#AIS: Palmer Luckey on Anduril

Intro and thanks

00:00Hey everybody. Hey everybody. We have an exciting show for you today. This is the 15th and the final episode from the All-InSummit 2022. I wanted to take a quick moment to thank my team. They worked tirelessly over a 100red days to make the event magical for everybody who was able to make it. Thanks to the audience for coming. Next year we'll try to have twice as many of you there. Just a quick thank you to Amber, Ashley, Jackie, Nick, Fresh, Marine, Molly, Big Mike, Andre, Times 2, Rachel Reporting, Producer Justin, Jamie, Jimmy D, my brother Josh, everybody who came and supported the event. We had an incredible crew. We had an incredible time. And of course, I would be remiss if I didn't thank the

00:44amazing speakers who joined us from all around the world. So candid, so insightful. My pal Bill Gurley, Bry Gersonner, Adena, Mara, Tandis, Tim, Elon, Antonio, Nate, Ryan, Claire, uh my boy Ra Boy, Antonio Garcia, Martinez, Joel, James, Mata, Glenn Greenwald, and of course, today's guest, the one and the only, Mr. Palmer Lucky. And most of all, I'd like to thank my besties, Chimat Saxs and Freeberg, who did an amazing job of hosting the event. Now, a little preamble here before we start this episode. Many of you have heard uh that this is a controversial episode. It is a little controversial. There may be a little twist in it. So, I will be coming back after Palmer Ly's talk to give you a little context because it

01:32might get a little confusing. I don't want to spoil the surprise for you. So, enjoy this episode. But before we go to this episode, a lot of you have questions. You have questions about the future of the All-In podcast. And those questions are important and um they're never going to be answered. They're never going to be answered. But just so you know, I'm not leaving. I'm not leaving. I'm not leaving. [cheering] The show goes on. This is my home. They're going to need a wrecking ball to take me out of here. They're going to need to send in the National Guard cuz I ain't going nowhere. The show goes on. [music] >> We'll let your winners ride. >> Rainman, [music] >> we open source it to the fans and

Why Palmer founded Anduril

02:26[music] they've just gone crazy with it. Love you. [music] >> So, my name is Palmer Lucky. I founded two companies. My first was a company called Oculus VR that I founded when I was 19 years old and living in a camper trailer. Thank you. Thank you. um sold that to for a few billion dollars to Facebook and then got fired a few years later and then started Android because I wanted to work in the national security space for a variety of reasons and I'll get into some of those reasons today. So the technology industry for many years has prided itself on being the first to understand where things are heading so that they can build the things that are going to be relevant for the future. on national security though

03:06and on the rise of our strategic adversaries. It was one of the last industries to realize where things were going due to a variety of ideological reasons but also business reasons. Silicon Valley didn't just predict the importance of defense in the 2020s. It largely took the exact wrong position, the opposite position. Uh first of all, you have the obvious examples like big technology companies explicitly refusing to do work with the Department of Defense. Google is one big example, but the worst examples are really in the startups that don't exist because people didn't want to even get into such a controversial space less it ruined their careers. Um, you know, when I started Anderoll, I had already sold a company

03:45for billions of dollars and investors still didn't want to invest. I still had a tough time in a lot of meetings with venture capitalists and none of the conversations with VCs that I had were about my ability to hire or execute or build products. Everyone believed that I could do those things, even the ones who didn't like me much. The vast majority of conversations that we had were about whether or not it was even ethically okay to ever build a company that would build weapons. And the people who turned us down, the ones who decided not to invest in Anderole, actually believed that we had a good team and good people and good product market fit. The issue is that they thought that it was inherently wrong to build tools capable

04:22of being used for violence because they believed that the idea of deterring violence through having a strong arsenal was fundamentally obsolete and itself wrong. Uh even you know imagine how hard it would have been to raise money if I hadn't founded Oculus would have been impossible. Even after we raised money and got traction the negativity continued there there was a really interesting uh cover story in Bloomberg in 2019 that called us tech's most controversial startup. This was a year where Tik Tok was banning users for calling attention to the weaker genocide in in China and banning users for posting homosexual content. This is a year in which Adam Newman paid himself tens of millions of dollars for the

05:01right to use the word we. It's a year that Uber was under a federal investigation for its workplace culture immediately after a board coup that ejected much of the leadership. It's a time where Facebook was getting hauled in front of Congress to testify. But of course, as a tiny defense company making a handful of purely defensive base security systems that committed the crime of building technology for the military, Andrew was the one that claimed the bel belt for the world's most controversial technology company. I'd say that the war in Europe has totally shattered the idea that we live at the end of history. Every few decades, we start to believe that economic ties have ended all prospect of

05:38war. And every few decades, we're reminded that this isn't true. That's is a very popular idea, especially in DC, that we live at what they call the end of history. It's this idea that economic ties and interconnections make the prospect of conflict fundamentally unthinkable, ignoring the fact that many people see this as a matter of destiny, not economics. In 1909, English economist and politician Norman Angel published an entire book called The Great Illusion. And it was entirely about how war in Europe was impossible and that spending money on building militaries that could deter conflict was a waste of time that could be better spent building utopia. The he specifically argued that any European

06:18country annexing another would be as absurd as London annexing Herford. And the book was actually the number one bestseller in 1909. Now, we've had some version of this argument for a few decades now, ever since the Cold War started. And luckily, a lot of people are waking up. But unfortunately, it's not because they've come to a reasoned decision based on the fundamental principles at play. It's because right now supporting the military, supporting defense, and supporting Ukraine in particular has become the current thing. And in current year, current thing is the thing that you have to support regardless of what you think of the underpinnings. Unfortunately, for issues like defense and national security, the

06:59stakes are too high and the relevant timelines far too long for people to start caring about things at the moment that they need to start caring about them. So today, I want to talk a little bit about why I started Andreal and why you should all think exactly the same way that I do. So why I founded Androl, I thought that I would work on virtual reality for my entire life. I had no plans on leaving Oculus at all. And I I love virtual reality. I loved virtual reality. I started Oculus as a teenager and I would have been there for another 50 years. I said as much less than 30 days before I was fired. Uh and there there's a a lot of reasons for that, some of which I'll get into later. Uh but the decision was

The broken defense industry

07:38made for me. I gave $9,000 against the wrong political candidate and it was pretty unpopular in Silicon Valley. Before I worked on Oculus, I actually worked in an Army affiliate research center on a program called Bravemind, which was an Army project to treat veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder using virtual reality exposure therapy. Basically putting them into virtual reality environments that would set off their symptoms and then under the guidance of a licensed therapist who's also in the simulation, they could be taught coping skills that would reduce their dependency on medication and medical aid. Uh it was a really fantastic program. I wasn't doing anything important on it. I was just a

