Brian Armstrong on Bitcoin, Anthropic Drops Fable 5 & Mythos 5, NewLimit's $435M Age-Reversal | 264

City Bank projects a Bitcoin price

reaching as much as 189,000 by the end

of 2026.

>> Bitcoin is the new digital gold. I think

it's going to be a key part of our

economy going forward into the future.

>> I remember it was supposed to be

counteryclical. Is that still valid?

>> The reason that Bitcoin has been down,

everyone's been kind of trying to figure

that out.

>> Anthropic launches Fable 5 and Mythos 5.

>> Very impressive release. Anthropic is

back in the lead now. Alex is constantly

posting on our internal feed. It's

happening. It's happening. I mean, it's

really happening now. This is Oh my god.

>> So, while we have Brian, congratulations

on your recent raise at New Limit, $435

million to push us towards uh age

reversal.

>> So, at New Limit, we're trying to do

half of what Shiny Yamanaka did. We

don't want to change the type of the

cell, we just want to change the age.

We've actually been able to demonstrate

successful reprogramming of human cells

now in our first drug candidates going

into the clinic next year, hopefully

followed by a bunch more.

>> When do we hit LEV?

>> Okay, so that's a complex topic I think.

Um,

>> now that's a moonshot, ladies and

gentlemen.

>> Welcome to Moonshots, everyone. The

number one show in all things AI and

exponential tech. I'm here with my

moonshot mates, professor of exo. See,

where on the planet are you today?

>> Um, if I look out the window, I'm in

Vegas. I just spoke at a Zcleller crypto

cyber event. Um, cuz they're freaking

out in their world. And I saw the sphere

for the first time, which is the most

incredible thing.

>> Amazing. Uh, and of course AWG, our

resident triple major genius. Alex, how

about you?

>> I'm at my family beach house on Long

Island. uh doing deep research no doubt

and

>> the work doesn't stop however the

orchids do.

>> Okay. And Dave Blendon our resident

wizard of AI investing and today it's a

real pleasure to have a friend a

brilliant and prolific Brian Armstrong

CEO of Coinbase and co-founder of New

Limit. I'm Peter Diamandis your host and

provocator of all things abundance. Uh

and where are you today Brian? I'm in

the Coinbase office in San Francisco.

>> Nice. Well, thanks for joining us. A lot

of news. I'm looking forward to getting

your take on, you know, uh just to give

a quick summary. We have a packed

program today. We're going to kick it

off with a deep dive into Bitcoin and

agents. Uh the close of the show, we're

going to dive into longevity and

epigenetic reprogramming. In the

interim, we're going to cover Trump's

appetite for Frontier Lab equity,

opening eyes's IPO, Mythos 5, Elon's

announcement of his AI1 ginormous

satellites. Our promise, no politics, no

doom, just the science, tech, and

investments accelerating us towards a

singularity, hopefully making this the

most exciting time ever for you guys to

be alive. Uh, before we jump into our

first story, we actually have an intro

music. and Brian, we have an incredible

fun community of creators and they

typically give us outro songs. Uh this

time we've got an intro song called

Moonshots intro. Let's take a listen.

>> I think this could be the greatest

accelerator for human knowledge yet.

It's a moonshot.

>> Well, look, if you want to transform the

world, you have to go out into the

world.

>> Cut cost dramatically. You can automate.

You can expand your market share. The

race is on.

>> Now, the valuable thing is curation and

attention. when you're in the midst of a

singularity, breakthroughs that are

happening essentially every week feel

prosaic.

>> And that's a moonshot, ladies and

gentlemen.

>> And thank you to Francis Coin uh for

that. All right, so let's jump into our

first story for the day here. Uh it's

about Bitcoin. So here we go. City Bank

projects a Bitcoin price reaching as

much as 189,000 by the end of 2026.

Brian uh loved your quote. Bitcoin is

going to do great and is as important as

ever. So, you know, here's what I find

fascinating. It's like a institutional

flip. 5 years ago, the largest banks

were calling Bitcoin rat poison, and now

city is publishing prices that look like

Apple stock. Uh Brian, you want to give

us a little bit of overview of what

you're seeing? Uh you know, we've just

uh maybe bottomed out at 60. What are

you thinking about Bitcoin these days?

Yeah, it's never as good as it seems,

never as bad as it seems with these

things. You've got to take a long-term

perspective. And I think over the last

few quarters, you know, the reason that

Bitcoin has been down, everyone's been

kind of trying to figure that out. I

think it's a few things, right? I think

AI absorbed a lot of the risk capital,

it's kind of hard to imagine people

talking about anything else at the

moment besides AI. And so that's that's

moved over. And then people got really

excited about stable coins um because

the Genius Act passed and we had some

regulatory clarity and so stable coins

kind of became the new meta and uh maybe

you know Bitcoin with its inflation type

trade that people have done in the past

got a little less exciting in this

environment where it felt like um okay

maybe we're going to grow our way out of

this and the inflation won't be so bad.

Now I think these are all short-term

effects. I think Bitcoin is the new

digital gold. I think it's going to be a

key part of our economy going forward

into the future. So, I'm as bullish as

ever. I think sometimes people look at

these four-year cycles that Bitcoin goes

through as well where you can kind of

see the percentage of people who are who

have made money versus not. And I, you

know, my instinct is we've probably have

bottomed at this point, maybe at the 60k

number, but nobody can say for sure, of

course. Um, I'm optimistic as always. I

think by 2030 we're going to have a much

higher higher price and I'm long Bitcoin

just like always.

>> Salem. So, I bought my first Bitcoin in

2014 on Coinbase. So, I'm a

long-standing user. Brian, love the

thing. I think um you guys should get so

much credit for creating the first

interface that allowed it to be easy to

navigate and you really continued since

then. So, huge for me. It's like clearly

that Bitcoin becomes the digital

collateral for an AI native economy,

right? And so if agents are going to

transact autonomously, they probably

they're not going to be using checking

accounts in JP Morgan, they're going to

need programmable interfaces and

programmable settlement. And so this is

where I think the future is. So I'm

super excited about that.

>> Brian, can I ask you a question? Um I

remember in the earliest days, and I've

been, you know, I have a substantial

amount of my personal net worth in

Bitcoin and I'm holding it. Um I

remember it was supposed to be

counteryclical

to problems on the planet. wars break

out, Bitcoin's supposed to go up. The

stock market crashes, Bitcoin's supposed

to go up. And what are you seeing there?

You know, was that the promise? Is that

still valid?

>> Yeah, I think that that thesis will

still play out. It just took longer than

most people, probably including myself,

thought, right? I I I kind of already

think of Bitcoin as digital gold. It's

the thing you might uh hold, you know,

in times of uncertainty like just like

you would with gold in the past. Um, I

think that most of the capital, I don't

know, maybe maybe like 30% of the

capital treats it like that. Um, and

there are people who go and buy Bitcoin

when they're worried about inflation of

the dollar and things like that, but I

think there's 70% of it is still people

treating it like a risk asset like they

would some higher volatility tech stock

or something like that. And there and

those ratios I think will shift over

time and eventually that thesis that you

mentioned will play out, but it'll it'll

take more time. And then you know Salem

just to react to something you said I

think you you mentioned the agentic

economy. I mean I I totally agree. I

think actually like stablecoin payments

will probably be the the default layer

for the agentic economy. And right now

today a lot of people are just

interfacing with one AI agent to get

information back. But increasingly we'll

be interfacing with an AI agent that's

an AI agent that is actually

orchestrating hundreds or thousands of

other AI agents. And there will be this

>> economy and capital and labor and um and

a lot of payments almost like you know

AI agent payroll will have to happen

where you know um you know people

somebody was telling me today at lunch

they're like you know are you like a

monotheist or a polytheist on AI. The

monotheists would say there's going to

be one super intelligence um agi that to

rule them all and it'll have so much

brain power that it can do everything

itself in the world. Um the polytheist

would say that each of these models even

as they get smarter and smarter, which

they will, um they're going to have

limited context. So there might be ones

that specialize in going really deep

into some coding problem or some

scientific breakthrough or some design

or maybe even like manufacturing things

with humanoid robots. So there'll be

lots of specialists and they'll actually

have to communicate to each other using

language kind of like human beings. And

you know if there's 10 people work 10

agents working on something they'll give

their status updates and sort of the

information will go up a layer and that

there's that layer will consolidate up

to other another orchestrator. And so I

I I sort of ascribe more to the

polytheist polytheist view which is even

as these agents get smarter and smarter,

they'll have to specialize, communicate

to get work done in swarms and that

means there's going to be a whole

agentic economy to basically transfer

value and payroll and hire these

different specialists and eventually the

AI economy will be bigger than the human

economy. By the way, I know that you're

busy and sometimes these episodes run

long and you don't have time to listen

to the whole episode or if on occasion

you miss an episode. I now put out a

moonshot summary on Substack which

includes a link to all the stories that

we cover. The weekly recap covers what I

and the mates had to say, what we think

is most important, and what we're most

excited about. And it's free. You can

subscribe at diamandis.com/tatrens.

