NEWSMAX

Good morning, everyone. Good morning. Guess what? Guess what you're watching. TVPN today is Monday, December 8, 2025. We are live from the TVPN Ultradome. The temple of technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. We have new merch in stock. It's not for sale. Look how festive it looks. Let's go to the wide with the tree. We got the tree with the horse. The horse. Can we get the horse? Cam up. Okay, Team is going to have some fun with the.

Good morning, everyone. Good morning. Guess what? Guess What? You're watching. TVPN today is Monday, December 8th, 2025. We are live from the TVPN Ultradome. The temple of technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. We have new merch in stock. Look at this. Look at.

To have the durability and the attention necessary to create some of these other markets. But I think so many people are just absolutely sick of the marketing. And just the feuding between Kalshi and polymarket. That part of people's prediction. Insiders are. Insiders are. Outsiders don't know the difference for sure. They just think like, oh, financialization of everything is bad. X specifically. Yeah. Like if we were on X and like FanDuel and DraftKings were just constantly going at each other all day long, everyone would just be like, please leave. Oh, no, no, no. I think they are like, I think, I think we have the CEO of DraftKings coming on the show tomorrow. But, but I do think that that, that the, that the traditional sports betting world is. Is also just very cutthroat. Are they though? I mean, it's such a dude. Go back and, go back and read some of the. No, no, I'm not. Go Las Vegas, like Caesar versus mgm. Like these were knockout drag out fights. These were not like, oh yeah, everyone was like positive sum building. I'm just saying I would be surprised if you have like a marketing manager at DraftKings like saying like hateful things to a marketing manager at FanDuel in the year 2025 on the Internet. We need to watch Casino because I believe in Casino. They did things much worse than that. And not that Casino is a documentary, but.

In video integration like this. We have to pull up the video that's at the bottom of the timeline. They just reinvented the Star Wars Cerveza Cristal ads. Have you seen these? You've barely seen Star Wars. But at one point, there was a. At one point, there was an international showing of the original Star Wars. And for some reason, they needed to cut ads into the actual footage. And so we gotta play this with sound. It's one of my favorite things. Let's play it. You fought in the Clone Wars. Look at this. Yes. I was once a Jedi Knight. The same as your father. I wish I'd known him. He was the best star pilot in the galaxy. And a cunning warrior. I understand you've become quite a good pilot yourself. And he was a good friend. Which reminds me, I have something here for you. Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough. It's the best. It's like pure art. AI could never. It's so good.

Integrate on chain infrastructure all through one simple API. Prediction markets are absolutely tearing up the timeline. They are the current thing. Every day the debate rages. This one's hilarious from Aaron Mars. He says prediction markets will replace buying stuff. I want someone to bring kiwis to my house. I make a prediction market about whether someone will deliver four kiwis to my doorstep and load $15 into no. A guy with an E bike sees it and picks up some kiwis before dropping them off on my doorstep. He bets yes, drops them off, the market resolves to yes and he gets $15. Rest in peace, Amazon doordash, Uber eats, et cetera. Salah comes in and says prediction markets will replace relationships. I have a crush on your girlfriend. I make a prediction market about whether she will leave you for me and load $15 to no. She sees this and drives over to my place before texting me. She's here. She bets yes. She comes inside. The market resolves to yes and she gets $15. Rest in peace. Tinder, bumble, hinge, dry at bars, restaurants, etc. It's so insane. Yeah. The mood. The prediction markets are fighting an uphill battle right now. They're on life support. It's such a good, such a good, such a good copy pasta. And I can only imagine the quote tweets on this post just being like an endless stream of iterations of this exact template because it truly is so funny. The financialization of everything. Well, Rob.

Imagine it'd be really annoying to have your email leak on an earnings call. Anyway, people. Really want Lina Khan back in the driver's seat. Sammy Gold says, Lina Khan, you can have this one. This one time. I don't really understand why people are so against this. It doesn't seem the idea of Netflix owning Succession, the Soprano and the Wire. Well, the TV stuff doesn't seem that bad because that was never in theaters. I guess I do understand people who are saying, like, they're gonna own Lord of the Rings. Seeing Lord of the Rings in theaters was a special thing, and that special thing might not happen anymore because it's incompatible with the modern business model. And so if you're a Lord of the Rings fan and you really like movies and you did not like the show, well, then it's like, get ready for more shows and less movies. Probably, yeah. I think anybody who's upset because of the impact on traditional cinema and movie theaters, I wanna see every single. I want to see proof of how many movies they've gone to in the last. The revealed preference is crazy. No one cares. But they're like, oh, I've seen one movie. And yeah, it's. Like, okay, I don't know. Well, we should move on. Let me tell you about restream. One livestream 30 plus destination.