08:11lab technician, a cable monkey. But I got a lot of exposure to both the virtual reality uh technology side, but also how broken defense procurement was, how slow it was, how old a lot of the technology was, how the incentives were totally misaligned. And ever since then, I'd always wanted to make a contribution to national security if I could. Just took a few years for the right for the right set of circumstances to come up. The defense industry in America is fundamentally broken. uh you know before even getting into the specific problems of our defense industry, the United States has the strongest commercial artificial intelligence industry in the world followed closely by China. But at the same time, the United States

08:48military and the prime contractors that dominate the military-industrial complex have none of the right tools, talent, or incentives to apply autonomy to the systems they do. There's no reason to save cost because they don't get paid for making things that work. They get paid for doing work. And in a world where you get more prestige and more money by having more people working on bigger things, there's no reason to use autonomy to reduce costs and increase capability. The US military is well behind the Chinese people liber people's liberation army in the implementation of artificial intelligence. Um there's more better AI in John Deere tractors than there is in any US military vehicle. There's better computer vision in the

09:25Snapchat app on your phone than any system that the US Department of Defense has deployed. And other countries are taking notice of this. Countries like Russia and China do not want to compete with us toe-to-toe with the tools that we have. People will make fun of China and say, "Oh, they have a they don't have a blue water navy. They only have one aircraft carrier coming up onto uh you they could never fight us." The reality is that that's not where they're going to fight us. They're going to arm proxies or if they engage directly, they're going to use technologies that give them an asymmetrical advantage in the areas where we are the least competent. These are the areas where they are putting a lot of their

09:58resources. The reason that Vladimir Putin is saying that the ruler of the world is going to be the country that masters artificial intelligence is not because he thinks that they are going to lose at this. It's because he thinks that that is one of the only ways that they're going to be able to get the best of us. Now, the people who are building technology for our military, the large defense primes, I won't name any names because I'm I'm not I I I don't want to I don't want to wrestle too many feathers in that area. You never know who's in the room. But the people who are building the technology for the United States military, the people who spend all their time do not have access to the best

10:30talent. They do not have access to the people that the technology industry has largely had a monopoly on in areas like autonomy, artificial intelligence, sensor fusion, high-end networking. And then at the same time, the people who can build who can build good software, the ones who do work in these technology companies are largely prohibited from doing so. And even if they're working on something that the military buys, let's say all the people at Apple who are working on an iPhone that can be sold to the US Air Force, that same iPhone is also being sold to Russian intelligence, that same iPhone is being sold to the Chinese Navy. Uh working on technologies that help the United States don't give

11:03us a strategic or competitive advantage if everyone else is getting the exact same thing. Uh the other problem to consider is that asymetric technologies like artificial intelligence are almost certainly going to empower nations that we aren't thinking about today. Some of them are a little more obvious like Iran. It was a close US ally until the late 1970s and today obviously is in a very different position. There's about a dozen countries in Africa, South America, and Asia that were they to acquire extremely advanced artificial intelligence either through coincidence or by proxy arming would almost certainly start to wage war on their neighbors in a very destabilizing way. It would have been a much sher bet for

11:37me to found a second unicorn in a different industry that wasn't so fundamentally broken. Uh gaming, fast casual dining, fintech, I could have made some ape coins. But there have actually been more mattress unicorns than defense unicorns in the last 35 years. Uh but I decided the best thing that I could do to try and solve this problem was to use the fact that I had a bunch of money and I had a bunch of credibility to do something that was hugely unpopular. to ignore the fact that people were belittling me for it and try to convince a bunch of brilliant people to come along with me so that they wouldn't waste their lives spending augmented reality mustache emojis and instead they could do some work for our

12:15armed forces. But it's worth looking at the past and realizing that this is a recent problem. It's not something that has been the case for a very long time. Um Silicon Valley was largely built on the back of defense in 1947. Half of Stanford's engineering budget came from the Department of Defense. Fred Turman, Stanford Dean, brought DoD contracts and interest to the West Coast in a way that had fundamentally been limited almost entirely to the East Coast. And Silicon Valley helped power a lot of the things that are powering the modern military machine. In the 1950s alone, we built the Pentagon in well, sorry, I I I I I I have an error in my notes. This is wrong. um in the leadup to the 50s and

Silicon Valley's defense history and China dependence

13:00the early 50s. We built the Pentagon in 16 months. We completed the Manhattan project in three years. We put a man on the moon in under a decade. And just between 1951 and 1959, we built five generations of fighter jets, three generations of bombers, two classes of carriers, nuclearpowered submarines, and ballistic missiles to go on top of them. If you look at the current state of the industry, we're lucky to do even one of these things in a decade. And I can't really blame the the defense industry for not working with the DoD entirely. It's not just an ideological problem. It's also an economic problem. When the Cold War ended, the government really became a pretty terrible customer. The technology industry

13:36drifted away. Most engineers in Silicon Valley do not remember a great power conflict because they haven't lived in a world where a great power was a existential threat to the United States. And so you have a lot of people who are ideologically opposed to working with the military. Now, we could spend an entire talk. I only have a few minutes to talk today. We can talk spend a whole talk talking about the ethics of defense and you know what what the reasonable critiques of the military are and how you can change what you build for them in a good way. But I I'll I'll throw out a factor that I think most people don't think about enough. Even the people who do agree on working with the military.

14:09Um, there's a lot of companies in Silicon Valley and and and elsewhere who look at those employees who are ideologically opposed to working with the military and they use them as a smoke screen pretending that it's principled opposition that drives their decision when in reality they want access to Chinese markets. They want access to Chinese investment. They want access to other countries that are tied into these things. And so they're able to use these people who are ideologically opposed to working with the military, which actually make up a pretty small fraction of the US population, as a smoke screen for their real intention, which is to preserve access to those markets, preserve access to those capital. Um, our largest

14:45companies are not making these decisions based on what is best for the United States. Certainly not what is best for the United States in the long term. They're largely making the decisions based on short-term ideas that are not based in any kind of long-term thinking. If you look at the recent chips bill that Congress passed saying that they're that the United States government is going to put uh 50 billion 52 billion dollars into building semiconductors in the United States. You have to compare that with the recent news that well it leaked. It wasn't wasn't news on purpose. Uh but Apple has pledged to put $275 billion as one company into Chinese manufacturing. You have one company putting in more than five times as much

15:24money into manufacturing advanced technology as what is supposed to be a landmark piece of US legislation. The situation that we're in is is pretty weird. Uh this is going to sound hyperbolic, but bear with me. The situation we were we are in right now would be like if in the buildup to World War II, General Electric had said, "You know what? We really like the United States, but we're actually very bullish on Imperial Japan. We think it's going to be a huge growth opportunity for us and our metrics just aren't going to look the same if we wipe those off of our roadmap. Imagine [snorts] if in the buildup to the Cold War if you had had Westinghouse and other major US technology companies say, "Ah, you know, we love manufacturing in