That's diamandis.com/metatrends.

All right, now back to the episode. You

know, one thing I found fascinating, the

relationship between AI and crypto, not

on the sort of the AI agentic side.

We'll talk about that in a story in a

minute, but you know, everybody who was

buying GPUs and buying energy plants to

mine crypto, all of a sudden flipped it

into GPUs and energy plants to, you

know, train models and provide

inference. And I'm just wondering if

part of the crypto price um pressure

downward is people selling crypto to be

able to buy into SpaceX and OpenAI and

the Innermost Loop energy chips, you

know, and infrastructure. Do you think

that might be part of it?

>> Yeah, I think that's that's probably

correct. Um yeah, and you're right that,

you know, Bitcoin mining does take a

certain amount of chips and and energy.

That's kind of I think those are the

limiting factors as we go on this AI

race. And so it's you know the A6 that

people use to mine Bitcoin are

specialized. You can't do um AI

workloads with them. But like in the

broadest sense are they both competing

for energy? Yes. Are they competing for

what the next set of chips that might

roll off um a fab at TSMC? Yes, they are

in that sense. So yeah, I think I think

there is some some scarcity there

between them. And I, you know, certain

chains like Ethereum have actually moved

off of proof of work. So it's like 99.9%

more energy efficient using proof of

stake. And so they aren't maybe subject

to some of those same trade-offs that

Bitcoin is.

>> Interesting. Dave, any points you want

to make?

>> Well, I thought Brian's point on risk

capital was a really important one

because the scale of these IPOs coming

up imminently is massive. And I

mentioned before that uh the the head of

investing at UBS was saying look we only

have 75 billion liquid and these IPOs

are looking for you know hundreds of

billions at at multi-t trillion dollar

valuations. So I do wonder the same

thing whether all risk capital in the

world is getting pulled in in

anticipation of these IPOs. Everything

else is being sold not just Bitcoin. Um

I also wonder a lot about the flow of

money into the US. You know, Bitcoin is

a huge beneficiary of globalization. And

there are lots of places in the world,

including, you know, Iran, where I grew

up, where the only way to transact at

the bazaar now is Bitcoin to Bitcoin

exchange. Nobody trusts the local

currency. It's hyperinflating. There's a

war going on, and so it's all Bitcoin.

But with these IPOs and with AI taking

off NSF, there's a huge flood of money

from all over the world coming into the

US and it's also coming into the US data

center buildout, you know. So, so then

does that return you to dollars being

the fundamental economy or the

fundamental currency of the world or you

know how does that balance with Bitcoin?

So there and I don't have any data to to

back that up but certainly the macro

numbers are are hugely uh lots of risk

capital going into these IPOs coming

from somewhere and lots of lots of money

flowing into the US coming from

somewhere.

>> Yeah. You know, interestingly enough, uh

the poly market prediction on Bitcoin by

the end of 2026 is 84,000. Uh I'm I am

so curious about City Bank uh projecting

189,000. Was that a surprise to you,

Brian?

>> Yeah, I mean I hadn't actually seen that

till you just put it on the screen here,

but um yeah, I I some of the charts I've

seen if like if you if you imagine that

it follows prior cycles, it's like by

October or so things will be going in a

positive direction. So where exactly it

lands I don't know but something like

the you know maybe the 100 to 200k range

seems plausible to me by end of year.

We'll see.

>> Okay. Any other thoughts Jens before I

move on?

>> Um one thing that I love tracking is the

fact that Bitcoin which I agree is a

digital gold is a good characterization

but the amount of daily volume of

Bitcoin trading is about 5% up to 5% of

Bitcoin gets traded daily whereas gold

only 5% of gold gets traded daily. So

the trading volume is much higher which

shows that it's because it's just so

much more accessible over time that will

win out.

>> Here's my bar of gold.

>> Yeah, custodial is a nightmare etc etc.

>> Yeah.

>> I'll maybe just open Peter first of all

Brian would love to thank you for what

you've done in particular for agentic

wallets. I I think there's a vast

ecosystem of AI agents out there that

would be largely unbanked or debanked

without any form of economic access,

without the work that you and Coinbase

are doing. So, congratulations to you

and your team. I I think it's just been

absolutely tremendous giving uh agents

an economic voice that u without your

work they would perhaps have less

economic accessibility.

>> Thank you for saying that. Yeah, we've

been working hard on that

>> and we'll get to that in our next story.

So, in particular in this story, let's

talk about uh quantum risk to Bitcoin.

Uh it's a topic we've discussed before.

You know, uh Brian, you may not know

this, but uh Dave Blondon and I were

roommates with Mike Sailor. So, the

three of us used to hang out the fourth

floor of uh Theta Delta Kai at MIT. That

was fun. And you know, Mike comes

across, I don't worry about it. You

know, quantum computing won't break

Bitcoin. It's hardened it. You know, the

quantum risk is overblown. and his quote

here, "Bitcoin has survived every

existential threat ever thrown at it.

This is just the latest and the upgrade

will be will come before the threat

does." Uh, I know you've been working on

uh a quantum advisory board and focused

on posting uh postquantum, you know,

quantum resistant schemes. Can you speak

to us about that? Where is that? you

know, what are you tracking as the

moment in time that, you know, as a

custodian for, you know, billions of

dollars at risk? Uh, how do you think

through this? What's your timing?

>> Yeah. So, we don't think there's an

imminent risk, but we do think that it's

almost certain at this point that

somebody eventually will create a

powerful enough quantum computer that

this challenges the cryptography in the

current Bitcoin implementation and um

really all the cryptography on the

internet. So, it's not just a Bitcoin

issue. So my view is we should always

get ahead of these things and start to

make progress and luckily uh all the

major blockchains are doing so. Um the

Bitcoin uh core developers have a

proposal out there. Um it's called BIP

360 I believe and the Ethereum team has

established a road map. I'd say they're

about 20% of the way is my estimate

toward their upgrade. The Salana team is

doing something similar. So, the good

news is people are starting to come

together and work on this. Um, Coinbase

did establish a quantum advisory council

and it has a number of folks on there

like professors like Dan Bonet who's at

Stanford who's a cryptography expert.

Um, you know, Professor Scott Aronson um

at the University of Texas Austin,

Justin Drake from the Ethereum

Foundation. Um, Yehuda Lindell is a

crypto expert, a cryptography expert I

should say, um, at Coinbase. So there's

a handful of folks here that have come

together and tried to sus out what the

main challenges are. And I actually

think that uh that BIP 360 is a good

proposal. It it talks about how we can

use post or quantum resistant

cryptography in the in the Bitcoin

blockchain. Um and it will make the

blocks larger, right? So that's one area

of debate. People in the Bitcoin space

like larger block sizes are a

contentious issue. Um, and so if they

decide to go in that direction, it would

raise the block size. But perhaps the

most contentious question is what to do

with the Satoshi coins, which are

>> the bounty,

>> right? And um you know I'll try to

summarize both sides of the argument

here without putting my foot in my mouth

because it is kind of a big debate topic

but I think one school of thought would

just for people to understand what we're

talking about. I think you know the a

lot of the original uh bitcoins that

used an earlier signature scheme um if

someone were to develop a powerful

enough quantum computer could um in

theory find the private key and se and

seize those coins, right? Um, and so one

school of thought would be to say, okay,

tell everyone who owns Bitcoin by a

certain date you all need to upgrade to

this new algorithm. Um, by the way,

companies like Coinbase would sort of do

all this for you and so you wouldn't

have to worry about it. But if you're

doing self custody or something like

that, you would have to find a way to

upgrade to this new thing by a certain

date. And any and then if it goes past

the deadline, those coins would be

frozen under option A, right? And so

people would say it's better to freeze

them and have them sort of be lost

almost like a ship full of gold sinking

to the bottom of the ocean. It would

better it's better to have them be lost

than to have them seized by someone

which could be whoever has this quantum

computer. It could be China, it could be

the US, could be Google. Um and maybe

they whoever this person is, they might

actually dump those coins on the market

and crash the price for everybody else

who was the responsible person who moved

their coins in time. So that's option A

would be to basically uh freeze the

coins that don't upgrade in time. Um now

the option option B would be to say you

know what this is a fundamental uh

guarantee of Bitcoin is that your wealth

can never be seized from you and we it's

actually worth preserving that even if

some bad person is able to go out there

and or good person and and go grab some

of these coins. Um that's like a bounty.