Was not existential to them, at least in the short term, but we'll see. But this Justin Bieber post is insane because you read me this and I didn't hear you say this is from Justin Bieber's account. And I was like, oh, that's funny, there's someone who's mad at Apple. But it's way funnier coming from Justin Bieber. Put Justin Bieber as a product manager at Apple and I genuinely believe the products across the board would improve. Get him in figma. Think bigger, build faster. Figma helps design and development teams build great products together. So without further ado, Justin says if I hit this dictation button after sending a text and it beeps and stops my music one more time, I'm going to find everyone at Apple and put them in a rear naked chokehold. Even if I turn off dictation, I somehow hit the voice note thing. The send button should not have multiple functions in the same spot. I couldn't agree more. This is so. I mean it's just absolutely insane because. Because the issue is, yeah, 1, 1. This happens a lot. This happens to me. And then it's always nerve wracking because if you have somebody pulled up on text and you happen. Let's say I'm like, hey, this, hey, this person is wanting to change the time of this meeting to this other point and I'm actually, I'm like, what do you think? What should we do? And then it's just like happens to be like recording and then you're like, whoa, whoa, whoa. I don't want to. Sure, sure. So yeah, I'm not a dictation maxi. I find it, I think it's very offensive to send people voice notes of any sort. And so I don't do it. I don't appreciate when people. Apparently we have to issue a correction. Taylor's over there putting us in the truth zone. Apple doesn't have product managers. That makes sense. There's so many. There's this new software. Every time I open an app made by Apple, there's a new bug. It is. The software is a lot of it. I mean, yeah. Now living with the new iOS iOS 1700 for. A month or so. Now it's 26. They're on the car release schedule now. Right. Living with it for a while. I feel like they made every app worse with the new update. You're still upset about it? Yeah, I'm fine. I. It's not the end of the world. Yeah, every app design is worse. I expected to just I expected to, like, get used to some of the new stuff, and I'm still like, oh. The photo app skill issue. Just get used to it. I'm getting used to it. I feel like a lot of these apps were branded. Jacob Truth Zone to the Truth Zone says in the X chat. Truth Zone to the Truth Zone. They historically have not had PMs, but that recently. Whoa. Okay. Yeah. OTP agrees. Wow, Apple does have a. FPMS. Taylor Bro, I'm incorrect. Well, I'm glad we have a debate in the chat going.

So that is a little bit of a counterpoint to a lot of the arguments that we're making here. And I just want to make sure we consider that. Fair enough. One more bet. One more bet. Just one more bet. You're good. Wanted to go back, get your thoughts on startup launches. Kind of random. I think everyone has launch video fatigue. I know we did. We were doing a lot of launch style videos earlier this year and we pretty much, pretty much stops completely just because we felt like the meta was kind of dead. It wasn't actually a way to truly break through anymore. And wanted to get your if you think that writing is underutilized as. A launch strategy, there's been some viral PDFs. I think situational awareness is a good example of just if you can put together a good enough document, you can attract. I mean, obviously Leopold is in a unique situation, but it feels like writing is super underutilized and effectively went viral. On a blog post on Hacker News and drove 10,000 signups. A ton of interest and people were starting a conversation around that it was just a blog on some random person's website basically. And it actually broke out massively. But yeah, it's tricky. But I'd love to know your thoughts. I think it tends to be true, and this is not black and white, but it tends to be true that if you can explain your value proposition in a paragraph of text, you will do it. And if you can't, you're much more likely to say, well, we need some glossy pictures. If you can do it with that, then you kind of work your way down to like, can we just create a movie out of this kind of thing? That's not always the case, but I do think it's a case. Like if your idea is so obvious and so good, you can just explain it with crayons on a piece of paper and you're good, you're good from there. And so I think, look, when I started writing books, somebody told me advice that I thought was good, great for books, but true for almost any product. And it was, if the book is good, you don't need to market it. And if the book is bad, no amount of marketing will help. Sure, I think you could apply that to a lot of different things. If your product is good, you don't need to market it. That's not true. I'm being very generalized here. Marketing is important, but if your product is good, then it can kind of sell itself. If the product is bad, no amount of marketing will help, particularly in the longer term. And so, look, I like good design, I like flashy videos. I like all that kind of stuff. But good ideas are very obvious. I think that's one of the keys to good writing, is that you don't need to spend a lot of mental horsepower to understand what the author's saying. You can just kind of glance your eyes over a paragraph and be like, yeah, I got it. Makes perfect sense. I don't need any more flashy video. That one sentence explained everything I need to know. Let's move on from there. I think that tends to be true. Do you have a book of the year? Do you. Do you like looking back and creating, like, a list of the things that you.