16:01the United States, but we actually think communist manufacturing is a really interesting experiment that we need to see through and you know, we're not sure that we really want to take a side on this." Uh, the situation that we are in today is as dire or worse. The only reason that it seems ridiculous and the only reason it seems hyperbolic is because conflict has not actually broken out yet. If a conflict does break out, we're going to look at the current situation where we are hugely strategically and economically dependent at the highest levels of our technology industry and government on an adversary that is literally committing genocide, enslaving millions of people. Uh we are going to look back on ourselves and feel

16:34really stupid. Now the good news is that because of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, defense is now the current thing. Uh in the United States, there is this idea that any problem can be fixed at the last second with just a really incredible twist if we just come up with the right thing. But there's a lot of problems out there that cannot be solved that way. national security, economic policy, environmental policy. These are things that require non-political bipartisan agreement on the problem decades before it becomes a really big problem. Those are not things that are acceptable current things. Uh shape rotation, this is an acceptable current thing to debate. Uh whether or not Will Smith was wrong to uh to to

17:20wrong to take the slap or if he's just, you know, a representative of warrior culture, you know, that's that's a that's a fair debate to have. The idea of the United States having a military that is strong enough to deter conflict should not be in that category. Um, so why is it too why is it too late to care about defense now at this exact moment in time? Why is it too late for everybody to suddenly change their minds? Uh, well, a few things. One, you go to war with the tools that you have, not the tools that you wish you had or the tools that you start working on when things become a problem. If you look at the weapons that were given to Ukraine, they were built in the 80s, '90s, and 2000s, $40 billion plus worth of them.

Deterrence and why it's too late to start now

17:54And for all their differences, defense is one of the few things that Republicans and Democrats alike have realized transcends the partisan divide. On one level, it's obviously very bad that we don't have more modern weapons to give to Ukraine. But on the other, it shows a level of foresight in planning that we've been stockpiling and building these legacy weapon systems for decades explicitly for a situation like today, which has been war gamed out to the nth degree. Imagine if the Department of Defense had done nothing to prepare for war for 40 years. And then as soon as war broke out, they started tweeting a lot and changed their profile pictures to Ukraine flag and then started saying, you know, we we stand with Ukraine. Uh

18:27the people who are actually tasked with solving these problems are uh they generally have good planning, but there's only so much they can do without good technology. Um so I want to reiterate, if you only start building now, you've lost the chance to deter war from happening. That's the real purpose of the defense industry. It's not to fight wars. It's not to win wars. It's to prevent wars from happening. Wars happen when one or both sides misestimate their probability of winning. If both sides agree that one side or the other is going to win, typically you end up with diplomatic resolution. It's when both sides disagree about the possibility of winning that conflict actually actually breaks out. And so if you actually want

19:06to prevent conflict from happening in the first place, you have to get involved well ahead of time. If you get involved after conflict breaking out breaks out like so many companies have, you're ensuring that you're only going to be a part of the killing. you're only going to be a part of the bloodshed. You're only going to be a part of the war. You're not going to be a part of preventing the war from happening in the first place. So, I would argue that people in the technology industry need to work on defense, not because it's the current thing, but because it's the right thing. I have one more thing that I want to say.

Confronting Jason Calacanis

19:43Thank you. [applause] I talked earlier about NPC thinking that prioritizes popularity over principles. What I'm about to do is in very, very bad taste, but I'm going to do it anyway. Yeah, we'll see. one of the people who I think embodies this type of NPC thinking of going with what's popular and not being willing to to to ever reverse their position even when they're proven wrong is Jason Calakanas. Let me read about some of the things he said about me over the years. Just a just a small sampling. Palmer lucky hideous. What an idiot. A This guy, Parker Lucky, Parker Lucky, a complete and utter Jesus, this kid is an idiot. Palmer Lucky is just an idiot and a troll. He is dumb. So, so, so dumb.

20:45Oh, no. We got to keep going. For him to pull the plug on the Palmer Lucky experience was brilliant. Kudos, Zuckerberg. A complete lack of moral character and leadership. Palmer lucky a complete Palmer doesn't care about any of his employees, family members, or team members. Now, this doesn't include any of the lies that he's told about me. This doesn't include any of the lies he's told about my businesses. This doesn't include any of the terrible things that his co-hosts and guests had said about me over the years that went unchallenged and egged on. If I'm a hideous, stupid person with no morals who doesn't care about my family or my employees, I shouldn't be invited here, no matter how relevant Ukraine is. He's had many

21:27chances to retract or apologize these statements. And rather than taking any of them, he keeps telling people that the reason I won't be on his show is because I'm too thin skinned because I disagree with him on some of the things he said about Oculus. This is not the case. I've explicitly told him why I've refused to be on his show. It's because he and his crew of bullies have been vicious liars who have attacked me for years and bered me for years and spread lies about me for re years years in a way that I've been able to overcome that very few entrepreneurs would have the money or the resources or the credibility to do. And being nice to a few people like I'm sure he's being nice to you does not excuse this. This isn't

22:05debatable whether it happened or not. It clearly happened. It's these are all direct quotes from things that he said over the years, both while I was at Oculus and during my time after Oculus. And Jason, like many influential people, some of them even in this room, who have treated me like for years, suddenly changed their tune as soon as Andreal was on the upswing, as soon as we were doing good things. They started inviting me on their podcasts, liking all my social media posts, putting me on their innovator lists, all without any acknowledgement whatsoever that they were the ones that were attacking me when it was popular, kicking me while I was on the ground, and treating me like garbage. It's really pathetic because a

22:40lot of my remaining critics at least are basing their opinions on some kind of consistent worldview. A lot of other people are attacking me and the work that I do because it's popular. When it's popular to attack me, they attack me. when it's unpopular to attack me, when Ukraine is being attacked, they are suddenly friends. And those are the same people that I know are going to go back to on me the second that it becomes popular again. Um, I'm coming to the end of this. And I know that you guys are probably thinking, "Wow, this guy's pretty thin skinned for a billionaire." That's fair. That's fair. [cheering]

23:22But I want to remind you of something. Jason and the people like him are the reason I was fired from my OC from Oculus, my own company. The company, it was my heart and my soul for my entire teenage and adult life. For him, it was a game. It was his show. And for me, it was everything. And I lost everything. It almost destroyed me. I'm still filled with rage about it. I always will be. >> [snorts] >> I'll end with this. I was able to create Andreal because a small group of people were willing to give me a second chance to let me build something great in an important but controversial industry that was being constantly bered by people who thought we lived at the end of history. They invested in me while

24:01Jason was trying to poison my career and keep me on the ground. Thank God he failed. Thank God for investors who ignore him and people like him. The market conditions suggest there are going to be a lot of founders, hopefully none of the people in this room, losing their startups over the next year or so. And I pray that they get a second chance like I did. I pray they aren't deterred from working on important but unpopular problems. I pray that they will successfully claw their way back to success. That they aren't deterred from working on things that really matter. I pray that they manage to do this despite the inevitably stupid and hot takes. sorry, inevitably stupid and spiteful hot takes

24:43that Jason, his associates, and the many people like him who make money spewing are certainly going to be putting out there. Amen. Thank you.