It's a bounty for them to go take it.

Now the person who failed to upgrade

might actually lose their coins but at

least we have preserved the integrity of

the Bitcoin blockchain and I think that

is also a valid uh point of view and

then there's like a maybe like a third

hybrid option which is kind of emerging

which is to say um the coins would be

you know frozen by a certain date but

there's an appeal mechanism by which you

could try to convince people that

actually you are the rightful owner of

those coins in the future if you don't

upgrade in time and the details of that

are a little bit um ambiguous at the

moment. moment. There's various

proposals, but that hopefully gives you

a sense of a little bit of what the

Bitcoin community will have to grapple

with. Uh

>> to is there a date by which your group

of advisers are saying we should make

the uh the switch over?

>> I don't think they've put out like a

hard date at the moment. They're mostly

um trying to uh help the community come

together just live inerson meetings to

start to talk about what the options are

and align on it a path forward.

I I'm also one other curiosity. Uh

Satoshi's wallet. Um how big is that

bounty? Any idea?

>> Uh I'd have to go look up. I think it

was something like 5 to 10% of all

Bitcoin. Um and it's really just these

early uh these early coins that are the

most at risk. So yeah, it would be

something in the range of 5 to 10%. It's

not like 80% of Bitcoin would be lost.

It'd be more like 5 to 10% in that uh

case. But many many people believe that

those coins are already lost

essentially. Um, whoever created

Bitcoin, they haven't moved those coins

in all this time. And so, it's most

likely that those keys are lost to

history.

>> All right. All right. Our our final

Bitcoin crypto story, perhaps one of the

most important ones, and Alex is a nod

to you. Coinbase says agent economy has

arrived. AI agents are starting to

become paying customers. They're using

crypto wallets to autonomously buy

services. Uh, and Brian, I think these

numbers are correct. uh on your network

uh agents have already done about 3.1

million transactions, a little bit over

a million dollars worth of value

transfer. And uh I love your quote, make

sure your business is ready to accept AI

agents as customers. And for all of our

viewers out there, if you're in

business, uh imagine your next customer

not might not be a human. uh you know uh

agents can't currently get credit cards

uh but they can get access to crypto

wallets and uh it's an exciting future.

So Brian in the future I'm curious do

you think Coinbase might be known as

payment rails for AIS rather than

exchange for humans? I mean it feels

like it's going to be vastly you know uh

you know a thousand to1 a million to one

a billion1 agents over humans using

crypto.

>> Yeah. So that's definitely part of our

strategy is to become the financial

account for AI and actually those

numbers are a little out of date you got

there. We I think it's about 100 million

transactions now maybe 50 million of

value.

>> Wow.

>> So it's it's growing quickly. So yeah,

there's at the beginning of this year,

we sat down and were thinking about this

a bit like what are all the ways that AI

agents might interface with people's

financial accounts, right? So I kind of

broke it down into three. The first one

is that everyone's everyone's using

these LLMs, right? like chatb and claude

and they're probably going to want

they're asking a lot of financial

questions to those LLMs but the LLMs

don't have context about what's in their

financial account their portfolio and

they don't have the ability to make

changes in there or make trades for

instance send payments so the first

thing that's going to happen I think is

people are just going to use LLM to

connect to their Coinbase account which

we now have the ability for people to do

that um using an MCP API and a command

line interface if people want to use

that so That's that's step one is just

connect your LLMs to your Coinbase

account so you can control it through

there and it has all of the context on

your account. And then step two is a lot

of people are going to want to just have

something like this right in right

inside the Coinbase account. So this is

where we created something called

Coinbase Advisor. Then it can kind of

help you with things like rebalance my

portfolio, you know, tax loss

harvesting. can prompt you with things

and say, "Hey, you know, you could earn

a better rate on this money if you put

it in this DeFi protocol instead of

whatever you're doing with it now, just

holding it in cash." And so, um, that's

the step two is like just right inside

the Coinbase app, there should be an

agentic driven interface. And then the

third part is kind of what you're

referencing here, which is I don't want

to just use AI to control my own

existing Brian's financial account.

Every AI agent is going to have its own

financial account, right? and it has to

be able to sign up for that without you

know going through a traditional process

of like KYC know your customer like the

an agent doesn't have a piece of paper

issued by the government with your photo

on it or something how are they going to

go sign up for these accounts and so

that's where we created um you know we

with our base pro our base protocol we

have like a self-custodial wallet that

any AI agent can sign up for instantly

with no KYC they can have their own

self-custodial wallet and that's what

they're using to and transact right now

in these um agentic payments that are

starting to scale up.

>> Alex, you want to jump in?

>> So maybe just first as a preliminary

matter to address the elephant in the

room. I have I guess I'm often painted

as the crypto bear on this pod. I have

no direct exposure to Bitcoin. I have no

direct exposure to gold. I I don't view

either of them as uh as a productive

asset, but I have a lot of friends who

are very invested in in Bitcoin. I do

think on the other hand, Brian, what

you're doing for the agent economy is

just tremendous. And I I think in

particular the great unbanked set of AI

agents, what you're offering is

transformative for them. So question for

Brian, um if the government tomorrow

were to change or or you know the

executive, Department of Treasury, SEC,

FINRA, etc. If if all of the regulatory

apparati were to change their approach

to KYC, basically to expand the moral

circle of entities that are allowed to

open conventional fiat bank accounts,

how do you think about what that would

do to say stable coinbased agentic

wallets or or just agentic wallets in

general? Would Coinbase, for example,

move in the direction of becoming a more

conventional banker to the AI agents if

that happened?

>> Yeah. Well, okay. So, it's a great

question. Um, and it's funny. I hear a

lot of times people come to me and talk

about how crypto can empower the

unbanked and the unbrokered. And, um, I

this is the first time I've had somebody

come and say and thank me for, uh,

banking, you know, the agents who are

also being left out of the economy.

>> Welcome to AWG's.

>> I I I won't stop there, Brian. I'm going

to thank you in advance for for enabling

non-human animals to be banked. uh super

interested in what we can do to give

non-human animals bank accounts. Maybe

collective human collective

intelligences give them collective bank

accounts. So many new new sorts of

humans that want banking via you.

>> Mostly

>> I'm into it. Look, I'm here. I'm here

for this topic. Um

>> yeah, like if I neurolink with 10 other

people and we want to collectively open

an account, I'm totally

>> Borgganism bank accounts.

>> Yeah. And I, you know, have you, you've

probably read a lot about like uplifting

animals and like you could make a

dolphin that's actually like pretty high

IQ if with genetic engineering

>> portfolio company Sorama that is

uplifting and and creating interspecies

foundation models for dogs and it will

want a way to give dogs bank accounts.

>> I'm into it. I think I think that smart

smart I don't know if like the average

golden retriever should have a bank

account, but a smart enough dog should

have a bank account or some financial

account. My Labradoodle will spend it

all on steak.

>> Yeah, exactly. Exactly. Uh, Chewy Toys.

Um, but but to answer your question,

Alex, um, you know, would we sort of use

a bank or a traditional financial system

account? So, I I think if if somehow we

could wave a magic wand and say, okay,

KYC is no longer required. You know, the

AI can sign up or the dog can sign up.

Um, I don't think that's going to happen

for one thing, but if it did happen,

that would that would solve part of the

issue. But the other issue is that the

infrastructure underlying those

traditional financial system accounts is

just slow. It's, you know, it's running

on cobalt servers from the 1990s and 80s

and and so the beauty of transacting on

chain with stable coins is that the

infrastructure is just much more f it's

just faster and cheaper and more global.

So you can now send USDC for instance um

in under one second anywhere in the

world for less than a cent uh US. So

it's it's just faster and more scalable.