Is the story that we start seeing told maybe if they hypothetically go public one day? Yeah, let's see. To me. It feels like the company is very on track in that when people started talking About Starship in 2020, 21, I remember telling people, look, this is super exciting, but if you just look at the complexity of that vehicle route to Falcon 9, it's a huge step up in complexity. But that's also roughly the step up in terms of, like, size of company that SpaceX is and complexity that they can take on. And so then my, like, quick math is like, well, then it'll probably take about as much time as Falcon 9 to get to, like, true production rate. And so there are people that were like, no, they'll be like, you know, like, fully online by 25, commercial flying. Super. And I always remember saying in like 2020, I was like, I don't think that that's going to sort of be the case. I think it'll be closer to like, end of decade. Because that's roughly the time frame that Falcon 9 sort of took. Yep. And so that's where I kind of see them, where it's like, yeah, they like, are obviously making phenomenal progress with Starship. I don't think that we're going to be seeing, like, you know, this year. It's going to be on the order of. I forget, I think like 200 sort of Falcon 9, you know, sort of rocket launches. Yeah, I don't think that we're going to see 200 Starship launches until. Yeah, probably end of decade would still be my, like, you know, sort of rough bet. But I still think it's like a really phenomenal outcome. Yeah, they're going similarly on timing and speed, but they're blowing up more rockets than Falcon 9. Because I think the third Falcon 9 rocket was successful. Something like that. And yes, but they had a bunch of landings that they blew up. The more relevant landing. People forget that, like. Yeah, I mean, for what it's worth, Starship is already functional and online. It's just like, not fully reusable. Yeah, I think a lot of people misunderstand that. Like, when it's blowing up, it's usually blowing up, like on the way down. Like, it's not. It very quickly was like, okay, it takes off successfully, it gets up to the top and then it starts blowing up all the way down. It bounces off the. No, no, no, no, no, no. It's not bouncing off anything. It is, in fact going to space. It is. Space is real space. Is real here on this show. It glances off the top. That's very funny. Okay. Are. Are you. Yeah, sorry, continue. I was going to say, yeah. People underappreciate that, like, starship is actually a very successful rocket already. Yeah. It can take things up to orbit at, like, very large scale at very cheap prices. Literally today it just happens to be that, like. Yeah, they're still figuring out the landing thing. Sure. But obviously they want to figure that out before they get to, like, super mass production rate. I think the other story that is really going to start to be told is.

Side of SpaceX, things that have been happening over the past year, sort of month. Yeah, let's pause on this. On the SpaceX stuff. I want to stay on. NASA. The way I was thinking about Jared Isaacman and just kind of framing the broader discussion of the lunar economy. The orbital economy was this idea of like, are you a Mars guy or a moon guy in the short term? And I don't know if this is like too simplistic, so maybe you can just bring a bunch of nuance. But it does feel like Elon has been beating the drum on like, Mars, Mars, Mars, Mars. And maybe the moon is a pit stop along the way. And then some other folks, some of the more legacy space flight providers are a little bit more focused on the tractable get to the Moon. But then you have different folks breaking different ways. Like, Casey Hanmer's really obsessed with beating China to the Moon. Obviously Mike Solana at FoundersPlan is, Moon should be a state and there's a whole bunch of different things. But is there, do you think that there's a real trade off between like, should we be prioritizing moon or Mars in the short term? How do you think about that? You know, when I think about like, why Elon was so dead set on this, like, you know, call it, you know, five years ago, 10 years ago, I think it had more to do with the fact that the moon can be seen as a distraction if our capabilities as a species are limited. Because the moon is not a place where you can send up a sort of permanent colony that is sustainable and independent of Earth. Right. You know, so no, atmospheric terraforming is impossible in some ways, like, you know, because that likely to be highly, highly dependent on Earth. So it's not really like a backup sort of function relative to Mars. And so when I think about like Elon 10 years ago, it was basically like, look, we're so decrepit as a industry in the United States or across the globe that if we set a goal, we need to really keep the goal very, very focused. And so you have to go straight to Mars. I think just like the world of today is fundamentally very different, where we're just like much more capable of an industry in terms of just like, I don't know if you guys saw this, but I tweeted that in November was the first time in human history where there were more orbital rocket launches than there were days in the month. That's right. That's ever happened in human history. And so that obviously points to like, we just like, are much more capable as a species. And so in that world of more call like space abundance, I don't worry as much. And I admit that I've always been more on the like, the Moon is absolutely the right pit stop on the way to Mars and advocate for that for a long time. And I think in this world of abundance, it's a lot easier to see that. And now you even have Elon, in some ways, his totally reverse course of like. Yeah, he talked about making a mass driver on the moon. So you make huge amounts of solar panels and data centers there and then are shipping them up basically to orbit. Sorry, mass driver. Define that. Yes. One second. We just shut the lines. No worries. While he's shutting down.

Indisputably that homeownership was, was more accessible and cheaper back then. And I've, I've been thinking a lot about the topic that I think almost every societal problem that we have today is downstream of housing, of housing affordability. It's the single biggest issue that we have. Even back to the gambling issue that we were just talking about. Yeah. If you are 28 and you feel, whether it's true or not, you feel like you will never own a home, it's impossible for you to get there to save the down payment, you become much more likely to be like, I have nothing vested in this system. Might as well throw it all away. I have nothing to lose. I might as well throw it all away. And so even if median incomes adjusted for inflation were lower back in the 1950s, if owning a home was more accessible, and by and large it was for most people, that just gave you more of a vested sense in the system, caused you to take, I think, smarter risks. Not betting everything on the spread on tonight's game, but taking a risk of, I'm going to move to a new town and try to get a job at an auto factory. That was a risk, but it's more calculated risk than today's gambling mentality. I think there's something to be said too, of just access that which we're.

