi dạo. Tôi cảm thấy đó là một trong những niềm vui lớn nhất trong cuộc sống của nó. Thế là tôi lại một lần nữa, nhân cách hóa. Nhưng để ngửi một cái gì đó rồi đi tiểu ở đó, nó dường như có một nguồn nước tiểu vô tận cho điều này. Thật đáng kinh ngạc. Đúng vậy. Bạn biết đấy, với tư cách là một nhà khoa học và người yêu chó, yêu nó, bạn biết đấy, nhiều hơn cả lời nói, tôi chỉ nghĩ, điều này thật tuyệt vời. Giống như, nó yêu thích hành vi này. Đúng vậy. Và nó cũng đang đọc ‘mã nước tiểu’ từ các chú chó khác trong khu vực. Vì vậy, nước tiểu cung cấp rất nhiều thông tin cho động vật khác. Nó cho biết giới tính, trạng thái sinh sản, có thể là một số điều về trạng thái cảm xúc hoặc trạng thái tâm lý của động vật. Vì vậy, tôi sẽ không ngần ngại nói rằng đó là một trong những niềm vui của cuộc sống của chó. Bởi vì, sau cùng, đó là cách chúng giao tiếp. Vì vậy, chúng dành rất nhiều thời gian để làm điều đó và chúng sẵn sàng làm việc để có cơ hội này. Vì vậy, chắc chắn, tôi nghĩ rằng điều đó mang lại cho chúng những trải nghiệm cảm xúc tích cực khi làm điều đó. Vì vậy, có một động lực bẩm sinh trong chó, có vẻ như, để đọc các trạng thái cảm xúc và hormone của các con chó khác đã ở đó. Đối với tôi, cảm giác như đó là hình thức truyền thông xã hội của chúng. Đúng vậy, đúng vậy. Giống như, tôi sẽ đăng ở đây. Những người khác đang đăng gì ở đây? Điều gì đang diễn ra? Đúng vậy, đúng vậy. Tôi có nghĩa là, rõ ràng, có một số khu vực trong não dành cho hành vi này. Tôi không đùa đâu. Bởi vì, tôi có nghĩa là, tôi nhìn vào – bạn biết đấy, cái não người, 40 phần trăm trong số đó là dành cho thị giác. 40 phần trăm còn lại, nó được pha trộn với các thứ khác, là dành cho hành vi vận động. Chúng ta có khu vực thần kinh dành cho việc ngửi và chắc chắn dành cho việc chạm. Nhưng ngay cả khi bạn là một nhà trị liệu xoa bóp hoặc bạn làm, bạn biết đấy, công việc dựa trên cảm giác, ngay cả khi bạn là người đọc chữ nổi, lượng khu vực thần kinh cho những thứ khác này lớn hơn rất nhiều, ngoại trừ đối với người mù, nơi mà phần thị giác được chiếm lĩnh bởi các thứ về cảm giác và thính giác. Vì vậy, lượng khu vực đó tương quan. Vì vậy, khi tôi thấy một hành vi giống như, đây là – đây là một trong những điều chính mà chó làm. Đúng vậy, đúng vậy, đúng vậy. Đúng vậy. Thật đáng chú ý. Đúng vậy. Vì vậy, chó có nguồn gốc từ – chúng đã được thuần hóa từ sói, đúng không. Điều đó có xảy ra ở các vị trí độc lập trên khắp thế giới không? Tôi không thực sự biết câu trả lời cho câu hỏi đó. Nhưng dường như chúng đã tự thuần hóa. Rằng đó là những con sói đã bắt đầu lảng vảng gần nơi cư trú của con người và rằng đó là những con sói ít sợ hãi nhất và kiểu khám phá nhất đã dám làm điều này.
    Vậy là không phải chúng ta đi bắt sói và nói, à, tôi sẽ nhân giống các bạn bây giờ.
    Mà thực ra, đó giống như là một mối quan hệ cộng sinh đã phát triển theo thời gian.
    Thú vị.
    Tôi không biết có loài nào khác làm vậy, trừ có thể như một số loài cá hoặc cá heo theo sau tàu đánh cá để chúng có thể lấy một ít cá.
    Nhưng điều đó khác vì bạn biết đấy, tôi thấy những video trên Instagram về một con rái cá nhảy lên kayak và có sự tương tác thường xuyên.
    Bạn biết đấy, người đó ra ngoài trên kayak của họ.
    Họ tương tác với con rái cá này.
    Vậy nên, động vật sẽ làm điều này.
    Nhưng thường có một số loại thức ăn – nghe có vẻ như lợi ích là thức ăn và an toàn thực sự là chìa khóa.
    Điều đó có nghĩa là động vật ở mức độ rất cơ bản đang tìm cách tối ưu hóa việc tiếp nhận thức ăn và an toàn hay không?
    Và điều đó cho chúng ta biết gì về sở thú?
    Cá nhân tôi có phản ứng rất mạnh mẽ với các sở thú có thú ăn thịt lớn.
    Tôi nhận ra rằng chúng ta có thể có một cuộc thảo luận về voi nữa.
    Nhưng tôi cảm thấy rằng việc nuôi nhốt thú ăn thịt lớn trong sở thú tạo ra một số vấn đề cho tôi.
    Tôi sẽ không đi sâu vào điều này.
    Nhưng tôi cũng nghe rằng các sở thú có các chương trình nhân giống tích cực, các chương trình bảo vệ các loài có nguy cơ tuyệt chủng.
    Quan điểm của bạn về sở thú là gì?
    Khi chúng ta nói về sở thú, có lẽ tốt để nói về sự tiến hóa của các sở thú.
    Bởi vì vào thời điểm cách đây khoảng 150 năm, nó từng giống như một sở thú hơn hay kém.
    Bạn biết đấy, đây là một con sư tử, và đây là một con voi, và đây là một con ngựa vằn.
    Và chúng ở trong những cái lồng nhỏ.
    Và điều duy nhất bạn làm là đơn giản là nhìn thấy động vật.
    Các sở thú ngày nay có xu hướng có mục đích thực hiện nhiều công việc bảo tồn.
    Vì vậy có cái gọi là bảo tồn in-situ, nơi bạn làm việc để bảo vệ các môi trường sống hoang dã và tạo ra các công viên quốc gia, v.v.
    Và tạo ra cơ hội để tái thả các loài và những thứ tương tự.
    Và có bảo tồn ex-situ, đó là nuôi giữ những loài động vật đang bị đe dọa tuyệt chủng trong một môi trường.
    Và lý tưởng thì, môi trường đó nên đủ tốt để thúc đẩy hành vi điển hình của loài và những thứ tương tự.
    Vì vậy, tôi, có nghĩa là, tôi đang mâu thuẫn.
    Tôi nghĩ rằng nhiều sở thú đang làm rất nhiều điều tốt trong nỗ lực này và cũng đang giáo dục công chúng.
    Và nhiều, tôi nghĩ rằng nhiều người đi đến sở thú có thể đánh thức trong họ một sự quan tâm đến động vật, điều mà tôi nghĩ là tốt khi chúng ta quan tâm đến động vật.
    Nhưng đôi khi việc nuôi nhốt lại không tối ưu.
    Và chắc chắn rằng một số loài khó giữ gìn hơn nhiều so với những loài khác.
    Chẳng hạn như gấu Bắc Cực rất khó giữ vì chúng là loài ăn thịt đi lang thang.
    Chúng đi bộ hàng dặm, hàng dặm, hàng dặm.
    Và thực sự khó để cung cấp cơ hội cụ thể cho loài trong nuôi nhốt so với những loài ăn thịt khác có một cách tiếp cận khác về việc săn mồi.
    Một trong những điều thực sự làm tôi ấn tượng về độ tinh vi hơn của các loài mèo so với những gì tôi từng nghĩ là điều gì đó đã xảy ra khi tôi là một nghiên cứu sinh sau tiến sĩ, cũng tại Stanford.
    Tôi là một thành viên của Sở thú San Francisco.
    Sở thú San Francisco là một sở thú ngoài trời so với hầu hết những sở thú khác mà tôi đã đến, và tôi không đi đến quá nhiều, nhưng cảnh quan ở đó khá đẹp.
    Có một khu trưng bày lemur ngoài trời, tôi gọi nó như vậy, nhưng bạn biết đấy, có một khu lemur trong nhà và ngoài trời.
    Điều đó thực sự tuyệt vời.
    Có một số con hươu cao cổ, tất cả những thứ này.
    Vào khoảng thời gian tôi ở đó, khi tôi là nghiên cứu sinh, tôi sẽ kể ngắn gọn câu chuyện này.
    Tôi đã đi xem phim ở San Francisco và tôi đã bước ra ngoài để lấy một cái gì đó uống.
    Và đứa trẻ phía sau quầy nói rằng một con hổ đã trốn khỏi Sở thú San Francisco và đang giết người.
    Và tôi đã nghĩ, cái gì, thật điên rồ.
    Hóa ra điều đó chỉ đúng một phần.
    Điều đã xảy ra là có một con hổ ở đó, Tatiana, họ từng có những cái mương quanh khu làm rào cho hổ.
    Và nó gần Giáng Sinh.
    Mọi người có thể tìm kiếm điều này và lấy chi tiết.
    Và có một vài đứa trẻ đã ném một cái gì đó hoặc ném một số quả thông vào những con hổ.
    Được rồi.
    Sở thú sắp đóng cửa.
    Tatiana đã chạy lên hoặc nhảy qua cái mương.
    Tôi không biết cô ấy đã làm điều đó như thế nào.
    Cô ấy ra ngoài và di chuyển qua đám đông.
    Đây là phần thú vị với tôi.
    Di chuyển qua đám đông, hoàn toàn bỏ qua hầu hết mọi người xung quanh.
    Cô ấy tập trung vào và giết một trong hai đứa trẻ.
    Sau đó chuyển sang đứa trẻ thứ hai.
    Cô ấy đã làm việc rất tốt với nó.
    Nhà chức trách xuất hiện.
    Giết Tatiana.
    Điều này mở ra một cuộc thảo luận toàn diện trong cộng đồng sở thú.
    Đặt ra rất nhiều câu hỏi phức tạp về các chuồng, v.v.
    Những cái rào ở đó, nhân tiện, bây giờ rất khác.
    Họ có những tấm kính cao như vậy.
    Và, dĩ nhiên, kết thúc thật buồn cho mọi người.
    Tôi đã tạm ngừng tư cách thành viên của tôi ở đó.
    Tôi đã kích hoạt lại vài năm sau.
    Họ biết, tôi không, con hổ đó rõ ràng đã biến mất.
    Nhưng tôi vẫn đang mâu thuẫn về toàn bộ bức tranh này.
    Điều thú vị đối với tôi là chủ định của con hổ.
    Vậy nên đây không phải là một con hổ khát máu chỉ muốn giết người hoặc ăn người.
    Mà là hai con người đó đã làm cô ấy tức giận và hai con người đó sẽ phải trả giá.
    Và họ đã trả giá.
    Gia đình đã kiện sở thú và sau đó đó là một vấn đề lớn.
    Tôi không biết nó kết thúc ra sao với vụ kiện.
    Nhưng đó là một vấn đề lớn.
    Vậy nên mọi người có thể tìm kiếm điều này trực tuyến.
    Khi bạn nghe rằng một con hổ đã làm điều đó, trái ngược với việc chỉ đi vào một cơn điên cuồng như cách mà con người đôi khi đi vào một cơn điên cuồng, tấn công bất cứ ai và càng nhiều người càng tốt.
    Bạn nghĩ gì?
    Điều đó cho chúng ta biết gì về những con hổ và ý thức của chúng?
    Tôi nghĩ rằng chúng ta thường không đánh giá đúng động vật.
    Đối với tôi, không có gì ngạc nhiên khi cô ấy đã trải qua một điều gì đó thực sự khó chịu mà cô ấy đã liên kết với hai cá nhân và điều đó đã tạo ra một trạng thái cảm xúc tiêu cực và hành vi hung hăng mà cô ấy đã thực hiện, được hướng tới hai người đó.
    Bạn có ngạc nhiên không về việc nó đã được chỉ đạo một cách rõ ràng như vậy?
    Không.
    Trái ngược với việc chỉ là, ý tôi là, có rất nhiều người xung quanh mà sẽ dễ dàng hơn để giết.
    Tôi nghĩ rằng một con vật sợ hãi có thể tấn công bất cứ ai.
    Nhưng một con vật đang tức giận thường có xu hướng hành động có tính toán hơn.
    Tính toán theo một cách nào đó.
    Vì vậy, tôi mong đợi rằng nếu bạn đã dọa con hổ, nó có thể sẽ thể hiện sự hung hăng phòng thủ,
    đó chỉ là phản ứng tấn công vào bất cứ ai ở gần nhất.
    Nhưng điều này là sự hung hăng tấn công.
    Và vì vậy đó là có tính toán.
    Tôi muốn tạm dừng một chút và cảm ơn một trong những nhà tài trợ của chúng tôi, Function.
    Năm ngoái, tôi đã trở thành thành viên của Function sau khi tìm kiếm cách tiếp cận toàn diện nhất
    đối với việc xét nghiệm trong phòng thí nghiệm.
    Function cung cấp hơn 100 xét nghiệm lab tiên tiến mà cung cấp cho bạn một cái nhìn tổng quan về toàn thể
    sức khỏe cơ thể của bạn.
    Cái nhìn tổng quát này mang đến cho bạn thông tin về sức khỏe tim mạch, sức khỏe hormone, chức năng miễn dịch,
    mức độ dinh dưỡng và nhiều hơn nữa.
    Họ cũng đã gần đây thêm các xét nghiệm cho các chất độc như BPA từ nhựa có hại và
    các xét nghiệm cho PFAS hay hóa chất vĩnh viễn.
    Function không chỉ cung cấp xét nghiệm cho hơn 100 dấu hiệu sinh học quan trọng đối với sức khỏe thể chất và tinh thần của bạn,
    mà họ cũng phân tích những kết quả này và cung cấp thông tin từ những bác sĩ hàng đầu
    chuyên về các lĩnh vực liên quan.
    Ví dụ, trong một trong những xét nghiệm đầu tiên của tôi với Function, tôi đã biết rằng tôi có mức thủy ngân cao trong máu.
    Function không chỉ giúp tôi phát hiện ra điều đó, mà còn cung cấp thông tin về cách tốt nhất để giảm mức thủy ngân của tôi,
    bao gồm cả việc hạn chế tiêu thụ cá ngừ.
    Tôi đã ăn rất nhiều cá ngừ trong khi cũng cố gắng ăn nhiều rau xanh hơn
    và bổ sung NAC và acetylcysteine, cả hai đều có thể hỗ trợ sản xuất glutathione
    và quá trình giải độc.
    Và tôi nên nói rằng, bằng cách thực hiện một xét nghiệm thứ hai với Function, cách tiếp cận đó đã hiệu quả.
    Xét nghiệm máu toàn diện rất quan trọng.
    Có rất nhiều điều liên quan đến sức khỏe tâm lý và thể chất của bạn mà chỉ có thể được phát hiện
    qua xét nghiệm máu.
    Vấn đề là xét nghiệm máu luôn rất đắt và phức tạp.
    Ngược lại, tôi rất ấn tượng với sự đơn giản của Function và mức giá.
    Nó rất phải chăng.
    Vì vậy, tôi đã quyết định tham gia vào hội đồng tư vấn khoa học của họ, và tôi rất vui vì họ
    đang tài trợ cho podcast.
    Nếu bạn muốn thử Function, bạn có thể vào website functionhealth.com slash Huberman.
    Function hiện đang có danh sách chờ hơn 250,000 người, nhưng họ đang cung cấp quyền truy cập sớm cho
    các thính giả của podcast Huberman.
    Một lần nữa, đó là functionhealth.com slash Huberman để có quyền truy cập sớm vào Function.
    Chúng ta có thể nói một chút về con mồi, việc rình rập, bắt và giết chóc không?
    Một trong những điều mà tôi luôn thấy thú vị là khi một con mèo, chỉ cần dùng mèo làm ví dụ,
    có thể là mèo lớn hoặc mèo nhỏ, ở trong chế độ rình rập của nó thì về cơ bản nó chỉ có một
    cơ hội tấn công duy nhất trước khi cuộc rượt đuổi bắt đầu, hoặc con mồi chạy thoát hoặc nó bị bắt, đúng không?
    Chúng ta sẽ thấy, chúng tôi đã có một con mèo khi tôi còn nhỏ sẽ rình rập và, bạn biết đó,
    thậm chí là creep lên.
    Và ngay trước khi nó nhảy vào con mồi, nó sẽ bắt đầu nghiến răng của mình.
    Tôi đoán rằng đó là sự kềm chế hành vi hoặc một cái gì đó đang rò rỉ ra.
    Chuyện gì đang xảy ra khi một con vật làm hành động rình rập rất rõ ràng như vậy, có tính toán
    và những âm thanh như nghiến răng hay như run rẩy bắt đầu xuất hiện.
    Đó là gì?
    Dự đoán của tôi có thể là một loại hành vi chuyển chỗ nào đó, rằng có động lực để chuyển sang
    trong chuỗi hành vi đến hành vi tiếp theo, nhưng chưa phải là thời điểm thích hợp.
    Và vì vậy sự kích hoạt đó được thể hiện qua hành vi đó, nhưng tôi thực sự không biết.
    Tôi không biết.
    Tôi chưa thấy điều này được thảo luận.
    Vì vậy, nó gần như giống như một, như áp lực thủy lực hay một cái gì đó.
    Có thể.
    Vâng.
    Thú vị.
    Thú vị.
    Chúng ta đã nói về chó.
    Chúng ta đã nói về mèo.
    Hãy nói về chim.
    Được rồi.
    Tôi đã nuôi vẹt khi tôi còn nhỏ.
    Chúng là những con vẹt nhỏ có má xám, được nuôi tại nhà.
    Nó không diễn ra tồi tệ.
    Nó không diễn ra tuyệt vời.
    Chúng đã, um, tôi không cắt cánh cho chúng vì tôi không thể làm điều đó.
    Và chúng bay quanh phòng của tôi rất nhiều và làm bừa bộn quanh phòng rất nhiều và ném rất nhiều thức ăn
    xuống đất rất nhiều.
    Và cuối cùng thì thật hợp lý khi đưa chúng cho ai đó có một, một chuồng chim.
    Um, vẹt rất thông minh.
    Vâng.
    Vâng.
    Vẹt đang nghĩ gì?
    Tôi nghĩ rằng những gì mà tất cả các loài động vật đang nghĩ, nơi đến bữa ăn tiếp theo của chúng,
    các tương tác xã hội và liệu có mối đe dọa nào ở đâu không.
    Có phải đó thực sự là, như 90% cuộc sống ý thức của chúng không?
    Tôi sẽ nói rằng, um, nếu con vật không cảm thấy an toàn, thì rất khó để thu hút con vật vào
    bất kỳ kiểu quan điểm nào.
    Nếu một con vật sợ hãi và bạn cố gắng cho chúng ăn, chúng thường sẽ không nhận thức ăn, chẳng hạn.
    Vì vậy, cảm giác an toàn có ưu tiên rất cao bởi vì nếu bạn không cảm thấy an toàn, bạn có thể chết,
    về cơ bản.
    Vì vậy, nếu bạn đang ở trong một tình huống mà bạn không cảm thấy an toàn, đó là vì tình huống đó
    có thể nguy hiểm.
    Có thể có những kẻ săn mồi xung quanh và bạn phải tập trung sự chú ý của mình vào những kẻ săn mồi đó
    bởi vì nếu không bạn sẽ chết.
    Và điều đó tất nhiên tùy thuộc vào loài, nhưng một số loài tập hợp thành những đàn lớn
    nếu chúng ta đang nói về chim và một số là những loài gắn bó theo cặp.
    Nhưng môi trường xã hội là rất quan trọng, cả về
    hành vi nuôi dạy con.
    Vì vậy hành vi tình dục, hành vi nuôi dạy con, nuôi dạy con cái và như vậy.
    Tất cả những điều đó cũng có ưu tiên cao vì nó về cơ bản liên quan đến việc
    mang gen của bạn vào thế hệ tiếp theo.
    Um, và sau đó, um, và rồi các hành vi tìm kiếm thức ăn.
    Tôi sẽ lấy thức ăn của chúng trên một cái đĩa.
    Chúng tôi nghĩ rằng, như chúng tôi nghĩ rằng chúng tôi đang làm một dịch vụ cho chúng.
    Như đây, đây là thức ăn của bạn trên cái đĩa.
    Bạn không cần phải làm gì cả.