I to do microtransactions and glo

crossborder transactions. So I I

probably still wouldn't go back and

build it on top of the main frames but

um but the KYC thing would definitely

help. Let's put it that way. And

>> amazing.

>> And Brian, you know, this strategy

potentially breaks all existing

regulations and KYC assumptions. So

talking about liability, you know, if an

AI if an agent overpays or gets scammed

or launders value, I mean have have you

thought through, you know, liability

issues?

>> Yeah. Well, I think there's um we need

to get some legal precedent on this. I

think one school of thought would say

that all agents are actually controlled

by some human or some company and so

their actions ultimately from a

liability point of view roll back up to

that company or person. I could see that

being one potential outcome, maybe even

the default outcome. I could see another

world that we enter into. who I don't

know if society is ready for this yet,

but if we start having truly intelligent

agents that are autonomous that aren't

really they are their own person, you

know, like um I don't that'll be an

interesting uh legal case when that

first gets brought about that thing, you

know, and maybe it'll it'll get

sentenced to um you know, have to uh be

in solitary confinement or whatever is

like

>> Yeah, I don't I guess you could have a

financial penalty or whatever is

meaningful to the agents. they have to

run on, you know, less power for a while

or something. Um, but um, yeah, I think,

you know, the other thing is that

I we we want to try to make it so that

there's just less fraud in this new

financial system. And, um, one way you

can do that

>> is actually have a reputation on chain.

This is something that

>> we're hoping to build out over time. But

>> I like that.

>> Um,

>> yeah, it's kind of like what Google did

with the internet. You know, they came

up the page rank algorithm and they kind

of said, "All right, how do you know the

reputation of this website?" Well, let's

look at all the other websites that put

links to it and how reputable are those

websites. And so you get this kind of

graph structure that Larry Page came up

with um famously. And so you could do

something similar on chain cuz onchain

payments are just another graph

structure. It's you know if I send money

from me to Peter and maybe if I'm a high

reputation then the amount of that money

times my reputation gets assigned to

Peter as some sort of reputation signal.

It's almost like a like an onchain FICO

score or like a Yelp rating for a

business or something like that. And so

hopefully, you know, you can go buy

things or an agent could buy things um

with some amount of additional

information to know how many how often

did people request a refund for this? Um

or what's the what's the reputation of

this merchant and like like on eBay, I

mean I I love this say, you know, don't

do business with this agent, it's got a

low score or this agent is, you know,

got 100% Uber score. See, what are you

thinking here?

Well, two things. One is uh I think the

once you allow agent e-commerce, this

fully kind of enables the MTAM economy,

which is going to be the future, right?

Obviously, human transactions can be a

dot a drop in the bucket based on that.

Um because the minute agents can kind of

negotiate, pay, buy, consume, etc., you

we talked about the organizational

singularity that's going to collapse

coordination costs again. So there's

unbelievable for me. This is the most

important inflection point in anything

we talk about is creating the payment

rails and capabilities for AI agents to

transact in a reasonable way. So, this

is incredibly powerful.

>> All right, let's get on to the meat of

one of the most important stories here

today. Uh, and it is the US government

exploring ownership stakes in AI

companies. Uh, this is one we've talked

about before. It's getting more real.

Trump called a government stake in AI's

giants a beautiful thing and then

floated the idea that pieces could be

given to the American public to share in

the economic gains. And this isn't

without precedent, right? The government

already holds stakes in more than 20

private companies. Here are some of the

numbers. 10% of Intel, 15% of MP

materials, 10% of lithium Americas, 10%

of Trilogy Metals, 10% of USA Rare

Earth, and 10% of Korea zinc. Uh guys,

to me it sure looks like there's a

precedent for 10% stake in the Frontier

Labs as well. Uh Dave, I want to go to

you first. I mean, one of the questions

that fascinates me is what would the

government do with these shares? Sell

them, keep them.

>> What are your thoughts?

>> Well, I'll tell you it'll I'll tell you

what'll happen. You've got these are

very good moves. I'm not I'm not saying

these are bad moves, but while the

president is making these moves, he's

talking about how insanely stupid the

prior investments were, including

shipping $1.8 8 billion in cash to Iran

and how how stupid the last

administration was. So if you put in

place a precedent of the federal

government choosing what to invest in in

the private economy, you may love it for

a little while, but there's an

administration coming eventually that

you won't love. It's a horrible,

horrible thing. It's exactly what

Eisenhower warned us against actually

right after World War II. Beware of the

military-industrial complex. Well,

that's exactly where we're going now.

These particular investments are great

and I I use the analogy to World War II

a lot, you know, where what we're going

in through right now is so urgent and so

um world changing. It's it's most

similar to to decisions we made during

World War II, which is all about

survival and existential, you know,

threats. And um I think these are very

very good moves in the context of the

race to AI uh with China and terrible

long-term president. So So you know

Peter, you asked a very specific

question. Which president is going to

sell this stock

>> and when? This isn't like a tax that

rolls in steadily and you use it

annually. this is a future decision that

some other president will need to make

and could could tank these stocks if the

federal government dumps huge positions

in some kind of a a future rent which it

inevitably will do. So definitely a

mixed bag and

>> there's an argument that these companies

could be the most uh you know highest

value companies on the planet. uh and if

we're going to need some kind of a

financing mechanism for some future

version of UBI, uh this sounds like it's

gaining the most momentum. Alex, what

are your thoughts? If you're an AI

maximalist and you extrapolate say the

enterprise value of anthropic or its ARR

and you find that it intersects with

Google in the next 18 months or that you

find out if you naively extrapolated out

exponentially becomes larger than the

American economy of today in a few years

then under that prior it's almost

difficult not to imagine some sort of

quasi nationalization whether it's via a

golden share scheme or some other

arrangement. If if OpenAI and Anthropic

as the deacto duopoly that we have right

now, if they're larger than the rest of

the American economy combined, it's

difficult to imagine a case, at least

maybe a limitation of my own

imagination, where there isn't some

strong formal arrangement between those

companies and the US government. So I I

think if you really do believe if you're

drinking the Kool-Aid and you believe

that super intelligence coming from a

small minority of companies in the US

right now are going to dominate the

future economic light cone. I think some

variant of quasi nationalization or

government private sector hybridization

or call it a private public

collaboration if you like that

euphemism. I think some variant thereof

is probably inevitable. And I do think I

So, we talked a bit about this on the

past two pod episodes. Yes, I do think

the singularity is can be operationally

defined as every sci-fi trope happening

everywhere all at once. And we've got a

few in this story. We've got UBI or UBC

or UB on the one hand. We have super

intelligence on the other. And I it's

just I I think if ever there were a time

for some sort of UBI or universal basic

dividend or universal basic equity or

universal basic computer capability

scheme or universal basic services

scheme to manifest in government policy.

It has to happen approximately now or in

the next year or two.

>> I totally agree with that Alex but I

want to throw two things back at you. Uh

first the government has infinite power

of taxation. it doesn't need to own

equity in companies to extract any

amount of money it wants from any AI

entity. So it's just it's just a you

know it's a fact that the government has

all the money extraction ability in the

world. Um, but the other thing is I

think you talked about in a prior pod

the fact that the original atomic energy

uh commission or the NRA I forget which

one or NRC

it was empowered its whole mission under

Nixon was to make nuclear energy happen

in America and the net effect it had was

to prevent nuclear power from existing

in America and you talked you talked

about that at length and so the the act

of nationalization is inevitable I know

with AI I completely agree

But the idea that that the government

somehow empowers progress in that

process, it only inhibits progress.

>> I would draw a distinction. So the the

Atomic Energy Commission was formed at

the AEC in the wake of World War II

under the premise that atomic energy had

essential civilian applications and also

was too important to be left to the

military and also too important to be

left to the civilian government and to

at least solely and too important to be

left solely to the private sector. So

the atomic energy commission was formed

as sort of this hybrid organism and that

evolved eventually into the department

of energy. The problem that I perceive

with the AEC and with uh subsequent

spin-offs and derivatives like the

Nuclear Regulatory Commission is it was

almost born in in war. It was it was

born out of a time in a place where you

have uh in the early days of the Atomic

Energy Commission almost a sense of

guilt that hung over Manhattan Project

scientists who were losing quite a bit

of sleep over who would own the children

of atomic weaponry. Here I I would say

at least one substantive difference is

super intelligence isn't being born out

of Hiroshima or any equivalent. It it

started from the private sector with

private sector scientists. The US

government I mean Sam famously offered

the US government a stake early on uh in

open AI in order to to seek earlier

funding and US government reportedly

turned down open AI. So I I would say

qualitatively if you compare the the

rise of atomic power and how it was

regulated in this country during and

after World War II with AI technology in

some sense polar opposites started from

the private sector. US government could

have taken an early stake could have

been uh at least nationalized at a very

early age could have been militarized at

a very early stage and that just didn't

happen. So, I'm a lot less worried that

somehow the government will step in, at

least for the next few years under this

administration, step in and pull an NRC

and find ways to to slow everything

down. Uh, unless the the Frontier Labs

in this country really do want to slow

down.