25:10>> [cheering]

The Facebook firing and mob behavior

25:15[applause] >> Uh, >> nice talk. >> Well, great to meet you in person. >> Um, Jason, what lessons have we LEARNED HERE TODAY? [laughter] WELL, I mean, I guess we were talking backstage and Jason's like, "Oh, you know, I had to do so much to get this guy here because I think he hates me." And this was before this happened. And I was like, "Well, maybe you shouldn't talk about people." >> Well, the the good thing is I was able to make it to this stage to say this. Most of the people that you've gone after this way will never have that opportunity because they won't start a second unicorn. I'm only here because I managed to claw my way back. And remember, this is personal because it's not just you. It's you. You're one of

26:00the most influential certainly, but it's you and really a small cadre of people that by attacking me ceaselessly made it impossible for me to continue my tenure at Oculus. I'm really lucky I clawed my way back cuz that's exceedingly rare for a company to do a person to do that. >> [applause] >> What? I was hoping to talk about your new thing, but I guess since we have no choice but go here. Well, what happened at Facebook and maybe you just explain that and what I I got wrong about what happened. >> Well, it's not just what's wrong. This is actually why I I I went out of my way. There's actually a lot of lies you told and spread and your co-hosts and your guests. Uh but I'm not even talking about those. The things that I listed,

26:44you'll notice these aren't material accusations. These are just personal attacks you've made on my character. These are just things you've said about me personally as a founder and entrepreneur. Vicious personal attacks. Separately, there's all of the lies you've said about how Oculus didn't have any differentiated technology. It was totally commoditized. Anybody could have done it. It really was just the right thing at the right time. Like, we could spend all day talking about why these aren't true. But the real reason that it became untenable for me and the real reason that I'm not in the VR industry is because people like you were enabling those lies and then being vicious about it and attacking me personally. It

27:20became clear I couldn't be a representative in an industry where people are going to treat me like fairly or not. >> Imagine doing a podcast with them. >> What's that? >> Imagine doing a podcast with

27:34>> I guess if you have no choice but to keep I'll just ask you the same question. Do you want Do you want us to just describe what Palmer's talking about? Can I Can I try my best? >> No, no, no. Hold on. What What What Cuz my memory of of the events. Uh, >> you just read all the things you said, >> right? But what is the What were we talking about at the time? >> Well, there was a lot of controversy at Facebook about some donations, anonymous accounts, things you said. >> Well, so those that wasn't one thing. That was over the course of years. So, that was just a small sampling. Um, I I had to really find a small sample. you know, you can't you can't ever do anything, but I'll tell you what happened.

28:06>> You got fired from Facebook. What was the controversy there because that's what I was commenting on in this. >> Well, no, some of those were after I was fired and you were saying it was great that I was fired. Um, and actually, by the way, it's like one of your one of your co-hosts said on your show that they're glad I got fired from my politics and that line is mysteriously missing from your transcripts, by the way. Um, and there's >> we never have edit we don't edit any of the things and I didn't have a co-host at the time. It was probably just one of the news reporters who came on. we would have interview them. But there was a lot of controversy wrong there. Here's what happened. I gave $9,000 to a group that

28:37ran a single anti-H Hillary Clinton billboard. That was actually the extent of it. And then a huge number of people in the tech influencer space, the social media talking heads and media. They started saying Palmer Lucky is this terrible person who's funding all >> Sorry, just to be clear. So you made a donation and it was on an FC filing somewhere. Somebody pulled it out and then basically said >> like to a pack or something? It was so it was to a it was to a 501c4 I believe who used that for their political harm. Um so but it it was it was public. This was it wasn't public filing. Yeah. >> Yeah. And so and I and I actually ended up giving a quote to a reporter about it. Uh so you know it wasn't it wasn't

29:11uh it it wasn't something that people understood what it was but then a bunch of people just lied. They said Palmer Lucky was funding uh people who are attacking Hillary Clinton supporters online. Uh there were a lot of people who I think were looking for a scapegoat to kind of be the right-wing uh the right-wing reaction to correct the record, which actually was paying people to attack. >> Why did Zuck fire you? >> What's that? >> Why did Zuck fire you? >> Oh, no. Zuck didn't fire me. He's way >> face Why did I'll just ask the third time. Why did Facebook fire you? >> There's a lot of reasons. >> I always had good performance reviews. Uh, but what it what but what >> here here's what it what what it really

29:55boiled down to was this. >> This is my favorite talk by far. >> What it really boils down to is this. Uh, it was clear that there were a lot of people in the media and in the tech industry who were going to continue attacking me. We hoped it would blow over, but they kept attacking me for months and months and months and months. I was put on leave for 6 months. I don't know if you know that. >> Right. is all on the heels of this one political donation. >> Correct. >> $9,000. >> Yes. And so on the heels that the hope was that it would go away. Now, I think here's here's the real problem. I think if Trump had lost, people could have said, "Oh, well, you know, he's just one of those eccentrics impact. No impact.

30:31>> He's a loser. Loser, but whatever." Uh Trump winning is I think what made it unable because people continued to attack me not for >> the $9,000 donation was the reason you were fired just for just for supporting Trump. >> As you know these things are very complex but more or less yes. I mean there's a there's a direct causal line from that to me being put on leave to me not being allowed to come back and then pushed out. We talk a lot about this on the pod on um mob behavior and and I think uh Mark Andre said the smartest thing I've read on Twitter in the year. I retweeted it and I took it away and I think he pointed out that it's it feels safer to be in the mob than to not be in the mob. >> Well, it always cuz when you're in the

31:14mob, you're part of the group, but you also get to attack and it's safe to attack when you're in the group, >> right? And I think by the way what you did there, one of the things I I I will highlight irregardless of the content and the thing that was very brave and we don't see a lot of bravery nowadays. And uh um [applause] and I I I don't mean that honestly I don't mean that to disparage Jason, but like that sort of behavior where you stand up and you say something that will be highly controversial and go against the mob and against the tide and maybe piss off an entire room is something that we don't see a lot of. And I think that that level of bravery is also what's missing going back to the mid-