    Nhưng chúng đến với những hành vi tự nhiên của chúng để thể hiện khả năng tìm kiếm thức ăn. Vì vậy, thường thì nếu chúng ta không cho phép chúng thể hiện những hành vi đó, có thể chúng ta sẽ thấy một số hành vi không mong muốn xuất hiện thay thế, bởi vì chúng sẽ chuyển hướng năng lượng, ý định của mình sang một cái gì đó khác, tôi không biết. Bạn có gặp khó khăn gì với những con vật, kiểu như chim, biết không, khi chúng xé thảm của bạn hay làm điều gì đó không? Ồ, chúng đã phá hoại mọi thứ. Ý tôi là, chúng đã phá hoại, chúng rất thích việc xé mọi thứ. Sách, bìa sách, đúng không? Vậy thì tôi nghĩ rằng điều đó giống như hành vi tìm kiếm thức ăn nhưng lại hướng tới những thứ không đúng. Ừm. Đúng vậy. Tôi không khuyên ai nên nuôi vẹt, thật lòng mà nói. Đó là một thí nghiệm không thành công. Ờ, may mắn thay, tôi nghĩ là chúng vẫn còn sống. Chúng sống rất lâu. Ồ. Mọi người có thể tìm hiểu về vẹt Ecuador xám má, vẹt lùn. Chúng có lớp lông đẹp màu cam dưới cánh. Chúng có má xám và được gọi là vẹt túi. Ờ, bạn biết đấy, điều thú vị với tôi khi đó, khi tôi còn trẻ, có lẽ khoảng 11 tuổi, là tôi có thể mang chúng trong túi của mình. Chúng hoàn toàn không muốn làm điều đó. Ừm. Dù sao thì, điều thú vị là nghĩ về nhu cầu của động vật trong việc thể hiện bộ hành vi tự nhiên của chúng. Đối với những người nuôi chó, tôi nghĩ rằng thực tế phổ biến là, bạn biết đấy, đưa cho chúng một cái bát thức ăn. Chúng ta có tốt hơn không nếu mang thức ăn đến một công viên và rồi cho chúng ăn ở đó? Ừm, hoặc là kết hợp sự lang thang và hành vi tìm kiếm con mồi. Ý tôi là, làm thế nào để một người có thể kết hợp điều đó vào một trải nghiệm dễ chịu hơn cho chó? Bởi vì những gì bạn đang nói hoàn toàn hợp lý rằng chúng cần phải thể hiện những hành vi đó. Nếu chúng không thể, thì nó sẽ bộc lộ ra theo một cách khác và có thể đó sẽ là hành vi phá hoại cả bản thân chúng lẫn môi trường. Ừm, về cơ bản, tôi nghĩ rằng đối với những người nuôi chó, những gì chúng ta có thể làm là cố gắng thúc đẩy các khía cạnh khác nhau của chuỗi hành vi săn mồi mà chú chó cụ thể trước mặt chúng ta thích làm. Tôi đã đề cập đến việc tìm mùi như một trong những điều mà nhiều chú chó thực sự thích. Và thú vị là, đây chỉ mới là những ngày đầu của những nghiên cứu khoa học về tác động của việc tìm mùi, nhưng rất hứa hẹn rằng một trong những tác động của việc tìm mùi dường như là. Nếu bạn không quen với nó, thì thực tế là động vật đã học rằng chúng cần phải tìm một mùi cụ thể trong một khu vực. Và vì vậy, chúng ngửi xung quanh, đi lang thang trong khu vực đó và chúng theo dõi mùi, và khi tìm thấy mùi, chúng sẽ dừng lại và đánh dấu và sau đó chúng nhận được phần thưởng. Thế là, đó về cơ bản là một thiết lập hơn hoặc kém như vậy. Và có vẻ như điều đó giúp điều chỉnh sự hưng phấn, để những động vật đang hưng phấn cao và gần như bị lo âu tổng quát sẽ được làm dịu lại, và những con vật đang có phần trầm cảm thì trở nên, um, hào hứng hơn về cuộc sống. Và, và cũng, và, um, nếu chúng ta trở lại không gian hiệu ứng cốt lõi, lần nữa, chúng ta có sự chuyển dịch sang bên phải của không gian hiệu ứng cốt lõi. Vì vậy, chúng ta có giá trị tích cực liên quan đến điều đó. Ồ, có vẻ rất thú vị, um, vẫn là những ngày đầu, bởi vì thể thao chó này chỉ mới, tôi không biết, khoảng 15 năm tuổi hay gì đó. Nó không phải là rất, không phải rất lâu. Vậy nên về cơ bản những gì chúng ta có thể làm là mỗi con chó đều có thể thực hiện việc tìm mùi. Tôi nghĩ rằng đó sẽ là một sự thoát ra thú vị cho phần đầu tiên của chuỗi hành vi. Và sau đó tôi biết rằng một số, một số, um, huấn luyện viên làm việc cụ thể để giúp những con chó đuổi theo động vật hoang dã, chẳng hạn. Và nó liên quan đến việc dạy chó ở lại trong những phần đầu của chuỗi săn mồi, để thực hiện hành vi ngửi, chỉ tay và hành vi quan sát. Và sau đó nhận được phần thưởng cho điều đó nhiều lần đến mức nó trở thành một vòng lặp phản hồi mà chúng thấy một con hươu chạy qua đường và chúng đi, mẹ ơi, tôi thấy một con hươu. Và sau đó chúng nhận được phần thưởng cho điều đó. Vậy, và những con chó khác như chó đua greyhound thích việc chạy theo điều đó, bạn cho phép chúng làm điều đó. Và sau đó, uh, những con chó khác thực sự thích việc, um, thích mang những thứ mà bạn cho phép chúng làm điều đó. Và sau đó cho poodle của bạn một thứ gì đó cũ để xé ra, bạn biết đấy. Đó có phải là điều mà poodle thích làm không? Làm rách những thứ. Ừ. Poodle thích, thích, thích giết và, và, và, để, sau khi giết thì xé rách. Ừ. Xé rách. Trời ạ, cái tên và vẻ bề ngoài của một con poodle gợi ý về một động vật hiền lành hơn nhiều. Vậy nên chúng thực sự thích xé rách cơ thể. Ừ. Theo những gì tôi hiểu. Vâng. Điều đó hợp lý. Um, với những gì tôi hiểu về việc liều lượng các gen khác nhau. Và sau đó cũng cho rằng, bạn biết rằng, thay vì phục vụ thức ăn trên đĩa, bạn có thể thử cho ăn rải rác. Vậy chỉ cần, um, hoặc, hoặc cho chúng ăn theo cách mà động vật thực sự phải làm việc để có thức ăn. Vì vậy, làm một số hành vi, như, um, một trong những tấm thảm ngửi mùi, bạn giấu thức ăn trong đó. Vì vậy chúng thực sự phải dành một chút thời gian để tìm kiếm thức ăn trước khi tiêu thụ nó. Bởi vì nếu không, nếu bạn cho thức ăn trong một cái bát, một số động vật, bạn biết đấy, chúng chỉ việc, họ hít vào. Nó chỉ mất khoảng 30 giây và chúng đã xong. Costello ăn như một con hải âu. Ừ. Thật sao? Anh ta không nhai thức ăn. Ừ. Thật thú vị. Thế giới huấn luyện thức ăn cho chó, sức khỏe động vật bán rất nhiều thứ mà bạn có thể cho thức ăn vào trong một vật thể mà chúng phải thực sự làm việc chăm chỉ để lấy. Ừ.
    Tôi có những kết quả hỗn hợp, bạn biết đấy, kiểu như là kết quả hỗn hợp với điều đó vì tôi đã nghe rằng ngoài việc tập thể dục và mong muốn sự gần gũi, thì động vật, đặc biệt là chó, có thể thực sự cần một số công việc nhận thức, rằng chúng cảm thấy chán và thực sự cần sự thách thức của việc hoạt động về trí óc, đến nỗi vào những ngày mưa, khi thời tiết thực sự xấu và bạn không thể ra ngoài, thì chúng cần một lượng lớn hành vi tìm kiếm và săn mồi.
    Vì vậy, tôi cố gắng làm điều đó. Và tôi biết một số người có thể nghe điều này và nghĩ rằng, điều này thật điên rồ. Chó của tôi chỉ muốn cuộn tròn ở chân tôi và chỉ muốn mang bóng về, nhưng đó chỉ là với những giống chó thích tìm bóng. Nếu tôi ném một quả bóng cho Costello, nó sẽ chạy đến đó và sau đó chỉ ngồi lên nó. Nó hoàn toàn không có hứng thú gì với việc làm gì đó với quả bóng đó trong việc mang về, nhưng nó lại thích kéo.
    Vì vậy, bạn biết đấy, nếu tôi buộc một sợi dây vào cây, chẳng hạn, nó sẽ nhảy lên đó và bám chắc, và tôi có thể đu nó bằng trọng lượng cơ thể của nó, bạn biết đấy, 90 pound, và nó sẽ ở đó trong 10 phút. Sự thích thú với việc nhai rõ ràng là động lực bẩm sinh mạnh mẽ nhất.
    Vì vậy, tôi nghĩ rằng điều tôi nhận ra là hiểu thứ tự của những hành vi tự nhiên, nhưng cũng là nơi trong thứ tự đó mà một giống chó cụ thể thực sự thiên về. Chắc chắn rồi. Vậy nên đôi khi có thể rất khó để biết chó của bạn ở đâu trong thang đó, đặc biệt nếu nó là một giống lai nào đó.
    Và sau đó bạn thực sự có thể nhìn vào hình dáng của con chó. Những con chó rất gầy, tôi đang nghĩ đến chó đua, những con chó gầy với không nhiều cơ bắp và mõm rất nhọn thường là những kẻ đuổi bắt, còn những con có nhiều cơ bắp hơn, cơ bắp phía trước và hàm lớn hơn có xu hướng là những kẻ xé toạc mọi thứ. Bulldog, Rottweiler, Mastiff.
    Và một số con nhỏ hơn, như chó pug, chó bulldog Pháp, tôi nghĩ rằng mọi người không đánh giá cao việc thuần dưỡng chúng vì bây giờ, bạn biết đấy, rất nhiều người có chó sống trong căn hộ, những con chó nhỏ hơn. Mặc dù có điều kỳ lạ này, bạn biết đấy, nếu bạn nói chuyện với một bác sĩ thú y, tôi có một thành viên trong gia đình là bác sĩ thú y, bạn hỏi, con chó nào phù hợp với căn hộ? Họ sẽ nói Great Dane vì chúng không cần nhiều không gian để di chuyển, nhưng bạn phải dắt chúng đi, nhưng chúng không cần đi bộ lâu như một con terrier nhỏ đôi khi cần đi đi lại lại cả ngày. Tôi có nghĩa là, cần hai tiếng đồng hồ hoặc hơn để hoạt động.
    Tôi nghĩ bạn cần chú ý rất nhiều đến loại cuộc sống mà bạn sẽ cung cấp, cho dù đó là sống trong một căn hộ ở thành phố bận rộn hay bạn ở trên một trang trại nào đó, giống chó nào sẽ thích nghi tốt nhất với lối sống đó. Bạn có nghĩ chó thích sống ở thành phố không? Tôi nghĩ nhiều con chó cảm thấy rất căng thẳng ở thành phố vì sự tấn công không ngừng của thông tin cảm giác.
    Vì vậy có tiếng ồn, có chó, nếu bạn ra ngoài đi bộ trên đường, có sự gặp gỡ liên tục với người lạ. Và đối với nhiều loài động vật, việc gặp gỡ người lạ A, không xảy ra thường xuyên, và B, gây ra sự gia tăng hưng phấn vì nó có thể là, bạn biết đấy, một người bạn hoặc kẻ thù. Nó có thể là một ai đó mà bạn muốn chiến đấu. Có thể là một ai đó mà bạn muốn giao phối. Bạn cần đánh giá tình huống.
    Và tôi nghĩ rằng chó khá đặc biệt trong khía cạnh đó và chúng có khả năng chịu đựng cao đối với người lạ vì nhiều loài động vật khác thì không. Và tôi nghĩ rằng đôi khi chúng ta có xu hướng quên rằng chúng ta giới thiệu động vật với những động vật mà chúng không biết. Chúng ta kỳ vọng chúng hòa hợp và chúng thì không. Loại giới thiệu đó cần phải được thực hiện thật cẩn thận.
    Thường thì chúng ta có thể bắt đầu bằng cách chỉ đơn giản là trao đổi mùi. Nếu bạn có một con mèo và muốn có một con mèo thứ hai, chẳng hạn, chúng thường không chấp nhận con mèo khác như cách mà hai con chó có thể làm, chẳng hạn. Vì vậy, bạn có thể để chúng ở những phòng khác nhau và bạn có thể xát một con mèo với một chiếc khăn và xát con mèo còn lại với một chiếc khăn khác rồi sau đó đổi khăn. Rồi bạn có thể dần dần đưa vào những giác quan khác nữa để chúng bắt đầu nghe thấy nhau.
    Và cuối cùng, chúng bắt đầu nhìn thấy nhau. Và rồi đến cuối cùng, sự tiếp xúc thực tế, tức là sự liên hệ vật lý thực sự. Và nếu bạn làm theo cách đó, bạn giảm thiểu rủi ro rằng chúng sẽ thực sự bắt đầu chiến đấu khi bạn thực hiện giới thiệu. Bởi vì nếu bạn chỉ đặt chúng cùng nhau, chúng có thể ngay lập tức leo thang đến sự hung hăng. Nhưng nếu bạn thực hiện dần dần, sự trao đổi thông tin đó sẽ giúp chúng tìm ra ai là người kia và giảm thiểu rủi ro hung hăng.
    Một điều mà tôi luôn cảm thấy fascinate, và có một chút dữ liệu bắt đầu nổi lên về điều này về các cơ chế có thể là gì, đó là nhận diện loài mình so với loài khác. Đặc biệt là chó, trừ khi đó là một hành vi thống trị, không cố gắng giao phối với mèo. Chẳng hạn, chúng có thể nhảy lên, nhưng đó là một chuyện khác. Thực ra có những mạch riêng biệt cho hai hành vi đó. Đồng nghiệp của tôi, David Anderson tại Caltech, đã thực hiện một nghiên cứu rất đẹp. Tôi chỉ có thể chia sẻ rằng việc nghiên cứu cho thấy có những mạch riêng biệt trong não cho hành vi giao phối với hành vi thống trị.
    Ô, điều này thú vị. Và hành vi giao phối để thống trị tồn tại trong cả con đực và con cái của một loài mà chỉ có con đực giao phối cho mục đích sinh sản. Vì vậy, khái niệm về giao phối như một hành vi thống trị là một điều rất thực tế, ngay cả trong chuột.
    Dù sao thì, bỏ qua hành vi giao phối để thống trị, còn gọi là nhảy lên, điều này thật đáng kinh ngạc. Một con ngựa không cố gắng giao phối với một con chó. Những loài động vật khác nhau dường như biết tự nhận diện mình với loài khác. Chúng không cần phải học điều này từ mẹ hay cha hoặc từ chúng ta. Điều này là bẩm sinh.
    Đối với hầu hết các loài, thực sự có một vài ngoại lệ, những gì mà tôi nghĩ đến là một số loài chim水水 tự nhiên trong đó con cái, và tôi không thể nói chính xác là loài nào bây giờ, nhưng một số loài chim nước.
    Con cái sẽ nhận ra đực một cách tự nhiên, nhưng đực sẽ học thông qua sự định hình giới tính khi còn nhỏ để bị thu hút bởi những con cái giống như con cái đã nuôi dưỡng chúng. Thực ra, điều này xảy ra bởi vì trong những loài đó, đực thường có vẻ đẹp rực rỡ và trông rất tuyệt vời, trong khi con cái thì kín đáo. Chúng giống như được nguỵ trang vậy. Chúng có màu nâu. Vì vậy, các con đực cần phải học hình dáng của mẹ, và khi trưởng thành, chúng sẽ bắt đầu tán tỉnh những con cái giống như mẹ. Nếu bạn nuôi một con đực như vậy với loài sai, nó sẽ bắt đầu tán tỉnh con cái sai. Tất nhiên, con cái đó sẽ không hứng thú vì nó không giống tiêu chuẩn vàng mà nó kỳ vọng ở một con đực của loài đó. Thật thú vị. Là một đứa trẻ từng nuôi cá, bạn có thể thấy tôi đã nuôi rất nhiều loài động vật khác nhau. Bạn biết đấy, tôi chưa bao giờ thành công trong việc sinh sản cá trong điều kiện nuôi nhốt. Tôi đã cố gắng sinh sản mực len trong điều kiện nuôi nhốt ở phòng thí nghiệm của mình. Điều đó không thành công, mặc dù tôi đã nuôi chúng rất thành công. Nhưng tôi đã rất thích cá đĩa nước ngọt trong một thời gian và đã cố gắng rất nhiều để tạo ra một bể sinh sản. Thật sự rất khó. Nhưng thỉnh thoảng, bạn biết đấy, có ai đó trong cộng đồng nuôi cá mà tôi tham gia sẽ thành công trong việc sinh sản cá đĩa. Nhưng bạn chưa bao giờ thấy một trường hợp cá đĩa cố gắng thụ tinh cho trứng của một loài cá khác. Chúng đơn giản là biết. Đúng vậy. Và điều này phải liên quan đến mùi hoặc có thể là cảm quan hỗn hợp. Đây thật sự là một khía cạnh đáng chú ý, ngay cả khi tôi có bạn bè nghiên cứu ruồi. Nếu họ nghiên cứu Drosophila của một loại cụ thể, loại ruồi trái cây này sẽ không cố gắng giao phối với loại ruồi trái cây khác. Chúng trông rất giống nhau đối với bạn và tôi. Vì vậy, có điều gì đó thật mạnh mẽ ở đó. Đúng vậy, tôi nghĩ rằng có sự tránh né giao phối cận huyết là một cơ chế ngăn cản nhiều loài động vật giao phối với ai đó có gen quá giống mình bởi vì chúng ta gặp phải tình trạng suy yếu do cận huyết. Nhưng cũng có kiểu gì đó không phí thời gian giao phối với ai đó mà bạn không thể sản xuất con cái được. Tuy nhiên, một ngoại lệ mà tôi nhớ đến là động vật móng guốc. Đôi khi, và tôi có một kỷ niệm, tôi đã ở châu Phi vào năm 1995 tại Trại trẻ mồ côi Chumfunji, dẫn những con tinh tinh vào rừng để phục hồi chúng. Họ có một con diker trẻ ở đó, một con linh dương rất nhỏ, như kiểu ủng hộ chú linh dương, đã bị mồ côi và được nuôi dưỡng bằng bình và có ấn tượng tình dục với con người. Vì vậy, nó tiến lại và bắt đầu, bạn biết đấy, nhảy lên tôi, hơn hoặc kém nghĩ rằng tôi là đồng loại của nó. Vì vậy, kiểu định hình tình dục này chủ yếu, tôi nghĩ, là những con đực học, chúng có ấn tượng tình dục với kiểu cá thể đã nuôi dưỡng chúng. Vì vậy, đó là kiểu cá thể mà chúng sẽ cố gắng tán tỉnh sau này. Tôi nghĩ Conrad Lorenz cũng đã nói trong một trong những cuốn sách của ông, ông mô tả một loại loài quạ mà ông cũng nuôi từ nhỏ và những con đó đã bắt đầu tán tỉnh “thư ký” của ông hoặc ai đó. Và câu chuyện thú vị ở đó là hành vi tán tỉnh trong loài chim này là nôn mửa, bạn biết đấy, để lại như một món quà và cung cấp thực phẩm trên bất kỳ bề mặt hoặc lỗ nào. Vì vậy, ông ấy sẽ cố gắng để kiểu khiến cô ấy mở miệng. Và khi cô ấy không làm vậy, ông sẽ đến và để món quà vào tai cô thay vào đó. Thật kinh tởm, tâm lý có thể giảm bớt sự ghê tởm của mình bằng cách, chúng tôi sẽ cung cấp một liên kết đến bức ảnh rất nổi tiếng của Conrad Lorenz, người đã giành giải Nobel, tôi tin, cho những khám phá của ông về sự in hình khi mà những chú ngỗng sẽ in hình lên ông. Đó là hình của ông bơi trong một cái hồ với những con ngỗng nhỏ theo sau ông. Vì vậy, đó là kiểu in hình khác mà bạn đang nói về. Đó là sự in hình từ cha mẹ. Có hai loại. Một là in hình tình dục, nơi bạn học cách giao phối với ai, và một là in hình từ cha mẹ, nơi bạn học ai là người an toàn để ở bên cạnh, và chúng bắt đầu theo đuổi cá thể đó. Đây là điều mà chó làm với chúng ta. Thực tế, tôi sẽ nói rằng chó không in hình với con người. Chúng hình thành các mối liên kết gắn bó với con người. Sự khác biệt là gì? Vì vậy, in hình thường là một quá trình rất nhanh. Nó xảy ra trong, bạn biết đấy, chỉ vài phút hoặc vài giờ. Gắn bó kéo dài hơn và liên quan đến nhiều cảm giác hơn. Vì vậy, in hình có xu hướng, tôi nghĩ, là hình ảnh. Nếu tôi không nhầm. Có thể là mùi trong một số loài. Và việc gắn bó chủ yếu đã được nghiên cứu ở con người trước đó. Vì vậy, mối liên kết này phát triển giữa người chăm sóc và con cái. Điều thú vị là mối liên kết gắn bó sẽ phát triển theo nhiều cách khác nhau, tùy thuộc vào cách mà người chăm sóc phản ứng với nhu cầu của con nhỏ. Vì vậy, bạn có thể có một mối gắn bó an toàn, khi người chăm sóc phản ứng rất đáng tin cậy với nhu cầu của con nhỏ. Điều này có nghĩa là nếu chúng ở một mình, chúng có thể tự điều chỉnh tốt hơn. Do đó, hệ thần kinh của chúng dễ dàng bình tĩnh lại hơn sau một căng thẳng so với khi chúng gắn bó không an toàn. Và vì vậy có vẻ như chó hình thành, thay vì in hình với con người, chúng hình thành một loại mối liên kết gắn bó. Và chúng cũng có thể có gắn bó an toàn hoặc không an toàn với những người chủ của mình. Điều này sẽ mở ra một loạt ý tưởng cho mọi người, vì khái niệm an toàn, không an toàn, sau đó là những đứa trẻ D và các cuộc thí nghiệm cổ điển của Bowlby mà chúng ta đã nói trước đây trong podcast này, nơi mà phản ứng rối loạn kiểu này là điều mà bây giờ được nói đến nhiều trong văn hóa hẹn hò, văn hóa mối quan hệ và tâm lý học đại chúng. Như kiểu, người ta có an toàn không? Người đó có tránh né không? Người đó có lo âu không? Đoán xem, mọi người? Điều này cũng xảy ra ở thú cưng của bạn. Vì vậy, bây giờ bạn có thể bắt đầu suy nghĩ về nó. Trong những thí nghiệm cổ điển của Bowlby, chỉ để tóm tắt một cách rất ngắn gọn, mẹ và – thường là mẹ, mặc dù các người chăm sóc khác bây giờ đã được thử nghiệm, nhưng mẹ và con cái bị tách rời. Có một phản ứng lo âu có thể dự đoán, hiểu được và lành mạnh xảy ra.
    Nếu điều kiện thuận lợi, đứa trẻ cuối cùng sẽ đến để chơi và thư giãn một chút. Nếu điều kiện không thuận lợi, chúng sẽ không làm vậy. Tất cả đều lành mạnh. Nhưng bài kiểm tra thực sự là khi đoàn tụ với mẹ. Đúng vậy. Và cũng như cách chúng phản ứng với người lạ. Đúng. Kiểm tra tình huống lạ lùng. Đúng, tình huống lạ lùng. Chúng có cảm thấy được an ủi không, và chúng tiếp cận mẹ như thế nào khi mẹ quay lại? Có háo hức để gặp và thư giãn không? Có cảm giác không chắc chắn không? Hay có xu hướng né tránh? Đó là điều mà bài kiểm tra này đề cập. Đúng, đúng. Hoặc cũng có thể bám chặt. Đúng. Vì vậy, những loại thí nghiệm tương tự đã được thực hiện trên chó, và người ta phát hiện rằng một số chú chó bị gắn bó không an toàn. Chúng sẽ bám chặt hoặc né tránh, trong khi một số khác được gắn bó an toàn. Vì vậy, chúng sẽ có xu hướng khám phá hơn. Chúng sẽ phục hồi nhanh hơn sau sự chia ly. Điều này thật tuyệt. Vì vậy, nếu mọi người gửi chó của họ cho người trông chó khi họ đi du lịch và sau đó quay lại, cuộc đoàn tụ cho bạn biết rất nhiều về cảm giác của chú chó đó. Thật buồn, tôi nghĩ rằng – và tôi không chắc rằng tôi có bất kỳ bằng chứng nào từ các nghiên cứu khoa học ở đây, nhưng tôi nghi ngờ ít nhất rằng việc cai sữa sớm có thể khiến chó dễ bị gắn bó không an toàn. Ở đất nước này, quan niệm điển hình là chó con có thể bị tách biệt khỏi mẹ của chúng khi khoảng tám tuần. Bạn có cảm thấy điều đó quá sớm không? Đúng, với tư cách là một nhà sinh thái học, khi nhìn vào cách loài sinh sống trong tự nhiên, loại tương tác xã hội mà chúng có, và làm thế nào chúng ta có thể cung cấp một môi trường tốt nhất để thúc đẩy hành vi tự nhiên, đối với tôi, tám tuần là quá sớm. Vì vậy, chúng tôi có một số nghiên cứu từ, tôi không biết, những năm 60 hay gì đó, nơi tôi nghĩ rằng hai nhà nghiên cứu tên là Scott và Fuller đã thực hiện một số nghiên cứu về sự tách biệt, nhưng đó là với chó ở độ tuổi khoảng ba, bốn, năm, sáu tuần, và họ phát hiện rằng loại tách biệt sớm đó thực sự có hại. Chắc chắn rồi. Nhưng theo như tôi biết, đã có rất ít nghiên cứu được thực hiện sau tám tuần, và tất nhiên, nhiều người sẽ nói rằng, được rồi, chúng ta phải thực hiện tất cả các hoạt động xã hội mà động vật học cách chấp nhận cuộc sống với con người. Vì vậy, điều đó sẽ phải xảy ra ở những người nhân giống thay vì ở môi trường mới. Nhưng thực sự, tôi không chắc lắm, vì có vẻ nếu bạn có gắn bó an toàn, bạn sẽ có khả năng tự điều chỉnh tốt hơn sau khi, bạn biết đấy, tiếp xúc với một cái gì đó có thể làm rối loạn. Vì vậy, bạn có một sự kiện xảy ra, bạn cảm thấy lo lắng và sợ hãi, và sau đó hệ thần kinh của bạn có thể bình tĩnh lại một lần nữa. Và vì vậy tôi nghĩ rằng nếu chúng ta để cho chó có gắn bó an toàn, thì có lẽ nhu cầu cho những thủ tục xã hội này thường rất phức tạp. Có danh sách 100 điều mà chó cần phải tiếp xúc, bạn biết đấy, những người đàn ông có râu và trẻ em từ 12 tuổi và những người có giày, bạn biết đấy, những loại giày cụ thể và, bạn biết đấy, máy hút bụi và tiếp tục như vậy. Có một danh sách dài các điều mà bạn cần phải cho một động vật tiếp xúc. Và tôi nghĩ rằng nếu động vật có gắn bó an toàn để chúng đã học cách tự điều chỉnh, thì việc tiếp