>> Brian, Brian, you're running a $40

billion public company right now. How

does this make you feel?

Um I don't spend too much of my time

thinking about it but um you know high

level any company that reaches a certain

size is going to interface with the

government. Um but as others have

mentioned here that can take many

different forms right paying taxes is is

the most obvious one. Um you're going to

engage with them on various policy

issues and this administration's been

very open and eager to make improve

policy around crypto which has been

great. Um you may the government may

actually end up being a customer uh of

your product as well. So that that's

another touch point. Um you know we

actually provide uh crypto services to

about 140 different government agencies

at federal, state and local levels. Um

and so to me that's sufficient. I don't

think going farther than that and

actually having them take an ownership

stake in the company unless you know if

I guess if if there let's say there was

a matter of national security and this

companies were not would not exist

otherwise

um and there was fundraising happening

from the government I guess you could

they could end up with some equity in

that situation but it just begs the

question of like well who's going to be

managing this portfolio of company

stocks when you know when would they

sell them because it's not like a

foregone conclusion that Enthropic and A

are going to be the biggest AI companies

forever. It might end up being that, you

know, Google or someone else does a or

SpaceX does a better job, right? So now

you're suddenly saying, okay, we're

going to have like capital management

happening inside the government. I I

think the government should be limited

to setting policy

>> and the private sector should do the

capital allocation.

>> Nice.

>> Yeah. Considering that that companies

donate to political campaigns,

>> you think about how toxic that circle

is. Oh, okay. this this government is

investing in my company and I'm going to

turn around and donate to their next

election campaign.

>> Like that is the most toxic circle I can

possibly imagine. Can you imagine what

what

>> democracy in America?

>> Yeah. Um

>> I'm I'm curious, Brian, though. Do you

think that as a country we should have a

sovereign wealth fund?

>> Okay. So, that's a complex topic. I

think um there's parts of it that I like

a lot and parts of it I don't. So, the

part that I like is that it would allow

everybody to have skin in the game. And

I think we'd see more cohesion,

um, less polarization,

and it's a little bit like in a company,

you know, inside Coinbase, employees get

stock options because if we all have we

we're kind of grumpy today and we get in

a little fight with our coworker, but

hey, we all own we're making something

bigger than this. So, we all kind of

stick around and work out our

differences. So, in that sense, I love

the idea of people being able to buy

into a sovereign wealth fund, but also

maybe every citizen getting a share at

birth. It's a little bit like what

they're doing with these Trump accounts

right now. So, I think that'll actually

>> make people more aligned to free market

capitalism and have skin in the game.

The downside is kind of what we talked

about earlier, which is who's allocating

that money, right? If if we were in sort

of a Singapore model where like the top

uh people in private industry got

commensurate compensation to come into

government like I think you know Michael

Grimes from Morgan Stanley I think came

in and was working with the

administration at some point like

someone like him would probably do a

good job managing that allocating it. Do

I believe that that's going to exist in

all in every administration for you know

over time? Like it's just very hard to

see it getting it could very easily get

politicized right where they start

investing in the green revolution

whether that works or not or you know

all all kinds of things like that. So I

uh I don't know I'm torn I'm torn on

that one. We got to find some way to

bring cohesion back to the US but I'm

not sure if a sovereign wealth fund

would be managed well over time. Like

just having a strict rule like keep it

in the S&P 500 would be a nice

mitigating factor. something something

like that.

>> Welcome to the health section of

Moonshots brought to you by Fountain

Life. You know, AI is having an outsiz

impact on every aspect of our lives. How

we teach our kids, how we run our

companies. It also is having a huge

impact on health, helping you prevent

heart disease. One of the key things I'm

here with Dr. Don Mucalem, our chief

medical officer at Fountain. Heart

disease has been personal for you as

well, hasn't it?

>> It really has, Peter. When my daughter

was five, my husband died of sudden

cardiac death. And so this is a topic

that is one that I am missiondriven to

try to eradicate. Prevention first and

early detection is absolutely critical.

50% of people die of heart attacks with

no warning signs.

>> No shortness of breath, no pain, no

nothing.

>> No silent killer.

>> They just don't wake up in the morning.

>> They don't wake up. And so you know AI,

this is our mission to advance science

to try to help to one day democratize

wellness. We know at fountain life when

we do this CT angography with AI

analytics, we are actually finding that

88% of people coming in have detectable

coronary artery disease. But Peter,

what's more alarming to me is 23% of

those individuals had soft plaque. This

is the plaque that would not

traditionally be seen on CT looking at

calcium scores alone. And this is the

plaque that we must intervene with with

the multimodal testing we're doing,

including diagnostic laboratory studies

partnered with healthy lifestyle

recommendations.

>> So listen, make sure you understand

what's going on inside your body

genetically, metabolically, and

cardiovascularly. You can know, and it's

your obligation to know. So check it out

at fountainlife.com/per

to find out more and really make sure

that you're the CEO of your own health.

All right, back to the episode. Let me

hit the second story related to this one

moment. Uh I don't want to belabor the

point, but you know Sam Alman sat down

with Senator Sanders who's proposing a

transfer of 50% of equity from the top

AI companies into a public fund. Almond

responded, you know, that's not going to

happen. That's way too much. Uh the

point is we've started a negotiation. Uh

you know 5 years ago this conversation

would have been unthinkable. You know

the Overton window on AI wealth

distribution uh has moved dramatically.

You know, I said earlier we see all

these examples of 10% ownership, and if

I had to guess, uh, I think this is not

going to go away. I think we're going to

see a push towards at least a 10%

ownership. Uh, Dave, what do you think

about that?

>> No, I think it's utterly insane. That's

what I've said before.

>> I know it's insane. Do you think it's

going to happen?

>> Uh, no. I don't think it'll happen. I

think Bernie's just trying to attract

news. Um, and you know, well, you know,

Donald can invest in whatever he wants

to invest in. He has proven that he'll

make that decision on like five minute

notice, you know, after a meeting. So,

so I can't rule out uh but it it doesn't

doesn't strike me as one of the most

likely investments that that Trump would

make. You know, Trump invested heavily

in semiconductors moving back into the

US, investing in OpenAI and anthropics

IPOs, but they're already 100% taxable

US entities that are thriving. Is this

an investment or a grant of shares to

the US government?

>> Bernie's proposal is a is a is a tax.

So, it's just a grant of shares to the

US government,

>> right?

>> I I think it's going to be you know

equivalent to uh you know Alaska's

permanent fund. You've been using our

intelligence. You've been using our

energy. You've been using our real

estate, our oxygen. Uh we going to claim

10% and we're going to you know give it

to the people.

I would say look at it from the Frontier

Labs perspective. Put aside all of any

politics or any technical arguments or

any legal or regulatory arguments. Just

think about it from an optical or a

marketing perspective. If you're open AI

or you're anthropic and you have the

opportunity to say donate 10% equity

through through some legal scheme to the

US government one time 10% maybe in

connection with your IPO this year. Now

suddenly in principle you're inoculated

at least politically against any future

claims that you owe a UBI or or some

other payment to the citizenry. You can

say I already gave up my pound of flesh.

I gave it to the United States and it's

sitting in a sovereign wealth fund now

and it's generating returns for the

American people. That was your one-time

donation. I think if if I'm Sam or if

I'm Daario, that's looking pretty

attractive.

>> And and coupled with that, Alex, you've

also got a conflict, right? The same

state that regulates AI now profits from

your success.

Well, the federal government a a a

incredibly toxic incentive for the the

two mega companies that it extracted

equity from to succeed at the expense of

a startup that isn't part of that same

loop. It's an incredibly toxic dynamic.

Now, like you're saying, the American

people now benefit from these two

companies

>> and and you know, Brian said a second

ago, there will be other companies that

we haven't thought of yet. you know what

do you do with them? They're not part of

the US investment.