31:5120th century which allowed us to do all the things you highlighted as a country last century that we're not doing anymore. I appreciate your bravery more than anything. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. [cheering] But but look, I I don't know about the specifics with with JCAL, but it certainly seems that there's a lot of this. We talk about this like with with Brian Armstrong standing up at Coinbase and all the stuff that's gone on that we think I I I would argue probably made Twitter a highly complacent place is everyone wants to be, you know, you don't want to stand up and you don't want to make that change and you don't want to be brave and you want to be part of the mob of the of the crowd attacking

32:27the right. >> Well, people see what happens. I mean the the what happened to me has like this is this is I can't I can't back this up obviously this is getting into personal anecdote which is never a good way to support any idea but you know I know a lot of people who remain at Facebook and they will not say anything and they will not donate to any politician >> yeah it's crazy >> who's left of Bernie because they saw what happened to me and they've explicitly said I saw what happened to you because remember it wasn't just the public it was the internal reaction where people were saying oh my god uh like I will not work for a Trump supporter. This is terrible. I mean actually one great example, Andrew

33:03Bosworth, he ran ads at Facebook for 14 years. He was put in after my departure as the head of Oculus and he was the guy who was putting things on social media like I think the exact wording was if you support Donald Trump because you don't like Hillary Clinton, you are a shitty human being. >> And he's the person who's allowed to lead Oculus now. So it's it's not a problem of being aggressive. It's being on the right side of the politics. And so there's a lot of people where they're just they're not going to say anything because they see what happens to me. Now, if Zach is loving this, [laughter] >> and I tell when I hear somebody to disagree with, I'll let you guys know. [laughter] [applause]

33:46But the the the real the real the real irony here is my contributions have been very open. But my advice to founders who are on the right has actually been don't be public about your political leanings because you won't accomplish anything. You will just you will be terminated by the mob. You should focus on building. You should focus on creating value and then after you don't need the rest of the industry, you can kick them to the curb and do something else. How do you how do you implement that philosophy um differently now at Anderil so that you have a more inclusive place where folks on the left and folks on the right come together work on things that really matter. I mean I think everybody agrees

Anduril culture and politics

34:22you're building really important things in the world. So how do you do that this time around? That's different from the Facebook experience. So >> there's a few things. One I think that building working in national security has been a great filter where uh people aren't going to come work for you unless they're okay working in a bit of a controversial field. I'm actually somewhat concerned about the Ukraine conflict in that regard in that in the making of in in making defense mainstream, it makes it possible for people to potentially say, "Oh, that isn't controversial now. I'm going to go to this place and then I'm going to potentially attack people with their views." But I think when you run a

34:51company that is inherently working on something that's controversial, people on the right and on the left both feel like they're on the side of this important bipartisan issue and all of these other policy differences can kind of go to the side. And the culture at Anderil is everyone is free to have whatever politics they want. You like I'm a Republican. Our CEO, Brian Chimp, is a Democrat. We both make significant contributions to our respective sizes and we have employees across the country. And I think also it's it's nipping it in the bud. You know, it's about when somebody says something that is out of line, it's about n getting in early and say, "Hey, that's not okay at this company. We're we're here to to work on

35:26a common mission." For example, if we had a manager who then publicly went and said, "The half of my employees who support this political candidate, they're terrible people. They're shitty humans. They'd be fired. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I'll give you a counterfactual to what this is, which is very aspirational, which is seven or eight years ago, we funded a business that actually makes seaf fairing drones. And the whole point was to actually measure the surface flux in the oceans, which you can use to get a really good sense of climate change. And somewhere along the way, we had the chance to to do a contract with the DoD. Um, but invariably there's a a faction of folks inside this company that said

36:02under no circumstances are we going to put our efforts towards that. And as a result then the company spent a three-year detour trying to build a weather app. Um, which turned out to not be the right thing. And and 3 years later um you know they're doing a bunch of stuff now with these government agencies. Um, and it turns out that's the right thing to do because now they're that much closer to actually mapping the world's oceans which creates a repository of data and there's all these positive knock-on effects that sometimes folks don't see. And you need strong leadership to kind of say it's what Elon said yesterday. You know, companies are there to make products that people and organizations want and

36:41need u not necessarily to fight over political ideals. Well, I think one of the interesting things in the example you just gave, like I I mentioned earlier, I have some empathy for people who work in companies who don't want to work in defense. Like I think broadly the technology industry needs to support the military. And I'm glad that the conflict in Ukraine has changed at least the thinking around that. Uh but at the individual level, people should have the right to choose to work on what they think is important. And so the Google example was interesting because it was Google employees saying, "Hey, I didn't sign up to work on weapons and I can understand that maybe they're pacifist and they say, you know, for religious

37:10reasons, for philosophical reasons, I I cannot work on this." and they were upset that their work was put to work on defense without it being clear. And I suspect that in the situation you're talking about is similar objections were raised. Hey, this is when I joined the company to do this isn't what I signed up for. And so at Andreal, one of the ways that we've been able to get around this is just being very clear like you are signing up to work with the Department of Defense. That is that is the mission that you're signing up for. And uh I mean we're we're about a third US service veterans at Andro, which is higher than any company that I'm aware of. And we're about a thousand people now. Um [applause]

37:40and so these are people who uh they understand the importance of the mission, >> right? >> Uh just shifting gears for a second, I want to ask you about drones. First, let me just say that um the first time I tried VR, which was Oculus, I thought it was one of the most magical computing experiences I've ever had. So, I don't know, have you guys tried it? You you put the goggles on. [applause] >> I did the thing >> and you're in the Oculus trailer and it's like it was amazing. I did the thing where you show like a big hole. >> Like Facebook had this demo for a while or whatever and I thought I was going to fall into the hole and then I fell forward and I fell on the ledge of the cliff table >> and I didn't I didn't want to like

38:16tiptoe beyond it. I'm like I don't [laughter] know. I'm like wait I know this is not real but anyway >> VR is the it's so funny. These are I feel these mental circuits that haven't activated for years activating. So I've got my talking points but >> VR is the final computing platform. It's not the next one. It's the final one. And people talk about augmented reality and it's very interesting. I love AR. We did a lot of great AR foundational work. But at the end of the day, if you can make a tool that allows you to experience anything and in any way that can emulate every other medium, it is going to be the >> Parker caught on a question. Go ahead. >> Well, I was going to ask you ask about drones. Um, so um

VR's future

38:54>> Well, maybe maybe I should answer. Why isn't it caught on? It's not It's not good enough yet. People ask I'll have this debate. People like, "Well, I'm not sure VR is ever really going to be a thing. Explain the dimension when you say it's not good enough. Is it weight? Is it physical interface? >> It's a whole bunch of things. It's content being available. You need a self-sustaining ecosystem of a broad enough variety of content that enough people can use it to create further network effects. So that's part of it is just a content thing. You have to build a self-sustaining flywheel. Until you have that >> apps aren't good enough yet to draw people in. >> They're not good enough and they don't