xúc với những thứ đó sẽ không phải là một vấn đề lớn. Nhưng tôi không nghĩ rằng chúng ta có nghiên cứu để hỗ trợ cho khẳng định đó cho đến nay. Tôi rất thích khái niệm này vì chúng ta không thể chuẩn bị cho con người, bao gồm cả chính mình, hoặc động vật cho mọi hoàn cảnh, nhưng chúng ta có thể huấn luyện lại các mạch thần kinh. Dù sao tôi cũng là một nhà thần kinh sinh học. Vì vậy, tôi thích nghĩ rằng điều này nhiều hơn là chuẩn bị cho sự kiện, bạn chuẩn bị cho quy trình. Vì vậy, bạn biết đấy, có rất nhiều điều đã được nói về podcast này và những podcast khác về như việc tiếp xúc với lạnh có chủ đích, bạn biết đấy, tại sao lại tắm nước lạnh? Điều đó không phải về những lợi ích cụ thể của việc tắm nước lạnh. Nó dạy bạn cách điều hướng khi có adrenaline cao trong cơ thể, điều này là phản ứng chung đối với căng thẳng. Vì vậy, bạn có thể xuất khẩu việc tự điều chỉnh từ tình huống này sang tình huống khác. Những gì bạn miêu tả là một ví dụ về giai đoạn sống quan trọng hơn nhiều so với việc tiếp xúc với lạnh có chủ đích. Đó là về, như bạn đã nói, khả năng điều hướng những sự gắn bó có ở đó, rồi biến mất, rồi lại xuất hiện. Đây là một trong những mối quan tâm chính của tôi. Chúng ta không muốn đi quá xa vào một ngách nào đó ở đây, nhưng vì con người là động vật, như bạn đã chỉ ra, về việc nhắn tin. Bạn biết đấy, thường thì nhắn tin có thể là một công cụ tuyệt vời. Nó cũng có thể là một cách mà mọi người không học cách để đương đầu, để tự điều chỉnh. Bạn thấy điều này khi máy bay hạ cánh hoặc máy bay cất cánh. Mọi người, bạn biết đấy, nhắn tin một cách vội vàng, điều này có thể là về, này, máy bay của tôi vừa đến. Nó cũng có thể là về một sự bất lực để đơn giản đối phó với sự không chắc chắn trong cuộc sống thực mà bạn không kiểm soát được ở đó, phi công và tình hình thời tiết thì có. Vì vậy, trong mọi trường hợp, tôi có một câu hỏi có lẽ gây tranh cãi. Được rồi. Nhưng chúng tôi đã mở ra một số hộp Pandora, vậy thì tại sao không? Tôi đã quyết định triệt sản cho chó của mình. Đúng. Tôi đã làm điều đó khi nó khoảng sáu tháng tuổi. Tôi đã làm điều đó, thành thật mà nói, một cách miễn cưỡng. Mọi người nói, bạn biết đấy, đàn ông với chó của họ và họ không muốn triệt sản cho chó của họ và vì những lý do liên quan đến nhiễm sắc thể Y hoặc gì đó. Có thể đúng là như vậy. Nhưng thực sự lý do tôi miễn cưỡng là, A, tôi nghĩ tôi có thể muốn nuôi giống Costello vào một thời điểm nào đó. Lý do khác là tôi đã dành hai năm cuộc đời của mình để nghiên cứu và cuối cùng công bố các tài liệu về tác động của androgen sớm đối với – tôi đã có một vai trò nhỏ trong nghiên cứu đó, nhưng tác động của androgen sớm đối với sự phát triển não bộ. Và bạn không cần phải dành quá nhiều thời gian trong lĩnh vực hormone và sự phát triển để biết rằng hormone, testosterone và estrogen, có một tác động tổ chức mạnh mẽ, mạnh mẽ đến não của cả nam và nữ. Và điều đó cũng xảy ra trong thời kỳ vị thành niên. Đúng rồi. Và sau đó là sự gia tăng hormone đến – vì vậy, đúng, điều đó xảy ra trong tử cung. Đúng.
    Và sau đó –
    Và sau đó là các hiệu ứng tổ chức và sau đó là các hiệu ứng kích hoạt, như bạn đã chỉ ra, của hormone mà trong thời kỳ dậy thì, buồng trứng ở con cái hoặc tinh hoàn ở con đực, sản xuất hormone hoạt động trên kiểu mẫu mà đã được thiết lập.
    Và vì vậy, tôi biết rằng bất kỳ testosterone, estrogen, v.v., mà Costello đã thấy trong bụng mẹ, anh ấy đã thấy, và bằng cách loại bỏ tinh hoàn của anh ấy – hãy thành thật, đó chính là điều mà chúng ta gọi là triệt sản, tất cả đàn ông đều cảm thấy rùng mình và phụ nữ thì như, được rồi, hiểu rồi.
    Nhưng nếu tôi nói loại bỏ buồng trứng, họ có thể sẽ có phản ứng khác.
    Vì vậy, bằng cách loại bỏ tinh hoàn của anh ấy, anh ấy sẽ không trải qua các hiệu ứng kích hoạt của hormone.
    Được rồi, để tóm tắt, có vẻ như anh ấy đã có một cuộc sống tuyệt vời.
    Anh ấy là một chú chó tuyệt vời.
    Khi anh ấy khoảng chín tuổi, anh ấy bị đau khớp và có nhiều cơn đau.
    Móng chân của anh phát triển rất nhanh.
    Một số điều thì kỳ lạ.
    Tôi đã chọn thực hiện một thí nghiệm và bắt đầu tiêm cho anh ấy 50 miligam testosterone mỗi tuần.
    Phản ứng thật đáng kinh ngạc.
    Sức sống của anh trở lại, cơn đau khớp của anh, ít nhất là về độ sẵn sàng của anh để xuống cầu thang nhanh chóng, đứng dậy nhanh chóng, thật không thể tin được.
    Anh đã có thêm hai năm mà tôi nghĩ là một cuộc sống tuyệt vời.
    Tôi hy vọng là như vậy.
    Và điều thú vị là khi tôi nói về điều này công khai trên một vài podcast khác, tôi đã tiêm testosterone cho bulldog của mình sau khi triệt sản cho anh ấy.
    Tôi nghĩ rằng tôi sẽ nhận được một cơn sóng chỉ trích từ cộng đồng thú y.
    Được rồi.
    Thay vào đó, tôi nhận được hàng trăm email nói rằng, cảm ơn bạn.
    Chúng tôi thực sự khuyến khích mọi người không triệt sản động vật trừ khi chúng ở trong trường hợp động vật đó có thể ra ngoài và giao phối vì chúng tôi không cần thêm những con mèo hoang.
    Và có nhiều lợi ích sức khỏe tích cực từ việc giữ nguyên hormone.
    Vâng.
    Và tôi sẽ bắt đầu làm những gì bạn đã làm với một số chó bệnh của tôi.
    Vâng.
    Không có một bác sĩ thú y nào.
    Lưu ý rằng tôi không có đào tạo như một bác sĩ thú y.
    Không có một bác sĩ nào nói, này, bạn đã vượt quá giới hạn khi làm điều đó.
    Bạn không nên làm như vậy.
    Và tôi sẽ nói với bạn, nếu tôi có thêm một con chó và nó là con đực, tôi sẽ rất cẩn thận không cho nó ra ngoài.
    Và tôi sẽ rất cẩn thận với việc huấn luyện để nó không quá hung dữ.
    Nhưng tôi sẽ không triệt sản nó.
    Vâng.
    Và tôi biết điều này sẽ khiến một số người nổi nóng.
    Nhưng tôi rất muốn nghe ý kiến của bạn về việc triệt sản cho chó đực và cái, đặc biệt là, với tất cả những gì bạn và tôi biết về hormone và những gì chúng ta vừa nói đến.
    Vâng.
    Bạn đang đề cập đến vài điều khác nhau mà tôi nghĩ là thú vị.
    Một là, đây thực sự là một hiện tượng văn hóa.
    Rằng ở Na Uy, tôi biết rằng bạn không được phép triệt sản chó trừ khi vì lý do y tế.
    Thật sao?
    Vâng.
    Và ở Tây Úc, bạn không được phép không triệt sản chó trừ khi vì lý do y tế hoặc nếu bạn muốn nhân giống chúng.
    Vì vậy, điều này rất phụ thuộc vào văn hóa, liệu triệt sản có phải là điều bạn làm hay không ở bất kỳ địa điểm nào.
    Đó là điều thứ nhất.
    Điều thứ hai là bạn đã nói rằng triệt sản là về việc loại bỏ tinh hoàn.
    Thực ra có những thủ tục khác có thể thực hiện, đó chỉ là cắt bỏ mối liên kết.
    Vì vậy, không loại bỏ tinh hoàn để chúng tiếp tục sản xuất tất cả những thứ mà chúng sản xuất.
    Nhưng chúng không thể sinh sản tình dục.
    Vâng.
    Tại sao chúng ta không chỉ làm thủ thuật thắt ống dẫn tinh?
    Vâng.
    Vì vậy, thắt ống dẫn tinh.
    Và đối với cái, thủ tục tương ứng thì sẽ là cái gì đó.
    Thắt ống.
    Vâng.
    Thắt ống.
    Nói một cách tương tự.
    Bất kỳ điều gì.
    Vâng.
    Và cũng còn một lựa chọn thứ ba, đó là castration hóa học.
    Điều này có thể đảo ngược.
    Bạn có thể thử xem những hiệu ứng hành vi nào bạn nhận được từ sự thay đổi về trạng thái hormone.
    Cũng có điều thú vị là kiến thức về các hiệu ứng của việc triệt sản hoặc castration thực sự đã thay đổi rất nhiều trong khoảng 20 năm qua.
    Trước đây, vào những năm 1990, nó thường được khuyến nghị vì chúng sẽ không sinh sản và sẽ có ít hành vi kích thích hơn.
    Và vì vậy nó đã được quảng bá liên quan đến một số thay đổi hành vi nhất định.
    Các nghiên cứu sau này đã chỉ ra, và có hơn 20 nghiên cứu trong khoảng thời gian 20 năm qua, cho thấy rằng khá liên tục rằng một số hiệu ứng của việc triệt sản có thể là, đặc biệt là ở chó đực, dường như.
    Và điều này cũng phụ thuộc vào độ tuổi thực hiện thủ thuật.
    Và nó liên quan đến quá trình kích hoạt này, tất nhiên.
    Là bạn thấy rằng có sự gia tăng nỗi sợ, gia tăng độ phản ứng, hành vi hung hãn.
    Bạn có thể thấy sự gia tăng độ nhạy cảm với tiếng ồn, v.v.
    Vì vậy có vẻ như, như bạn đã đề cập, sự thay đổi về trạng thái hormone không chỉ có ảnh hưởng sinh lý, các hiệu ứng vật lý lên cơ thể mà còn có các hiệu ứng hành vi.
    Bây giờ cũng có sự gia tăng nguy cơ mắc một số loại ung thư hoặc một số vấn đề thể chất nhất định và giảm thiểu ở những loại khác.
    Vì vậy, tôi sẽ đề xuất rằng khi bạn nhận nuôi chú chó tiếp theo, bạn hãy thảo luận với một bác sĩ thú y về lựa chọn tốt nhất cho giống chó cụ thể đó và cá thể đó.
    Bởi vì nó sẽ rất đặc thù theo giống, theo giới tính, và cũng phụ thuộc vào độ tuổi mà những thủ tục này được thực hiện.
    Được rồi, đối với tôi, điều này thật thú vị rằng ở Na Uy, chó không được phép bị triệt sản ngoại trừ lý do y tế.
    Ở Úc, chúng buộc phải, ít nhất là ở Tây Úc.
    Vì vậy, ý tưởng giữ chó nguyên vẹn, nói một cách tương tự, không phải là một điều gì quá dị giáo.
    Nhưng tôi nghĩ rằng ở Hoa Kỳ, nhiều điều này vẫn đang được làm rõ.
    Và tôi nghĩ số liệu thống kê cho biết rằng số người có thú cưng trong gia đình hiện nay ở Hoa Kỳ gần như là mọi hộ gia đình.
    Vâng.
    Tôi nghĩ rằng 40% người Mỹ sở hữu chó.
    Và tôi nghĩ ở Na Uy, con số này khoảng 15.
    Có lẽ điều này liên quan nhiều đến việc tại sao các nền văn hóa đã phát triển khác biệt đến vậy, bởi vì ở Scandinavia có rất ít việc nhân giống ở sân sau và dân số hoang dã của chó.
    Vì vậy, chúng tôi không phải đối mặt với vấn đề quá tải lớn như bạn sẽ thấy ở một số quốc gia khác.
    Vậy, và tôi nghĩ rằng ở đây, rất nhiều việc triệt sản được thực hiện để kiểm soát dân số, chủ yếu như một cách để cố gắng giảm số lượng động vật phải vào trại tạm trú và những thứ tương tự. Chắc chắn hiện nay có rất nhiều chó trong các trại tạm trú. Trong thời gian đại dịch, mọi người đã nhận nuôi chúng như điên cuồng. Thực sự khó để có được chó và mèo trong thời gian đó. Tôi không biết tình hình hiện tại như thế nào. Ai đó có thể để lại lời bình về điều đó. Tôi thực sự có một câu hỏi cuối cùng, nhưng đó là một câu hỏi mà bạn đã chạm đến từ nhiều góc độ trong suốt cuộc trò chuyện hôm nay, và điều đó liên quan đến con người như những động vật. Bạn biết đấy, tôi không nghĩ ai đó có thể là nhà nghiên cứu động vật hoặc nhà sinh lý học thần kinh mà không một lần nào đó dừng lại và nhận ra rằng, chúng ta là loài linh trưởng cổ đại. Chúng ta là những người giỏi nhất trong việc phát triển công nghệ, bạn biết đấy, trong số tất cả các loài. Ý tôi là, tôi không nghĩ rằng đó là một bước nhảy quá lớn. Chúng ta chắc chắn không giỏi như loài khác trong việc ngụy trang tự nhiên, bắt và giết chóc bằng tay của chúng ta. Chúng ta cần công cụ để làm điều này. Vì vậy, chúng ta có những điểm mạnh của mình. Chúng ta có những giới hạn so với các loài khác. Có điều gì trong đào tạo của bạn như một nhà nghiên cứu động vật mà khiến bạn suy nghĩ về con người như là một loài, theo cách điều gì đó, tôi không biết, kỳ diệu hay đồng thời thiếu sót theo cách nào đó? Giống như, hay chỉ là bất kỳ suy ngẫm nào về loài người, vì đó là một loài mà chúng ta chưa nói đến hôm nay. Nhưng tôi nghĩ rằng nhiều điều bạn đang mô tả về việc phân tích những chuỗi hành vi này, điều gì khiến chúng ta cảm thấy an toàn, bạn biết đấy, không thể không tự hỏi, như, có một số khía cạnh của chính mình mà có thể nếu chúng ta suy nghĩ sâu hơn một chút, chúng ta thực sự có thể thu lợi từ? Một điều mà tôi nghĩ đến là mức độ mà việc học văn hóa xảy ra ở con người. Đối với các loài động vật khác, chúng học hỏi từ, bạn biết đấy, thử và sai. Nếu tôi làm điều này, thì điều đó xảy ra. Đầu tiên điều đó xảy ra, sau đó điều khác xảy ra. Vì vậy, điều kiện cổ điển và điều kiện điều chỉnh liên quan đến việc hình thành hành vi của động vật. Chúng cũng có việc học xã hội. Chúng quan sát người khác và xem họ làm gì. Bạn biết đấy, trong tình huống này, tôi cảm thấy hơi lo lắng, bối rối, quan sát bạn để xem bạn phản ứng như thế nào. Ôi, bạn có vẻ không quá lo lắng. Được rồi, tôi đoán là tôi cũng không cần phải lo lắng như vậy. Hoặc bạn đang tương tác với thứ đó theo cách đó. Tôi đoán tôi sẽ làm tương tự. Nhưng giống như, ảnh hưởng đến từ những con vật gần gũi nhất với bạn và từ kinh nghiệm cá nhân của bạn. Và chúng ta cũng đứng trên vai của những người khổng lồ, chúng ta, con người, vì chúng ta có thể đọc những suy nghĩ của con người đã hàng ngàn năm tuổi, thật sự. Và vì vậy, tôi nghĩ đó là một trong những khác biệt lớn nhất, tôi nghĩ, trong việc học của chúng ta là chúng ta đã từng được gọi là con người là người tạo ra công cụ, như thể việc chế tạo công cụ sẽ là điều làm chúng ta khác biệt so với các loài động vật khác. Đến khi Jane Goodall báo cáo rằng bà đã thấy những con tinh tinh chế tạo công cụ để, bạn biết đấy, hành vi câu termit mà bà chứng kiến, nơi chúng sẽ bẻ một cành cây, lấy tất cả lá ra và sau đó mài nhọn để có thể đưa vào tổ termit. Và những con termit sẽ leo lên đó và chúng có thể lấy ra một cách cẩn thận và ăn những con termit. Vì vậy, chúng đã chế tạo những công cụ này. Vậy, vâng, đó sẽ là, tôi đoán, suy nghĩ đầu tiên của tôi về câu hỏi của bạn. Đó là một câu hỏi tuyệt vời, nói thật là như vậy. Ý tưởng này rằng, bạn biết đấy, bên cạnh khả năng của chúng ta trong việc xây dựng công cụ phức tạp, khả năng của chúng ta trong việc ghi lại và truyền đạt kiến thức. Và, ý tôi là, kiến thức luôn thay đổi. Nên một số điều mà chúng ta đã thảo luận hôm nay và những gì tôi đã nói với sự tin tưởng lớn có thể sẽ được chứng minh hoàn toàn sai trong một năm tới. Vậy đó là, tôi nghĩ, điều thú vị về khoa học là chúng ta luôn phải đặt câu hỏi về những giả định của mình. Được rồi. Tôi cảm ơn bạn đã nhắc nhở chúng tôi rằng, tất cả điều này là một quá trình động. Bạn biết đấy, chúng ta chỉ có thể làm được nhiều điều với miếng thịt này trong hộp sọ của chúng ta về việc cố gắng giải mã thế giới xung quanh. Nhưng tôi thực sự nghĩ rằng ý tưởng về sự hiểu biết này rằng chúng ta độc nhất trong khả năng học hỏi từ những điều đã xảy ra xa xưa đã ghi lại những điều mà hiện tại con người có thể học hỏi không chỉ trong hiện tại mà còn trong tương lai. Vâng. Thật tuyệt vời và theo nhiều cách thích hợp cho nơi chúng ta đang ở bây giờ, đó là bạn ngồi đây giáo dục chúng tôi về các loài khác nhau. Và tôi muốn, tôi thực sự muốn cảm ơn bạn vì công việc bạn làm rất đặc biệt. Mọi người giờ đây sẽ nhận ra điều đó. Bạn là nhà nghiên cứu động vật, nhưng bạn chú ý đến những thí nghiệm trong thế giới thực được thực hiện trong một loạt các bối cảnh đa dạng. Và rõ ràng là bạn rất quan tâm đến tất cả các loài trên hành tinh và cách chúng tương tác. Và bạn cũng đã cung cấp cho chúng tôi một số công cụ tuyệt vời về cách cải thiện cuộc sống của mèo, chó của chúng ta, và thật sự hy vọng có thể khiến mọi người trở thành những nhà nghiên cứu về chính mình và về sự tương tác của họ với động vật. Tôi nghĩ rằng, đối với tôi, một trong những bài học lớn nhất hôm nay là, thật sự, những người nghe và xem điều này nên suy nghĩ không chỉ về việc chó có thích được vuốt ve ở đây hay ở đó không, mà, bạn biết đấy, điều gì khiến một hành vi nhất định xuất hiện ở một con vật? Điều đó phản ánh điều gì vì di truyền tự nhiên của nó và của chính chúng ta và thực sự suy nghĩ về những mối quan hệ đó và cố gắng cải thiện chúng? Vì vậy, bạn đã cung cấp cho chúng tôi kiến thức đáng kinh ngạc vì chính nó, kiến thức thiết thực. Và, một lần nữa, thật sự có rất nhiều sự quan tâm được đan xen trong mọi điều bạn làm mà bạn đã chia sẻ. Vì vậy, cảm ơn bạn đã đi một chặng đường dài để chia sẻ với chúng tôi. Cảm ơn bạn đã mời tôi. Tôi nghĩ rằng đây là một cuộc thảo luận tuyệt vời. Cảm ơn bạn rất nhiều. Cảm ơn bạn. Cảm ơn bạn đã tham gia cùng tôi trong cuộc thảo luận hôm nay với Tiến sĩ Carolina Westland.
    Để tìm hiểu thêm về công việc của cô ấy và tìm các liên kết đến các tài nguyên khác nhau được thảo luận trong tập hôm nay, vui lòng xem mục ghi chú chương trình. Nếu bạn đang học hỏi từ hoặc tận hưởng podcast này, xin hãy đăng ký kênh YouTube của chúng tôi. Đó là một cách tuyệt vời và không tốn kém để ủng hộ chúng tôi. Ngoài ra, hãy theo dõi podcast bằng cách nhấn nút theo dõi trên cả Spotify và Apple. Trên cả Spotify và Apple, bạn cũng có thể để lại cho chúng tôi đánh giá lên đến năm sao. Hiện tại, bạn có thể để lại nhận xét cho chúng tôi trên cả Spotify và Apple. Hãy kiểm tra các nhà tài trợ được đề cập ở đầu và trong suốt tập hôm nay. Đó là cách tốt nhất để ủng hộ podcast này. Nếu bạn có câu hỏi cho tôi hoặc nhận xét về podcast hoặc khách mời hoặc các chủ đề mà bạn muốn tôi xem xét cho podcast Huberman Lab, xin hãy để lại những điều đó trong phần bình luận trên YouTube. Tôi có đọc tất cả các bình luận. Đối với những ai chưa biết, tôi có một cuốn sách mới sẽ ra mắt. Đó là cuốn sách đầu tiên của tôi. Nó có tựa đề “Protocols, an Operating Manual for the Human Body”. Đây là một cuốn sách mà tôi đã làm việc trong hơn năm năm. Và nó dựa trên hơn 30 năm nghiên cứu và kinh nghiệm. Nó đề cập đến các quy trình cho mọi thứ từ giấc ngủ cho đến tập thể dục và kiểm soát căng thẳng, các quy trình liên quan đến sự tập trung và động lực. Và tất nhiên, tôi cung cấp các cơ sở khoa học cho các quy trình được đưa vào. Cuốn sách hiện đã có sẵn để đặt trước tại protocolsbook.com. Tại đó, bạn có thể tìm các liên kết đến các nhà cung cấp khác nhau. Bạn có thể chọn cái mà bạn thích nhất. Một lần nữa, cuốn sách có tên là “Protocols, an Operating Manual for the Human Body”. Và nếu bạn chưa theo dõi tôi trên mạng xã hội, tôi là Huberman Lab trên tất cả các nền tảng mạng xã hội. Bao gồm Instagram, X, Threads, Facebook và LinkedIn. Trên tất cả những nền tảng đó, tôi thảo luận về khoa học và các công cụ liên quan đến khoa học, một số trong đó chồng chéo với nội dung của podcast Huberman Lab, nhưng nhiều nội dung khác lại khác biệt với thông tin trong podcast Huberman Lab. Một lần nữa, tôi là Huberman Lab trên tất cả các nền tảng mạng xã hội. Và nếu bạn chưa đăng ký nhận bản tin Neural Network của chúng tôi, bản tin Neural Network là một bản tin hàng tháng không tốn chi phí, bao gồm tóm tắt podcast, cũng như những gì chúng tôi gọi là quy trình dưới dạng PDF một đến ba trang, đề cập đến mọi thứ từ cách tối ưu hóa giấc ngủ của bạn, cách tối ưu hóa dopamine, đến việc tiếp xúc lạnh có chủ đích. Chúng tôi có một quy trình tập thể dục cơ bản bao gồm tập tim mạch và tập kháng lực. Tất cả đều có sẵn hoàn toàn miễn phí. Bạn chỉ cần truy cập HubermanLab.com, vào tab menu ở góc trên bên phải, cuộn xuống phần bản tin và nhập địa chỉ email của bạn. Và tôi nên nhấn mạnh rằng chúng tôi không chia sẻ email của bạn với bất kỳ ai. Cảm ơn bạn một lần nữa đã tham gia cùng tôi trong cuộc thảo luận hôm nay với Tiến sĩ Carolina Westland. Và cuối cùng, nhưng chắc chắn không kém phần quan trọng, cảm ơn bạn đã quan tâm đến khoa học.