It's been a while since we caught up. Thank you for hopping on the show after a hiatus and breaking your silence. I want the quick update on Jarek Isaacman first. What's the status of things there? What are the implications? What's the mood in the space economy? What's the mood amongst your team? Are people excited? Are people thinking that that's going to move forward? Yeah, look, I think I can't imagine you're sort of a better. You're sort of leader for NASA then, you know, sort of Jared, right. Somebody that like, literally is like willing to put their life on the line, actually do some of the, like. I mean, he did literally the first commercial spacewalk that's ever been done in human history. Right. So he's like, you know, putting his neck on the line. But then also somebody that's obviously built a phenomenal business and understands, you know, how to think about roi, how to manage a workforce, you know, how to think about connection into capital markets. And so, yeah, generally, generally say like across the entire commercial space industry, like, you know, ecstatic mood. My, like, you know, various moles in the Senate, etc. Make it seem that things are all sort of tracking on plan and going well there. He's definitely got to pay the piper and shake hands and everything, but he's. Done that. And in some ways it's like the likelihood that they pull it for a second time. It's like, man, you already shot the guy down to the ground once, can't do it again, so feel highly likely. I think there's a ton of implications for that. Probably the one that I get a.

You need to write an amazing book about it that you need to turn that book into a movie and a TV show and then cast an iconic actor and then we'll remember and then that's what. How are you processing the AI trade in the context of history? I think historically the gap between a product changing the world and people making a lot of money off of it can be 20 miles apart. The railroads are probably the most transformational technology ever. Way more transformational than anything we've had over the last hundred years. And a few people made ungodly fortunes from it. 99% of railroad investors lost everything. And that was true for the airplane. Completely changed the world. A lot of people lost huge fortunes on Automobiles. There were 2,000 car companies in the early 1900s. Three of them remained by the 1930s or so. And so you can go on down the list of changed the world and 99% of people lost everything. Of course that was true of the dot com bubble. Everyone's thesis by and large in the late 1990s of what the Internet would become was right. But it didn't mean that you were going to make any money from it. You were going to lose everything. Webvan I think is such a good example because it's like DoorDash Just yeah, 15years.com Chewy's a banger company. Mp3.com Spotify is the company you want to own. Like there's just so many. Every, every current company there was some.com that was doing basic idea and just didn't get to, didn't get to scale at all. Yeah, I think so. I think, I think that, I think you could easily imagine just based off of history that in 20 years of course AI completely changed everything. Nothing is the same. And when we talk about the businesses that have been involved over the previous 20 years, there's two or three unbelievable winners. 99% of companies went to zero. And the three companies that won are either not around today or not the obvious ones today. So if you're talking about the Internet, in 1998, Google was in a garage. Obviously Facebook didn't exist exist yet. That tends to be the story of what it was. The Wright brothers themselves didn't make very much money from the airplane. If anything, it wasn't until you had someone named William Boeing who came along and he was like, I'm just going to copy your idea but do it way better than you guys could do it. And that tends to be the idea. It's what Google did with Yahoo and Hotbot and all the other search engines who were the actual front runners just took someone else coming along to be like, great idea, hold my beer and watch me do it 100 times better than you could. Speaking of AI, we've talked about this before. Obviously, AI is not.

Which we'll see in time. You know, this like you're already levering up a lot. I mean, you know, I think one of the things that was really misunderstood, there was this story going around for weeks that, you know, Larry Ellison was writing a check himself. Like he was buying this with his, you know, he'd be. Selling his Oracle. Stock and he was basically buying this. The reality is, is Ellison is putting up a portion of the dollars. But a lot of the dollars are actually coming from capital they've raised from the Middle East. You know, you've got 24/billion dollars is coming from three. Double their, double their, double the Ellison's investment. Correct. And so the question is, is. Is there more capital? Like is Ellison not willing to spend more? You know, he's backstopping the whole thing. But how much money does he actually want to put in? How much leverage will banks put on this? That is a big question. You know, you're, you're probably. And when. You close this deal, you're. Probably around six times, maybe even a little bit more times levered. That's a pretty. High leverage. They'll work it. Down quickly, but it. Is a pretty high. Leverage on media assets. In 2020. I'd probably close in 2020, late 26, 27. That's a lot of leverage. Yeah, well, and you gotta look at Oracle itself.