39:23they don't have broad enough appeal. There's a particular niche where we have a flywheel. Like there's a dozens of developers that are making many millions of dollars making games for Quest 2, but that's its own little niche. The other thing is quality, its weight, and its cost. Like the example that I like to use when arguing with people who say that VR is not going to be a thing that they spend their whole life in, say, "Okay, wait. Imagine this. What if for $99 you can pair buy a pair of sunglasses and it gives you an experience the quality of the Matrix or Sword Online or whatever your sci-fi pick is >> and you can do anything and there's endless content. It'll >> get there." >> And it's people like, "Oh, of course I

39:52would use that." But but but but that's not what VR is. Well, then that's just a tech disagreement. Philosophically, we agree how fast we'll get there. So, I mean, listen, you created the category. How far away are we? >> It depends on the experience. So, the hardest things to simulate are going to be the ones that are kind of like these multi-haptic multi-element things that rely on scent and motion. Like surfing is going to be really, really hard. Uh, on the other hand, being able to perfectly simulate the experience of being in a brightly lit fluorescent, you know, fluorescent conference room, that's going to happen within 10 years. Like the resolution will be there, the weight will be there. You will be able

40:25to perfectly simulate that experience. You know how much of my life I've spent flying to the other side of the world to sit in fluorescent lit conference rooms and then flying back. If I if I can just eliminate that part of my life, it's way better for me. But it's it's going to start by simulating that experience where it's low dynamic range. You don't need tons of haptics and then it's going to go from there. >> Wait, Zach is going to talk about drones. >> Yeah, let's just shift gears for a second to to drones. So um obviously in Ukraine right now the um the the Russian military and specifically their armors has been pulverized by the combination of the Javelin plus this Turkish drone this I guess by Ractor. Yeah.

Drones and defense contracting

41:00>> So I guess this has raised the profile I would imagine it's raised the profile of drones and uh the use of drones in the military. Also, it points out the weakness of having kind of a large platform strategy. In the case of the Russian military, their platform is this Russian tank, but so is our military. We're built around aircraft carriers and the F-35. Yes. >> Um, and you know, the Abrams tank. All these things, I would imagine, are susceptible to drones. And the thing that's destroying the Russians is their tank costs a couple million bucks and it can be destroyed by a drone that costs 200,000. many more than a million, tens of millions for EMP. So, we just won a billion dollar contract with US SOCOM

41:44special operations command to to do counter drone work. And so, to a certain extent, the what you have to do is then say, okay, we're going to have these you these armored systems. We're going to have these vessels and then we need to have technology that allows to counter drones and it is possible to counter drones. What's going on with Russia is they don't have the technology to counter drones and so they're they're largely just totally >> Can I Can I ask you something about this contract just general terms? You said something very important before which is the military-industrial complex today is basically paid to do work not to get to a result. >> Yes. >> How do you fight that when you're like

42:13when when you hear a billion dollar contract is that cost plus that DoD just is willing to give you? So this is I mean we could do a whole talk on this but fundamentally for people don't know a cost plus contract structure is the way that most work for the Department of Defense has done. That means you get paid for your time, your materials, your people, and then a fixed percentage of profit on top even if you're way way way way over your budget until Congress eventually takes them money. >> And then there's layers of subcontractors, so the costs all add up. >> Exactly. And so the the bad the bad thing about this is that not only the prime contractor owns the contract, but everyone under them is incentivized to

42:44come up with the most expensive way of solving a problem that they can convince the government to fund. So they wanted to build the most expensive system with the most expensive parts with as many hours as possible. And the bids are so complex that you're only going to have one or two real bids and they're basically going to be the same price. >> And those top bids, the worst part is they're not just trying to come up with the most successful solution. They're even encouraging the subcontractors under them. They get a% >> because they get a percent of that. And so if I'm getting, let's say, 6% profit margin, I want to make it >> as big a number as possible >> and I want to drag it out like >> and that's why this budget's ballooned

43:13like crazy despite the last. >> They make more money when they do poorly because they're not being paid to make things that work. They're being paid to do work. That's what I said. Just the act of the doing is what gets >> now for you. What do you do differently? >> So we use our own money to decide what to build, how to build it when it's done. We're using building our own products. And when we're going to the customer, we're not going to them. Look, first of all, I can't just build whatever I want. I can't build a Batmobile and then try to sell it to the army. But I I we we talk to them about their problems. They understand their problems. They don't It would be cool. Be so patient. >> But but sorry. Would you build someone

43:45in this room a Batmobile if he could come up with the money? Look, if if it's if it solved a real problem, I mean, if if that was the right way to solve profit, >> all right, probably not. But but the nice thing about this is that when we go to customers, we're not going to them with a white paper saying, "Hey, let the taxpayers pay for us to try this out for years and years." We say, "We've already proven that this works. It will not be a boondoggle for you. It will work." We go to them with a working system with a full >> delivering goods and services already derisked. >> Exactly. And and the thing is this is popular with the customers and politicians alike because it removes the risk of them getting into political

44:20boondoggles like the F-35 program being a trillion dollar. >> So this creates this creates new budget line items because now folks are saying I can actually get out of this. I'm going to move money from whatever pot of money I'm spending over here. Move it into this sort of a structure and then that creates competitive dynamics in the market. >> That's right. >> Yeah. So how does it how does it actually close the loop? So for example, you deliver a drone to the DoD, it costs $10,000. I'm making up a number. It cost $10,000 and it works on ABC dimension. And then there's whoever makes General Dynamics makes the Hellfire drone. Again, I don't know the specifics, >> of course. >> Uh, and they want to charge 90,000 or

44:55110,000. How do they still not get picked? Because it seems if you look at their um performance as public companies, >> Yep. It's an incredibly steady. It's almost like an inflationary line item, you know, that you can predict 6 8 9 10% growth consistently every year. >> Correct. It is. I mean, the defense companies are not high growth, high margin companies. They're extraordinarily predictable. People basically see them as an extension of the US government. It's like buying bonds. >> The US federal budget. >> Yes. Exactly. And as the window and when the budget goes up, you see a direct proportional and linear increase. >> Palmer, let me ask you, hold on. Hold on. Palmer, let me ask you a question

45:30about uh something very pragmatic knowing what you know in the in the to your building and uh I do appreciate the work you're doing defending the country. I think it's important work and I told you that um and [applause] uh I lobbied you to be here >> uh to have your platform and to have your voice and I've probably sent you no less than 30 or 40 invites to come on the pods. Can't deny that. And so I told you I'm willing to have any debate at any time. I'm going to put aside the personal stuff, but knowing what you know, uh, doing this very good work, um, the situation in Taiwan, if it does materialize, what would it look like today given the tools we have? And would we be able to would Taiwan be able to