    歡迎來到胡伯曼實驗室播客,我們在這裡討論科學以及日常生活中的科學工具。
    我是安德魯·胡伯曼,我是史丹佛醫學院的神經生物學與眼科教授。
    我今天的嘉賓是卡羅琳娜·韋斯特蘭德博士。
    卡羅琳娜·韋斯特蘭德博士是一位動物生態學家和動物行為專家。
    韋斯特蘭德博士和我討論人類與馴化動物之間的關係,
    著重於針對優化我們寵物心理和身體健康的循證協議。
    韋斯特蘭德博士解釋了與我們的動物互動的最佳方式。
    我們可能假設,撫摸我們的動物、讓它們運動和餵養它們的方式使它們真的很快樂。
    但正如她所指出的,許多人假設的許多事情在我們的寵物及其基本驅動力方面結果卻是錯的。
    她教我們一些非常基本但強有力的事情,以滿足這些驅動力,
    當然,這是為了動物的福祉,同時也改善我們與它們的關係。
    韋斯特蘭德博士,我們還探討了不同犬種的獨特神經生物學和生理需求。
    這是一個迷人的對話,源於它們的狼族血統。
    我們會告訴你,無論你的特定品種,即使是一隻混種狗,是否需要以特定的方式進行運動,
    是否需要你目前沒有提供的其他刺激形式等等。
    因為我們都意識到,也有貓主人在這裡,
    我們討論了貓咪經常被誤解的溝通信號和社交需求。
    如你所知,關於如何訓練和照顧我們的狗和其他動物,外界有大量的辯論。
    而其中許多是基於推測和訓練結果,這當然很重要。
    今天與韋斯特蘭德博士的對話通過動物生態學的視角來接觸動物的健康與福祉,並且提供基於科學的可行協議,讓你可以立即實施,以改善你的寵物的福祉。
    所以如果你是寵物主人,這集將對你有巨大的價值。
    如果你不是寵物主人,您仍然會學到許多有關動物生物學和心理學的內容,包括你自己的。
    在開始之前,我想強調這個播客與我在史丹佛的教學和研究角色是分開的。
    然而,這是我希望將零成本的科學和與科學相關的工具信息帶給大眾的願望和努力的一部分。
    遵循這一主題,這一集包含贊助商。
    現在,我們開始與卡羅琳娜·韋斯特蘭德博士的討論。
    卡羅琳娜·韋斯特蘭德博士,歡迎您。
    謝謝。
    我非常期待這次對話。
    是的,我也是。
    我幾乎無法抑制自己的興奮。
    我認為我們有很多可以向動物學習的地方,而且我們在與動物的關係中學到的東西也非常多。
    我也相信我們對動物的感受、它們對我們的看法以及我們認為與它們的關係都有各種各樣的想法。
    哦,對。
    今天你將澄清事實。
    首先,你能簡單列舉一下你的學生們曾經與之合作和研究過的一些動物物種嗎?
    我的大多數學生就像是動物的守護者。
    所以他們可能是狗主人、馬術教練,或者可能是獸醫。
    有些人則在動物園工作,擔任飼養員或動物訓練師等等。
    因此,我的學生真的是相當多樣化的。
    他們的知識水平也非常不同,從40歲時才擁有第一隻狗的人,到已經訓練動物30年的人。
    我周圍長大就有一些馬術愛好者,我的第一任女友有一匹馬,這讓我驚訝的是,透過觀察我對人類與動物之間關係的理解。
    我認為在所有人類與動物之間的關係中,馬人關係似乎是最有身體接觸的,對吧?
    你騎著馬,學會理解馬的意圖,牠也會透過這些腿部的細微擠壓或輕輕踢腿,來理解你的意圖,不是用力踢,而只是用腳後跟輕輕一觸,或者輕輕拉拉韁繩。
    這真的很神奇。
    馬如何感知世界呢?
    我曾聽說過,牠們周圍似乎有這種意識的範圍,並且會關注地平線上的事物,明顯注意到靠得很近的東西。
    但如果你能讓我們進入馬的思維,儘可能準確地描述,一匹野馬與背上有騎手的馬在特定速度下朝特定方向行進時,牠會如何體驗世界?
    作為一名生態學家,我傾向於後退一步,從整體物種的視角來看待問題。
    馬是獵物動物。
    牠們也是群居動物。
    我認為我們作為人類,往往不太理解不同動物物種與我們自己在感知世界及其重要性方面的不同之處。
    因此,馬作為獵物動物,意味著牠們通常相當警覺。
    所以牠們非常注意周圍的世界,視覺範圍也很大,能夠看到後面發生的事情。
    我作為生態學家對於今天我們餵養和管理馬的方式有一些擔憂,特別是從動物在野外生活的方式來看。
    我們通常會在很早的時候就將馬和母馬分開,即使在野外,牠們會待很長時間在一起。
    因此,我作為生態學家對於我們如何養馬的一些擔憂是,早期的斷奶以及對於這種聚集性物種的單獨飼養。
    而且,牠們在野外會進行多達16小時的覓食活動。當我們將牠們帶入圈養環境時,我們通常會用促進快速進食的方式餵養牠們,而這只是牠們覓食時間的極小一部分。這可能會導致行為上的問題。因此,我認為馬可能是圈養動物中,對於許多個別馬來說,我們提供的生活方式並不算好。這很有趣。
    我知道狗是非常依賴嗅覺的。牠們透過鼻子來體驗世界,雖然可能在某種程度上是如此,甚至在很多方面。牠們能感知氣味,而不是距離,尤其是近距離。牠們喜歡將鼻子靠近事物嗅聞,深深地嗅聞。牠們總是在用鼻子收集信息。狗的品種範圍非常廣泛。我認為討論狗的話題時,我們首先需劃分一些主要差異,至少在純種版本中是這樣的。當我看到獒犬、吉娃娃和嗅覺獵犬的時候,我會覺得這些動物非常不一樣。
    某些狗是否真的比其他狗更依賴嗅覺?如果是的話,那麼依賴嗅覺的狗是否在沒有明確要求的情況下不會注意牠們正在看的東西呢?換句話說,我們應該根據狗的品種以不同的方式與牠們互動嗎?
    是的。我覺得我無法真實回答這個問題的第一部分。我並不知道不同狗品種的感官能力有多大差異。然而,如何與不同狗品種互動,這是一個很有趣的問題。在馴化過程中,尤其是在過去幾百年裡,我們開始選擇不同的能力,以適應需要不同任務的狗。如果我們看看狼的狩獵過程,牠們會先進行嗅聞定位反應,然後再尋找獵物。接下來牠們會進行觀察和潛行的行為,然後專注潛行、追逐,最後抓咬、致命咬。然後牠們會解剖並進食獵物。所以在狼中,我們可以看到整個掠食序列。在馴化過程中,我們在不同的品種中選擇了該序列的某些方面。我們有嗅探者、非常厲害的獵犬。我想這可能回答了你的第一個問題。我認為所有的狗品種都喜歡嗅聞。嗅聞是一個人們現在探索的主要事情之一。然而,回到馴化的過程,我們還有那些我們真的選擇了這種行為的指示犬。在一窩小狗中,我們會選擇最容易做出這種行為的那一隻。因此,經過幾代人,我們真的在這方面進行了雕塑。指示犬通常不會進入掠食序列的下一個行為。然後我們像邊境牧羊犬這樣的品種,牠們可能會進行一些追逐、觀察和潛行,並略微追逐,但理想上不會抓咬。我們還有純粹的追逐者,例如灰hound。然後是抓咬者,如取回犬,還有殺手,如鬥牛犬。
    我想人們預期你會提到比特犬或杜賓犬。但任何擁有鬥牛犬的人都知道,牠們是很棒的捕鼠犬。牠們是被培育來消滅小型,比如說,囓齒動物的。任何見過西高地白梗的人,這些可愛的小西頓犬,這些小白狗,牠們非常可愛。如果其中一隻聽到或感覺到牆壁裡有囓齒動物,我看到過有一隻追蹤一隻囓齒動物好幾天。牠會慢慢接近。我們以前稱它為老鼠電視。西高地白梗會專注於何時何地有囓齒動物,如果有任何方法能進入牆壁並捕捉到囓齒動物,牠就會衝出來,嘴裡叼著那隻囓齒動物。這真是令人驚奇。這種專注程度讓人驚訝,都是為了殺掉那隻老鼠。因此,幾百年前,我們有系統地、故意地為此進行了育種。然後有些品種在掠食序列中幾乎不表現出任何行為,主要只是吃,這是什麼呢?你稱他們為什麼?那些幫助守護牲畜的牠們。牠們仍然喜歡嗅聞。所以牠們傾向於保留嗅聞這部分,然後某些品種會擁有從狩獵序列中來的一或幾個行為。因此,我認為如果我們想給狗一個良好的生活,我們應該了解牠們在這個範疇中的位置。此外,工作犬似乎攜帶著這種進化的背包,牠們的基因背包會促使牠們真正想要從事那項工作。我們還有那些有時稱為玩具犬的品種,這些是 lap犬,對工作犬行為並不那麼感興趣的。因此,我認為對於不同的品種,我們需要理解牠們被育種的目的。
    我想快速休息一下,感謝我們的贊助商 Our Place。Our Place 生產我最喜愛的鍋、平底鍋和其他炊具。令人驚訝的是,像 PFAS(永久性化學物質)這類有毒化合物在80%的不黏平底鍋中,以及各種餐具、電器和無數其他廚房產品中仍然存在。正如我之前在這個播客中討論的那樣,這些 PFAS 或永久性化學物質如特氟龍與諸多重大健康問題有關,例如荷爾蒙失調、腸道微生物群失調、生育問題,以及許多其他健康問題。因此,盡量避免它們非常重要。這就是為什麼我非常喜歡 Our Place。
    我們的地方產品採用最高品質的材料製造,完全不含PFAS和毒素。我特別喜歡他們的鈦合金“永恆煎鍋專業版”。這是第一款不含任何化學物質和塗層的防黏鍋。它使用純鈦製作,這意味著它不含有害的永恆化學物質,也不會隨著時間的推移而降解或失去防黏效果。它的外觀也很美觀。我幾乎每天早上都在我的鈦合金“永恆煎鍋專業版”中煮蛋。它的設計使蛋煮得完美,完全不會粘鍋。我還用它煮漢堡和牛排,能給肉類帶來非常漂亮的焦脆效果。然而,無論怎麼做,沒有任何東西會粘在上面,因此清洗起來非常容易,甚至可以放進洗碗機清洗。我非常喜歡它,幾乎一直在使用。現在,我們的地方推出了全系列的鈦合金專業炊具,採用了首創的鈦合金不粘技術。所以如果你在尋找無毒且耐用的鍋具,請訪問從我們的地方.com / Huberman,並在結帳時使用優惠碼Huberman。目前,我們的地方正在進行季節性最大促銷。你可以在2025年5月12日之前享受所有產品最高30%的折扣。提供100天無風險試用、免費配送和免費退貨,你可以無風險地嘗試我們的地方,看看為什麼超過100萬人選擇了我們的地方廚具。再次強調,請訪問從我們的地方.com / Huberman以獲得最高30%的折扣。
    今天的節目同樣由8Sleep贊助。8Sleep製造智能床墊套,具備冷卻、加熱和睡眠追蹤的功能。我在這個播客中曾提到,我們每晚都需要充足的高質量睡眠是多麼關鍵。確保你的睡眠環境溫度適宜是確保良好睡眠的一個最佳方法。因為為了進入與維持深度睡眠,人體的溫度實際上需要下降約1到3度。為了讓你醒來時感覺神清氣爽、充滿活力,身體的溫度實際上需要上升約1到3度。8Sleep會根據你的獨特需求,自動調節你的床在整夜的溫度。我覺得這非常有用,因為我喜歡在夜晚開始時將床墊調得很涼,半夜時再冷一點,早上覺醒時調得溫暖。這樣可以帶給我最多的慢波睡眠和快速眼動睡眠。我知道這一點,因為8Sleep有個很棒的睡眠追蹤器,告訴我整晚的睡眠情況以及我獲得的睡眠類型。我已經在使用8Sleep床墊套四年了,這完全改變和提升了我的睡眠質量。他們的最新型號Pod 4 Ultra也具備打鼾檢測功能,可以自動抬高你的頭幾度,以改善你的氣流,防止你打鼾。如果你決定嘗試8Sleep,你有30天的時間在家中試用,若不喜歡可以退貨,不會問任何問題,但我相信你會喜歡的。請訪問8Sleep.com / Huberman,最高可節省$350購買Pod 4 Ultra。8Sleep產品還可運送至包括墨西哥及阿聯酋在內的多個國家。再次重申,請訪問8Sleep.com / Huberman,以最高節省$350購買你的Pod 4 Ultra。
    這是一個美麗而且對我來說完全新穎的描述,展示了不同犬種的細分。不是基於狼和獒犬基因的劑量,這是一些更加簡化的研究論文實際上所做的。他們的圖表。我們將提供一個鏈接,該鏈接是大約10年前在《科學雜誌》上發表的,該圖表展示了獒犬基因與狼基因的劑量。你所描述的情況則美麗地細分了如果你去狗公園或海灘時所觀察到的情況。我的鬥牛獒Costello,是一隻混合鬥牛犬。我總是說,沒有下頜咬不合。所以它不是這樣,而是這樣,對吧?在牠們因為過度近親繁殖而產生有下頜咬合和短鼻、塌鼻的問題之前,這是一隻真正的鬥牛犬。但牠既不打獵也不追逐,也沒有興趣去傷害任何東西。牠的確喜歡享用美食。所以牠在該行為特徵描述的末端。牠們被繁殖的目的到底是什麼?我會盡量不在這方面佔用太多時間,因為我想向你學習。最初的鬥牛犬血統是獒犬(類似於獒犬,強壯、體型大且耐痛)和鬥牛犬(短鼻)的交配。而基因的交叉,顯然犬類遺傳學家並未考慮特定基因,他們是考慮特徵的,那就是短鼻非常適合所謂的牛鬥,因為那短鼻在牠們咬住公牛鼻子時,提供了一種槓桿,這也是牠們的用途,這是一種殘酷的做法,公牛非常難甩掉牠們。想想用長夾子去撿東西的物理學,與用夾具,如C夾相比,差異是如此大。對的。那種可以去除面部疼痛感受器的突變,或減少疼痛感受器的基因,靠近另一種參與生成皮膚張力特性的基因。因此這就是為什麼牠們有那個下巴和皺折。哦,對了。我不建議任何人這樣做,但Costello,有時不幸的是,會在海邊玩時不小心把魚鉤刺進牠的下顎。牠會流血著微笑著過來,實際上你得把它拿出來。牠的疼痛忍耐度相當高。疼痛忍耐度在動物的前面,即臉部是非常高的。
    在動物的後方,你觸摸他的後腳趾,事實上,他們的疼痛感受器在後面密度高,前面則密度低。因此,他們是被培育來進行鬥牛的。原始的血統已被培育出來。這是關心鬥牛犬品種的人們以及希望將更人道的繁殖實踐引入鬥牛犬品種,因為如今這種品種相當殘酷。曾經有人試圖重新建立原始血統,即後肘彎曲,沒有強烈的下顎突出,與現在所看到的情況正好相反。這就是鬥牛犬的簡要歷史。他們必須通過剖腹產出生,因為肩部寬大,臀部狹窄。無論如何,關於鬥牛犬我總是說的有趣之處是,我感覺我與我的鬥牛犬之間的契約是,他會誓死保護我。你確實會注意到,每當他們聽到噪音或任何聲音時,他們都非常警覺。但如果沒有即將來臨的威脅,他們就會完全放鬆,這是任何物種中最有效的能量使用。因此,基本上就是,我會為你,安德魯,犧牲我的生命,但除非你的生命受到威脅,否則我不會做任何事情。因此,也許我們可以討論一下狗的性情以及他們是如何體驗情緒生活的。我不知道我們是否能對此做出一般性的陳述,但你花了很多時間思考動物的情緒生活。狗需要什麼才能感到冷靜和安全?這是一個很好的問題。是的,為了感到冷靜和安全,我認為我們應該回到核心效應空間,這是我發現理解和為動物提供良好環境的三個情緒模型之一,這樣他們才能真正茁壯成長。核心效應空間是一種描繪或概念化情緒的方式,我們在x軸上有效價,即某事物的愉快或不愉快程度,在y軸上有喚起程度。你所問的就是,低喚起和愉快的狀態,即他們放鬆,感到安全,並且以某種方式在社交上與他人互動,感到輕鬆安逸。我們如何達到這一點呢?我認為要考慮到的一些方面是消除負面情緒。因此,再次強調,如果我們處於核心效應空間的第四象限,與高喚起的不愉快狀態,我們會找到恐懼、攻擊等情緒。因此,幫助減少這些情緒將自動幫助動物向右移動。在下方的第三象限,與令人不愉快的低喚起狀態,動物在無聊或抑鬱時往往會出現這種情況,必須參與其中,提供一個刺激的環境,讓他們能夠做一些有趣的事情,幫助他們進入核心效應空間的右側。而在那個第一象限的上方則是高喚起的愉快狀態。但那類似於尋找或覓食行為,探索、玩耍、交配。至於你的問題,我們如何進入第二象限,感到安全以及那種溫暖、模糊的感覺?因此,解決方法之一可能是,如果動物喜歡來自你的感覺,他們往往必須認識你才能真正欣賞,像是觸覺刺激,也就是撫摸。可能會干擾這一點的是我們這些靈長類動物,人類是靈長類動物,我們喜歡擁抱。我們往往在想要與我們非常喜歡的動物互動時,會用手這樣做。對許多動物來說,這是約束,且非常可怕。因此,我們提供給動物的身體接觸方式應該考慮他們是否真的喜歡,是否能夠忍受或喜歡這種接觸。其中一種方法是提供一個同意測試。你可以伸出手稍微撫摸一下,最好是在動物特別喜歡的地方。因此,大多數狗不喜歡手放在他們的頭頂上,而是可能更喜歡這裡。也就是在他們的脖子上,或上胸部。你可以這樣做幾秒鐘,然後移開手,看看這個動物是否喜歡這樣的接觸?然後他們會再主動恢復這種接觸嗎?還是會移開?我現在遇到的問題是我的貓,他並不是特別喜歡我撫摸他,然後我必須非常注意,確保我讓他有機會說不。因此,我們可能考慮到輕觸這個動物作為同意測試,然後如果他們朝你移動,那麼狗喜歡什麼樣的觸覺刺激模式?我有稍微閱讀一些相關資料,有人進行了一個實驗,我認為很好地描述了撫摸速率之間的差異。基本結論是,他們聲稱所有狗都不喜歡非常快速的觸碰,但人們往往會快速拍打、快速撫摸。而他們展示了一個很好的例子,就是如果一個人故意非常緩慢地撫摸動物,動物的眼瞼就會開始下垂。你基本上能快速舒緩緊張。我認為這很有趣。作為人類,我們認為,哦,我們想拍打狗的頭。而且不知為何,我們把拍打與快速的拍打聯繫起來。是的,或者認為撫摸是一個快速的過程。你要去撫摸這個動物。所有的狗都有可能渴望一些非常緩慢的撫摸。我也認為,如果你自己處於一種冷靜的情感狀態,那麼我們可能會觸及另一種有趣的情緒理論,即多迷走神經理論和共同調節的概念。因此,如果你非常冷靜和放鬆,那麼你就正在發出這些提示,這些微妙的提示,其他個體正在解讀和感知。看起來我們也確實這樣與我們的狗互動,當然對馬可是如此。
    讓自己保持冷靜和放鬆的狀態,真的可以幫助狗狗放鬆。而你所說的快速撫摸或拍打狗的方式,對我來說非常有道理。我知道有一項針對馬的研究顯示,如果你拍打一匹馬,許多馬會覺得這很厭惡。換句話說,這是牠們會努力避開的行為。然而,這往往是我們在狗狗做出我們想要的行為時獎勵牠們的方式。牠們確實喜歡被抓癢。通常在鬃毛的根部,如果你在那裡抓癢,牠們通常會很享受。但我想說的是,不同的動物,不同的個體會有不同的喜好,只要試著看看牠們喜歡什麼。或許如果你像這樣伸出雙手,牠們甚至可能會挪動身體,告訴你牠們想讓你抓癢的身體部位,一旦牠們學習了這種溝通的規則。我覺得狗狗想要被抓癢的部位,是牠們自己無法接觸到的地方。是的。我尚未遇到一隻不喜歡被抓癢在臀部的狗。臀部抓癢對許多動物來說都是一件大事。對,當然是。像是在它們後腿的上側。對,不是嗎?就正那裡。對。一定感覺很好。對,因為牠們無法自己做到。還有在後腿下方。對吧?就像在後腿與柔軟皮膚的彎曲處。對,對吧?那樣——但是,你知道的,與那些比較膽小和比較冷靜的狗互動後。我完全同意,不同的動物不論品種,對觸感的反應完全不同。對,還有牠們希望互動的速度。我聽說過,而且我不知道這是否真的,狗狗非常注重空間。我不知道這是否真實。我相信會有人反駁這一點。但這個想法是,如果你的狗在你走進房間時跑向你,或者一隻新認識的狗跑來碰觸你或跳到你的腿上,那是牠們試圖主導你的方式。就像是「這是我的空間。我在控制你。」因為你不會隨便走向一隻剛認識的狗,並直白地進入它的空間,除非牠們也走向你。對於這個基於觸感和空間的主導與服從的問題,你有什麼看法?這就像是潘多拉的盒子,對吧?不錯。我在這方面沒有任何利益。我只是希望學習,我希望人們能夠學習,這樣他們在與動物互動時能有更好的體驗。當然。是的。所以首先,我認為其實我們經常會走向從未見過的陌生狗。我們會說,「嗨,我可以摸牠嗎?」然後我們開始在動物的頭頂拍打。罪魁禍首。所以我覺得我們確實這樣做了。然後這整個關於主導的討論真有趣,因為作為一名生態學家,我們對主導的定義與大多數人完全不同。這與大多數人定義的方式不同。事實上,我翻閱了百科全書,看看那裡是如何定義主導的。我發現這個定義只包含兩行。一個是生態學上的主導定義,另一個是社會學上的主導定義。我認為我們通常所做的,是在動物身上不恰當地使用社會學的定義,我覺得這樣很不幸。因為生態學的定義是關於對資源的訪問優先權。這裡有一個資源。這裡有五個個體接近。在那裡只有一個。主導的個體將擁有對該資源的優先訪問權。其他個體只能等待或尋找其他地方的資源。這樣可以減少衝突和攻擊的風險,以及與之相關的所有成本。因此,與彼此共處的動物,在穩定的社會群體中,會組織或擁有某種主導階層,以便實現這一點,減少攻擊的風險。在圈養環境中,這種情況通常會比野外情況更為加劇,因為動物可以分散,而他們可以去那邊獲得資源。然而,當我們將牠們置於家中,並提供資源,尤其是像這樣,當你有兩隻或三隻貓,然後提供食物時。你正在讓這些動物處於衝突之中,因為貓是孤獨的獵手。所以如果你有好幾隻貓,應該在不同的地方餵食,以減少與這種餵食方式相關的強烈興奮感。好吧,在狗或者狗與其他非人類動物之間存在主導關係。我在想人類與狗之間的關係以及觸感和空間。我聽說過狗碰觸你是因為牠認為擁有你。我聽說過如果你進入狗所在的空間,狗往後退,那麼牠認為你是主導的。我還聽說過如果狗很快地進入你的空間,牠將自己視為這段關係的領導者。關於這一點有很多理論。我意識到,所有這些關於動物的理論必定是相當有爭議的,因為它們缺乏告訴我們想知道的事情的語言。對。因此當我們進行生態學研究時,我們總是在猜測。我不會將你所描述的任何情況標籤為主導互動。其實,我更寧願,如果狗在你與牠面對面時後退,我會將這標籤為一種恐懼反應,而不是服從,因為這不是給予你資源訪問的優先權。通常,野生的流浪狗將會形成線性主導階層,以獲取資源,且這可能會根據資源的不同而改變。所以這並不是一成不變的。
    所以這就像是流動且可變的,但通常在資源獲取的優先權上仍然會有某種排序。 然後我們還有另一種社會角色,就是領導者的角色。 當我作為一名動物行為學家提到領導者時,我指的是那個人在一個地點走向另一個地點時,走在最前面的人。 我喜歡舉大象的例子,當牠們遷徙時,通常都是由一隻老母象,也就是族長,帶路。 因此,牠就是領導者,牠會幫助牠們找到路,基本上牠知道要去哪裡。 還有其他的社會角色。 可能會有控制者,這是傾向於開始活動變化的動物。 我們在牛身上可以看到這一點,例如,當所有的牛都站著吃草時,然後有一頭牛,控制者,躺下,其他的牛也都躺下。 哇。 接著牠們開始反芻。 牠們的行為常常會同步,但牠們會跟隨。 不是說某一個個體在強加於其他,而是牠們就這麼做,然後其他的隨之而行。 有趣。 是的。 我聽說過,當你遛狗時,狗應該在你身邊或在你身後。 實際上很少有狗主人會讓狗在他們身後走。 我住的地方有很多狗和主人經過。 有趣的是,把這解讀為一個問題,即如果狗在前面走,是否意味著牠在某種程度上是領導者? 我的意思是,人類對這些事情完全錯了嗎? 我想是的。 很好。 我認為我們承載了很多,實際上,我們沒有提到這一點,我認為我對狗幾乎沒有實際經驗。 我沒有和狗一起生活,也沒有訓練過狗。 但是我的許多學生訓練狗,而我幫助他們。 所以,這也意味著我沒有這些假設,即狗應該在你身後或身邊,如果不是這樣,那麼……這意味著我可以看待這種說法並說,真的嗎? 因為我認為有很多學習發生,當然,你教狗如果你待在我身旁或身後,那麼,就不會有任何不愉快的事情發生。 但如果你拉著前面,我會把你拉回來。 所以這種拉扯行為將會有不愉快的後果,然後會影響動物選擇與你待在一起的決定。 但我認為我們通常所標籤為優越的行為,常常可以簡單地,如果我們去掉這個標籤,看看動物的行為,就可以用其他術語來解釋。 再次強調,對我來說,作為一名動物行為學家,優越性與資源獲取的優先權有關。 就資源獲取的優先權而言,當我得到我的小狗時,我在與牠一起參加的狗訓練課程中被告知,我應該先吃,然後讓牠吃。 或者我們可以一起吃不同的食物,雖然我承認我經常給牠吃牛排。 如果那是適合鬥牛犬的適當食物,我就給牠吃,而不是讓牠在我之前吃,因為這與資源獲取有關。 這有什麼真實性嗎? 這在很多狗/主人訓練中都有教授,因為很多狗訓練其實是主人訓練。 是的,是的,是的,當然。 我的意思是,你必須設置情況以使之對你和動物有利。 但再一次,我不會把這個框架置於優越性之中。 牠們與我們建立關係,但就我所知,從動物行為學的角度來看,我們在狗之間的優越性階層中沒有角色。 牠們知道我們是不同的,並會作出反應。 牠們會學會期待在這種情境下會發生什麼,在那種情境下會發生什麼。 所以我們經常可以從不同的學習系統中對這進行重新框架,而不是優越性。 這是一個新穎的觀點,因為我認為目前市面上關於狗/主人訓練的許多內容實際上更多是關於建立一種關係,讓你清楚地成為照顧者,以「讓牠們感到安全」。 這樣牠們的角色就非常明確,這樣就不會感受到需要承擔或許是你角色的焦慮。 這聽起來就像你所聽到的父母與子女訓練的情況,基本上都是這樣。 所以,也許基於你在過去幾個問題中的回答模式,我應該問一個非常直接的問題,即你是如何看待動物的? 像是你在思考它們時有哪些看法? 我知道你對牠們的福利和改善牠們的生活條件感興趣,但你是如何看待——當你看到一隻動物時,大多數人會說,好吧,那是一隻狗,那是一匹馬,那是一隻鸚鵡。 我可以與之互動嗎? 也許我不想要,或者我可能有恐懼症。 誰知道呢? 但是你是如何看待動物的? 像是什麼驅動著這一調查,涉及到牠們的情感和認知生活? 首先,我認為我們人類也是一種動物物種,我們傾向於把自己置於一個高位,認為我們是一類,動物就像這樣——另一類,彷彿它是同質的,實際上並不是如此。 所以每種動物都有自己的——我們有自己的適應性,而我們所包圍的所有其他動物物種也有。 因此,我不知道這是否能真正回答你的問題,但我傾向於——所以我所做的工作是盡量幫助動物與人類共同生活得更好。 而這通常是從了解該動物物種在野外如何生活及其生活方式開始的,不論牠們是捕食者還是獵物動物物種,牠們如何處理世界,牠們吸收的資訊類型。
    例如,我們可能會看到一隻搖著尾巴的狗,並認為只有快樂的狗才會搖尾巴,但實際上,搖尾巴在許多不同的情境中都能見到。我們可能會將這視為一種視覺溝通的行為,但實際上,搖尾巴也可能是牠們在散發氣味,這尾巴的搖擺會將氣味飄散到你那裡,讓你能夠獲取有關我目前情緒狀態的信息。牠們那裡肯定有嗅腺。哦,是的。對,這很有趣。
    那麼我們能否解讀狗的不同搖尾巴類型?有辦法做到這一點嗎?一件非常有趣的事情是,狗如果主要是向左搖尾巴——對於狗來說是左邊。牠是在身體的左側搖尾巴。嗯,這通常與負面情緒狀態相關聯。而右側則通常與正面情緒狀態相關聯。同樣的情況,貓在負面情緒狀態時往往是從左側看世界,而在正面情緒狀態時則是從右側看。因此,從左側看,意思是左眼稍微向前。是的,頭部傾斜,所以右眼——這樣通過這隻眼睛來獲取信息。
    如果你感到恐懼——有些人只是聽,並且不看,因此他們看不到這一點。所以卡羅利娜所描述的是,如果頭稍微向側面轉動,左眼向前,那樣就是一種負面的情緒狀態——所以當刺激物使牠感到恐懼時,牠是用左眼看那個刺激物。而如果那對牠更具吸引力的話,就會向右邊看。是的,所以這是有側向性(lateralized)的。這很有趣。那麼你所說的狗的左邊搖尾巴更負面,右邊則偏向正面。那麼全範圍的搖尾巴呢?
    哦,全範圍的搖尾巴。我不知道具體的細節,但肯定是搖尾巴的類型,不論是非常低且快速的還是高且稍微僵硬的,將傳達出不同的情緒狀態。你覺得隨著時間的推移,我們會在不知不覺中學習這些信號嗎?是的,絕對是的。因為我們會將其與我們的狗在特定情境中或以某種方式行為的聯繫起來嗎?
    研究表明,我們人類實際上是通過接觸——即使是被動接觸,僅僅是在同一個環境中生活,來學會解讀狗的行為。顯然,如果我們生活在狗與人類近距離相處的文化中,我們會比在狗與人類互動不多的文化中,更擅長於解讀狗的行為。還有一點就是,我們通常在讀取粗大肢體語言方面比面部表情更擅長。明顯的原因之一是,狗在展現情感面部表情時,會移動不同的面部肌肉。牠們所使用的肌肉與人類不同。
    你能告訴我們關於狗的面部表情的哪些信息嗎?在過去幾年中,有一些研究探討了在不同情境下,哪些肌肉在什麼時候移動。研究人員會將狗置於不同類型的刺激之下,然後拍攝影片並觀察哪些肌肉在顫動。臉部在這些刺激下的反應如何。因此,這類研究發現,當狗接觸到,比如雷聲或煙火聲時,會顯示出某種特定的面部配置。當牠們的主人在幾個小時後回到家時,牠們則會顯示出不同的面部配置,等等。所以似乎牠們確實會展現面部表情。只不過這些面部表情中,有些不是我們在對應的情緒狀態下表現出的相同肌肉。因此,我認為這會讓我們在某些方面誤解狗的面部表情。
    但另一方面,假如我們和狗一起生活,我們開始的時候,並不會僅僅觀察面部表情。我們會觀察整個狗。通常來說,我們解讀牠們的肢體語言會更好,而不是僅僅解讀面部表情。即便我認為研究也顯示,臉部是我們首先觀察的地方。
    在狗與其他犬隻互動時,哪些行為會延續到狗與人類的互動中呢?例如,如果有人要帶狗去散步,而狗對於牽繩從掛鉤上拿下的聲音很熟悉,狗進入那種人們稱之為瑜伽中“向下狗”的長前肢伸展姿勢並不罕見。有些人會說這是一種幼犬玩耍姿勢的遺留。人們經常這麼說。人們通常是自封的狗專家。這真的很有趣。我從在線研究中得知,各種所謂的狗專家彼此間強烈不和。我是說,他們會寫信給我,說:“你知道,他們是邪惡的。這個人是殘酷的。”他們彼此指責對不同訓練工具的動物虐待。我們稍後會談論這一點。不過狗會做這種向下狗的動作,無論這意味著什麼,與其他狗或與人類互動時都會這樣做。你認為這在這兩種不同的情境中意義相同嗎?大概是的。你所描述的那種玩鬧鞠躬被稱為遊戲的主要信號。因此,這通常是在玩耍的情境中展現出的。我從未見過有人在散步的情境中描述這種行為,但就我所知,在遊戲的情境下,狗和人類的遊玩方式與牠們和其他狗的方式略有不同。但牠們確實享受與人類的互動。而有時我認為,我們人類很難判斷我們所看到的是玩耍還是攻擊,因為玩鬧鞠躬會帶有攻擊行為中的元素。不過,通常我們可以用MARS(M-A-R-S)來進行觀察。
    因此,M代表元訊號。
    因此,那些遊玩前的姿態。
    或者在其他物種中,會有其他行為在某種程度上表達出我想玩。
    我知道黑猩猩對遊玩有大約30到50種不同的元訊號。
    M-A-A代表活動轉移。
    因此,我們會看到不同的行為。
    它們可能在追逐。
    它們可能在撲擊。
    它們可能在摔跤,互相咬。
    但你會看到這些活動轉移。
    而且它們的順序並不是像真正打鬥時那樣。
    M-A-R-R代表角色互換。
    因此,你會看到狗狗,如果牠們的大小不同或耐力不同,或者牠們的大小或戰鬥能力各異,會輪流贏與輸。
    是的,我見過。
    是的,因為如果你總是輸,那玩起來就不好玩。
    所以為了能繼續玩,較大的狗有時也需要輸。
    因此,他們需要這樣做才能保持互動,這是保持互動的方式。
    最後一個,S,代表自我限制。
    所以,較大的狗將會自我限制。
    你可能會看到牠們在拔河,然後大狗只是站在那裡,保持著繩子。
    而小狗則在使勁拉,努力想要獲得那個玩具。
    而大狗只是在那裡什麼都不做。
    但如果一個人類接手這個玩具開始拉的話,那麼大狗就會開始參與並展現出更多的力量並升級那個行為。
    當你看到動物調整牠們的遊玩活力水平時,這是一件美妙的事情。
    是的,是的。
    這樣玩才能繼續下去。
    這非常可愛。
    我的意思是,這引發了一個更大的問題,那就是,狗有同理心嗎?
    哦,我認為有。
    絕對有。
    我不能說我看過任何關於這方面的研究,但就是,對。
    我的意思是,很多狗主人都熟悉,在我們悲傷的時候,狗通常會靠得更近,而不是遠離。
    我見過一些不可思議的瞬間。
    你知道的,我們解釋這些事情,對吧?
    我們人性化。
    但是我幾年前在家裡有一個人,她在悲痛中,Costello來了,然後把爪子放在她的膝蓋上。
    很難不把這解讀為一個有意義的同理瞬間。
    誰知道他在經歷什麼?
    也許他也在感到不安,我無法知道。
    但更愉快的解釋是,他想要給予安慰。
    我認為從進化的角度來看,生活在緊密社會群體中的社會動物善於讀懂彼此的情緒狀態,也善於在可能的情況下緩解負面情緒。
    所以我會期待在任何那些更具認知能力的物種中出現某種形式的同理心。
    我想花點時間來休息一下,並感謝我們的贊助商,AG1。
    AG1是一種維生素礦物質益生菌飲品,還包含適應原。
    我從2012年就開始喝AG1,早在我甚至不知道什麼是播客的時候。
    我開始喝它,現在每天都喝,因為它能確保我獲得每日維生素和礦物質的配額,還幫助我確保獲得足夠的益生元和益生菌以支持我的腸道健康。
    在過去的十年中,腸道健康已經被認識到對我們的消化健康、免疫系統以及神經遞質和神經調節劑的生成非常重要,像是多巴胺和血清素等。
    換句話說,腸道健康對於大腦的正常功能至關重要。
    當然,我努力從未加工的來源攝取健康的全食物為我的大多數營養攝取,但AG1中有一些成分,包括特定的微量元素,從全食物中難以或不可能獲得。
    所以,通過每天服用AG1,我獲得所需的維生素和礦物質,以及促進腸道健康的益生菌和益生元,從而促進大腦和免疫系統的健康,以及對身體所有器官和組織至關重要的適應原和重要微量元素。
    因此,任何時候有人問我,如果他們只能服用一種補充劑,那該補充劑應該是什麼,我總是說AG1,因為AG1支持大腦和身體中與我們的心理健康、身體健康和表現相關的許多不同系統。
    如果你想試試AG1,可以訪問drinkAG1.com/Huberman。
    本月(即2025年4月),AG1正在免費贈送一個月供應的OMEGA-3魚油,以及一瓶維生素D3加K2。
    正如我之前在此次播客中強調的,OMEGA-3魚油和維生素D3加K2被證明對於從情緒和大腦健康到心臟健康和健康的荷爾蒙生產等各種方面都有所幫助,還有更多的好處。
    再次提到,請訪問drinkAG1.com/Huberman,以獲取一個月免費的OMEGA-3魚油和一瓶維生素D3加K2,並申請訂閱。
    今天的節目還由Juve贊助。
    Juve製造醫療級紅光療法設備。
    如果有一樣東西我在這個播客中一直強調,那就是光對我們的生物學影響之巨大。
    除了陽光,紅光和近紅外光源已被證實對改善多種細胞和器官健康方面有積極效果,包括更快的肌肉恢復、改善皮膚健康和傷口癒合、改善痤瘡、減少疼痛和炎症,甚至促進線粒體功能,以及改善視力本身。
    Juve燈具的特點是它們使用臨床證明的波長,意味著特定的紅光和近紅外光波長的組合,以觸發最佳的細胞適應。
    就我個人而言,我每週大約使用Juve全身面板三到四次,並在家中和旅行時使用Juve手持燈。
    如果你想試試Juve,可以訪問Juve(拼寫為J-O-O-V-V).com/Huberman。
    Juve 為所有 Huberman Lab 聽眾提供獨家折扣,最高可享 $400 的 Juve 產品優惠。再次提醒,請造訪 Juve,網址是 J-O-O-V-V dot com slash Huberman,以獲取高達 $400 的折扣。
    我一直對一個現象感到驚訝和好奇:如果兩隻同種動物都獲得食物或點心,它們似乎會注意到對方得到了多少點心。我不確定,但似乎是這樣。作為一個有兄弟姐妹的人,我有一個和我關係非常好的姐姐,我記得小時候如果有點心,比如奶昔之類的,她總會指出她比我多了一點。如果有一塊蛋糕或其他東西,無論我們多麼專注於被端給我們的蛋糕,我們都會注意對方獲得了多少。
    這是一種本能的反應,而我們並不是真的在任何層面上具有競爭心。無論如何,我們一直在以一種互補的方式尊重彼此的優勢和劣勢。但在享受點心方面,人類和狗都會非常注意誰獲得了什麼。公平,是的。有一個實驗是法蘭茲·杜瓦爾(Franz Duval)及其團隊對卷尾猴進行的,顯然他們做了這個實驗並發表了一篇論文,但沒有人閱讀它。然後,十年後,為了一次演講,他們重新進行了一些實驗並拍攝了影片,並在演示中分享了這些內容。我不知道你是否看過,但基本上有兩隻卷尾猴,它們彼此相鄰,可以看到對方獲得了什麼,然後它們被要求執行一項任務。研究人員給它們一塊石頭,然後它們把石頭還給研究人員,之後它們會得到一個強化物,也就是作為行為報酬的點心。
    所以第一隻猴子得到了片黃瓜,它很開心地吃了那片黃瓜,然後研究人員轉向第二隻猴子並請求同樣的行為,第二隻猴子也完成了該行為,於是研究人員餵那隻猴子一顆葡萄。卷尾猴對黃瓜並不是太熱衷,但它們非常喜歡葡萄。因此,當她再次轉向第一隻猴子,重複同樣的行為,又餵那隻猴子一片它剛剛開心地吃過的黃瓜時,它竟然發脾氣,把黃瓜扔回給研究人員,似乎在表達:“我看到你餵對方一顆葡萄。”觀眾們都在笑,我想我們都認識到了這種情況,就是對於同樣質量的工作,卻對別人獲得更好報酬感到不滿。
    是的,我對這些每隔幾年就會出現的研究很感興趣,某些研究顯示資源配置的現象。我覺得這是一個很有趣的研究,即使某些烏鴉會教會彼此打開箱子以便另一隻獲得食物,即使牠們並不擁有該食物的來源,這似乎就是一種利他主義的行為。因此,我們可能會看到公平和利他主義。
    哦,的確,這與物種中每個成員都在追求盡可能多獲得資源的主導層次觀念形成了極大的對比。在某種程度上這是美麗的,而我們再次必須小心,不要人性化,不要假設物種成員之所以這樣做是因為他們善良。我喜歡這種解釋。但也許,正如你之前所指出的,擁有一個快樂的群體能讓自己更快樂。
    絕對如此。我認為如果這個群體運行良好,那麼每個人都將受益。因此,我們過去以為只有個體選擇,但實際上也有一定程度的群體選擇。個體選擇是更強的,但當一個群體的合作能力更強時,這個群體將會比那些合作較差的群體表現得更好。而且這很有趣。你提到過幾次人性化的風險。我認為如果我們把這看作是從人性化到人性否認的一個連續體,我們可以定義人性化為認為動物和人類是一樣的。只是牠們毛長得有一點不同,多多少少是相同的。而另一方面,我們所謂的人性否認,是法蘭茲·杜瓦爾所創造的術語,反映了我們不承認事實上人類和其他動物物種之間的共同性。
    我認為在我們對人性化的恐懼中,我們已經陷入了人性否認。我認為答案可能就在中間,我們確實與動物有很多共同性。我認為,例如,儘管我們對世界的感知可能非常不同,但我們處理該信息的方式及我們對環境的情感和情緒反應、情緒變化的方式非常相似,雖然不同動物物種所注意的刺激物可能不盡相同,具體取決於是什麼物種。但我認為我們已經落入的另一個陷阱是,我們如此避免討論人性化,對此感到如此害怕,以至於我們否認它與我們有任何關聯。
    那麼我們來談談一個可能有爭議的物種,貓。哦。我的姐姐有貓,我對貓並不反感。我不能說我特別喜歡牠們,但我也不討厭牠們。
    對,你有養貓。是的。你是一位動物行為學家。嗯。從動物行為學家的角度來告訴我們一些貓的事吧。
    當你看著一隻貓的時候,你在何尋找的東西來判斷它是否是一隻友善的貓呢?我指的是,很明顯的,如果貓背上的毛豎起來,它彎曲身體並發出嘶嘶聲,那就是顯而易見的訊號。但在貓的進化及其物種的一般情境中,你又在看什麼呢?
    我們今天作為寵物的普通家貓,演化為一種孤獨的獵手,但它們會聚集在鬆散的社會團體中。它們會一起待著,但並不是一個非常緊密的集體。它們獨自狩獵,所以它們也會自己進食。作為一名動物行為學家,當我看一種動物物種時,我通常會觀察三個方面。我會觀察它們的社交環境。通常來說,貓如果受得當的培養,應該有機會與母貓共度足夠的時間,通常應該長達14週。我想我們在瑞典時常會見到這一點。我不知道在美國的情況如何,但這似乎足夠讓動物真正學會怎麼做一隻貓,以免在斷奶後被帶入新環境時情緒受到太大影響。
    所以,看社會的一面是我做的第一件事。第二件事是我會觀察牠們如何獲得食物。同樣,貓是孤獨的獵手。所以我會探索它們狩獵的方式,與狗相比,貓通常保留整個狩獵序列。有時候,殺死獵物的咬合力並不完全到位,但肯定有捕捉的咬合力,而且有些貓如果是戶外貓,它們可能會把獵物帶回家。在我看來,這並不是因為它們想把獵物贈送給你,而是因為它們感到安全,所以只是把獵物帶到它們感到安全的地方。因此,這並不是一份禮物,我們可以把這點放下。我不認為這是一份禮物。
    我曾經有一個女友,研究生時期,她的貓常常會抓一些非常大的老鼠,然後把它們放在我們的鞋子裡,真是噩夢。貓是把老鼠放進鞋子裡,還是老鼠會躲在鞋子裡呢?當我們發現它們時,老鼠已經死了,所以我假設是貓把它們放進鞋子裡。那隻貓也喜歡撿起鋁箔球,小鋁箔球。我從未見過貓撿球。哦,是的,是的,起初我不這麼認為。你可以學到那個。我對那隻貓並不太熱衷,後來我與它建立了非常親密的關係。至少從我的角度來看,我認為這是一種親密的關係。而它會抓老鼠,然後在我們睡覺時把它們放在我們的鞋子裡,這相當不愉快。早上你必須檢查你的鞋子,所以那些不是禮物。我不認為它們是禮物。在我的了解中,貓會把它們捕獲的東西帶回到它們感到安全的地方,而且如果獵物不再動,牠們往往會失去興趣。所以,當然,如果你的貓或那隻貓真的殺了那隻老鼠,牠們就已經進入了真正的殺戮咬合力。許多貓並不會那樣做。牠們只是有抓住獵物的咬合力,所以牠們會讓小老鼠跑掉。我見過那樣。嗯,牠們會和牠們玩,對吧,Dale?是的。所以,牠們會放開獵物,如果老鼠靜止不動,牠們實際上可以逃離注意,因為貓可能會感到厭倦而離開。但一旦牠們再次開始移動,牠們就會重新啟動整個掠食行為。
    但回到你關於如何與貓互動的問題,或者如何解讀牠們,那將是我觀察的第三個方面:眼前的這種動物物種,牠們如何對感知到的威脅做出反應。我使用“感知到的威脅”這個術語,因為有時我們的意圖良好。我們道聲你好,想要擁抱牠們,因為我們是類人猿,然而牠們實際上並不喜歡那樣。所以,牠們會像對待一個掠食者一樣對待我們。我認為這與動物在幼年時期所接受的社交互動、社交經驗及學習類型有很大關係。