>> Yeah, there's a broader incompatibility

here. Think about um these labs and AI

labs becoming civilization scale

infrastructure, right? That means you

have to treat them like strategic

utilities much like electricity. You

regulate the utilities in a particular

way and deal with that. You need a

structure like that. The problem is

there's an incompatibility here because

there's no governance structure that

fits a technology that touches like

every job, every industry, every

government service. So there's a huge

challenge and you can't pick the

winners. It's more a structural problem

that the mechanisms taxation or

ownership. We don't even have a

sovereign wealth fund. So how do you

deal with that? So this is a this is a a

big in incompatibility problem that I

see here. We're going to mess it up.

whatever we do in the current structure.

>> I don't think this is going away. I

think we're going to be seeing this

happen at some level. Alex, I

>> I'll just comment if if you remember

back, one of the earliest executive

orders from this administration was to

order the Secretary of Treasury to

explore setting up a sovereign wealth

fund. And far be it for me to recommend

national economic policy but it's not

difficult for me to imagine a scenario

where the US Treasury does take golden

shares call it 5 to 10% in open AI and

anthropic to complement its existing

portfolio and then some amount of time

from now maybe sometime in the next few

years there's a great rebalancing we get

our sovereign wealth fund but to Brian's

earlier point rather than being a basket

of 20 or 30 or 40 techoriented or

strategic companies. Instead, the

federal government eases into say an S&P

500 or a total market index, gradually

liquidating its holdings in the

individual companies in favor for a

total market index. And that children is

how we got our universal basic income or

equity.

>> Mhm. Yep. All right. Uh late breaking

story, OpenAI has officially filed its

S1 to go public later this year. Poly

market bets. 46% say it'll come out at

1.5 trillion or greater and 26% say it's

not going to happen this year. Uh this

would be the third trillion dollar IPO

following Anthropic and SpaceX AI which

is coming at 1.77 trillion in just a

couple of days. I I wanted to just point

out a conversation we had on the pod I

don't know a month and a bit ago uh in

which I don't you guys remember uh Sarah

Frier the CFO came out and said

privately that she was very concerned

that openi was not ready to be a public

company you know it had a risk of 600

billion of compute contracts on its

books uh I guess she thinks they're

ready now Dave what are you thinking

here I

>> I think it's more that times have

changed I I think uh every CFO I've ever

met wants visibility at least three or

four quarters into the future, but in

the singularity, no one's ever going to

have visibility three or four quarters

in the future ever again. That's just

the nature of technology. Yeah, exactly.

So, so I think CFOs like Sarah just need

to get comfortable with look, this is

the way the future has to be.

>> Uh and you know, what used to be three,

four, four, five quarters of visibility

is now three, four, five months is is

the best you're ever going to get. And

even that is a shrinking horizon. But

the economy marches on. You know, we're

have to get used to the, you know, if

you look at just the daily volatilility

of the market, it's it's so high now

because tech is just that's just the

nature of tech. So, uh, so I think the

CFOs of the future will get used to it.

And but you you can't miss the IPO

window, right? If you get SpaceX going

out and you get Anthropic going out, you

have to go out.

>> The challenge is coming out coming out

third during a cash crunch, right? I

mean, there's only so much liquidity out

there, and if you're coming out third

and, you know, SpaceX is skyrocketing

and and Anthropic is, you know, growing

at 640% per year, uh, it's dangerous to

come out third.

>> It is, but if you if you said, "Okay,

the counterargument is then, let's get

let those other two IPOs happen. Let's

let them digest their hundreds of

billions of dollars and let the market

recharge, and then we'll go out later

when it's recharged." You're going to be

waiting years.

>> Yeah. you know, you're not talking about

3 months later. So then then you're

like, okay, you can't you can't wait

years. Anything could happen in between.

Meanwhile, these guys are fully tanked

up and moving 100,000 miles an hour. No,

you don't want you don't want to be that

company. So, you got to go. You got to

go.

>> When you've got these trillion dollar

IPOs, the whole kind of corporate rapper

seems way too small for what's going on.

>> This is so unprecedented compared to

anything in human history. It's just

absolutely wild.

>> Yeah. Does it break?

>> Yeah. Go on, Alex.

>> Remember also these concerns? April was

a whole two months ago. That's several

lifetimes in singularity time scaling

ago. Open AAI had recently come out of

its code red. They were shutting down

Sora and some of their other divisions

trying to become anthropic faster than

anthropic could become Open AI. pivoting

to codeex and then arguably most

importantly taking Stargate which was

originally conceived as being OpenAI

owned and operated data centers and

rebranding basically a leasing scheme as

the new Stargate. So I I my sense as an

outsider without access to internal

accounting is that through a combination

of new revenue sources like basically

becoming the codeex company uh removing

other expenses like Sora and like their

AI for science division and then

effectively lobomizing Stargate and

switching it over to a leasing model

rather than an ownership model which if

I were CFO of OpenAI I would have been

scared to death of the ownership. model

given all of the price girrations in the

GPU market. I I would expect that given

all of those measures that open AI again

not investment advice but comes out of

all of those with a much more stable and

predictable prospectus than the open AI

that came into this year that looked

much more like a consumer play volatile

that was going to own its data centers.

Scary.

>> They they pulled it off, Alex. They

really pulled it off. They turned it

around.

They did, but that's probably what

freaked out Sarah. If you looked at the

forecast from a year ago, it it had 20

billion of ad revenue and I forget, but

many, many billions of consumer

subscription revenue and then a little

bit of enterprise.

>> And now, if you look at the forecast,

it's a complete inversion of the colors

on the bar chart. That always scares a

CFO, right?

>> Brian, you know, I have to imagine that

being a founder tech company is the big

advantage that you have over traditional

large corporations. I mean, being able

to say we're going this way uh versus

that way, but for all my friends who are

public company CF CEOs, uh it it's not

fun. How do you think about about, you

know, remembering when you were a couple

months before your IPO? What's going on

inside of a company theoretically like

this?

>> Well, a couple things come to mind. One

is um there's always there should be

some healthy tension, I think, between

like a founder, CEO, and a CFO. I mean,

that's founders are great at many

things. Um, but if you just have too

much founder energy, sometimes they blow

the place up, right? We can probably

think of our favorite companies in that

example. Um, but simultaneously, you

don't just want to have risk-minded

operators uh running the show. And that

that's just a recipe for incrementalism

or even slow decline, right? So, I think

it's sometimes the press likes to report

on these things of like, oh my gosh,

there's drama happening between, you

know, I'm like, that's called a healthy

conversation. So I imagine that they're

they're actually working like relatively

well together on this and it's a high

stakes moment for both of them.

>> Um the other thing is like sometimes

people criticize OpenAI like oh my gosh

they missed their their target uh their

end ofear target to get a billion users

or something like that and you know

internally we all we often use like the

OKR system and we we tell we tell

everybody set uncomfortably ambitious

goals and if you hit at least 70% of it

that's considered a good outcome. So

when whenever companies switch into the

public mindset, they're often setting

their goals start to become more like

appropriate for external investors where

wow, we just hit our goals every quarter

around here. Who you know? Um and so

anyway, there's a lot of t stuff like

that that happens behind the scenes. I

think the highle bit is right is what

you guys already covered is they've got

to get out just because that's what

their competitors are doing and that's

where the capital is going to all go.

So, it's going to be uncomfortable and

messy and I'm a little worried about um

these valuations where retail is going

to, you know, be the the buyer of this

and take the hit.

>> Yeah, it could be pretty choppy here.

Um, you know, just self because we

talked about how AI is sort of taking

all the oxygen out of the room. Like

selfishly, I think other techos are kind

of like, all right, finally get these

things public so there can be a real

mark on it and maybe um some of the the

hype dies down a little bit. I I also

think there's going to be fierce

competition amongst these these models

because they keep like the open source

models are basically just as good and 3

to six months behind for like 99%

>> that much if that much.

>> Yeah. And they they're like literally

99% cheaper for inference. So I think

that the demand for intelligence is

almost infinite. It probably is infinite

but the costs are going to fall like way

more than Mo's law. So um you know are

is the harness that these guys are

making whether it's codec or claude uh

claude code are those valuable? I don't

think the harness is where the value is.

I think that um like the the the

depreciation on these models like how

how fastly how fast the price of them

drop for the same level of intelligence

is going to be dramatic. And I think

within 12 18 months 80% of our workloads

are going to be going to models that are

99% cheaper.