Moon beyond what's been currently contracted. And so I like that and I like, I think we talked about this in some of our prior discussions, but I really like this program called Clips within the Lunar Program, where basically rather than trying to set a budget and say, here's how I want you to build XYZ thing, the way that they basically pay contractors is just a flat fee for each kilogram of down mass down to the lunar surface. Basically, it's just like you get something onto the moon, we basically give you. I forget, I think it's like basically $100,000, basically a kilogram, but you get margin on that. You figure out how to do it cheaper. Great, that's on you. But that's like, to me, where NASA should be. It's like for these like things that aren't yet really commercial and don't make sense, be the first buyer, establish the market and then that's what kickstarts, basically the commercial sort of economy side of it. So that's obviously been like a ton of activity. Obviously there's a whole set of SpaceX things, you know, that have been happening over the past year, sort of month. Yeah, let's, let's pause on this on the SpaceX stuff. I want to stay on. NASA. The way I was thinking about Jared.

Worries about sales tax and VAT compliance so you can focus on growth and. Putting presents under the Christmas tree. That's right. Speaking of presents under the Christmas tree, the Google team is cooking up a present for me in 2026. They're going to put ads in Gemini. Let's go hit the gong. Finally. Finally. We've been asking for it. I hear the sleigh bells ringing. We've been for it ads in LLMs. We talked to the founder of Perplexity about it. We asked Arvid, why are you going to put ads. We want ads in Perplexity. And he said, maybe. And the tech wrote a whole article. They got really bad. I'll let Google jump first. I'll let Google jump first. We talked to Sarah Fryer, we've Talked to the OpenAI team about how badly we want ads in chat GPT, how badly we want ads and LLMs. They said, maybe we're going to do it, maybe we're not. They've been sitting on their hands, but. Now I don't know. Listen, I love listening to your voice. It's good, it's good. We need a backup track. Yeah. This is interesting. This feels like very Google to just be like, yeah, we're the ad business. We're going to do ads. We're going to do them first. We're probably going to do them better than anybody else, at least initially. But some people were pushing back, just being like, hey, you easily could have just crushed, Right? Yeah, you easily could have just kept. The product people are excited about. Or a lot of people are, are wondering like, hey, there's a, there's a world where Gemini doesn't have ads and is free for two years and it just completely puts the screws to every other, you know, LLM provider. Yeah. And I mean, what would you do. If you were them? Would you. Would you monetize earlier? I don't know. Right. I mean, it would definitely hurt cash flow. Like, it would show up in financials for sure. I just. Pro plus is not cheap. But turning on ads for. I mean, I always look back to what, what would the Instagram business look like if they were forced to monetize it independently? Because it's, it's an amazing ad. Like, it's an amazing platform that's perfectly suited for. To monetize with ads. Yep. And yet you can imagine Meta ramped ad spend on the platform 10, 20 times faster than maybe an independent operator would have because they just had been. They had all the customer relationships, they had all the. They had a strong sense of who the person was already because they were probably on Facebook as well. So I don't think. I don't think ads cause failure to adopt a new product. I would be. I don't know. We'd have to look through the product graveyard. But I feel like of things that die, they rarely die because, yeah, people are. People are acting like ads and LLMs are going to be like the biggest deal and are going to be the biggest issue, and I just don't think it's going to be. I think they're going to. In many ways, they could make the product better or more like sticky in the sense that you're, like, looking at stuff, doing shopping. And personally, I want every alum to have a lot of ads so that I can swap between all of the best models without feeling like I need to sign up. Like, I actually like, for me, I'm like, there's. There's models that I just don't use because I'm like, okay, I'm not. I don't. I don't want to sign. I have. Not that much. I'll let Tyler sign up totally on our ramp cart. But do you think Xai is going to run ads?

Activity is something that they like are spending a lot of resources on internally. But I don't think it's like that public of a story relative to just Starship, Starlink, et cetera. I saw something, I saw this article that had all these motion graphics, very cool. And it was explaining how starship will take stuff to the moon. And it was something like they're gonna do like 26 refuelings in space. And then that just feels like in the 60s we could just go straight there. Now we gotta stop for gas 26 times. Like why should I not be black pill on this is this like this is a lost start. It just seems crazy to me. But break it down. What's actually going on? So funny historical fact from the like Apollo days. There was actually a huge debate internally at NASA whether or not to take the like fuel stop approach versus the like shoot straight for the moon approach. Okay. There was a significant chunk of NASA led by. It was like Pete, something I want to say that really want to do the gas station approach. The reason being that they saw that as what would make it so that going to the moon was just much more long term sustainable because you have these like pieces of infrastructure and it's easy to like send things mission by mission without each individual mission basically being super risky. Yeah. And the other side of the approach, which was just shoot straight for the moon was largely led by Werner Von Braun. A part of why he liked the shoot straight for the moon thing is because it allowed him to just make one really, really big rocket rather than launching lots of small rockets. And I think he was just addicted to rockets basically. And that was ultimately what went out. I do think probably that was the right call for the time and allowed us like etc. Ye, but counterintuitively the refueling and sort of fuel stations approach is actually just like the much more long term sustainable one. And that as we think about going to Mars very regularly going to the moon, you don't want to necessarily have to take on the risk of just like on a car trip, you don't take all your fuel literally with you like gas along the way. And that makes it so that the vehicle that is moving things is much simpler. Same thing. Want to set up a more stable logistics and supply chain. You actually do want basically these types of fuel stops. But yeah, that's a part of what SpaceX needs to prove is like. Yeah, I think that number that you're citing in terms of number of refuels is more for a full Mars mission for the moon. I think it's more like three refuels. So it is definitely, you know, sort of simpler by going to the moon. Also, it does seem like we've rebuilt the capacity to just yeet. Stuff directly to the moon, because didn't Firefly land something up there, like, and China's going up and stuff direct, like. Like, we seriously have checked that box, like, several times. It's not even like humans on the moon once. Like, I think we sent six manned missions, right? Yeah, exactly, exactly. But I think we want to get that to like, 600. It's going to be like, through the fuel stop, you know, approach probably. And what I like is that we're parallel tracking, which, like, the things that Firefly and China have done, those things are just amplified by the fuel stop, you know, basically approach when, like, that comes online. So I like that we're parallel tracking it. And this goes back to a little bit of the Jared Isaacman thing where, like, man, if I were in Jared Isaacsman shoes right now.