    例如,有一項研究顯示,如果你在小貓年齡大約兩到八週之間,每天陪牠們玩至少一小時,當我說“陪玩”,我只是指與牠們互動、嬉戲,讓牠們坐在你腿上等等。牠們就會成為成年後非常社交的貓。所以牠們會成為那種會跳到你膝蓋上並發出呼嚕聲入睡的貓。如果你與那隻小貓的互動少於每天15分鐘,牠們不會對人類感到恐懼,但牠們更像是走過來向你打招呼,然後又走開。這種冷漠的貓,冷漠的貓。
    是的。所以,我認為早期的生活經歷真的能塑造動物的氣質,或者說動物對環境變化的反應程度。貓的磨蹭行為是什麼呢,當貓用頭撞你或你的手臂時?這是為了散發氣味嗎?是的,我會說那是氣味標記。是的。當牠們在對你進行氣味標記時,為什麼會這樣?我會認為,這就像是在你們的群體中做的事情。你們進行相互的氣味標記,這意味著群體中的每個人聞起來或多或少都是一樣的。所以這是一種問候的方式,並且將其他同伴納入這個群體。所以在這類集體生活的物種中,會有大量的氣味交流。這將是我對於牠們為什麼這樣做的猜測。
    那麼氣味標記是否也和領土有關?例如,如果貓在角落氣味標記的話……哦,是的。
    他們,但那是另一回事,通常不是因為他們的臉上有多個腺體,並且其中一個用於標記內部領土的氣味,而這是他們感到非常安全的地方。然後,他們通常有這種尿液氣味標記,位於領土的外圍。如果你有一隻室內貓,他們開始隨地小便,然後你拿出一張紙和你家或公寓的佈局,“你開始在你找到小便的地方畫一個小圈,這將給你很多信息。因為如果這是屬於領土的問題,通常會在窗口或門的邊緣。如果這是貓的排便問題,也許是因為小便時會感到疼痛。因此,他就會學會將疼痛與進入箱子聯繫在一起。於是,箱子開始代表痛苦的經歷。因此,他會開始在箱子外面排便。但這種類型的行為將更能反映在那種背景中。有趣的是,如果你的貓在屋子裡小便,那麼你現在有了一個實驗可以進行。對我來說,使用貓砂盒是一個相當有趣的話題。這不是我花很多時間去思考的問題。但是,如果你退一步想,這裡有一種我們已經馴化的動物,而且它很快就學會如何掩埋自己的排泄物,這與狗的情況非常不同,狗可以訓練到忍耐,直到你出去散步。這基本上是兩種不同的策略。我不知道如果你擁有一隻猴子或其他動物會是怎樣的。但這種掩埋排泄物的行為有什麼特別之處?這在貓中是自然的行為嗎?如果他們四處遊蕩,為什麼還要這樣做?還有,與此相關的是,狗在排泄後,通常會向後退並踢土,這是為了朝著某個方向。我聽說過兩種解釋。一種是它們試圖散播氣味,另一種是它們試圖掩埋排泄物。因此,這就是為什麼我對與動物行為學家而不是寵物行為訓練師交談感興趣的原因。對,我也對這感興趣,但我認為我們必須再次承認,關於動物行為的許多解釋僅僅是人類的詮釋。是的,當然。所以,這種掩埋排泄物的行為是什麼?我們知道這在野外對貓有什麼作用嗎?掩埋排泄物是一種減少感染風險的方式。我假設它們也不會在吃飯的地方附近排泄。因此,如果我們在家裡有貓,就不應該將貓砂盒放在食物旁邊,我希望我在20年前養我的第一隻貓時就知道這一點。她的食物就擺在貓砂盒的旁邊。我還假設狗在踢它們的糞便時,這通常不是尿,而是廣播氣味的方法。因為如果是在掩埋氣味的話,行為會看起來非常不同,我覺得。但是我沒有看到過有關這個主題的任何科學研究。好的。所以,貓主人請記住,將食物與貓砂盒隔開一些距離。我總是有些驚訝,儘管隨著時間的推移,驚訝的程度減少了,但我的鬥牛犬在散步時多麼執著和努力地在東西上小便。我覺得這是他生活中的一大樂趣。又來了,我在擬人化。但對某物嗅覺後小便,他似乎對此有無窮無盡的尿液源,這真令人驚訝。是的。知道作為一名科學家和一名熱愛狗的人,真的是言語無法形容。我只是想,這真是太神奇了。他喜歡這種行為。是的。他還在閱讀鄰居其他狗的尿訊。因此,尿液向其他動物傳遞了很多信息。它告訴性別、繁殖狀態,以及可能還有一些有關動物情緒狀態或心理狀態的信息。因此,我毫不猶豫地說,這是狗生活中的一大樂趣。畢竟,那是它們溝通的方式。因此,它們花了很多時間在這上面,而且願意付出努力來獲得這個機會。因此,我絕對認為,這讓它們獲得了積極的情感體驗。因此,似乎在狗身上有一種天生的驅動力去讀取其他狗的情感和荷爾蒙狀態。我對我來說,這就像是它們的社交媒體。是的,是的。我將在這裡發佈。其他人在這裡發佈什麼?發生了什麼事?是的,是的。我是說,顯然有一部分腦部空間是專門為這種行為而劃分的。我不是在開玩笑。因為,我是說,我看到你知道,人腦的40%是用於視覺的。另一個40%,混合在其他東西中,是用於運動行為的。我們擁有嗅覺的腦部空間,當然也有觸覺。但是即使你是一名按摩治療師或者做一些觸感工作的,即使你是一名盲文讀者,這些其他東西的腦部空間相對來說要大得多,盲人的視覺空間被觸覺和聽覺所取代。因此,空間的數量是相關的。因此,當我看到一種行為,像這是狗主要做的事情之一。是的,是的,是的。是的。這真是很驚人。是的。狗是從——它們是從狼家養過來的,對嗎?這是不是在地球上的不同地點獨立發生的?我不知道那個問題的答案。但似乎它們是自我馴化的。是由那些開始在人的居住地附近徘徊的狼,那些最不害怕、最愛冒險的狼敢做到這一點。
    所以,並不是說我們抓住了狼,然後說,啊哈,我現在要繁殖你們。
    而是更像是一種隨著時間發展出來的共生關係。
    有趣的是,我不知道還有其他什麼物種會這樣做,可能只有某些魚類或海豚會追隨漁船,以便獲得一些捕獲的漁獲。
    但這是不同的,因為你知道,我看到這些Instagram影片,裡面有水獺跳上皮划艇,並且有一些互動是經常發生的。
    你知道,這個人在他的皮划艇上出海,他們與這只水獺互動。
    所以,動物確實會這樣做。
    但通常有某種食物——聽起來食物的獲得和安全確實是關鍵。
    這是否意味著動物在非常基本的層面上是希望優化食物攝取和安全?
    這告訴我們關於動物園什麼呢?
    我個人對於擁有大型食肉動物的動物園有相當強烈的直覺反應。
    我意識到我們也可以討論大象的問題。
    但我覺得大型食肉動物被安置在動物園裡對我來說創造了一些問題。
    我不會深入探討這個問題。
    但我也聽說動物園有正面的繁殖計劃,還有濒危物種的保護計劃。
    你對動物園有什麼看法?
    當我們談論動物園時,或許談談動物園的演變是好的。
    因為在150年前,那時的動物園更像是一個小型動物樂園。
    你知道,這裡有一隻獅子,這裡有一隻大象,這裡有一隻斑馬。
    它們被放在小籠子裡。
    當時你所做的只是看動物而已。
    如今,動物園的目的是進行大量的保護工作。
    所以有一種被稱為原位保護的方式,即努力保護野生棲息地與建立國家公園,等等。
    並且提供物種重新引入的機會等等。
    還有一種針對外部保護的方式,即將那些面臨滅絕的動物物種安置在一個環境中。
    理想上,這個環境應該足夠好,以促進物種特有的行為等等。
    所以我,其實有些矛盾。
    我認為許多動物園在這方面努力做了很多好事,也在教育公眾。
    我想到,很多去動物園的人,這可能會喚起他們對動物的興趣,我認為這是好事——也就是我們在乎動物。
    但同時,有時候棲息環境並不理想。
    而且肯定有些物種在囚禁條件下要遠比其他物種難以飼養。
    所以北極熊真的很難在圈養的環境中生活,因為它們是遊蕩的食肉動物。
    它們需要走好幾英里。
    而且在圈養環境中提供這些特定物種的機會是非常困難的,與其他那些對獵食的方式有不同取向的食肉動物相比。
    促使我意識到貓科動物比我以往假設的要精密得多的事情是,我當時在史丹佛的博士後期間發生的一件事。
    我成為了舊金山動物園的會員。
    相比於我去過的其他動物園,舊金山動物園是一個戶外動物園,而我去的並不多,但這裡的景觀相當不錯。
    那裡有一個戶外的環狐猴,我稱之為展區,但你知道,就是室內和戶外的環狐猴區。
    那真的很驚人。
    那裡有一些長頸鹿,還有這些。
    好吧,當我在進行博士後研究時,我稍微講一下這個故事。
    我當時在舊金山看電影,走出去拿點喝的。
    櫃檯後面的孩子說,舊金山動物園有一隻老虎逃出來了,正在攻擊人類。
    我當時想,什麼,這太瘋狂了。
    結果發現這只是部分真相。
    發生的事情是那裡有一隻老虎,名叫Tatiana,他們以前在老虎圍欄周圍有這些護城河。
    而恰好是在聖誕節前不久。人們可以查閱這些細節。
    當時有幾個孩子在向老虎扔松果或者其他東西。
    動物園快要關閉了。
    Tatiana要麼跑上去,要麼跳過了護城河。
    我不知道她是怎麼做到的。
    她成功逃出來,穿過人群。
    對我來說,有趣的部分是。
    她穿過人群,完全忽略了周圍大多數人。
    她集中目光,攻擊了一個孩子。
    然後再攻擊第二個孩子。
    那個孩子倒霉了。
    當當局出現時,Tatiana被擊斃。
    這在動物園社區引發了一場討論。
    引發了很多關於圍欄等問題的複雜問題。
    那裡的圍欄,順便提一下,如今是非常不同的。
    他們有這些高大的玻璃。
    當然,結局對每個人來說都是悲傷的。
    我暫時停止了我的會員資格。
    幾年後,我恢復了它。
    當然,那隻老虎已經不在了。
    但我仍然對整個情況感到矛盾。
    對我來說,老虎的意圖是有趣的。
    所以這不是一隻嗜血的老虎,只想殺死或吃掉人類。
    而是那兩個人讓她生氣,那兩個人是該付出代價的。
    而他們也付出了代價。
    那個家族起訴了動物園,然後整個事情就是這樣。
    我不知道訴訟的結果如何。
    但這整個事情引起了轟動。
    所以人們可以在網上查詢這些。一旦你聽到,老虎做出這樣的舉動,而不是像人類有時候會發狂攻擊任何人、儘可能多的人。
    你會怎麼想?
    這告訴我們關於老虎和它們的意識什麼?
    我認為我們常常低估了動物。
    對我來說,並不奇怪她經歷了某些非常不愉快的事情,這讓她開始將之與那兩個人聯繫起來,並產生了負面的情緒狀態和攻擊行為,然後針對這兩個人進行了行動。
    這樣的目標性讓你感到驚訝嗎?
    不。
    相較於簡單地,我的意思是,有很多人是更容易捕殺的。
    我會認為,畏懼的動物會對任何人發難。
    但生氣的動物則往往會更有計劃性。
    某種程度上能夠計算出來。
    所以我預期如果你嚇到了那隻老虎,它可能會表現出防禦性攻擊,
    那就是對最近的人發難。
    但這是攻擊性攻擊。
    所以這是有預謀的。
    我想快速休息一下,並感謝我們的一位贊助商,Function。
    去年,在尋找最全面的實驗室檢測方法後,我成為了Function的會員。
    Function提供超過100項先進的實驗室檢測,讓你獲得整體身體健康的關鍵快照。
    這個快照提供你的心臟健康、荷爾蒙健康、免疫功能、營養成分等的見解,還有更多。
    他們最近還增加了如BPA暴露於有害塑料和永久化學物質PFAS的毒素檢測。
    Function不僅提供超過100項對你身心健康至關重要的生物標誌物檢測,還會分析這些結果,並提供頂尖醫生在相關領域的見解。
    例如,在我與Function的第一項檢測中,我了解到我的血液中有較高的汞水平。
    Function不僅幫我檢測出這一點,還提供了降低汞水平的最佳建議,包括限制我的金槍魚攝入量。
    我當時吃了很多金槍魚,同時也在努力增加葉綠蔬菜的攝入,並補充NAC和乙酰半胱氨酸,它們都能支持谷胱甘肽的生成和解毒。
    我應該說,透過進行第二次Function檢測,這個方法是有效的。
    全面的血液檢測非常重要。
    有很多與你的身心健康相關的問題只能通過血液檢測來檢出。
    問題是,血液檢測一直非常昂貴且複雜。
    相比之下,我對Function的簡單性和成本感到非常驚豔。
    它非常實惠。
    因此,我決定加入他們的科學顧問委員會,我很高興他們贊助這個播客。
    如果你想試試Function,可以訪問functionhealth.com / Huberman。
    Function目前有超過250,000人的等候名單,但他們為Huberman播客的聽眾提供提前訪問的機會。
    再一次,訪問functionhealth.com / Huberman,獲得Function的提前訪問。
    我們可以談談獵物、潛行、捕捉和殺戮的過程嗎?
    我一直很好奇的一件事是,當一隻貓,無論是大型貓還是小型貓,在它潛行模式中,事實上只有一次彈道攻擊的機會,然後才是追逐,或者動物逃跑,或者被捕,對吧?
    我記得我小時候有一隻貓喜歡潛行,很明顯是悄悄靠近。
    然後就在要躍向獵物之前,它會開始打顫自己的牙齒。
    我猜那是行為抑制或某種情緒的泄露。
    當一隻動物進行那種非常有計劃的潛行時,計算和牙齒顫抖或抽搐開始發生,這是怎麼回事?
    我猜這可能是一種位移行為,因為牠有動力繼續行為序列,但目前還不是時候。
    所以那種激活的狀態可能會透過這種行為來釋放,但我真的不知道。
    我不知道。
    我還沒有看到這種情況被討論過。
    所以這幾乎就像是一種液壓壓力或什麼東西。
    也許吧。
    有趣。
    有趣。
    我們談過狗狗,談過貓咪,現在來談談鳥類。
    好吧。
    我小時候養過鸚鵡。
    它們是人工繁殖的小灰頰矮鸚鵡。
    結果不算太糟,也不算太好。
    它們,嗯,我沒有修剪牠們的翅膀,因為我實在無法下手。
    它們經常在我的房間裡飛來飛去,四處拉屎,還把很多食物灑在地上。
    最後,將牠們給一位擁有鳥舍的人是明智的選擇。
    嗯,鸚鵡很聰明。
    是的。
    鸚鵡在想什麼?
    我認為它們在思考所有動物都在思考的事情,下一餐會從哪裡來,社交互動,以及是否有任何威脅存在。
    那真的是它們90%的意識生活嗎?
    我會說,如果動物感覺不安全,那麼很難讓它參與任何類型的行為。
    如果動物害怕,而且你試著餵牠們,牠們通常不會接受食物,例如。
    所以安全感的感知是非常重要的,因為如果你感覺不安全,你可能會死。
    因此,如果你處於一個讓你感覺不安全的情況,因為那個情況可能是危險的。
    可能周圍有掠食者,然後你必須把注意力集中在那些掠食者身上,因為不然你就會死。
    這當然依賴於物種,但一些物種如果我們談論的是鳥類,就會聚集成大群,而一些則是配對繁殖的物種。
    但社交環境真的很重要,無論是與育兒行為相關的,比如性行為、育兒行為、撫養幼雛等等。
    所有這些也都是高優先級,因為這基本上是關於將你的基因延續到下一代。
    然後,再者就是覓食行為。
    我該從哪里獲得我的下一餐?
    我們把食物放在盤子裡。
    我們在想,我們認為我們在幫助牠們。
    就像這裡,這是你的食物,放在盤子上。
    你不必做任何事情。
    但是牠們來到這裡時,已經準備好要展示牠們的食物獲取行為。
    所以通常如果我們不讓牠們展現這些行為,那麼我們可能會看到一些問題行為出現,因為牠們會把這種能量和意圖轉移到其他地方,我不知道。
    你有沒有遇到過動物的問題,比如鳥會撕毀你的地毯或做其他事情?
    哦,牠們毀壞了所有東西。
    我的意思是,牠們非常享受撕毀一切。
    書本,書的封面,對。
    所以我會認為這像是對錯誤的東西進行覓食行為。
    嗯哼。
    是的。
    坦白說,我不建議任何人擁有鸚鵡。
    那是一個失敗的實驗。
    幸運的是,我想牠們仍然活著。
    牠們活得很久。
    哦。
    人們可以查詢厄瓜多爾的灰頰矮鸚鵡。
    牠們的翅膀下有美麗的橙色。
    牠們有小小的灰頰,被稱為口袋鸚鵡。
    嗯,對我來說,那時的興奮,當我還小,大概11歲,是我能把牠們放在口袋裡帶著牠們。
    但牠們根本不想這樣。
    嗯。
    無論如何,想想動物表達其自然行為曲目所需的事情其實很有趣。
    對於狗主人來說,我認為常見的做法是,放出一碗食物。
    我們是否更好地把食物帶到公園裡,然後讓牠們在那裡進食?
    或者以某種方式將遊蕩和獵物尋找行為結合進去。
    我的意思是,怎麼把這些融入到對狗來說更愉快的體驗中呢?
    因為你說的完全有道理,牠們需要表達這些行為。
    如果牠們不能,那麼這些行為將以其他方式表現出來,也許是具有破壞性的,對牠們或環境都是如此。
    是的。
    基本上,我認為對於狗主人,我們能做的就是促進每隻狗在面前的這隻狗喜歡做的獵捕行為的不同方面,我提到過嗅覺工作是許多狗非常喜歡的一種活動。
    有趣的是,這些嗅覺工作的科學研究剛剛起步,效果令人期待,這項活動似乎有的作用。
    簡單來說,如果你不熟悉,這本質上是動物已經學會在某個區域內需要找到特定的氣味。
    所以牠在那個區域裡嗅探,遊蕩,跟隨氣味,當牠找到氣味時會停下來並標記,然後獲得強化物。
    所以牠因為這樣而獲得獎勵。
    這就是基本的設置。
    似乎這有助於調節興奮狀態,這樣那些強烈、不安的動物會變得冷靜,那些有點沮喪的狗則會對生活更加熱情。
    如果我們回到核心情緒空間,則會轉移到右側的核心情緒空間。
    所以我們在那裡有正向價值。
    而且這真的很有趣,因為這項狗運動只有大概15年,還不是很久。
    所以基本上,我們可以讓每隻狗都進行嗅覺工作。
    我認為這會是一個有趣的方式來發洩行為序列的最初部分。
    我知道一些訓練師專門在幫助那些追逐野生動物的狗。
    這是教狗停留在獵捕行為的前面幾個部分,進行嗅探、指向和目視行為。
    然後再不斷獲得強化,讓這成為一個反饋循環。
    牠們看到了一隻鹿穿過馬路,然後就會說「媽媽,我看到了一隻鹿」。
    然後牠們會因此而獲得強化。
    還有一些狗,比如賽狗,則喜歡追逐,讓牠們這樣做。
    還有其他狗喜歡搬運物品,讓牠們這樣做。
    然後給你的貴賓犬一些舊衣服讓牠撕扯,你知道的。
    這就是貴賓犬喜歡做的事情嗎?
    內臟出血。
    是的。
    貴賓犬喜歡殺死東西,然後獵殺之後撕扯。
    是的。
    撕扯。
    哇,貴賓犬的名字和外貌讓人感覺牠們是一種更溫順的動物。
    所以牠們真的喜歡撕扯身體。
    是的。
    據我了解是這樣的。
    是的,這是有道理的。
    鑑於我對不同基因劑量的了解。
    然後我也會說,與其把食物放在盤子上,不如試試撒餌。
    所以,只是,或是以某種方式喂食,讓動物必須為此而工作。
    比如做一些行為,像這種嗅探墊,你把食物藏在裡面。
    這樣牠們就必須花一些時間去尋找食物,才能夠進食。
    因為如果不這樣做,假如你把食物放在碗裡,有些動物會簡直,知道的,牠們只是吸進去。
    花大約30秒,然後就吃完了。
    卡斯特羅吃得像海鷗一樣。
    是的。
    是嗎?他不嚼食物嗎?
    是的,
    有趣的是,這個狗食訓練和動物健康的世界賣了很多東西,你可以把食物放進一個物體裡,這樣牠們就必須真的努力去獲得它。
    我對這個有複雜的看法,嗯,你知道,我的結果有點混合,因為我聽說除了運動和想要和你在一起之外,動物,尤其是狗,實際上可能非常需要那種認知工作的挑戰,因為它們會感到無聊,並且真的需要在思維上得到挑戰。如此一來,在下雨天,當天氣真的很糟時,無法外出時,它們需要大量的搜尋和覓食的行為。
    所以我會努力做到這一點。嗯,我知道有些人聽到這些可能會認為這太瘋狂了。像我的狗只想蜷縮在我腳邊,只想撿球,但那是對於撿球性質的狗來說。如果我把球扔給Costello,他會去接球,然後坐在上面。他對於撿回球毫無興趣,但他非常喜歡拉扯。所以,如果我把一根繩子綁到樹上,比如說,他會跳到上面並抓住,我可以用他的體重(大約90磅)揮動他,他可以在那裡保持10分鐘。顯然,咀嚼的快樂是他最強烈的本能驅動力。
    所以我認識到要理解自然行為的序列,以及特定品種在這個序列中真正偏向的位置。絕對如此。是的。有時候,很難知道你的狗在那個尺度上的位置,尤其是如果牠是某種類型的混種犬。然後你通常可以看看狗的體型特徵。比如那些非常瘦的狗,我現在在想靈提犬,瘦長的狗,肌肉不多,頭部尖的狗往往是追逐者,而有更多肌肉,前肢肌肉發達和更大顎部的狗往往適合撕扯東西,比如鬥牛犬、羅威納犬、大型犬。而一些較小的品種,如哈巴狗和法國鬥牛犬,我認為人們沒有意識到近親繁殖的問題,因為現在很多人養的狗都住在公寓裡,都是小型犬。
    不過有一個奇怪的事情,你知道,跟獸醫交談,我有一位家人是獸醫,你問他,什麼是適合公寓的狗?他們會說大丹犬,因為它們不需要很多空間,但你必須帶牠們出去散步,但與某些小型的犬種相比,大丹犬不需要長時間的散步,而小型的鬥牛犬有時需要一直活動,兩個小時或更長時間的活動。我覺得你需要非常注意你將要提供的生活方式,不論是在繁忙城市的公寓裡生活,還是在某個農場裡,哪個犬種的狗會更適應那種生活方式。
    你認為狗喜歡城市嗎?我認為許多狗在城市中會感到非常有壓力,因為不斷的感官信息轟炸。所以有噪音,有狗。如果你在街上散步,始終會遇到陌生人。對於許多動物物種來說,見到陌生人A,並不常發生;B,會導致興奮感的增加,因為它可能是朋友或敵人,可能是你想要打架的人,或者是你想要交配的人,你需要評估情況。我認為狗在這方面非常獨特,它們對陌生人有很高的耐受性,而許多其他動物物種則沒有。
    我覺得我們有時會忘記這一點,我們將動物介紹給它們不認識的動物,卻期待它們能和諧相處,但卻並沒有。這種引介需要非常小心。通常,我們會首先開始交換氣味。所以,如果你有一隻貓並想再養一隻貓,它們通常不會像兩隻狗那樣迅速接受對方。於是,你可能會讓它們在不同的房間裡,然後用一條毛巾擦拭一隻貓,再用另一條毛巾擦拭另一隻貓,然後交換毛巾。接下來,你可能想漸漸地加入其他感官的元素,讓它們開始聽到彼此的聲音。最後,它們可以開始看到彼此。然後最終是觸覺,實際的身體接觸。如果你這樣做,你可以降低它們在引介時實際開始打鬥的風險。
    因為如果你將它們直接放在一起,它們可能會立即升級為攻擊。但如果你逐漸進行,這種信息的交流將幫助它們了解彼此,並降低攻擊的風險。我一直對一個事物感到著迷,而且開始有一點數據出現,探討其背後的機制,那就是自我與其他物種的識別。尤其是狗,除非是優越行為,否則它們不會試圖與貓交配。例如,它們可能會騎乘,但那是另一回事。它們實際上是分開的神經迴路。
    我的同事,大衛·安德森在加州理工學院做了一個非常精彩的研究。我可以說結論是,大腦中有分開的迴路用於性行為與優越行為的騎乘。哦,有趣。優越行為的騎乘迴路存在於某些物種的雄性和雌性中,只有雄性會為繁殖的目的進行騎乘。所以將騎乘視為優越行為的觀念在某些情況下的確存在,即使是在老鼠中。無論如何,撇開優越行為的騎乘(即騎乘行為不談),這是驚人的。像馬不會試圖和狗交配。不同物種的動物似乎知道自我與他者的區別。它們不需要從母親、父親或我們身上學習,這是天生的。對於大多數物種,有一些例外,想起來某些水禽物種的雌性,我現在不太確定是哪些物種,但某些水鳥。
    雌性動物天生能夠辨識雄性,但雄性在年輕時期透過性印記學習,開始對那些與撫養它的雌性相似的雌性感到吸引。這主要是因為在那些物種中,雄性通常具有非常華麗和引人注目的外觀,而雌性則隱蔽,就像是偽裝一樣,通常呈現棕色。因此,雄性需要學會母親的樣子,等牠們長大後,會開始追求看起來像母親的雌性。如果你用錯誤的物種撫養這樣的雄性,牠們就會開始追求錯誤的雌性。而且,當然,雌性不會對其感興趣,因為牠看不出他所代表的那個物種的雄性的黃金標準是什麼樣子。這真的很有趣。作為一個有飼養水族箱的孩子,你可以看出我有過許多不同的動物。我從未成功在圈養環境中繁殖魚類。我曾在我的實驗室中嘗試過飼養墨魚,但沒有成功繁殖,雖然我成功地養活了牠們。不過,我曾經非常投入於淡水碟魚,努力設立繁殖水槽,但這非常困難。不過偶爾在我所屬的水族館社區中,有人成功地讓碟魚繁殖,但你絕對看不到碟魚試圖給其他魚類的卵子受精的情況。牠們就是知道。對牠們來說,這肯定是與氣味或感官混合有關的。即使在我有一些研究蒼蠅的朋友之中,若他們研究的是某種特定類型的果蠅,一種類型的果蠅不會試圖與另一種類型的果蠅交配。牠們對你我看起來非常相似,因此這其中有某種強而有力的東西。我認為,避免近親交配是一種機制,能阻止許多動物物種與基因過於相似的個體交配,因為我們會遭遇近親繁殖所帶來的抑鬱。但還有一種情況,就是不要浪費時間與無法繁殖後代的個體交配。不過,另一個我想到的例外是有蹄類動物。有時,我記得1995年我在非洲的 Chumfunji 野生動物孤兒院,帶著猩猩走進森林去 rehabilitate牠們。那裡有一隻年輕的瞪羚,這是一種非常小型的羚羊,牠失去了父母,然後被人瓶餵撫養,對人類產生了性印記。所以牠過來,開始,嗯,大概是以為我也是同類,對我進行了模擬交配。所以這種性印記大多是雄性學習的,牠們對撫養牠們的個體產生性印記。這就是牠們日後會試圖追求的個體。我記得康拉德·洛倫茲在他的書中描述過某種烏鴉類的物種,牠也是從小撫養長大的,然後開始追求他的秘書或其他某個人。這個鳥的求愛行為非常有趣,會嘔吐,然後在任何開放的表面或孔洞上留下禮物並提供食物。所以牠會試圖讓她張嘴,而當她不張嘴時,牠就會把禮物留在她的耳朵裡。令人作嘔的人可以通過我們會提供的連結來減輕他們的噁心情緒,這張圖片非常著名,是康拉德·洛倫茲的,據我了解,因為他在關於印記的發現上獲得了諾貝爾獎,圖中是他在湖中游泳,身後跟著小鵝。所以那是你所說的另一種印記。那是親情印記。因此,存在兩種類型的印記。有一種是性印記,學習誰是交配對象;另一種是親情印記,學會與誰感到安全,然後牠們開始跟隨該個體。這與狗對我們的行為很相似。其實,我想說狗不會對人類進行印記。牠們對人類建立依附關係。這之間有什麼不同呢?所以印記通常是一個非常快速的過程,發生在幾分鐘或幾小時內。依附則需要更長的時間,且涉及更多感官。因此,印記傾向於是視覺上的。如果我沒搞錯的話,某些物種中也可能是嗅覺。依附則之前主要在於人類中進行研究。這種在監護者和後代之間成長的聯結也是有趣的,取決於監護者對年輕個體需求的反應。你可以有一種安全的依附關係,即監護者非常可靠地響應年輕個體的需求。因此,如果他們發現自己獨處時,可以更好地自我調節。如此一來,在遭受壓力後,他們的神經系統能夠更容易地平静下來,而不是如果他們的依附不安全。因此,似乎狗與人類之間形成的並不是印記,而是一種依附關係。牠們也可以安全或不安全地依附於人。這會為人們打開一整套的新思路,因為這個安全與不安全的概念,還有我們之前在播客中談到的“D寶寶”以及博爾比的經典實驗,這種無序反應在當今的約會和人際關係文化、流行心理學文化中經常被提及。像是人們,他或她是否安全依附?他或她是否回避?他或她是否焦慮依附?猜猜看,朋友們?這種情況也同樣存在於你的寵物中。所以現在你可以開始關注這方面。在博爾比的經典實驗中,簡要概括來說,母親和孩子會分開。這會引發一種可預測、可理解和健康的焦慮反應。
    如果條件合適,孩子最終會來玩耍並放鬆一下。如果條件不合適,他們就不會。這一切都是健康的。但真正的考驗是在和媽媽重聚的時候。對。還有他們對陌生人的反應。對。奇怪情況測試。對,奇怪的情況。當媽媽回來時,他們是否感到安慰,以及他們如何接近媽媽?是急切地想見到她並放鬆嗎?是有些不確定嗎?還是逃避?這就是這個測試的目的。對,對。或者是粘人也可以。對。因此,對狗也做過相同類型的實驗,發現某些狗似乎有些不安全的依附。他們會粘人或是逃避,而有些則是安全依附。因此,他們會更具探索性。在分離後恢復得更快。所以這是很棒的。如果人們在旅行時把狗送到寵物照顧者那裡,然後再回來,重聚可以告訴你很多有關狗的感受。可悲的是,我認為 — 我不確定有沒有任何科學研究的支持,但我至少懷疑,早期斷奶可能使狗 predispose 不安全的依附。在這個國家,普遍的觀念是小狗在大約八週的時候可以與母狗分開。你覺得這太早了嗎?對,作為一名生態學家,觀察物種在野外生活的方式,社交互動的類型,以及我們如何為他們提供促進自然行為的環境,對我來說,八週實在是太早了。所以我們有一些來自 60 年代或更早的研究,我記得有兩位研究人員叫史考特和富勒做了一些分離的研究,但那是針對三、四、五、六週的小狗,他們發現這種早期的分離實際上是非常有害的。當然。但就我所知,關於八週以上的研究非常少,當然,很多人會說,好的,我們必須進行所有的社會化工作,讓動物學會接受與人類的生活。因此,這將需要在繁殖者那裡進行,而不是在新的環境中。但實際上,我不是那麼確定,因為似乎如果你具備安全依附,你就能更好地在面對可能造成不安的事物後自我調節。你會遇到一個事件,你會感到焦慮和恐懼,然後你的神經系統能夠再次平靜下來。因此我認為,如果我們只是讓狗狗擁有安全的依附,那麼或許這些有時非常繁瑣的社會化程序的需求會減少。有一份清單,上面總共有 100 件狗需要接觸的事物,比如帶鬍子的男人、12 歲的孩子、穿著特定類型鞋子的人、吸塵器等等。你需要讓動物接觸到的東西有一整個清單。我認為如果動物有安全依附,從而學會了自我調節,那麼接觸那些事物將不會是如此大的問題。但我認為我們還沒有足夠的研究來支持這一主張。我喜歡這個觀念,因為我們無法為每個環境準備人類,包括我們自己,或是動物,但我們可以訓練神經回路。畢竟,我是一名神經生物學家。因此,我更喜歡將這視為一種過程準備,而不是事件準備。所以,你知道,在這個播客和其他地方已經談了很多關於故意冷暴露的話題,你知道,為什麼要洗冷水澡?這不是關於冷水澡的具體好處,而是它教會你如何應對身體中的高腎上腺素,這是對壓力的普遍反應。因此,你可以將自我調節從一種情況轉移到另一種情況。你所描述的,在生活階段上是一個比故意冷暴露要重要得多的例子。正如你所說,這是關於能否適應存在、消失、再出現的依附。這是我最擔心的問題之一。我們不想在這裡走得太偏,但既然人類是動物,正如你所提到的,有關簡訊的問題。你知道,簡訊有時可以是一個很好的工具。但它也可能是一種讓人們永遠不學會自我調節的方式。你可以在飛機降落或起飛時看到這一點。人們,知道不安地發送簡訊,這可能是,嘿,我的飛機剛剛到達。這也可能是無法面對現實生活中不確定性的表現,因為你無法控制飛機和天氣條件。無論如何,我有一個可能有爭議的問題。好的。但是我們已經打開了一些潘多拉的盒子,那為什麼不呢?我選擇給我的狗絕育。對。我是在他大約六個月大的時候做到的。老實說,我是心不甘情不願地這麼做的。人們會說,你知道,男人和他們的狗,他們不想給狗絕育,這是因為那些,無論如何,與 Y 染色體有關的原因或什麼。也許是的。但我不情願的真正原因是,A,我覺得我可能有意在某個時候繁殖科斯特羅的願望。另一個是我用了兩年時間研究和發表有關早期雄激素對大腦發育影響的論文。我在那項研究中只扮演了小角色,但早期雄激素對大腦發育的影響是顯而易見的。你不需要在這個荷爾蒙和發展的領域學習太長時間就能知道,荷爾蒙,睪丸素和雌激素,對男性和女性的大腦有著強大的組織效應。而且這種情況也會發生在青春期。對。而且會有荷爾蒙的激增發生 — 所以,對,這在子宮內就會發生。對。
    然後——
    然後這些是組織效應,正如你所指出的,還有激活效應,這些激活效應是來自於激素,這些激素在青春期時,女性的卵巢或男性的睾丸,產生激素,然後作用於這種已經建立的模板。
    所以我知道,不管科斯特洛在子宮內看到了多少睾酮、雌激素等等,他都看到了,而通過去除他的睾丸——坦白說,這就是絕育的意思,所有男人都在皺眉,而女人則表示,好的,明白了。
    但如果我說要去除卵巢,他們可能會有不同的反應。
    所以通過去除他的睾丸,他將不會經歷激素的激活效應。
    好了,簡而言之,看起來他過得很好。
    他是一隻很棒的狗。
    當他大約九歲的時候,他有很多關節疼痛和不適。
    他的指甲生長得非常快,而且有一些不尋常的情況。
    我決定做一個實驗,開始每週給他注射50毫克的睾酮。
    反應非常驚人。
    他的活力回來了,關節疼痛至少在他願意快速下樓、迅速站起來方面,表現得非常驚人。
    他又過了兩年我認為很棒的生活。
    我希望是的。
    有趣的是,當我在幾個其他播客上公開談論這個時候,我給我絕育的鬥犬注射睾酮。
    我原本以為會受到獸醫界的指責。
    好吧。
    但相反,我收到了數百封電子郵件說,謝謝。
    我們實際上積極建議人們不要給他們的動物絕育,除非在某些情況下,狗可以出去交配,因為我們不需要更多的流浪狗。
    而且保留激素的完整性對健康有許多積極的好處。
    是的。
    我會開始對我一些病犬做你所做的事情。
    是的。
    沒有一位獸醫。
    我要強調的是,我沒有獸醫的訓練。
    沒有一位獸醫說,嘿,你這樣做不合適。
    你不應該這樣做。
    我告訴你,如果我再領養一隻狗,如果是公狗,我會非常小心不讓他出去。
    而且在訓練上我會非常謹慎,以避免過度攻擊性。
    但我不會給他絕育。
    是的。
    我知道這可能會激怒一些人。
    但基於你我對激素及我們剛才談論的內容的了解,我非常想聽聽你對公狗和母狗絕育的看法。
    是的。
    你提到了幾個我認為有趣的不同方面。
    首先,這非常是一種文化現象。
    在挪威,我知道除非出於醫療原因,否則不允許絕育狗狗。
    真的嗎?
    是的。
    而在西澳大利亞,除非出於醫療原因或想要繁殖,否則不允許不絕育狗狗。
    所以無論是否絕育,在不同的地方的文化觀念上是非常不同的。
    這是第一點。
    第二點是你提到絕育是關於去除睾丸。
    其實還有其他的手術可以做,本質上只是割斷連接。
    所以不去除睾丸,使它們仍然可以產生所有的激素,但無法進行性繁殖。
    是的。
    那為什麼我們不給它們做輸精管結紮手術?
    是的。
    所以輸精管結紮。
    而對於雌性狗,對應的手術就是捆綁輸卵管。
    是的。
    捆綁輸卵管。
    可以這麼說。
    無論是什麼。
    是的。
    還有第三種選擇,即化學絕育。
    這是可逆的。
    你可以嘗試看看從激素狀態的改變中得到什麼行為效應。
    還有一個有趣的事情是,對絕育或結紮效果的認識在過去20年裡發生了很大的變化。
    在1990年代時,這是建議的,因為它們不會繁殖,也會減少性交行為。
    因此這在某種程度上是基於某些行為變化的推廣。
    後來的研究顯示,在過去20年中,有超過20項研究顯示,絕育的某些效果,特別是在雄性身上,似乎是這樣。
    而且這也取決於進行此手術的年齡。
    這與激活過程有關。
    你會看到恐懼感的增加、反應性增加、攻擊性行為。
    你可能會看到噪音敏感性增加等等。
    所以似乎,正如你所提到的,激素狀態的改變不僅對身體有生理影響,也會影響行為。
    現在某些癌症或某些身體問題的風險會增加,而其他問題則會減少。
    所以我建議,一旦你有了下一隻狗,與獸醫討論較適合該特定品種和個體的最佳選擇。
    因為這會非常依賴於品種,性別,以及進行這些手術的年齡。
    好吧,對我來說,在挪威狗狗除了出於醫療原因外不允許絕育,這是非常有趣的。
    在澳大利亞,至少在西澳大利亞,它們必須這樣做。
    所以,這種保持狗狗完整,這麼說吧,並不是一個那麼異端的想法。
    但我認為在美國,這些觀念還在慢慢地建立。
    而我認為統計數據顯示現在在美國,幾乎每個家庭都有寵物。
    是的。
    我認為40%的美國人擁有犬隻。
    而在挪威,這個比例大約是15%。
    所以這可能與文化有很大的關係,為什麼這兩者的文化發展如此不同,因為在斯堪的納維亞,幾乎沒有後院繁殖以及流浪狗的問題。
    所以我們並沒有過度繁殖的這種巨大問題,這在某些其他國家中是非常普遍的。
    所以,我認為在這裡,很多絕育工作主要是為了控制動物的數量,試圖減少進入收容所的動物數量等等。現在當然有很多狗在收容所裡。 durante la pandemia, 人們瘋狂地領養牠們。所以在那段時間裡,實際上很難得到狗和貓。我不知道現在的情況如何。有人可以在評論中補充這些。
    我確實有一個最後類別的問題,但這是您在今天的對話中從不同方面觸及過的問題,這與人類作為動物有關。您知道,我不認為一個動物行為學者或神經生物學家能夠只閱讀有關其他動物的論文和進行研究,而不在某些時刻退後一步,意識到我們是舊世界的類人猿。我們是技術發展方面最出色的物種,您知道,在所有物種中。我不認為這是一個太大的飛躍。就自然偽裝、用雙手捕捉和殺死東西這方面來看,我們確實不如其他物種。我們需要工具來做到這些。因此,我們有我們的優勢。我們也有相對於其他物種的局限性。
    在您作為動物行為學者的訓練中,是否有什麼讓您反思人類的特質,讓您認為我們在某些方面特別壯觀或特別缺陷?或者只是對人類物種的任何思考,因為今天我們還沒有談論過這個物種。但我認為,您描述的行為序列的崩潰,讓我們感到安全的一些東西,讓人不禁想知道:如果我們更深入地思考我們自身的某些方面,是否能真正受益?
    首先浮現的想法是,文化學習在人的程度上發生的程度。對其他動物物種來說,它們是透過試驗和錯誤來學習的。如果我這樣做,那樣的事情就會發生。首先那樣事情發生,然後另外的事情發生。經典條件反射和操作性條件反射與形成動物行為有關。它們也有社會學習。它們觀察其他人的行為。在這種情況下,我感到有點擔心,注意觀察您如何反應。哦,您似乎不那麼困擾。好吧,我想我也不必這樣。
    或者您以那種方式與那個東西互動。我想我也會這麼做。但影響主要是來自您身邊的動物和您自己的經驗。我們人類有時站在巨人的肩膀上,因為我們可以閱讀千百年前人類的思想。因此,我認為這是我們學習中最大的區別之一,我們曾被稱為造器者,仿佛製造工具是將我們與其他動物區別開來的事情。直到簡·古道爾報導她看到黑猩猩製作工具,用於捕食白蟻的行為,她看到了它們是如何折斷一根小樹枝,將樹葉都去掉,然後磨尖,以便插入白蟻的巢穴中。白蟻會爬上去,它們可以小心地抽出來,吃掉白蟻。因此,它們製作了這些工具。
    所以,是的,這應該是我對您問題的第一個自發反思。說實話,這是個好問題。這個想法就是,除了我們建造複雜工具的能力之外,我們還有能力積累知識。而且,我的意思是知識一直在變化。因此,今天我們討論的某些事情,以及我以強烈的信念所說的,可能在一年後會被證明完全錯誤。所以,我認為,關於科學的有趣之處在於,我們總是必須質疑我們的假設。
    好的。我感謝您提醒我們這一點,這是一個動態過程。您知道,我們只能用我們頭蓋骨裡這塊肉做那麼多,來試圖解讀周圍的世界。但我確實認為這個關於我們在學習過去事物的獨特能力的洞察,已經給現在的人們留下了可以在當前以及未來學習的地方。
    是的。這令人難以置信,在許多方面也恰如其分,因為我們現在正處於您坐在這裡教育我們不同物種的時刻。我真的非常感謝您所做的工作是非常獨特的。現在人們會意識到,您是動物行為學者,但您關注的是在多樣化環境中進行的真實世界實驗。顯然,您對地球上所有物種及其互動都有很大的關心。您還給我們提供了一些改善我們的貓、狗生活的精彩工具,並希望讓人們在和動物互動中成為某種程度上的行為學者。我認為,對我來說,今天最大的收穫之一就是,聽這些話和看這些視頻的人,應該真正反思的不僅僅是狗喜不喜歡在某個地方被撫摸,而是,某種行為是如何在動物中表現出來的?這反映了它的自然系譜和我們自身的哪些方面,並真正思考這些關係並試圖改善它們?
    所以,您提供了巨大的知識,為了知識本身,實用的知識。而且,您所分享的一切中都編織了如此多的關懷。因此,謝謝您走了這麼遠的路與我們分享。謝謝您邀請我。我認為這是一場很棒的討論。非常感謝您。謝謝您。
    謝謝您參加今天與卡羅琳娜·韋斯特蘭德博士的討論。
    要瞭解更多有關她的工作以及查找今天節目中提到的各種資源的鏈接,請參見節目說明的標題。如果您正在學習或享受這個播客,請訂閱我們的YouTube頻道。這是一個出色的零成本支持我們的方式。此外,請通過Spotify和Apple上的追踪按鈕來關注這個播客。在Spotify和Apple上,您可以給我們留下最多五顆星的評價。您現在也可以在Spotify和Apple上給我們留言。請您注意聽到今天節目開始和過程中提到的贊助商。這是支持這個播客的最好方式。如果您有任何問題或對播客、嘉賓或您希望我考慮的話題有意見,請將它們放在YouTube的評論區。我會閱讀所有評論。對於那些還沒聽說的人,我有一本新書要出版。這是我第一本書,名為《Protocols, an Operating Manual for the Human Body》。這本書我已經工作了五年多,基於超過30年的研究和經驗。它涵蓋了從睡眠、運動到壓力控制的各種方案,以及與專注和動力相關的方案。當然,我也提供了書中所包含方案的科學依據。這本書現在可以在protocolsbook.com進行預售。您可以在那裡找到各種供應商的鏈接,選擇您最喜歡的那一個。再次重申,這本書名為《Protocols, an Operating Manual for the Human Body》。如果您還沒有在社交媒體上關注我,我在所有社交媒體平台上都是Huberman Lab。包括Instagram、X、Threads、Facebook和LinkedIn。在這些平台上,我討論科學和與科學相關的工具,其中一些與Huberman Lab播客的內容重疊,但很多內容與Huberman Lab播客的信息是不同的。再次強調,我在所有社交媒體平台上都是Huberman Lab。如果您還沒有訂閱我們的神經網絡通訊,神經網絡通訊是一份每月零成本的通訊,包含播客摘要,以及我們所謂的以一到三頁PDF格式呈現的方案,涵蓋如何優化睡眠、優化多巴胺、故意冷暴露。我們有一個基礎健身方案,涵蓋心血管訓練和阻力訓練。所有這些都是完全免費的。您只需訪問HubermanLab.com,點擊右上角的菜單標籤,向下滾動到通訊,然後輸入您的電子郵件。我必須強調的是,我們不會將您的電子郵件與任何人分享。再次感謝您參加今天與卡羅琳娜·韋斯特蘭德博士的討論。最後,但肯定不是最不重要的,謝謝您對科學的興趣。