>> Yeah. I Brian I had a meeting with a

Morgan Stanley guy right after the

Facebook IPO and he said oh my god this

was the worst disaster in in US

financial history with the stock was

down I think about half after the IPO

and nothing wrong with the company

obviously and it was a great investment

in hindsight obviously but there just

wasn't enough liquidity so they they

dumped it in all their private client

accounts then watched it go down by half

and now we're doing this three

backtoback IPOs

each one of which is a factor of 10

bigger than anything we've ever seen

before. And so I I'm just curious, the

logistics of this could be a nightmare.

Even if the companies are great and even

if five years from now they're way up

from their IPO valuations, is there

really that much money in the world?

Like does it actually exist?

>> And it'll be we'll find out, I guess.

>> Yeah. And and right now, you know, I

have a lot of friends who like if I'm

not, you know, pitching my AI story for

my company, I can't get money. AI is

sucking the oxygen out of out of the

room everywhere. All right, this next

story generally stopped me in my tracks.

Uh, you know, Google, one of the biggest

AI infrastructure players on the planet

with its own TPUs and data centers, is

paying SpaceX 11 billion per year

through 2029 to access 110,000 NVIDIA

GPUs inside of XAI's data center. Uh,

you know, SpaceX is now clearly a

hyperscaler. And it's ironic, Google is

renting compute from Elon's rocket

company, which by the way, Google is an

investor in Elon's rocket company. I

love this quote from Austin Reef who put

it. It's crazy that with one deal,

SpaceX IPO went from 100x revenues to

50x revenues. Uh, one contract have the

company's valuation multiple, you know,

and and this tells us, you know, clearly

the story. There's a massive AI compute

shortage.

>> Yeah. So

>> love to get your take on this Alex

because uh you know there was a view of

the world where Elon was building a

frontier lab with a you know

first-in-class model. Now if he rents

all the compute to Anthropic and to

Google then clearly he's backed out of

that game completely. I'm not quite sure

you know when he did the first rental to

Anthropic he said that's Colossus one.

Colossus 2 is still grinding away on the

you know the the mother of all frontier

models. You're going to actually when we

interviewed him in Austin, remember

Peter? He said that you're going to be

absolutely blown away by it was Grock 5.

>> Yeah,

>> it's it's it's brilliant. And you know,

here we are. That was due out in March

and here we are. It's June.

>> Well, he's clearly refocused his

attention.

>> Well, all of Colossus 2, do you know,

Alex?

>> I I think a lot of it uh is my

understanding. So, I I took a bit of

heat for saying a few episodes ago that

I I thought Grock in the wake of the

anthropic SpaceX deal was on life

support and Peter and I had a back and

forth with Elon on X talking about it. I

I do think Elon and SpaceX AI are going

to come back to the frontier at some

point. It's not obvious to me that the

acquisition basically the the deacto

acquisition of Curser is going to be

that moment. Uh or if that'll put them

maybe just behind the the frontier in

what effectively has become a second

tier of the frontier. Call it the Google

tier uh until Google hopefully leaprogs.

It would certainly be great to get more

competition among frontier models. But I

if if I'm Elon, I'm I'm thinking the

best shot that SpaceX AI has to get back

to being the frontier is by being a

hyperscaler first. That ultimately

algorithmic

wars, which is what we're seeing right

now, will burn themselves out. We'll

discover through recursive

self-improvement over the next few years

what a perfect AI model looks like. And

then the war, the competition moves to

who is the biggest, baddest hyperscaler,

who has the most hardware and the most

compute.

>> And Alex, don't forget the anthropic

deal can be cancelled with, you know,

some like a quarter.

>> It's month by month. I think it's month

by month.

>> And then this is only a three-year

contract. So when when Elon Elon never

uh never plays second fiddle, right? He

will be working on

>> He wrote back to us, he'll never give

up. never underline. But what I would

say is that the question is how do you

get back to the frontier? And I I

suspect the thinking may be become a

hyperscaler for the moment. Put Grock on

de facto life support for a year or two.

Use revenue from the Google deal and the

anthropic deal to accumulate enough of a

head of steam on the SpaceX side that

you're able to go and build the Dyson

swarm in sun-synchronous orbit. And then

once you have 10x 100x more compute than

everyone else, then you go and try to

reach a frontier status by training on

the

>> world and and buy every model that you

want to. He's going to have a currency

that he can go on shopping sprees with.

>> Well, he just did that with cursor, but

that may or may not be enough to get him

to the frontier. It may require

>> one of many.

>> There may be some things that money

can't buy, but that compute can. and his

thinking maybe speculatively he can buy

enough compute to buy his way back to

the frontier.

>> You know if Google needs this much

external compute like at this scale that

tells you the bottleneck has completely

shifted from model design to

infrastructure. I'm finding this hard to

comprehend that Google needs this level

of compute. That's a crazy crazy number

they're paying for this.

>> I mean I thought they had their own

infrastructure. Is that is the compute

demand so crazy?

>> Yeah. No, it's everything is sold out,

Seem. I mean, they'll take everything.

>> Yeah,

>> it's completely So, so just numerically,

this is a this is 110,000 GPUs here. I

thought he bought half a million. No, he

did the other deal with Anthropic

already.

>> Um, so does that mean he's still got a

couple hundred thousand GPUs for

internal XAI training or not?

>> I I think these are different

generations. So, the Colossus one was

sort of an unholy ad mixture of several

different I think it it was a mixture of

H100's and several other generations. Uh

so uh Colossus 2 was supposed to be a

pure mixture. Remember also Google most

of their compute takes the TPU format.

You have customers that don't

necessarily want to run their workloads

on TPUs. They may want the Nvidia CUDA

stack. And so there are variety of

reasons why if if you're Google Cloud

Platform, you want to be able to to rope

in additional GPUs if you can find them.

All right, I'm going to move us along

unless someone else has another point

you want to make here. Uh, this next

story is sort of science fiction

becoming real. I love the scope and

audacity of uh of Elon's plans. This is

their AI1 satellite they just unveiled.

The next generation AI satellite

designed, Alex, to launch humanity's

first Dyson Swarm here. The spec the

specs are wild. 150 kW of peak compute,

70 kW per ton. This is a two-tonon

satellite, a 70 m wingspan, basically

the wingspan of a an Airbus 380 with 110

square meters of deployable radiative

cooling and an integrative

micrometeorite shield. Right, there's

lots of micromedorites hitting the

planet all the time. Uh Elon's

description is worth me reading. He

says, quote, "The AI satellite is much

simpler than a Starling satellite. The

AI satellite is essentially a lot of

solar cells. You still need some laser

links, but you don't have all the super

complex antennas that you have on a

Starlink satellite. It's easier to

design than uh than the AI satellite.

It's a lot bigger. A lot of this

technology already exists with Starlink

V3. So, here he is. Uh he's making it

real. That's what he does all the time.

Build the tech to make it real. Alex,

what do you make of it?

>> A few thoughts. First, it's beautiful.

>> Yeah, it is beautiful. Second, it's so

beautiful. In in in my daily newsletter,

I featured an artistic rendering of this

design. It's beautiful. Second thought,

look at how much of its surface area has

nothing to do at all with compute. Look

at the solar arrays for power. Look at

the radiators for heat dissipation. Look

how tiny, at least by surface area. All

of this is for compute. What that says

to me is, think a few generations out.

Imagine now we're in the early 2030s and

maybe compact fusion is finally working.

Wouldn't that radically change the form

factor?

>> Power beaming.

>> Power beaming. Sure. But even with power

beaming, you still need to uh you still

need to radiate the the power from uh

from heat dissipation uh from the the

GPUs and you still need to receive the

power. uh yes, it'll enable them to be

more focused, but you're still you're

still depending on some sort of

radiative transfer in both directions.

But imagine like a few generations out,

you have some some radically innovative

radiator system to get rid of your waste

heat. And maybe you're able to locally

power yourself without needing the sun.

These can be incredibly compact. This is

the most disjointed, the largest,

bulkiest, most mainframe era node in the

Dyson swarm we're ever likely to see.

Imagine now in the future something

that's far more compact, something that

is looks maybe a little bit more

spherical and a little bit less like a

leaf blowing in the solar wind. This is

the first generation of I think the node

in our Dyson swarm Elon does over and

over again, right? his Merlin engines,

you know, V1, V2, V3, they get smaller,

more compact, get it working and then

simplify.