Taiwan scenarios

46:14defend itself? What would that look like? Cuz that seems to be the next hot spot that we may have to do. >> Will weapons get shipped in there like they are in the Ukraine? No, that we were able to ship weapons into Ukraine because we had countries like Poland that were willing to at massive existential risk to themselves step forward. Yeah. Pol Poland has been paint unsung hero in this and getting weapons through. But Taiwan, what's going to happen is there's a few ways this could go. It could either be just a blitz where they go in, destroy the ports, destroy the airports, immediately occupy. That's that could happen. The other way this could happen could be a more drawn out blockade where they

46:48blockade the island. Is the US willing to pull the trigger on a blockade? It's unclear. But if you can stop trade, if you can economically strangle them, make sure new weapons don't get to them, they can be in a very, very bad position. And it's not clear that we or anyone else will be able to do that. No, there's different opinions on how things are going to go. I I can't pretend that I know exactly what it is. I can say Taiwan does not have the tools today that they need to deter Chinese aggression. They might have had the tools they needed to deter it a decade ago, but Chinese military has been ascendant. They've been investing so heavily in new technology, distri distributed swarms, high-end electronic

47:20warfare systems, and all of the amphibious landing craft that they're going to need to perform an invasion. They they've just they've built the capability that they need. It's just >> how vulnerable are our aircraft carriers. >> How vulnerable are aircraft carriers? >> They're extremely vulnerable to the point where we we feel like we can't use them. The problem is aircraft carriers were not designed to be a peer-to-peer uh a peer-to-peer great powers tool for us to go toe-to-toe with the Soviets or the Chinese. Like the reality is if each side launches 200 missiles, one of them is going to get through and it's going to end up hitting the thing. And this is especially true with satellite targeting

47:52systems. They were designed in the modern day to project power to places where you have air superiority uncontested. So there it's great to have a mobile base that can go somewhere and project power, but it you you you cannot stop the Chinese that way. And also if we send a carrier out there uh and they manage to sync it, that's 5,000 lives lost in one hit. >> Hey Palmer, we got a wrap, but I'll say this. Uh, >> wait. I I got to say one more thing on Taiwan. >> Well, hold on a second. Oh, not about me. Great. Go. >> No, no, no. Not this time. Not this time. >> I was bracing for impact. I don't have any anti-pommer drone systems. >> I I will say I will be working on them next week. >> I will say this about Jal. If you did

48:32that to Cara Swisser, she would have she would have like not she would have pulled you off stage. >> Keep going. >> You're so right. >> Yeah. [cheering and applause] And I think I think I think I I will say so and and and JCL JCL is um he's an incredibly loyal friend. He's got an incredibly um good heart. And I think that you know whatever he said or did uh it was really brave of him to come out here and also have the conversation. And he wants to have the conversation, wants to have a dialogue. And he always wants to do that with all of us. Sometimes he conflicts a bit and he and he butts heads. But I will say this about JCal, he means well. And I want to kind of say that for >> [applause] >> But anyway, finish your point about

49:10Taiwan. Let's talk about the importance of that. >> Cara says, "I'm a douchy man boy and a fourth reich broi." So, not that you remembered. Got to love memory. I think your cosplay stuff is cool. I was I was brave enough to do cosplay. I'm a little jealous of that. I'll be honest. And I would love to go cosplay with you sometime. But tell us Taiwan. >> Not the way to wrap the the the >> I WANT TO HEAR TAIWAN. All right. Yes. The big difference between Taiwan and Ukraine is that we still have a chance to make a difference. So what I'm so terrified of is that all these people who say, "Ah, we stand for Ukraine. We have to do this. This is the fight of fight of our, you know, fight of our generation." And then they're not going

49:51to do anything. And then immediately after Taiwan is invaded, they're going to change their profile pictures to a Taiwanese flag and say, "Oh man, we stand with Taiwan." It's like, "No, that's not good enough. If you care about this issue, there's things you can do right now." And and and what's really amazing to me is you have people who are saying like, "Oh, man. I I stand with Ukraine. We're cutting off all of our Russian business." I'm like, "Oh, wow. So brave. You cut off an entire country that's a regulatory nightmare. Has an economy smaller than most US states." Sorry, not most. Many. Uh yeah. It's like, "Oh, wow. You're so so brave for cutting off Russians." And then at the same time, they say, "Oh, but uh all of

50:24our expansion is in China." And and and I I'm not going to say anything about that. I think that worse than the people who change their profile pictures are going to be the people who remain silent when Taiwan is invaded and they say they just can't say anything because their business interests are so intermaged and so intertangled and that like that China has been fighting a strategic and economic war against us for a long time and it is extraordinarily good. The last thing I'll say on this, I talked about it earlier. There's a uniquely American delusion probably from our own Hollywood films that we can solve any problem the last second that will come in and we just be boom sex we win. That isn't how

50:58Taiwan is going to go. There is no DSX Machina. We know exactly what's going to happen. The war planners have figured out exactly one of several scenarios it's going to go. And when it's happened, we can't pretend like we didn't know. Um and and there isn't going to be anything that flies in to save. >> So, okay. So, >> hold on. I just want to say one more thing and then I'll let you close. >> You and I can debate anti-Hillary ads, the Donald Trump subreddit, all of those things. What we cannot debate is how important it is that the United States win and that democracy wins and that freedom comes to all of these countries. You and I are 100% aligned on that. Even if we disagree about the anti-Hillary

51:32ads or any of that stuff. >> Amen. >> I appreciate you coming [applause] and I'll debate you on anything, anytime, anywhere. >> I do care about my family by the way. That was the worst thing you said. >> Okay. And fair enough. >> I will apologize for that statement if I did say it. Wait, Jake, say the letter. Say the letter. >> I just said if if if I said something that hurt your feelings about that and it was out of line, I apologize. But what's more important right now is that you're here talking about the work you're doing and you and I will debate till the cows come home this other stuff. I can't stop you. I can't stop your credit. No commentator, no journalist can stop a founder. I disagree with that. Um

52:12>> Oh, I just You can stop a lot of people. >> I think we're overestimating my influence in the world. You're a force of nature. The work you do is undeniable. We can debate politics as much as we want. This country needs to be protected. The people at Google are cowards for not doing DoD contracts. You're not a coward. You came out here. You, you know, you take me on straight up as a man. I appreciate it. It was a little bit of a blind side, but I can take it. Um, what's most important is the work you're doing. That's what's most important. >> I mean, is a sucker punch, but I It's okay. I'm from Brooklyn. >> Thank you. We appreciate you coming. We appreciate you coming. Bottom line. [applause]

52:53[cheering]

Calacanis's closing context

52:58HUG IT OUT. HUG.