    My guest is Dr. Karolina Westlund, Ph.D., a professor of ethology at the University of Stockholm and an expert in animal emotions and behavior who uses science-based methods to improve the lives of animals in human care. We discuss the often overlooked needs of domesticated animals—primarily dogs and cats—and the things we can do to improve their well-being and our relationship with them.

    We cover how to interpret animal body language, the unique needs of specific dog breeds, and the needs of cats and birds. We also discuss the pros and cons of spaying and neutering and how weaning age impacts a pet’s attachment style. Whether you’re a pet owner, trainer, or simply an animal lover, this episode teaches you how specific pet behaviors are rooted in their immutable biology—and the simple things you can do to vastly improve your pets’ health and well-being, as well as your relationship with them.

    Read the episode show notes at hubermanlab.com.

    Thank you to our sponsors

    AG1: https://drinkag1.com.huberman

    Our Place: https://fromourplace.com/huberman

    BetterHelp: https://betterhelp.com/huberman

    Joovv: https://joovv.com/huberman

    Function: https://functionhealth.com/huberman

    Timestamps

    00:00:00 Karolina Westlund

    00:02:19 Students & Animal Species; Horses

    00:06:36 Dog Breeds & Interaction, Predatory Sequence, Smell, Domestication

    00:12:42 Sponsors: Our Place & Eight Sleep

    00:16:09 Dog Breeds & Domestication, Bulldogs

    00:20:16 Core Affect Space, Petting, Tool: Consent Test; Polyvagal Theory

    00:27:53 Space, Dominance, Resources, Leash Walking; Dog-Owner Training

    00:37:13 Tail Wagging & Interpreting Body Signals, Facial Expressions

    00:43:24 Play Bow, Tool: MARS & Playing; Dogs & Empathy

    00:48:39 Sponsors: AG1 & Joovv

    00:51:46 Fairness, Social Groups; Anthropomorphism vs Anthropodenial

    00:57:45 Cats, Hunting, Bring Gifts?, Interaction & Socialization

    01:03:56 Scent & Territorial Marking; Covering Waste, Tool: Litter Box Placement

    01:08:17 “Pee Mail” & Communication; Wolves, Domestication

    01:11:54 Zoos, Conservation; Tigers

    01:18:53 Sponsor: Function

    01:20:41 Stalking; Birds, Parrots

    01:25:22 Nose Work, Wildlife Chasing, Tool: Dog Feeding & Challenge

    01:31:01 Understanding & Choosing Dog for Your Lifestyle, Tool: Introducing Cats

    01:34:27 Recognizing Self vs Other, Inbreeding Avoidance, Imprinting

    01:40:51 Imprinting vs Attachment Bonds; Dogs, Weaning & Secure Attachment

    01:48:36 Spaying & Neutering, Hormones, Tool: Neutering Alternatives

    01:57:07 Humans as Animals, Tools, Cultural Learning

    02:02:47 Zero-Cost Support, YouTube, Spotify & Apple Follow & Reviews, Sponsors, YouTube Feedback, Protocols Book, Social Media, Neural Network Newsletter

    Disclaimer & Disclosures

  • Kipp Bodnar: Inbound Marketing Strategies for Explosive Business Growth in 2025 | Marketing | E348