Auto factory. That was a risk, but it's more calculated risk than today's gambling mentality. I think there's something to be said too of just access that which we're seeing in the gambling world today. If you gave a 19 year old boy Kalshi and all the sports bettings apps in 1955 they would have latched right onto it. There's nothing unique about today's young generation by and large. It's just that we didn't have those tools. Yeah, look up. I encourage people to look up. John and I were going back and forth on this. On our flight on Friday we were looking at the how popular gambling was during the fall of the Roman Empire. It was all social classes. We're doing it on the exact same levels that we're seeing today. Sure they weren't on a mobile device but it was like everywhere that you would be eating and drinking and it was in private and public and there was illegal and, and legal in some areas. Like at certain festivals it would be legal and then it would be like illegal otherwise. But you know, is kind of seen as okay. So there's nothing, there's nothing new. These things just are going in, in waves. But it certainly was, I think people were like somewhat nihilistic and they were just like sure, like things are, we're experiencing a collapse. We may as well put it all on block. Yeah. And so I think it's easy to look at the issues of today and frame it as we have degraded, particularly the younger generation. I don't think that's the case. I think any other previous generation would have become degenerate gamblers, gamblers and crypto traders if they had the option to like today's generation does. Yeah. I wonder how much of it is just memetic, just like.

If it was a competitor, I wouldn't do it, but I got to sneak these things in. Got to pay the bills over here anyway. So take us through what is a mass driver on the moon. So on Earth, there's been a variety of ways that we've hypothesized basically sort of getting things up to orbit. Only one that has sort of really worked right, which is basically chemical combustion. Put liquid fuel and an oxidizer basically in a rocket and launch up to space. There's people that have tried to work on other alternatives. So if you guys remember SpinLaunch, the company that would basically spin things up. Really, really fast, you eat aerospace, they would yeet it out into the aerospace. So that's the spin version. I love that. You can also imagine the like, rocket or like, you know, sled version. It's like an electromagnetic sled that is super, super long. So rather than like, spinning fast, you basically, like, you have like a maglev train effectively, but just like many, many miles long to get it up to space and shoot it up. Now, the reason that that's difficult on Earth is down here on the surface where the spin launches or the maglev sled thing would be, are still in the atmosphere. And so by the time you're getting to, like, you know, if you got to orbital velocity, you're still like in this thick atmosphere. And so it's just like crazy heat, crazy drag, et cetera, and so really difficult basically to do. So it's basically why we effectively use rockets is like, they have a way of starting off slowly while they're in the atmosphere, getting out of it, and then going more quickly once you're out of the atmosphere. On the moon, there is no atmosphere. And so the advantage there is you can basically set up effectively like a maglev track. You also don't have to go that fast because the Moon's gravity well is way less. And so it's super easy to basically, like, imagine a world where we mine a bunch of like, very simple metals and things like that on the moon, make this, like, magnet train. And now all of a sudden you just have something on the moon that you can, like, point towards Earth if you want to, like, send something into, like, low Earth orbit. But also now if you want to, like, point it out to Jupiter or Mars, etc. It's just like a phenomenal. Effectively, you can think of it as like, train station effectively where, like, I wouldn't be surprised that even if we are going to Mars, there's a world where, like, you know, yeah, maybe the humans are just going straight from Earth to Mars, but I wouldn't be surprised if like a lot of the materials or metals or like, you know, produce things. Especially if we have like an industrial outpost on the moon. The moon is the one that is like sending the solar panels to Mars or is sending the bioreactors or like the like, agricultural equipment, etc. That stuff's all coming from the Moon because it's like literally basically like free to effectively, like, send it. Send it to Mars. Yeah, and so that's an idea that's been talked about in sci fi for a long time, partially in some ways. It's also like, it's the best weapon in the world in that like you can just shoot a rock, you know, at the Earth really fast and then hit anybody that you want and you basically can't stop it. But yeah, speaking of space weapons, is there any movement on Golden Dome?