53:07[cheering] Let your [music] winners ride. >> Hey everybody, that was pretty crazy. What an amazing moment. I think we all learned a lot, but I actually wanted to show you the clip of the comments that Palmer referenced just to provide some context uh for those of you who are unaware. The clip was from a show uh in March of 2017, episode 721 of my other podcast, This Week in Startups. And listen, I'm super aware that this could come across as defensive, but I think some people might not know what Palmer was talking about, so I'll let you decide for yourself. We recorded um uh that episode, episode 721, the day Palmer Lucky was fired from Facebook and u it was a news round table of the podcast. I'm talking to Austin Peters

53:50Smith who worked at Inside at the time and Ian Thompson of the Register. He's a great journalist. Uh and just to clarify some uh facts here and the timeline, these are from the Daily Beast article in which Palmer was interviewed. You can go read that. It's in the show notes. Um and the facts are pretty basic. Palmer Lucky donated some amount of money to a proTrump political organization. It was called Nimble America right before the 2016 election. And as you just heard during the All-InSummit talk, Palmer said it was like $9,000. Nimble America was part of the infamous subreddit page, The Donald, if you remember that. Nimble America. They basically made anti-Hillary and proTrump memes, and they were self-proclaimed posters,

54:30as we uh now talk about on the internet. The organization said it was dedicated to proving quote posting is powerful and me magic is real. Uh Palmer was posting to the Ronald under the anonymous Reddit account called Nimble Richman. Here was one post which Palmer confirmed writing that was referenced in the clip you were about to see. The American Revolution was funded by wealthy individuals. The same has been true of many movements for freedom in history. You can't fight uh the American elite without serious firepower. They will outspend you and destroy you by any and all means. And here is what Palmer told the Daily Beast in 2016 when asked about supporting Nimble America. I've got plenty of money. Money is not my

55:07issue. I thought it sounded like a really jolly good time. Again, if you're listening, you might hear some other voices talking. Those are the two guests that I mentioned before. You can watch this 3 minute and 22 second clip, uh, which is just a mashup of my commentary. I'll see you on the other side of 3 minutes. He was supporting like I don't want to say violent trolling, but extreme trolling would be the way to do it. That's right. And his comment about it was really insensitive kind of that it was it was almost maybe not super um ideologically driven as much as it was like fun for him. >> What an idiot. >> Well, it actually lost it lost them a fair amount of business. There were about three or four game studios that

55:49said, "Right, we're no longer developing for the Oculus on this one." because he came out and said basically, well, to overturn an entrenched elite, then you need to be able to fund it and and and fight back. And you're like, idiot. That's not you're you're not a revolutionary. This is just HIT posting about politicians. This is not constructive dialogue. This is not an attempt to get reform the American political scene. This is just, oh, let's be a troll. >> Yeah. If you want to see like a person's true character, give them a pile of money or a bunch of power [laughter] and then you will see >> two bottles of vodka works very well on that >> as well. It's like the sort of quick way of being a billionaire or whatever. But

56:23I mean, can you imagine? I just want to stop for a second and just give everybody in my portfolio or the people I work with just a public service announcement. If you are lucky enough to hit the jackpot and make hundreds of millions of dollars, behave yourself, you You hit the jackpot. It's like somebody winning the Mega Ball lottery. >> Mhm. and then just going on the street and randomly punching people in the face. Like this guy Parker Lucky is a complete and utter For somebody to be a visionary to create something like Oculus and make VR, I bought the Oculus. It's pretty impressive. I have to say I believe that VR is at least 2 years away from being a meaningful business opportunity. But that's about

57:11the window where I like to invest. So it's it's kind of on my radar now. In fact, we have one company in our incubator. But Jesus, this kid's an idiot. But this case, >> Palmer Lucky is just an idiot and a troll. So [snorts] dumb. Here's the other thing. I think on a leadership basis, if you represent the company, >> so you represent your company first, Oculus, and your vision of the world, behave yourself. Number two, if you represent the company that's worth a couple of hundred billion dollars that made you a billionaire and you represent Mark and Dreason who invested in your company and and Jason Harwitz and you represent all the employees and all their families and everybody who's entire net worth is locked up in this,

57:52you have a higher uh duty of service. And this is a complete lack of moral character and leadership for someone like Paul to be doing this posting. F it. I'm going to say it. Let's move on to the next Facebook story. And now that we got over the Palmer Lucky is just a complete who doesn't appreciate his success or care about any of his employees, family members, team members. If you're going to do that kind of shenanigans, if you don't, here's a clue. I hate to get totally crazy. If you're doing something like this anonymously, you might want to think that the anonymity plus Reddit plus you would be ashamed about it. Like think about what you're doing if it's anonymous. In other words, if you have to put a mask on and then

58:38you throw the brick through the window, you may not want to throw the brick through the window cuz you weren't willing to do it with your mask off. Okay, so closing thoughts. I respect Palmer Lucky uh for his incredible innovations both with Oculus and his new company. We actually agree on many things uh which actually people in the tech industry might not which is hey producing weapon systems to protect America and democracy uh around the world is a beautiful and important thing. I respect Palmer for what he's doing there and we have a disagreement about uh you know this uh meme action that he did but yeah all is well that ends well. It was an interesting moment in time. I don't regret exactly what I

59:21said. I think what I said was fair. Uh, and when I talked about it in context, I was, you know, coming from a place that if you're going to post stuff, post it under your real name, not anonymously. And so, there you have it, folks. That's the entire controversy. Uh, thank you to Palmer Lucky for coming. Thanks to my besties for having my back. Uh, there was this big question of if I would go out and engage the discussion. Of course, I want to go out and engage the discussion. I want to talk. I don't mind a hard discussion. And in fact, that's what this podcast is about. Having hard discussions and then keeping our friendships and keeping it moving forward. I look forward to hosting this podcast forever. They're going to have

59:55to take drag me out of here and I hope we can uh host another all-in summit and all of you can attend either uh virtually or in person. It's great to uh have had Farmer at the event and actually I hope he comes next year and and shares more of the exciting work he's doing at Androl and I wish him the best. [music] We'll let your winners ride. [music] >> We open sourced it to the fans and they've [music] just gone crazy with it. [music]

1:00:33[music] >> Besties are my dog taking a driveway. Oh man, my habitasher [music] will meet the endless. >> We should all just get a room and just have like one big huge orgy cuz they're all just like this like sexual tension that we just need to release somehow.

1:00:57>> We need to get merch. >> I'm going all [music] in.

1:01:07I'm going all in. [music] Okay. Wait. Jal, stay out here. Hey, Nick. Nick, can you cue the uh can you cue the photo? >> What photo? Oh, no. >> Backstage. This is what happened at the last break. >> I think we got there. >> Well, this is what I said. I said, "You're you don't have drones over my house, right? Just to confirm." >> And he said, "Uh, cannot >> someone tagline that." said cannot confirm or deny.