    AI transcript
    0:00:03 Today’s episode is sponsored in part by Airbnb and Microsoft Teams.
    0:00:08 Hosting on Airbnb has never been easier with Airbnb’s new co-host network.
    0:00:12 Find yourself a co-host at airbnb.com slash host.
    0:00:15 If you’re looking for a way to collaborate with remote workers,
    0:00:19 your co-founders, interns, and volunteers,
    0:00:22 then you need to check out Microsoft Teams Free.
    0:00:27 Try Microsoft Teams Free today at aka.ms slash profiting.
    0:00:31 As always, you can find all of our incredible deals in the show notes
    0:00:34 or at youngandprofiting.com slash deals.
    0:00:38 Hey, Yap Gang, are you ready to build your personal brand online,
    0:00:42 attract a large and loyal audience through transformative content,
    0:00:45 and turn your long-running passion into profit?
    0:00:49 If that sounds like you, then don’t miss my brand new webinar,
    0:00:53 Build Your Personal Brand in the Creator Economy, happening May 7th.
    0:00:57 In this special live training, I’ll walk you through everything you need to know,
    0:01:01 from mastering personal branding, to understanding the psychology of attention,
    0:01:05 to crafting viral video strategies that actually work.
    0:01:11 Plus, I’ll show you how to leverage the latest AI-powered tools like Opus Clip to save time,
    0:01:15 boost your reach, and create smarter and stickier content.
    0:01:20 If you’re serious about building your personal brand as a creator, this is where you start.
    0:01:47 You can also find the link in the show notes.
    0:01:50 I didn’t work at McKinsey.
    0:01:51 I don’t have an MBA.
    0:01:54 I’m an untraditional marketing leader.
    0:01:56 Marketing is a game of arbitrage.
    0:02:00 The best marketers in the world just figure out where their inefficiencies,
    0:02:01 where things are underpriced.
    0:02:06 They lean very aggressively into those things to get a really high return.
    0:02:11 The best entrepreneurs in the world are people who just get really irritated that a problem exists
    0:02:15 and just become maniacally focused and obsessed with solving it.
    0:02:18 You could do that whether you’re a solopreneur, whether you’re an executive at a company.
    0:02:19 It doesn’t matter.
    0:02:22 It’s your job to understand what that unfair advantage is.
    0:02:27 So I know that HubSpot actually coined the word inbound marketing.
    0:02:31 So in 2025, what inbound strategies are working?
    0:02:32 A few things.
    0:02:34 The number one thing is.
    0:02:50 Yeah, bam.
    0:02:55 What if I told you that you don’t need a massive marketing budget to build a powerful brand?
    0:02:59 Today, we’re sitting down with Kip Bodnar, Chief Marketing Officer of HubSpot,
    0:03:03 to crack the code on digital marketing for entrepreneurs and small businesses.
    0:03:07 Whether you’re just starting out or looking to level up your marketing game,
    0:03:10 this episode is packed with practical tips, smart strategies,
    0:03:14 and real-world advice straight from one of the biggest names in digital marketing.
    0:03:17 Kip, welcome to Young and Profiting Podcast.
    0:03:18 Hey, Hala.
    0:03:19 Thanks so much for having me.
    0:03:20 Excited to be here.
    0:03:22 I am excited for this conversation.
    0:03:24 I love to talk about marketing.
    0:03:29 And I was so impressed with your journey when I was researching your story.
    0:03:35 I found out that you rose to CMO at HubSpot in just five years,
    0:03:37 which is absolutely incredible.
    0:03:39 So my first question to you is,
    0:03:43 what do you think set you apart from other employees at HubSpot
    0:03:45 and accelerated your career growth at the company?
    0:03:49 I think accelerating a business career growth, it’s all very similar.
    0:03:54 I think it’s about how do you really focus on the small set of things
    0:03:56 that are going to give you the high magnitude of return?
    0:04:01 I think so often people get caught up in operational details
    0:04:04 or let everybody else push their priorities on them,
    0:04:07 where you have to be like, you have to look at the situation and say,
    0:04:10 what are the three to five things that if I do,
    0:04:13 I will be 10 times more successful than anybody else in the situation?
    0:04:17 And that sounds simple, but it is the thing that I think matters the most.
    0:04:21 Before you were joining HubSpot and you started there,
    0:04:22 you were actually an entrepreneur.
    0:04:27 So what were the advantages or disadvantages that you faced
    0:04:31 joining corporate already having entrepreneurship experience?
    0:04:35 I think the first entrepreneurship thing I had,
    0:04:39 I would go to like Sam’s Club and Walmart and find like clearance items
    0:04:41 and flip them on eBay when I was in high school.
    0:04:45 And so I was always somebody who was obsessed with arbitrage.
    0:04:47 How do you buy low and sell high?
    0:04:49 And where are the inefficiencies of a market?
    0:04:55 And one of the great things about marketing is that marketing is a game of arbitrage.
    0:04:58 The best marketers in the world just figure out where their inefficiencies,
    0:04:59 where things are underpriced.
    0:05:04 They lean very aggressively into those things to get a really high return.
    0:05:09 And so what happens when you go and then work at a startup at the time,
    0:05:11 I think HubSpot was about 100 people when I joined,
    0:05:16 you go from just running really fast by yourself to needing to run really fast with a bunch of other people.
    0:05:18 And that’s the biggest change.
    0:05:21 And you have to adopt a different mindset.
    0:05:25 And I think the mindset there is I have limited scale just me.
    0:05:28 I could accomplish much bigger things if I do it with other people,
    0:05:31 but I got to bring them along for that journey.
    0:05:36 If I just try to push my agenda on everybody else, nobody’s going to understand.
    0:05:38 They’re not going to have the context and we’re not going to go anywhere.
    0:05:47 And so I think the biggest shift from being somebody who is working solo or on a small team to being on a bigger team
    0:05:52 is how do you actually clearly articulate the problem you’re going to solve
    0:05:55 in a way that people are really excited to solve it with you?
    0:05:57 Because when you’re a solopreneur, you don’t have to do that.
    0:05:59 You can just do what’s in your head and go.
    0:06:03 And I love what you said about marketing being arbitrage.
    0:06:04 I think that’s so smart and it’s so true.
    0:06:08 It’s like almost every marketing activity is some sort of arbitrage.
    0:06:09 100%.
    0:06:10 It’s exactly what it is.
    0:06:13 Whether you’re trying to game an algorithm, whether you’re trying to make a great YouTube thumbnail,
    0:06:19 whether you’re trying to buy ads on an obscure platform that maybe your industry doesn’t use,
    0:06:20 but they’re way cheaper.
    0:06:24 Those are all just different ways to find arbitrage and take advantage of it.
    0:06:28 So in your career, like I said, you rose up the ranks very quickly.
    0:06:33 Were there any pivotal moments that really shaped your trajectory or relationships?
    0:06:39 What do you think it was that you were able to go from employee to CMO and in the C-suite?
    0:06:43 I think there’s lots of moments that make that happen.
    0:06:46 My very first job was I ran the HubSpot blog.
    0:06:53 So basically the equivalent of what you do now and what a lot of creators and amazing media companies do now,
    0:06:56 I did a long time ago because I’m old.
    0:07:05 And I think the most pivotal moment was that first year when we had a blog that had about 200,000 readers a month.
    0:07:09 And by the end of the year, we were at about 1.5 million monthlies.
    0:07:12 And so we were able to really grow and scale that work.
    0:07:16 And I was maniacally focused on that.
    0:07:20 For better and for worse, there are challenges of being too overtly focused.
    0:07:22 And you probably don’t collaborate as well with others and everything.
    0:07:27 But I knew I needed to dramatically change the trajectory of the work we were doing.
    0:07:34 And so I look at everything as like a sprint, whether it be a week, a year, two years.
    0:07:38 It’s like, what do I need to really change and transform in that time?
    0:07:42 And I knew that I needed to change the type of content we’re creating, the frequency, the process,
    0:07:45 all of those things that creators now do on a daily basis.
    0:07:50 But in 2010 was kind of new and people were trying to figure it out at the time.
    0:07:53 And so I think that was one.
    0:07:57 And then the other is when you go from being somebody who is contributing as an individual
    0:07:59 to like leading a team.
    0:08:04 So I went from running that blog to running all of our content and how we were, our blog,
    0:08:07 our social, our SEO, how we were scaling up.
    0:08:12 And that was a pretty pivotal transition because it’s like, can I get people to follow me?
    0:08:14 Do I have a clear story?
    0:08:15 Do I have a clear strategy?
    0:08:22 And the simple thing I would tell everybody out there is the key step in that is people need
    0:08:25 to feel like they’re going to learn something from you.
    0:08:31 And so even though they may be specialists, like I would go and I would find the latest
    0:08:36 article, the latest hack that somebody had done, even if it was for somebody else on my
    0:08:36 team.
    0:08:40 And I would send it to them and talk to them about it and talk about how we could use it.
    0:08:42 And they were instantly like, oh, you understand my work.
    0:08:45 You understand the craft that we’re working on together here.
    0:08:50 And I trust you to help me make my craft much better than it is today.
    0:08:53 Not that it’s bad today, but that I think I can get much better with your help.
    0:08:57 So basically, you were a good colleague, right?
    0:08:58 And you helped other people.
    0:09:04 And that’s really important with politics in corporate and especially getting into the C-suite.
    0:09:07 So what advice do you have for good relationships in corporate?
    0:09:12 And being somebody who higher ups think about when promotions are coming up?
    0:09:15 I think the best relationships are results.
    0:09:19 I think results speak for themselves and results are the ultimate meritocracy.
    0:09:26 I think the biggest thing that people get wrong is they look at what other people ask of them and
    0:09:28 say, hey, here are the goals that I think you can achieve.
    0:09:31 And they look at that as the ceiling of what they’re supposed to do.
    0:09:36 So if you’re running a LinkedIn program, for example, it’s like, oh, I think you can get
    0:09:40 a million views a month this year for our company content.
    0:09:41 Great.
    0:09:45 Well, you or I, if we were in that situation, we would say, cool, you think a million is good.
    0:09:46 I think 10 million is good.
    0:09:51 How would I go and use the same constraints, everything I have access to, to do way better
    0:09:52 than you think?
    0:09:56 Because that change in magnitude is impossible to ignore.
    0:10:03 Because then you’re like, oh, wow, we have somebody who’s able to over exceed what we
    0:10:06 think are fairly aggressive expectations that we would have of them.
    0:10:10 Clearly, they are able to do more and we should put them in a situation to do more.
    0:10:15 I teach a LinkedIn masterclass and it’s people that want to grow their personal brands.
    0:10:21 And one of the most common objections I get from these folks is that I’m really scared to
    0:10:24 start growing my personal brand while I’m working corporate.
    0:10:25 I’m scared to do my own thing.
    0:10:30 And I noticed that you launched a book while you were working at HubSpot, right?
    0:10:31 Yeah, yeah.
    0:10:32 So talk to us about that experience.
    0:10:36 What’s your advice to people who want to become a thought leader in their space, but they do
    0:10:37 work in corporate?
    0:10:42 How should they approach it without stepping on toes or making sure that their company is
    0:10:43 aligned with what they’re doing?
    0:10:49 Yeah, I find that people’s own ambition or lack thereof is their biggest limiter to growth,
    0:10:52 not their capability, not their aptitude, not anything else.
    0:10:55 And I find those things to largely be an excuse.
    0:11:01 You know, you’re scared largely of what other people think versus what’s actually true.
    0:11:06 And what’s actually true, if you look at the market, what happens is that a company, no matter
    0:11:10 whether you’re starting it or you’re working for it, they need experts and they need people
    0:11:17 who their customers look to as trusted experts and advisors who have deep knowledge and deep
    0:11:19 perspective and point of view on their market.
    0:11:22 And you know how you get there?
    0:11:23 You have a great presence on LinkedIn.
    0:11:24 You start a podcast.
    0:11:25 You write a book.
    0:11:26 You have an email newsletter.
    0:11:31 There’s tons of different ways, depending on your skills, your interests, to get there.
    0:11:33 But you have to get there.
    0:11:38 And the thing that nobody tells you, because I got a job at HubSpot because I had run a blog
    0:11:40 and they liked my blog.
    0:11:43 And then I ran the blog and I host the Marketing Against the Grain podcast.
    0:11:48 Now, the thing that you know and a lot of people don’t know is that when you create, when you
    0:11:53 make something every day and every week, you learn so much faster and you get so much better
    0:11:55 at your craft.
    0:12:00 If you have to teach a lot of other people the thing that you want them to know and the thing
    0:12:02 you’re trying to be good at in your job.
    0:12:06 And I have always found on my team that the people who are out there actively creating
    0:12:12 are some of the best people in their current roles, in addition to what they may be doing
    0:12:13 on LinkedIn or YouTube or wherever.
    0:12:15 I totally agree with you.
    0:12:17 A lot of the times it is an excuse.
    0:12:20 People are saying, oh, I think my company is going to get mad.
    0:12:21 My boss is going to get mad.
    0:12:25 But in reality, what may happen, especially if you let them know you’re going to do this
    0:12:30 and it’s not competitive to what you’re doing at work, you’ll get more respected at work.
    0:12:34 I remember when I started growing my brand and podcast, I started getting promoted more
    0:12:34 often at work.
    0:12:40 I was being asked to teach the C-suite how to use LinkedIn and getting flown to conferences
    0:12:42 and whatever it was when I was working at Hewlett Packard.
    0:12:50 Right now, do you feel like you have an entrepreneurial itch or is being in C-suite enough for you to feel
    0:12:51 like you’re building something?
    0:12:55 Just because a lot of people think in order to be an entrepreneur, you have to start your own
    0:12:56 company.
    0:12:58 But I don’t think that’s necessarily true.
    0:13:01 I think entrepreneurship is about solving problems.
    0:13:06 Inherently, the best entrepreneurs in the world are people who just get really irritated that a
    0:13:12 problem exists and just become maniacally focused and obsessed with solving it and normally do so in
    0:13:15 a way that generates a lot of wealth for them and other people.
    0:13:15 Right.
    0:13:16 And that’s awesome.
    0:13:21 You could do that whether you’re a solopreneur, whether you’re a startup founder, whether you
    0:13:24 are a leader in a company, whether you’re an executive at a company.
    0:13:24 It doesn’t matter.
    0:13:29 I look at it as, am I in a situation to solve interesting problems?
    0:13:32 And the reason I don’t go start a company right now is because I’m in a great position
    0:13:35 to go start and solve really interesting problems.
    0:13:41 And I have a lot of access to capital and smart people to go and do that and make much
    0:13:45 faster progress than if I was just me trying to do something.
    0:13:50 And I look at it as every situation, you have an unfair advantage.
    0:13:53 It’s your job to understand what that unfair advantage is.
    0:14:00 And I always tell people that when you work at a great company, you have the two things
    0:14:01 that matter most.
    0:14:05 You have agency and control, which is what most entrepreneurs have and they want.
    0:14:10 But you also have resources to go and do what you want with that agency and control, which
    0:14:11 a lot of entrepreneurs do not have.
    0:14:15 And so when you have both of those at the same time, regardless of the situation you’re in,
    0:14:17 you should take advantage of it.
    0:14:18 Okay.
    0:14:21 So let’s move on to some marketing best practices.
    0:14:25 HubSpot has become a household name.
    0:14:29 So what do you think has been some of the major factors in becoming a global brand?
    0:14:33 I think it’s a little bit what we talked about earlier.
    0:14:36 I’m an untraditional marketing leader, right?
    0:14:38 I didn’t work at McKinsey.
    0:14:39 I don’t have an MBA.
    0:14:41 I’m not out of central casting.
    0:14:48 I am from a small town in West Virginia where my goal was to do interesting stuff and see the
    0:14:48 world.
    0:14:52 And when you’re in that kind of situation,
    0:14:54 you just think about solving problems differently.
    0:14:56 And that comes back to the idea of arbitrage.
    0:15:04 You have to understand if you’re a marketer, what are the unique ways to reach my audience?
    0:15:07 And what are some of the ways that we have done that at HubSpot over the years?
    0:15:09 I think would help maybe bring examples of that.
    0:15:14 First, in the very early days, we created a free tool called Website Grader, where you
    0:15:17 could just put your website in and it would give a full diagnostic.
    0:15:23 So normally what you would hire a consultant for or you talk to a sales rep for, it’s just
    0:15:28 going to give you a report on the webpage and email it to you, which in 2006, seven, eight
    0:15:30 was transformational at the time.
    0:15:32 That’s a long time ago, almost 20 years now.
    0:15:35 And we had millions and millions of people use that.
    0:15:37 Our co-founder, Dharmesh, built it himself, right?
    0:15:43 Like it was not like anything fancy, but it was rooted in, he watched our other co-founder,
    0:15:47 Brian, doing all these sales conversations and he was doing all this manual research.
    0:15:49 And he’s like, I can make an app that does that for you.
    0:15:50 And then they just gave it away.
    0:15:51 And that worked really, really well.
    0:15:56 Then the second thing that worked really well for us was blogging and content in the early
    0:15:59 days of content and creating.
    0:16:03 And what we figured out is that Google search was growing rapidly and there was an arbitrage
    0:16:09 in a market inefficiency where you would search for so many things back in the day and there
    0:16:10 were terrible search results, right?
    0:16:13 Like you would go and like, nothing on this page is good.
    0:16:17 And if we create something, we will by far be the best thing on that topic.
    0:16:22 And we were able to grow from thousands to hundreds of thousands to tens of millions of
    0:16:23 visits doing that.
    0:16:24 We had that hypothesis.
    0:16:28 We created a process to scale it and we spent a lot of time and money.
    0:16:34 The other thing that people in marketing get wrong is they just, they do 10 different things
    0:16:35 kind of shitty, right?
    0:16:37 They’re like, I’m spread real thin.
    0:16:39 I think I got to do everything.
    0:16:42 You’re way better off to do one to three things better than anybody else.
    0:16:47 And if you can do one to three things better than anybody else, you can build a billion
    0:16:48 dollar company.
    0:16:53 If you have one or two great marketing channels that you are world-class at, you cannot build
    0:16:55 a $10 million company.
    0:16:59 If you have 10 crappy marketing channels, I’ve seen it time and time again, it’s just how life
    0:17:00 works.
    0:17:03 Let’s hold that thought and take a quick break with our sponsors.
    0:17:06 Yeah, fam.
    0:17:10 Spring is just around the corner and I’m already planning my next getaway and that’s to Portugal
    0:17:12 for my best friend’s wedding.
    0:17:15 Now I’m paying for this one out of pocket because it’s not for work.
    0:17:20 It’s a vacation and so I love for my vacation trips to feel free and I love using points
    0:17:23 for travel and I’m always looking for ways to earn more.
    0:17:28 And in the last six months, I’ve been using a platform called Built to pay my rent and it
    0:17:30 has been a total game changer.
    0:17:34 I’m getting more airline points and hotel points than ever just by paying my rent, something
    0:17:36 I would have already been doing.
    0:17:41 Now I’m sponsored by them and I can’t wait to share with you that you can join as well
    0:17:44 no matter what your landlord or apartment complex situation is like.
    0:17:49 There’s no cost to join and just by paying rent, you unlock flexible points that can be transferred
    0:17:54 to your favorite hotels and airlines, a future rent payment, your next lift ride and so much
    0:17:54 more.
    0:17:58 When you pay rent through Built, you unlock two powerful benefits.
    0:18:02 First, you earn one of the industry’s most valuable points on rent every month, no matter
    0:18:04 where you live or who your landlord is.
    0:18:06 Your rent now works for you.
    0:18:09 Second, you gain access to exclusive neighborhood benefits in your city.
    0:18:15 Built’s neighborhood benefits are things like extra points on dining out, locally, complimentary
    0:18:20 post-workout shapes, free mats or towels at your favorite fitness studios and unique experiences
    0:18:22 that only Built members can access.
    0:18:26 And when you’re ready to travel, Built points can be converted to your favorite miles and
    0:18:29 hotel points around the world, meaning your rent can literally take you places.
    0:18:33 So if you’re not earning points on my rent, my question is, what are you waiting for?
    0:18:39 Start paying rent through Built and take advantage of your neighborhood benefits by joining joinbuilt.com
    0:18:40 slash profiting.
    0:18:43 That’s J-O-I-N-B-I-L-T dot com slash profiting.
    0:18:46 Make sure you use our URL so they know that we sent you.
    0:18:49 That’s joinbuilt.com slash profiting to sign up for Built today.
    0:18:51 Yeah, bam, picture this.
    0:18:55 You just realized your business needed to hire somebody yesterday.
    0:18:58 How can you find amazing candidates fast?
    0:18:58 Easy.
    0:18:59 Just use Indeed.
    0:19:02 When it comes to hiring, Indeed is all you need.
    0:19:06 Stop struggling to get your job posts seen on other job sites.
    0:19:09 Indeed’s Sponsored Jobs helps you stand out and hire fast.
    0:19:14 With Sponsored Jobs, your post jumps to the top of the page for your relevant candidates
    0:19:16 so you can reach people you want faster.
    0:19:18 And it makes a huge difference.
    0:19:24 According to Indeed data, Sponsored Jobs posted directly on Indeed have 45% more applications
    0:19:25 than non-sponsored jobs.
    0:19:31 Plus, with Indeed Sponsored Jobs, there are no monthly subscriptions, no long-term contracts,
    0:19:33 and you only pay for results.
    0:19:38 One of the things I love about Indeed is that it makes hiring all in one place so easy because
    0:19:42 I don’t have to waste my time sifting through candidates who aren’t a good match for my company.
    0:19:47 When I first started this podcast, I was knee-deep in resumes, juggling interviews, trying to find
    0:19:49 folks who actually fit what I needed.
    0:19:51 It was so slow.
    0:19:52 It was so overwhelming.
    0:19:53 It wasted so much time.
    0:20:04 There’s no need to wait any longer.
    0:20:06 Speed up your hiring right now with Indeed.
    0:20:11 And listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility
    0:20:13 at Indeed.com slash profiting.
    0:20:18 Just go to Indeed.com slash profiting right now and support our show by saying you heard
    0:20:19 about Indeed on this podcast.
    0:20:21 Indeed.com slash profiting.
    0:20:23 Terms and conditions apply.
    0:20:25 Hiring Indeed is all you need.
    0:20:27 Hello, young Improfiters.
    0:20:31 Let’s talk about what drives a business’s success.
    0:20:36 Sure, having a great product, a strong brand, and savvy marketing can set companies like Death
    0:20:40 Wish Coffee, Magic Spoon, or even a legacy brand like Heinz apart.
    0:20:45 But the real secret to skyrocketing sales often isn’t just what they sell.
    0:20:46 It’s how they sell it.
    0:20:51 Behind every thriving business is a powerful system that makes selling effortless and buying
    0:20:52 seamless.
    0:20:56 And for millions of businesses, that behind-the-scenes powerhouse is Shopify.
    0:21:00 Nobody does selling better than Shopify.
    0:21:03 It’s the home of the number one checkout on the planet.
    0:21:09 Shopify’s not-so-secret secret is ShopPay, which boosts your conversions up to 50%.
    0:21:13 That means way fewer cards go abandoned and way more sales get done.
    0:21:20 So if you’re into growing your business, your commerce platform better be ready to sell wherever
    0:21:25 your customers are scrolling or strolling, on the web, in your store, in the feed, and everywhere
    0:21:26 in between.
    0:21:29 Businesses that sell more sell on Shopify.
    0:21:34 Upgrade your business and get the same checkout that Magic Spoon, Heinz, and yours truly use.
    0:21:39 Sign up for your $1 per month trial period at shopify.com slash profiting.
    0:21:40 That’s all lowercase.
    0:21:44 Go to shopify.com slash profiting to upgrade your selling today.
    0:21:46 That’s shopify.com slash profiting.
    0:21:56 So I know that HubSpot actually coined the word inbound marketing.
    0:22:00 So can you help us understand for those who are new to marketing, what’s the difference
    0:22:02 between inbound and outbound marketing?
    0:22:06 And how was marketing different before HubSpot really came onto the scene?
    0:22:09 The world of marketing changed a bunch with the internet.
    0:22:16 Before the internet, people remember, it was largely TV ads, billboards, direct mail, all
    0:22:16 those things.
    0:22:18 And they were all really annoying, right?
    0:22:19 Because you didn’t opt into any of those things.
    0:22:24 The commercials interrupted your television when we didn’t have streaming services everywhere,
    0:22:24 right?
    0:22:29 You’d go home and your mailbox would be full of advertisements that you didn’t subscribe to
    0:22:30 or didn’t want.
    0:22:33 And that was very outboundy, very interruptive.
    0:22:36 And we were basically like, well, now that the internet exists, there’s a whole different
    0:22:36 way to do marketing.
    0:22:41 You can do it in an inbound way where you create content and pull people in through search engines,
    0:22:45 through social media, through email marketing, through things that people opt into and want
    0:22:46 to participate in.
    0:22:50 And that was now seems obvious because it’s how the internet works.
    0:22:52 But 20 years ago was fairly revolutionary.
    0:22:55 So we created a new category.
    0:22:59 And sometimes if you’re in marketing or if you’re an entrepreneur and you’re starting
    0:23:05 a company, the best thing you can do is, there’s a great quote out there, better is a debate,
    0:23:06 different is a choice.
    0:23:12 When you force somebody to make a choice and you do that by creating a new category where
    0:23:15 it’s like, hey, do you want to do this new awesome inbound thing that works really great?
    0:23:19 Or do you want to do that old stodgy outbound thing that everybody hates?
    0:23:22 We tell that story and people are like, oh, I want to do the new cool thing that people
    0:23:25 like, I don’t want to do the old bad thing that everybody hates.
    0:23:29 But if we had just said, oh, like, hey, we can help you do your direct mail a little bit
    0:23:31 better, who cares?
    0:23:32 Well, maybe it’s good enough.
    0:23:33 Do I really even need better?
    0:23:35 I don’t know what you’re talking about, right?
    0:23:42 And so painting a clear choice for your target audience is so powerful.
    0:23:44 It takes a little bit longer, right?
    0:23:45 Because people aren’t familiar with it.
    0:23:48 There’s a level of education you have to do, but anybody can do it.
    0:23:52 And if you’re in it for a long haul, if you think you have a big opportunity in your
    0:23:57 business as a five, 10, 20 year thing, then it’s a really important thing to take advantage
    0:24:00 of to actually be differentiated in the market.
    0:24:04 I know that you’ve been talking a lot about arbitrage, unfair advantages.
    0:24:08 So in 2025, what inbound strategies are working?
    0:24:10 Like are blogs still working?
    0:24:14 How do you think about SEO, podcasts and all that?
    0:24:14 Oh, yeah.
    0:24:15 It’s a great question.
    0:24:17 What works in marketing in 2025?
    0:24:18 A few things.
    0:24:19 Creators.
    0:24:25 Working, partnering, or being with creators and these modern media companies like you run,
    0:24:25 Holla.
    0:24:26 Huge opportunity.
    0:24:28 Huge, huge opportunity there.
    0:24:29 We work deeply with creators.
    0:24:30 I’m a creator myself.
    0:24:31 It works.
    0:24:32 YouTube.
    0:24:33 YouTube works.
    0:24:37 YouTube is an exceptional channel to drive awareness and monetization.
    0:24:42 It is much harder to disrupt through artificial intelligence, which is kind of the thing that’s
    0:24:43 changing marketing the most.
    0:24:44 Blogging still works.
    0:24:45 It does.
    0:24:51 But it works for the very focused universe of the industry you solve, where you have unique
    0:24:54 data, unique insight, unique credibility.
    0:24:55 You can get that.
    0:24:59 You can’t go and talk about everything in the world and get search traffic, but you can focus
    0:25:04 on your core niche and get a good baseline audience through blogging.
    0:25:06 Those things are completely working.
    0:25:11 Partnering with creators, even through advertising means hugely, hugely valuable.
    0:25:16 The other thing that’s working, a lot of people are doing events and in person because we’ve
    0:25:20 gotten so segmented, no shared experiences.
    0:25:25 I think if you’re selling high, big ticket, expensive things, bringing people together in
    0:25:30 person is becoming something that all the marketers I talk to are spending more money on
    0:25:32 this year, not less money on.
    0:25:33 So true.
    0:25:39 And when I’m thinking about my marketing strategies and unfair advantages and untapped
    0:25:45 opportunities, I’m thinking about SEO within platforms, podcast search, SEO.
    0:25:50 How do I become more searchable on LinkedIn in particular, right?
    0:25:52 How do I become more searchable on YouTube?
    0:25:56 So when it comes to blogging, I’d love to like dig deep on this because I actually was
    0:26:00 thinking I used to have a blog in my 20s that was really popular.
    0:26:02 And then I was like blogging is over.
    0:26:06 But sometimes these things come around and I was thinking, you know what?
    0:26:09 I feel like blogs are kind of making a comeback.
    0:26:11 I like with Substack becoming so popular.
    0:26:17 And I was thinking, should I start a blog on my website where I create content around
    0:26:22 entrepreneurship or should I leverage something like Substack and leverage that platform for
    0:26:22 a blog?
    0:26:25 Like what would be your advice to start from scratch or leverage a platform?
    0:26:30 I have a rule that I don’t make anything without being clear on how I’m going to get it distributed
    0:26:32 and what the distribution advantages are.
    0:26:38 I think Substack, if you’re an entrepreneur, has a little bit of built-in audience, but it’s
    0:26:42 not worth it because the bigger built-in audience is information discovery.
    0:26:45 And I say that kind of broader than search.
    0:26:48 And so if I were starting today, it was just me, you and I were starting a company.
    0:26:49 We were going to go out and do something.
    0:26:53 I would start a blog on my website for a couple of reasons.
    0:26:58 One, a ton of people still use Google search and you still can get a lot of traffic from
    0:26:59 Google search.
    0:27:06 The second thing is people are using AI for discovery, chat GPT search, Google deep research,
    0:27:09 Grok, all these things and perplexity.
    0:27:16 And what we have seen is that text-based content and video-based content that’s cited in those
    0:27:19 results still gets a real amount of traffic.
    0:27:21 I host a podcast called Marketing Against the Grain.
    0:27:27 We did a video on DeepSeek when DeepSeek first came out and it got recommended on everybody’s
    0:27:33 chat GPT queries on DeepSeek and we got 50,000 views in like 24 hours because everybody was
    0:27:35 searching for it and we had a really good, credible thing.
    0:27:40 And so it’s almost like the distribution for text and video is getting better.
    0:27:43 What’s changing is that it’s a little less attributable, right?
    0:27:49 Because if somebody is getting it in like chat GPT or perplexity, they may be reading information
    0:27:51 and see your link, but they might not directly click back to it.
    0:27:56 A proportion are, but a much smaller portion than historically in Google, but you’re still
    0:28:01 getting the awareness, the distribution, the brand recognition for being like a credible
    0:28:02 resource in those things.
    0:28:09 And that’s why I think you have to have a pretty healthy blog and YouTube strategy to surface in
    0:28:10 all these new models.
    0:28:11 Yeah.
    0:28:14 And we were just talking about SEO in platforms and that’s such a great example.
    0:28:17 Like how do I get better search on chat GPT?
    0:28:18 That’s the future, right?
    0:28:20 And by the way, there’s compounding benefits to all this, right?
    0:28:25 Like if I get discovered in chat GPT and I get really good engagement on my video, then
    0:28:26 YouTube’s going to be like, oh, this is clearly a good video.
    0:28:29 So I’m going to prioritize it more in YouTube search.
    0:28:32 And then you get more in the YouTube algorithm and the YouTube search engine.
    0:28:35 And then you have a video that completely takes off because of it.
    0:28:35 And that’s awesome.
    0:28:41 What would you say is the secret to making content that stands out today, considering that there’s
    0:28:42 so much more content?
    0:28:43 There’s so much-
    0:28:44 So competitive, right?
    0:28:44 So competitive.
    0:28:49 And it’s so easy now with AI to create videos, to create blogs.
    0:28:51 You don’t really need to be a writer like you used to anymore.
    0:28:53 So what’s your best advice?
    0:28:56 Here’s my advice on content creation day.
    0:29:00 First, people have never wanted more actionable content ever.
    0:29:02 They don’t just want to learn something.
    0:29:05 They want something that’s going to lead them to immediately take action.
    0:29:09 And so anytime you’re creating content that can allow people to immediately take action,
    0:29:14 that they can take, especially like in free tools or free platforms, that’s going to take
    0:29:14 off.
    0:29:15 It’s going to go great.
    0:29:16 I see that all the time.
    0:29:18 I imagine you see that all the time.
    0:29:21 That is clearly a trend that is happening.
    0:29:25 The second thing people want is unique data and perspective.
    0:29:30 If you have a survey of 2,000 people in a given industry, people are going to check it
    0:29:32 out because they want to know the benchmark.
    0:29:33 They want to see how they’re doing.
    0:29:34 They’re competitive.
    0:29:35 They want to compare themselves.
    0:29:37 All that stuff happens, right?
    0:29:40 And so you are going to see that be a real standout thing.
    0:29:46 And so that’s where proprietary research, customer data, things like that are a huge leverage.
    0:29:50 And then the third is, can you be really contrarian and have a good argument?
    0:29:56 Can you go against the status quo and change people’s thinking with a real deep and thoughtful
    0:29:58 reasoned argument about something?
    0:30:01 And if you can do that, you’re also going to get people’s attention.
    0:30:01 What would you add?
    0:30:02 You’re doing this all the time.
    0:30:03 What’d I miss?
    0:30:06 I think at the core of it is, how do you help people?
    0:30:10 How do you actually bring value where people feel like, oh, wow, I learned something.
    0:30:12 Oh, this is something unique and meaningful.
    0:30:18 This is not just regurgitating what’s out there or just clickbait for me to just get on this
    0:30:18 page.
    0:30:22 And there’s actually no good information or no good tools like you were mentioning.
    0:30:28 So you want to just figure out how to actually teach people something that they can’t really
    0:30:29 find anywhere else.
    0:30:31 So that’s what I feel like is really working.
    0:30:35 The prompt I’ve always given myself is, is what I’m about to do going to be 10 times more
    0:30:36 valuable for people?
    0:30:40 Or would somebody pay $1,000, $2,000 to have access to this?
    0:30:44 And if the answer to one of those two questions is yes, it’s going to be really successful.
    0:30:48 And if the answer is no, it’s probably going to be middly and average.
    0:30:48 Totally agree.
    0:30:51 So how do you think about email?
    0:30:55 So email is one of those channels that have been around forever, but it’s still really effective.
    0:30:56 What are your thoughts about it?
    0:30:59 How do you think we should best leverage it in 2025?
    0:31:00 Email is super important.
    0:31:03 And here’s why email is super important from like a principle base.
    0:31:05 It’s one of the few channels you actually control.
    0:31:06 There’s not an algorithm.
    0:31:11 Somebody gives you permission to email them and you get to send them a message and you
    0:31:12 actually own that email address.
    0:31:16 Somebody can’t come along and change the Google algorithm, the YouTube algorithm, the LinkedIn
    0:31:16 algorithm.
    0:31:20 I know people are all up in arms about LinkedIn algorithm changes recently.
    0:31:26 And so that’s the real value of email marketing is that you have way more ownership and control
    0:31:29 of email marketing than most other channels out there.
    0:31:34 And so once you kind of have that foundation, you’re like, okay, email marketing still matters.
    0:31:36 What am I going to do?
    0:31:43 And the number one thing you’re going to do is to have as highly personalized email as
    0:31:44 possible, and that’s writing your emails with AI.
    0:31:49 So one of the things we did at HubSpot is we have what’s called HubSpot Academy, which
    0:31:53 teaches you how to do marketing, how to use our software, all of those things.
    0:31:57 And there’s a bunch of different courses on HubSpot Academy.
    0:32:04 And we basically, when people come into HubSpot and maybe consume an article or a free guide
    0:32:08 or a webinar or what have you, we’ll then send a follow-up email that is custom, one-on-one,
    0:32:14 written from them by AI, and that we recommend based on everything we know about them, the
    0:32:17 content they’ve consumed, what the best course for them to take is.
    0:32:19 Not only do we mention their business, but we have puns.
    0:32:21 Like AI has gotten very good at that.
    0:32:25 And it feels like a human researches company and wrote them an email.
    0:32:30 And that email converts 80% to 100% better than our normal emails.
    0:32:36 And so that is, number one, anything you can do to better personalize your email and make
    0:32:41 it relevant to their problem and their experience with your company and your website, you’re going
    0:32:42 to get much, much better results.
    0:32:46 The other thing I would add when it comes to email is you were talking about giving
    0:32:48 away free tools, free content.
    0:32:53 Instead of having people pay for it, make their email the way that they pay for that content,
    0:32:54 right?
    0:32:57 You want to just collect as many emails as possible.
    0:33:01 One of the biggest regrets that I have is that I only started collecting emails like three
    0:33:01 years ago.
    0:33:06 I wish I started seven years ago and really made it a point to collect emails.
    0:33:10 So what are the best ways that people can grow their email list right now?
    0:33:11 What do you suggest?
    0:33:16 Look, you give them the great ways to do that, which is offer something really valuable that
    0:33:18 you consider charging money for.
    0:33:21 Remember that marketing is kind of a lesson in economics.
    0:33:24 It’s what do you want to sell versus what do you want to give away to sell a bigger thing
    0:33:25 down the road?
    0:33:27 And how do you offset how you think about that?
    0:33:32 And so for me, the things that are really good, if you have any free tools, great.
    0:33:37 If you have any templates, like you do the work of building out a big Excel sheet with formulas
    0:33:41 and everything that people could just drop their own data in, they will give you an email.
    0:33:47 One of the things that worked really well at HubSpot back in the day, and you can do similar
    0:33:53 versions of this now, is we would find our customers always needed stock photography and
    0:33:56 imagery for their email newsletters, their landing page.
    0:34:01 And I was like, well, what if we just hire a freelance photographer, buy the rights out
    0:34:06 for like $10,000 to 500 different pictures, and we just give those away for free instead
    0:34:08 of them having to pay Getty Images or all these people.
    0:34:12 And I think over the years, we’ve had like 5 million downloads.
    0:34:18 I can’t even tell you how popular that has been, but it’s looking at your market, thinking
    0:34:22 about something that they do that they spend money on and say, hey, can I give that to them
    0:34:23 for free?
    0:34:29 And if you can, you will get whatever information you want in exchange for them saving that money.
    0:34:32 And I think people need to realize that a lot of this marketing strategy is a long game.
    0:34:37 Like sometimes you’re marketing to somebody who might start a company in four years and
    0:34:39 might need your services four years down the line.
    0:34:41 So you guys have free trials.
    0:34:46 For me, I collect emails, I do webinars, and sometimes that leads to a course that’s pretty
    0:34:47 expensive.
    0:34:51 And people might attend three, four webinars before they actually purchase the course, but
    0:34:54 I’m investing in them, building that trust.
    0:34:59 And so talk to me about how you guys think about your free HubSpot service.
    0:35:04 Why are you guys giving away your tools for free initially?
    0:35:07 About 10 years ago, we were like, hey, you know what?
    0:35:11 The world is changing and trust is becoming the most important thing.
    0:35:16 And one of the ways you can build trust with people is to let them try before they buy, right?
    0:35:18 And like your webinar is a great example of that.
    0:35:23 It’s like, hey, if I’m on a 30, 60-minute webinar with you, I probably have a pretty good
    0:35:27 idea about what your course is going to look like, what the quality is going to be, what
    0:35:28 it’s going to feel like, the experience.
    0:35:31 And so I’m much more likely to have trust and go buy that course.
    0:35:37 So if you use our free version of HubSpot CRM, you’re much more likely to buy a paid version
    0:35:38 because you’re like, hey, you know what?
    0:35:39 I’m up and running on this.
    0:35:41 I’ve closed a couple of deals with it.
    0:35:45 I understand the features that if I pay for them that I would get.
    0:35:46 And you know what?
    0:35:49 I kind of need them because I think I would make even more money if I paid for those features.
    0:35:51 And it’s a whole different game.
    0:35:55 Right now, we all have access to infinite knowledge with AI.
    0:35:57 Knowledge is a complete commodity.
    0:36:00 So in that world, trust becomes everything.
    0:36:03 People can know who you are, but they can still not trust you at all.
    0:36:06 And giving that value away is how you build trust.
    0:36:09 And so for us, the free version of our product is how we do it.
    0:36:11 But you have webinars.
    0:36:14 There is a version of that for any business, is I think what I would say.
    0:36:20 And I think the main lesson is don’t be afraid to give away great things that people can actually
    0:36:21 use for free.
    0:36:27 Don’t be afraid for people to have to have enough for a couple months or whatever to do what they
    0:36:29 need to do because it’s going to build that trust.
    0:36:32 I have a maxim I live by, and it’s distribution is undefeated.
    0:36:36 If you can get a big audience, you can always figure out how to make money on it.
    0:36:37 The inverse is not true.
    0:36:43 You can have an expensive product and sell it to a few people, or you can have a big audience
    0:36:46 and sell it to a lot, lot more people, but it’s going to take a little bit of time.
    0:36:48 It’s a different way of thinking.
    0:36:52 But distribution is the biggest reason most businesses don’t grow because they just don’t
    0:36:56 have a big enough audience, universe of people who actually care about them and the thing that
    0:36:58 they’re offering in the world.
    0:37:01 We’ll be right back after a quick break from our sponsors.
    0:37:07 This episode of Young and Profiting Podcast is brought to you by Mercury, the modern business
    0:37:11 banking experience that brands like mine use to manage their finances.
    0:37:13 I’ve got a confession to make.
    0:37:17 I used to dread logging into my old business bank account.
    0:37:21 The interface looked like it hadn’t been updated since 2003.
    0:37:26 I tried to transfer funds and somehow ended up needing to call customer support just to
    0:37:27 move money between my accounts.
    0:37:31 That’s not ideal when you’re running a fast-paced business.
    0:37:35 And that’s why I made the entire company switch to Mercury.
    0:37:38 That’s right, all of our accounts, credit cards, it’s all on Mercury now.
    0:37:40 It’s our go-to banking product.
    0:37:46 And it’s also the go-to banking product for over 200,000 startups, small businesses, and
    0:37:46 e-commerce brands.
    0:37:50 It’s designed with a sleek interface and transparent pricing.
    0:37:51 There’s no hidden fees.
    0:37:56 So it makes it simple to manage your banking, capital, and credit all in one place.
    0:38:00 With Mercury, you can accept payments, send invoices, and pay vendors.
    0:38:04 Plus, enjoy free domestic and international USD wire transfers.
    0:38:09 You can also get instant access to virtual cards that you can track and lock to specific
    0:38:14 merchants, earning you 1.5% cash back on every single purchase.
    0:38:20 Mercury streamlines your banking and finances in one place so you can focus on growing your
    0:38:21 online business.
    0:38:28 Deposit $5,000 or spend $5,000 using your Mercury credit card within the first 90 days to earn
    0:38:32 $250, or do both for $500 in total rewards.
    0:38:35 Learn more at mercury.com slash profiting.
    0:38:38 That’s mercury.com slash profiting.
    0:38:42 Mercury is a financial technology company, not an FDIC-insured bank.
    0:38:47 Banking services provided by Choice Financial Group, Column N.A., and Evolve Bank & Trust.
    0:38:52 Members FDIC, Working Capital Loans Provided by Mercury Lending, LLC.
    0:38:54 Hey, young impropters.
    0:38:56 I know so many of you are in your grind season.
    0:39:01 You’re working that 9 to 5, and then you’re 5 to midnight building that dream.
    0:39:05 That’s how I started Yap Media, so keep going and hustling.
    0:39:09 But I do want to give you some advice, because if you’re a side hustler, I know personally
    0:39:13 how hard it can be to find the right tools for your team without breaking the bank.
    0:39:17 All those tools can get really expensive, but you need to collaborate with your team.
    0:39:20 And that’s where Microsoft Teams Free comes in.
    0:39:25 With Teams, you get pro-level collaboration tools without the hefty price tag.
    0:39:30 You can host free video meetings for up to 60 minutes, which is perfect for brainstorming
    0:39:33 with your team or to look super professional for your client calls.
    0:39:38 Plus, enjoy a limited chat for real-time collaboration with your side hustle team,
    0:39:40 no matter where you are.
    0:39:44 I wish that I had Microsoft Teams Free back when I was first starting Yap.
    0:39:47 I have a remote team, and it was really hard for us to keep organized.
    0:39:52 If we had Microsoft Teams Free, we would have gotten way further faster, because with Microsoft
    0:39:57 Teams Free, you can keep your client documents, invoices, and brand assets organized with their
    0:39:58 shared file storage.
    0:40:02 You can access everything you need all in one place.
    0:40:07 You can even create community spaces to organize your team, volunteers, or creative collaborators,
    0:40:11 making it easier for you to keep your project or business on track.
    0:40:17 Built by Microsoft, Teams offers a secure, professional, and reliable platform for entrepreneurs
    0:40:18 to build their businesses.
    0:40:21 It’s flexible, secure, and available everywhere.
    0:40:23 Best of all, it’s free.
    0:40:24 Stop paying for tools.
    0:40:27 Get everything you need for free with Microsoft Teams.
    0:40:28 So why wait?
    0:40:33 Try Microsoft Teams today and start growing your side hustle without the extra cost.
    0:40:38 Head over to aka.ms slash profiting today to sign up for free.
    0:40:42 That’s aka.ms slash profiting to sign up today for free.
    0:40:52 So CRMs, I’ve got a lot of young entrepreneurs who are probably working at spreadsheets and
    0:40:53 doing everything manually.
    0:40:57 What is a CRM, and how do startups benefits from CRMs?
    0:41:02 So if you think about CRM, there’s lots of views of what CRMs are.
    0:41:06 But what they really are is a single source of truth for your customers and your prospects.
    0:41:12 So instead of your support team working out of a project management system, sales reps working
    0:41:16 out of spreadsheets, all of those things, everybody, your marketers,
    0:41:22 your sellers, your customer service folks, all working, updating one record, all the context
    0:41:25 in one place, and then being able to do really powerful things, whether it be advertising,
    0:41:31 email marketing, marketing automation, sales call prep, sales follow-up, sales automation,
    0:41:31 all of those things.
    0:41:33 That’s what you’re talking about doing.
    0:41:38 And you’re going to see CRM be way more important over the next couple of years, because what’s
    0:41:42 going to happen with CRM over the next even year is that all the unstructured data,
    0:41:47 your meeting recordings, the emails you exchange, all of those things, all that context are going
    0:41:49 to make it way better.
    0:41:52 Your CRM is just going to generate the email follow-up to your meeting for you.
    0:41:53 And it’s like, oh, great.
    0:41:57 I know I need to follow up for this meeting, but I’ve got to go run to this other meeting
    0:41:57 right now.
    0:41:58 Well, it’s great.
    0:42:02 I can do it in 30 seconds versus having to do it 15 minutes tonight when I have forgotten
    0:42:04 half the things and need to go look them up.
    0:42:05 Right?
    0:42:07 And that is why CRM is so important.
    0:42:12 It also is when you have all your data in one place, you can do real reporting and actually
    0:42:14 understand what’s working and what’s not working.
    0:42:20 And as somebody who has helped grow a business from tens of millions of dollars to billions
    0:42:26 of dollars, it’s done through basic iteration over a long period of time, finding problems,
    0:42:28 solving them and building and iterating.
    0:42:31 And you can’t do that without your data in place and some clear reporting.
    0:42:36 Yeah, that’s what I’m most excited about, being able to track everything, having everything
    0:42:37 in one place.
    0:42:41 If I’m like, what’s happening with the sales deal, I can click in, see all the conversations
    0:42:45 to your point, like AI summaries and things like that are coming out.
    0:42:48 Have you guys been thinking about AI agents at all?
    0:42:50 Tons, tons of AI agents.
    0:42:53 So first of all, the most used AI features at HubSpot.
    0:42:55 One is to prep for sales meetings.
    0:42:59 So we have a co-pilot where it just will take everything from a conduct record and give you
    0:43:00 the full prep summary.
    0:43:01 That’s awesome.
    0:43:03 We have an agent called Content Remix.
    0:43:05 So like, let’s say you’re going to run a content campaign.
    0:43:06 You’re going to do an email newsletter.
    0:43:07 So you’re going to do a webinar.
    0:43:08 You’re going to do a webinar.
    0:43:15 It will spin up the landing page, the email, the ad assets, everything for you and does all
    0:43:16 the manual work in the background.
    0:43:22 And then we also have a product that our co-founder or mesh started called Agent.ai, which is a marketplace
    0:43:26 of agents where you can go and anybody can build or use different agents.
    0:43:32 It’s kind of like a modern automation marketplace where if you have a problem, you can either use
    0:43:35 Agent.ai to build it or somebody’s already built it and you can just use their agent.
    0:43:41 Like a really good example is there’s a company research agent that will give you like a McKinsey
    0:43:44 analyst level kind of deep detail briefing.
    0:43:48 Who’s the CEO, funding history, core products, competitors, the whole thing.
    0:43:51 And it’ll do it in like two minutes, right?
    0:43:52 Perfectly formatted for free.
    0:43:55 That is just a game changer when it comes to agents.
    0:44:02 If you are in marketing and in sales and you’re feeling overwhelmed with AI and leveraging AI,
    0:44:03 how would you approach it?
    0:44:07 I would pick one AI tool and get really good at it.
    0:44:09 And for marketers, that’s probably Claude.
    0:44:12 For sellers, that’s probably ChatGPT.
    0:44:14 And you’re going to use those tools.
    0:44:15 The reason I say Claude has the best taste.
    0:44:16 It’s really good at writing.
    0:44:22 You can upload to projects in Claude and have really great specific, highly repeatable writing
    0:44:24 output that’s core to marketing.
    0:44:31 For sellers, I think one of the best AI features that exists on the planet is ChatGPT’s deep
    0:44:37 research feature where you can have it go and just build a incredibly complex research report.
    0:44:42 And it might research a problem for 5, 10, 20 minutes with all these different agents in
    0:44:44 the background going and doing that.
    0:44:51 And you having the full map to an industry, the accounts within the industry, how your product
    0:44:56 maps, core competitors in that industry, those things become super valuable.
    0:44:59 So that’s where I would focus if I was just like feeling overwhelmed and not yet started.
    0:45:02 I feel like we’ve learned so much so far about marketing.
    0:45:08 I’d love to move into customer service because it’s not only important to bring in customers,
    0:45:09 we’ve got to retain them.
    0:45:13 So how does HubSpot help people in a CRM?
    0:45:16 How does that actually help with your retention, with your customer service?
    0:45:17 A few things.
    0:45:22 So one of the other agents we have is called our customer agent, and it basically helps
    0:45:23 resolve customer support.
    0:45:28 Like the average HubSpot customer solves 30% of their support questions are answered by AI,
    0:45:29 are answered by our agent.
    0:45:35 And so that’s 30% less support people, support time, founder time, depending on the size and
    0:45:36 scale of company that you have to spend.
    0:45:41 And if you focus on it, we’ve seen customers get to like 50, 60% deflection, which is huge,
    0:45:43 saves so much time and so much money.
    0:45:51 And the biggest reason why that’s important is because in today’s internet, where everything
    0:45:55 is highly competitive, as we’ve talked all show about, it’s never been easier for a customer
    0:45:55 to switch.
    0:45:58 So your core economics are going to be retaining that customer.
    0:46:03 I’m sure you see that your best customers are people who take multiple courses, people who
    0:46:05 do multiple purchases with you.
    0:46:11 And if you don’t have good customer service, good onboarding, good customer support, man,
    0:46:12 they’re going to be out really quick.
    0:46:17 And I think it’s one of the things most entrepreneurs overlook early on.
    0:46:21 They get so obsessed with sales and bringing those customers in, they’re like, oh gosh, why
    0:46:23 did like 80% of my customers leave this year?
    0:46:25 That’s because I haven’t been focused on it at all.
    0:46:27 I don’t have any of the infrastructure to actually focus on it.
    0:46:34 How can we better align marketing and sales so that we have the best customer service?
    0:46:38 Customer service is largely about setting expectations, right?
    0:46:40 Which is, do I know what I bought?
    0:46:43 Do I know what I’m going to use the thing I bought for?
    0:46:46 And do I know how I’m going to think that that’s valuable?
    0:46:49 If the answer to those things are yes, that customer is normally pretty happy.
    0:46:51 If it’s no, they’re going to be pretty unhappy.
    0:46:55 And so marketing’s job is to set up the value proposition early on.
    0:47:01 A sales job is to not oversell, to not make promises that the product can’t keep, and to
    0:47:06 understand that customer’s business enough to understand that this is how you’re actually
    0:47:08 going to use this thing once you buy it.
    0:47:13 And then customer success and customer supporter, their job is to help you get onboarded and get
    0:47:15 any blockers.
    0:47:16 Because there’s always unique things.
    0:47:20 Your business has this problem that isn’t relevant to our other customers that we need
    0:47:20 to help you solve.
    0:47:25 And once you fix those problems, the customer’s going to be very happy.
    0:47:28 It’s normally in one of those stages where things go off the rails.
    0:47:33 We just rolled out a new customer survey to try to see how our agency clients are feeling,
    0:47:34 how our network clients are feeling.
    0:47:36 It was really, really helpful.
    0:47:40 Do you have any suggestions of the type of questions you should ask your customers to get
    0:47:40 their feedback?
    0:47:47 The most helpful thing that we have done and learned over the years is we always run a monthly
    0:47:50 net promoter score survey with our customers.
    0:47:53 Net promoter score is a question we all see.
    0:47:55 How likely are you to rank the company from one to 10?
    0:47:57 And please tell us why.
    0:48:00 And the score, kind of important.
    0:48:03 The tell us why is very important.
    0:48:09 And the reason for that is you get a real sentiment as to what people value or like or dislike about
    0:48:10 your product.
    0:48:15 And now with AI, if you run a survey like that, you can take all of those text responses
    0:48:17 and just get the core themes very quickly.
    0:48:25 And what your job is with any customer surveying and why I think NPS is so good is to not have
    0:48:27 problems be festering and systemic.
    0:48:28 You always want new problems.
    0:48:31 So it’s like, oh, our customer support’s back.
    0:48:31 Great.
    0:48:33 Let’s fix our customer support.
    0:48:35 And then you won’t hear anything about customer support.
    0:48:40 You’ll hear about a new thing like product speed or, oh, our client portal is tricky.
    0:48:41 You hear all these things, right?
    0:48:48 And so I think the net promoter score question is the best because it gives you where the big
    0:48:49 root cause are.
    0:48:52 When you ask specific questions, you often get the symptoms without the root cause.
    0:48:56 I want to close out our interview with some scenarios that I think are going to be really
    0:48:56 fun.
    0:48:57 Okay.
    0:49:00 So you are a brand new entrepreneur.
    0:49:04 You have like a little bit of money, but mostly you have time.
    0:49:05 So you have time to invest.
    0:49:09 What would you do for your marketing strategy launching a new company?
    0:49:09 All right.
    0:49:12 If I’m time rich and money poor, what would I do?
    0:49:19 The first thing I am doing is I am figuring out what type of creator I need to be, right?
    0:49:21 Am I going to be YouTube, LinkedIn?
    0:49:22 What’s my product?
    0:49:22 What’s my market?
    0:49:26 And I got to start creating and I got to create on the daily because I’m time rich.
    0:49:30 I got the time to make every day and I got to make something every day.
    0:49:33 And I’m going to use AI tools to help me keep up the pace of production.
    0:49:36 And they’re free to very low cost.
    0:49:38 So I can take advantage of that.
    0:49:43 And then the second thing I’m going to do is I’m going to find one area where my target
    0:49:49 audience spends a lot of time that I might be able to reach them in a very interesting
    0:49:50 way.
    0:49:54 Like an example of this is the early days of LinkedIn groups, right?
    0:49:59 What you could do in the early days of LinkedIn groups is sponsor messages to that the group
    0:50:00 owner could send to the entire group.
    0:50:03 And we would go and we would spend money to do that.
    0:50:05 And nobody else was doing that.
    0:50:09 And we got hugely efficient lead generation by doing that.
    0:50:12 And it’s just like, oh, a million marketers in this group.
    0:50:14 Nobody is really going after them.
    0:50:15 How do we get them?
    0:50:18 I think the whole theme of this episode is unfair advantage.
    0:50:21 I remember when I started my podcast, I started on LinkedIn.
    0:50:25 I wanted to target young professionals and nobody was talking about podcasts.
    0:50:27 Nobody was putting up anything about podcasts.
    0:50:30 And then I became the number one podcaster on LinkedIn.
    0:50:33 But it was already a channel where people were hanging out.
    0:50:34 They just weren’t doing what I was doing.
    0:50:39 So what is your way of cutting through the noise and getting in front of a lot of people
    0:50:40 in a creative way?
    0:50:45 OK, now, what if you exited a company, you’re slightly older, you’ve got more experience,
    0:50:49 you’ve got some money, but you’ve got a family, you’ve got a lot going on, but you do want to
    0:50:50 start a new company.
    0:50:52 What would you do to market your company?
    0:50:54 Money richer, time poor.
    0:50:56 Yeah, exactly.
    0:50:56 OK.
    0:51:02 If I have some resources to do this, it’s not going to be that dissimilar.
    0:51:07 I think the channels work, how I’m going to accomplish those channels.
    0:51:13 I’d probably still be a creator, but I would hire an agency to help me do all the post-production,
    0:51:16 to do the research, do all that.
    0:51:17 And I would use AI to prep.
    0:51:22 But I would need somebody if I was time poor to tell me, oh, these topics suck.
    0:51:23 They’re not working.
    0:51:24 These are the new topics we should do.
    0:51:30 They kind of give you the cheat sheet of editorial and iteration for sure.
    0:51:34 And then if you have some money, you can use programmatic ad platforms.
    0:51:40 You can use Google, you can use Meta, that will give you enough baseline revenue to kind
    0:51:41 of start reinvesting.
    0:51:44 And so I would probably use YouTube ads, to be honest with you.
    0:51:50 YouTube ad targeting is great, and the cost is so much lower than Google and Facebook and
    0:51:52 Instagram that I would probably do that.
    0:51:53 Yeah.
    0:51:55 There’s plenty of agencies, like my agency, for example.
    0:51:56 Yes.
    0:51:57 I was sure to show up.
    0:51:59 We do everything for you.
    0:52:03 If you want a podcast, you show up to record, or we literally just write everything on your
    0:52:03 behalf.
    0:52:06 So if you’ve got money, you can invest, like you said, in an agency.
    0:52:10 I know we only have a couple of minutes left, so I got to wrap up, even though I really want
    0:52:12 to keep asking you more questions.
    0:52:16 So the last questions that I have, I ask all of my guests.
    0:52:19 And this doesn’t have to do with, you don’t have to even talk about marketing.
    0:52:20 You can talk about whatever you want.
    0:52:25 So what is one actionable thing our young and profiters can do today to become more profitable
    0:52:26 tomorrow?
    0:52:28 Start using AI.
    0:52:34 Pick a foundational model, chat GPT, Claude, Google Gemini, and use it every day.
    0:52:37 Once or twice a day, every day.
    0:52:37 Build the habit.
    0:52:39 It’s very important for the future.
    0:52:42 And what is your secret to profiting in life?
    0:52:44 And this can go beyond financial.
    0:52:48 I just bought a piece of art that says, if you don’t know, find out, be endlessly curious.
    0:52:53 Be endlessly curious and ask questions.
    0:52:54 Never feel like you’re stupid.
    0:52:57 Just go and ask all the questions.
    0:53:00 And if you’re curious about something, just call somebody up.
    0:53:00 You’ll be shocked.
    0:53:01 People will give you time.
    0:53:04 People will give you information if you care enough to know it.
    0:53:09 And then once you have that knowledge, your life is just way better in every single way.
    0:53:13 And where can everybody learn more about you and everything that you do?
    0:53:16 You can check out HubSpot.com, product, everything there.
    0:53:20 I host Marketing Against the Grain over on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.
    0:53:21 You can check out Marketing Against the Grain.
    0:53:22 Perfect.
    0:53:25 And I’m really excited that I get to go on your show soon.
    0:53:26 Yeah, you’re coming on Marketing Against the Grain soon.
    0:53:26 So I can’t wait.
    0:53:27 We get to talk again.
    0:53:30 And maybe I’ll play that on this podcast so you guys can get more of Kip.
    0:53:31 I love that.
    0:53:32 I’m excited to have you on.
    0:53:33 We’ll catch up again real soon.
    0:53:34 Awesome.
    0:53:34 Thank you, Kip.
    0:53:35 Thanks, Hala.
    0:53:42 Well, that about does it for this episode.
    0:53:46 And I thought Kip Bodnar touched on so many of the key themes that I’ve been preaching
    0:53:47 for a while now.
    0:53:49 For example, I love his approach to entrepreneurship.
    0:53:53 You don’t actually have to start your own company to be an entrepreneur.
    0:53:58 You just need to think like an entrepreneur, even when you work at a large company.
    0:54:03 Like Kip said, entrepreneurship is about solving problems and finding ways to do so that others
    0:54:04 miss.
    0:54:08 And one of the best ways to do that is to find out where you have an unfair advantage
    0:54:10 over somebody else.
    0:54:12 That is where your opportunity lies.
    0:54:14 And that’s where true value can be created.
    0:54:18 Marketing is likewise about locating opportunities.
    0:54:20 What are the market inefficiencies?
    0:54:23 Where can you take advantage of arbitrage?
    0:54:24 What is undervalued?
    0:54:28 Where can you buy at a low price and sell at a high price?
    0:54:31 So where are all the opportunities in 2025?
    0:54:33 Kip pointed to several good ones.
    0:54:34 First, events.
    0:54:39 Bringing people together for shared experiences and to demonstrate your own value.
    0:54:40 Next, YouTube.
    0:54:43 Still an incredible channel to drive awareness.
    0:54:48 We also talked about blogging, including your own website, which can be an effective way to
    0:54:54 reach people, especially as more advanced AI search tools drive users to relevant content.
    0:54:57 And also, lastly, don’t sleep on email marketing.
    0:55:02 It can be really useful, especially if you use AI tools to target and personalize your messaging.
    0:55:07 Finally, whatever method, I really want you to think about what you can teach others.
    0:55:12 What do you have to offer that is thoughtful, that is interesting, that is unique, that is
    0:55:15 going to grab somebody’s collar and make them pay attention?
    0:55:19 That, after all, is what the best marketing does.
    0:55:21 Thank you for your attention.
    0:55:25 And I know that there’s so many places you can direct it, and I’m so grateful that you’re
    0:55:27 spending time with me and Young and Profiting Podcast.
    0:55:32 And if you listened, learned, and profited from this conversation, please bring it to somebody
    0:55:32 else’s attention.
    0:55:36 Share this episode with somebody who you know could benefit from it.
    0:55:41 And also, why not drop us a five-star review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, CastBox, wherever
    0:55:42 you listen to the show.
    0:55:46 Nothing thanks us more than a good review from you.
    0:55:50 And if you prefer to watch our podcasts as videos, you can find us on YouTube.
    0:55:54 You can also find me on Instagram at Yap with Hala or LinkedIn by searching my name.
    0:55:56 It’s Hala Taha.
    0:55:59 And of course, I got to shout out my talented Yap production team.
    0:56:00 You guys are amazing.
    0:56:02 Thank you for all your hard work.
    0:56:06 This is your host, Hala Taha, aka the Podcast Princess, signing off.
    0:56:20 This is your host, Hala Taha.