Like, that was sort of the precedent for Varda being able to basically come back from space. And that mission was the one that had the venue samples on board. Okay, so it's just now getting disclosed or talked about? Yeah, yeah, basically, obviously, with something this material and significant, like, you want to make sure that you dotted the I's and crossed the T's, and also, like, it takes time to go analyze these samples and like, handle it, et cetera. So, yeah, the asteroid sample, yeah, landed like, honestly, October, November of 2023. And now obviously, this is all starting to get published two years later. What they effectively sort of showed was that on the asteroid you have effectively, like the building blocks of life, which. And this is my favorite term in the world. Build more data for the panspermia hypothesis. So the panspermia hypothesis is that the early building blocks of life are plentiful in the universe. And a part of how they get distributed in the universe is through, you know, basically collisions that end up, you know, you have like, you know, some early protoplanet, it collides with some other big planet, and then there's crazy asteroids that get sent out at high speed. But those asteroids have a little bit of like, sugars and ribose, et cetera. And that's what actually, like, basically like incepts planet on a future, or incepts life on a future, basically planet. One of my favorite graphs that I saw, you know, I wish that I could pull this up right now, but. If you look at the average length of a genome on Earth over various periods of time, right? If we look at, like, old fossils, et cetera, the most complex genome basically has a perfect linear relationship between basically the age of Earth and the genomic length. The thing though, is if you were to extrapolate that line downwards, if you go to when the start of Earth is, it was already at a relatively complex genome. Like, if you look at, like, the length of a human genome, the length of bacteria, length of virus, et cetera, it would predict that Earth has not been around long enough to have the level of complexity of genomes that we have given this linear relationship. And so it strongly supports the idea that, like, the reason we have life on Earth is actually, like, there was some earlier solar system planet, et cetera, that did the early building blocks and then got kicked us off, and then kicked us off because, like, it collided with something, some asteroid then went and landed on Earth. And. And the building blocks sort of started us a little further in that trajectory of life. It's basically the plot of Prometheus. Exactly. So if you look at sort of the Fermi's paradox, what this implies is that highly likely the Great Filter is actually basically behind humanity in that, given that this likely suggests that there is the building blocks of life all over Earth, but that we do not yet see signals, it means that there is probably some filter that makes it difficult to go from like, early building blocks to intelligence, more so than, you know, basically like intelligence being, you know, you know, risky for, you know, being able to like, spread out into the stars. And so it is there's this great graph that showed like all the potential, you know, basically like answers to the Fermi's paradox, but this one basically shifted it significantly towards the world of, like, there is abundant non intelligent life in the universe, and we just happen to be the first intelligent one. And as we go out, we will probably see lots of early building blocks, and as we spread, we may start to see other very early sort of life, sort of planets that maybe are just getting into bacteria or early mammals and things like that. So, yeah, it's really tight. Time means the universe is plentiful in terms of life. That's fascinating. Polymark just.

People are acting like ads and LLMs are going to be like, the biggest deal and are going to be the biggest issue. And I just don't think it's going to be. I think they're going to. In many ways, they could make the product better or more like sticky in the sense that you're, like, looking at stuff, doing shopping. And personally, I want every LLM to have a lot of ads so that I can swap between all of the best models without feeling like I need to sign up. Like, I actually like, for me, I'm like, there's models that I just don't use because I'm like, okay, I'm not. I don't. I don't want to sign up. I have. Not that much. I'll let Tyler sign up totally on our ramp cart. Do you think Xai is going to run ads? Do you think they're going to put ads in Grok or ads in Romantic? Yeah, I'm sure they will at some point. I doubt it's a huge priority for them. There's this company, Halftime, which won the Grok hackathon that happened over the weekend. I DM with the founder. He's down to. Come on, we need to pull this up. Because when I saw this, I was like, whoa. Like, Xai. I didn't realize that it was from a hackathon. I thought it was just this actual company. So it says Halftime dynamically weaves AI generated ads into the scenes that you're watching. So breaks feel like part of the story instead of interruptions. So there's really cool. Cybrex in the chat says it just makes you second guess every output you get from the model. Totally. I agree. That's the bad case. There's a world where they just give you the real response and then there's an ad. Yes. So there is a different flip. So, so to Cybex's point, you second guess every output you get from the model because you're worried the ad is influencing it. If you go to your favorite chat app and you say, what are the best headphones? And it says Apple AirPod Pros, and you're like, oh, is it sponsored? Is it not? Are they being objective? Are they not? Yes, that is something that you'd worry about. But. But there's also the other flip side, which is that if they're not monetizing well, they might be putting you on the cheapest model. That's just guessing. And it's just like, oh, yeah, like, I guess it's this product because they didn't cook. They didn't give you the reasoning model because they can't afford to because they're not monetizing you. Well, I think. Yeah. One reality is somebody types, what is the best cell phone that I can get for $1,000? And it's gives you the iPhone, and then there's an ad for an Android phone right below it. And that's still worth advertising on because it's a high intent query, and it's very. You know. And it's likely ends up being profitable for the Android device manufacturer to advertise against it. But let's pull up Halftime. They're dynamically weaving AI generated ads into scenes you're watching so breaks feel like part of the story instead of interruptions. Watching. Wrong. Boo. What do they say? Harvard trivia. The Lightning round. Go. Pulitzer Prizes. 46 Nobel Peace Prizes. Jessica, what are you doing here? I was just. That is so weird. So bad. I'm sold now. I want to. I want a Coca Cola. Okay, okay, okay. If you want to see. If you want to see how ads are done, well, in. In video integration like this, we have to pull up the video that's at the bottom of the timeline. They just reinvented the Star Wars Cerveza Cristal ads. Have you seen these? You've barely seen Star wars, but at one point, there was a. At one point, there was an international showing of the original Star wars, and for some reason, they needed to cut ads into the actual footage. And so we got to play this with sound. It's one of my favorite things. Let's play it. You fought in the Clone Wars. Look at this. Yes. I was once a Jedi Knight, the same as your father. I wish I'd known him. He was the best star pilot in the galaxy and a cunning warrior. I understand you've become quite a good pilot yourself. And he was a good friend. Which reminds me, I have something here for you. Look at this. Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough. It's the best. It's like pure art. AI could never. It's so good. It's absolutely genius. And they do that two or three other times throughout the movie. And so you're just watching. And it's always when they go to grab something, then they just do the insert shot. So if you're watching the Cerveza Cristal version of Star wars, by the end of the movie, Obi Wan Kenobi has had, like, five beers. Whoa. More than cheeky pint. Yeah, yeah. No, he's definitely. He's definitely his buzz going, but that's one of my favorite little bits. That's great. Let me tell you about Banto really quick. Dante Automate, Compliance and Security.

And we're sharing it with you today. We're sharing this alpha, alpha, deep alpha. And so we'll hopefully pull up some of the photos, which. So this is. So in first class, they give you headphones with a case. And so what I was able to do is I was able to take the food. So my food. And put it in the case. I bring it over to John. So we all had dinner before the flight. That's ice cream in the boner case. We had dinner before the headphone case. So I show up and I'm not hungry, but Ben's a growing boy. And I'm like, we gotta get my dinner back to bed. And so we put. We take the headphone case, we zip it up. I take it back, I pass it. You insisted on the bread roll going in there. I don't know. Of course I had to. I wasn't gonna have. He needed the bread. Did you eat the bread? I ate all of it. Okay, wait, was the bread over buttered or did it have the appropriate amount of butter? It had a lot of butter. It had a lot of butter. Right. Jordy insisted on giving you the full pat of butter, and I thought maybe half a pad of butter. I just wanted you to have optionality. Okay, well, yeah, I guess you had optionality. You could have taken it out, but what would you have done with it? I didn't have anybody sitting next to me. Oh, you didn't? Okay. No, but the guy. There was a guy across the aisle from you. He was giving me the dirtiest. No way. I thought he was like, headphones in there. I thought he was gonna say, like, if you don't bring me back food too. Oh, you wanted. He's gonna tell tale. That is a risk. No, but the real risk when you're running a strategy like this and you need to be highly coordinated, is that the flight attendant in the business class section says, where's your cutlery? Yes, yes, yes. Where's that plate? Because it's in. Your knife and fork are gonna be missing. Yeah, you can see Jordy going back to. I took that photo. We were running plays, and so. No, no. So there's another tip here that. You don't want to jump the gun. So the food service, the dinner service, it takes place over a couple minutes. All the plates get passed out, and people eat pretty quickly. So typically, the flight attendant, by the time they finish delivering the last plate, they will go and start picking up the plate from the beginning because it only takes a couple minutes to eat the food. On the plan, but you want to wait them out. You need a couple rounds of them coming by and you have the full meal there and they're like, are you done with that? And you say, no, no, I'm still working, I'm still working. So you got to say, I'm still working a couple times. And then they will go back and sit down at the front of the plane. They'll kind of relax. The post meal break they might be gearing up for. Oh, maybe I'll get everyone a new glass of wine in 20 minutes. But I'm chilling. That's your opportunity because that's when they're at their weakest. That's when they're not going to be paying attention. You almost got caught at one point. I got caught. She came, she. The flight is lovely, lovely. And she came over and said, she, she came up and said, do you want any tea? Yeah. And you had. Missing. Missing. There was, there was food in the headset. To close the headset case. Because you don't want to get caught with the crew. Yes, yes, yes. We do need the whole crew on business and we will be doing that. We're working on it, we're working on it. Yeah. We got a ton of machinations, but in the meantime, we're having fun. We're also on profound. Get your brand mentioned in ChatGPT meets millions of consumers who use AI to discover new products and brands and.