    In today’s competitive market, many entrepreneurs, solopreneurs, business leaders, and marketers struggle to cut through the noise and scale their businesses. Kipp Bodnar’s rise from employee to Chief Marketing Officer at HubSpot in just five years demonstrates how the right mindset and focus drive success. By blending entrepreneurship, inbound marketing, and leadership, he achieved remarkable growth. In this episode, Kipp shares the most effective marketing strategies, reveals how to spot opportunities, and the key to scaling your business through content marketing, customer relationships, and AI.

    In this episode, Hala and Kipp will discuss: 

    (00:00) Introduction

    (01:24) Key Strategies for Career and Business Growth

    (10:32) The Entrepreneurial Mindset in Leadership

    (12:10) HubSpot’s Secret to Global Marketing Success

    (15:10) Inbound vs Outbound Marketing

    (17:23) Effective Content Marketing Strategies

    (22:00) Three Ways to Stand Out as a Content Creator

    (24:16) The Value of Email and Online Marketing

    (30:42) Leveraging AI in Sales and Marketing

    (35:52) The Power of Customer Service in Retention

    (39:09) How to Market a Startup with Limited Funds

    (40:53) Marketing Strategies for Busy Entrepreneurs

    Kipp Bodnar is the Chief Marketing Officer at HubSpot, a leading global marketing and sales platform. His expertise in social media, SEO, and email marketing helped him advance to CMO in just five years. With a background in entrepreneurship and marketing, Kipp also hosts the Marketing Against the Grain podcast, where he shares insights on AI, marketing trends, and growth hacks.

    Sponsored By:

    Resources Mentioned:

    Kipp’s Podcast, Marketing Against The Grain: bit.ly/MarketingAgainstTheGrain 

    Kipp’s Book, The B2B Social Media Book: bit.ly/B2BBook 

    Active Dealsyoungandprofiting.com/deals  

    Key YAP Links

    Reviews – ratethispodcast.com/yap 

    Youtube – youtube.com/c/YoungandProfiting 

    LinkedIn – linkedin.com/in/htaha/ 

    Instagram – instagram.com/yapwithhala/ 

    Social + Podcast Services: yapmedia.com 

    Transcripts – youngandprofiting.com/episodes-new 

    Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship Podcast, Business, Business Podcast, Self Improvement, Self-Improvement, Personal Development, Starting a Business, Strategy, Investing, Sales, Selling, Psychology, Productivity, Entrepreneurs, AI, Artificial Intelligence, Technology, Marketing, Negotiation, Money, Finance, Side Hustle, Mental Health, Career, Leadership, Mindset, Health, Growth Mindset, E-commerce, LinkedIn, Instagram, Digital Marketing, Storytelling, Advertising, Social Media Marketing, Communication, Video Marketing, Social Proof, Influencers, Influencer Marketing, Marketing Tips, Digital Trends, Marketing Podcast.