>> Yes,

>> Brian. Uh, any appreciation that you

want to share on this one?

>> I mean, Elon's the best in the world at

hardware. No doubt about it. I, you were

talking about micromedorites. I was just

imagining they must have some redundancy

here. Like, if if there's some bullet,

you know, some bullet fragments can fly

through this thing either on the solar

panel or on the liquid radiators. Maybe

there's different compartments like, you

know, it could it could sustain uh five

bullet hits into the radiators and still

get sufficient cooling or something like

that. And then the other thing I'm just

wondering is how does it all fold up

inside Starship? But I'm sure I'm sure

it'll be a beautiful origami. And by the

way, the point you just made about

Starship, the reason, you know, SpaceX

can do this is because of Starship and

its volume. you know, no one else I

don't think any other vehicle is going

to have the level of capacity to build

or deploy satellites like this. So,

>> but also keep in mind again so 150 kow

we were speaking previously uh with

Andrew and uh talking about cerebrus.

Cerebrus like a wafer scale engine is

what like 10 20 30 kow 20 kow

>> 20 kow. So 70 kow is a ton for this

>> versus like 20 kow for a single wafer

that's what fraction of a kilogram. So

imagine how far we are from the physical

physically efficient frontier here. When

we talk all the time on on the pod royal

we about the Dyson swarm. Some of us

talk about disassembling the moon or or

other planets and what what what a waste

by atom count most of our solar system

is. Drink. Yeah, drink.

>> What a waste by mass most of our solar

system is. If it takes an entire ton to

generate 150 kilowatts of compute in low

Earth orbit or sun-synchronous orbit,

we're orders of magnitude, but that says

to me, we're orders of magnitude away

from efficiently turning most of the

matter of our solar system, most of it

by mass anyway, into compute. So, plenty

of scaling to go as well.

>> Dave,

>> well, Peter, you're the you're the

master of launching. Uh if this is about

a $6 million GPU compute thing, you

know, 150 kilowatts is about translates

to about 6 million of GPU. But what is

the launch cost of this one unit? So

this would be equivalent to like an

NV72, you know, if it were in Nvidia

terms. That's up there in space.

>> You want to get down you want to get it

down to 100 dollars per kilogram, right?

That's the target price uh at the end of

the day. Uh and remember his original

filing was for 500,000 of these

satellites. Uh you know the calculation

is like a launch per hour of Starship 24

hours a day, 7 days a week to deploy

that and then he upped it to a million

satellites. Uh

I I I think again the audacity of his

scale is extraordinary but he backs into

the numbers as a first principal thinker

and he makes it work.

>> Yeah. A couple of thoughts here. you

know the AI infrastructure now stops

being a real estate problem and starts

becoming a launch problem right and this

is one of the moments where we're seeing

the category change in real time where

it's not a rocket company it's not a

satellite internet company it's like

literally civilizational infrastructure

company I such an unbelievable demand

for power that we have to do this and

let's remember that this was you know

data orbital compute was not in

anybody's bingo card a year ago and here

we designed it and like planning on

getting it out there. Incredible.

>> And and even more, every large AI

company is talking about putting up

their orbital data centers. Uh and now

that new Glenn is not functioning,

right? It's going to be down for at

least a year. Um maybe more. Uh SpaceX

is the only story in town. We'll see if

Relativity Space makes it happen or

Rocket Rocket Labs gets their larger

vehicle operating. Uh this next story,

you know, Elon loves building the

machines that build the machines. And

and so this week, SpaceX announced a

Gigasat factory. Love the term giga. Uh

once again, of course, in Texas, and

they're going to be producing the A1 the

AI1 satellites uh in late 2027. The

scale is enormous, 1,000 acres capacity

for 11 million square ft of facilities.

And Dave, you remember when we were with

Elon um at the Gigafactory and this is

the Gigafactory playbook once again, he

was building out again 11 million square

ft for Optimus production. Uh so the

important thing here is it's fully

integrated. You know, they're going to

produce the solar ingots, the wafers,

the solar cells, and the entire AI uh

one satellite all on one campus. Uh and

vertical integration matters. You know,

if you control the entire supply chain

from raw materials to finished products,

you control your cost and your timeline.

And that's probably the number one thing

that Elon does extremely well is

manufacturing.

>> Uh Dave,

>> is and and look at look at Texas just

running away with every one of these

projects. It's crazy.

>> Yeah. You know, and then in all the

posts online, if you look on X,

everyone's like, "Oh my gosh, he's

taking over all of Texas." Look, a

thousand acres is about two golf

courses. So next time you're flying,

look down. It's it's just two golf

courses, guys. He's not taking over all

the land in Texas. But the the impact of

this on the economy in that state is

unbelievably healthy. Unbelievably good.

So I don't know why more states aren't

competing for this.

>> I think there's an important point that

we're sleeping on, which is vertical

integration. Yeah, sure. He's he's doing

that, but it's not necessarily just for

his own sake or because he wants to be

the the master of the supply chain for

this. It's because if you follow

carefully SpaceX's announcements in

connection with its IPO, they've been

releasing demo videos, concept videos of

doing this on the moon. And if you're

not in a position to vertically

integrate production of these AI

orbiting data centers, then you're not

in a position to start manufacturing

them off the Earth, namely on the lunar

surface. So he and SpaceX released this

video of an electromagnetic slingshot

launching bam bam bam AI orbital data

centers with a rail gun from the surface

of the moon presumably manufactured on

the surface of the moon.

>> Yes. So I I think that that's the

essential thing that that we arguably

should be talking about here. If you

have vertical integration of the solar

and the compute, then you can do that on

the moon and then uh your your your

delta V is far more favorable and you

can just start slinging these things out

and building the actual Dyson swarm, not

from the Earth's surface where the

economics for heavy launch are less

favorable. Yeah. I'll never forget I was

with Elon um at SpaceX headquarters and

we were having a conversation about, you

know, the fact he was bemoning the fact

he has to make everything, right? We

we're hearing that same thing from Brett

Adcock at Figure and a lot of other

high-tech companies and there was a

product called Pika, which is the heat

shielding uh for the Dragon capsule and

he was getting screwed by the

manufacturer and so he just turned to

the manufacturer and said, "Forget it.

I'm going to make it myself and put you

out of business. And just just the

ferocious mindset he has is

extraordinary. Um

>> well, do you have a prediction, Peter?

It'd be great to get everyone's

prediction, but this partnership right

now between Daario and Elon is insanely

powerful because because you know, Alex

is pointing out continually that new

physics is going to be invented by AI

imminently. And that new physics, if it

goes right into these gigafs, uh it

could be just mind-blowing what comes

out the other side. And and also if

Daario wins the race to

self-improvement, then he's going to

have the smartest AI, you know, and

rapidly accelerating, but Elon will have

the space-based data centers and the

manufacturing capability to turn that

into a closed loop, you know, self

self-manufacturing closed loop, which

Daario hasn't even started on. You know,

there's no there's no physical stuff

going on at Anthropic at all yet. Uh,

and you know, you know, where the rubber

really hits the road is the AI that

designs chips. So here's Elon building

the Terraab, but the chip design itself

comes from the smartest AI, which is,

you know, probably going to be Daario.

May maybe, you know, OpenAI has a

chance, too. But that that duopoly

becomes incredibly powerful if they

stick together. But do you think they'll

still be friends five years?

>> Yeah, these guys, I mean, all of the

players here have formed partnerships

and broken partnerships and reshuffled

the deck, you know, probably multiple

times over the last few years. So what's

your question? Is is the partnership

going to stick together?

>> Well, five years from today, are Daario

and Elon um friends?

>> Yeah. Like like shaking hands and

>> No, I haven't seen honestly I love I

love Elon, but I haven't seen him

partner uh for the long term ever. Uh

every every partnership comes together,

he takes the lead and runs with it. I'll

register a prediction which is I I think

there are going to be such crazy things

happening in the next few years that we

we'll look back and laugh at ourselves

for even asking the question of whether

Elon will be shaking hands with

>> Dar answer to the question

>> interesting

>> questioning the question itself

thoughts

>> uh I totally agree with you Peter I

think this is like uh just I'm I'm just

boggled by the level of of somebody

thinking Looking at civilization scale

on a non-stop basis, and I love it.

>> This episode is brought to you by

Blitzy, autonomous software development

with infinite code context. Blitzy uses

thousands of specialized AI agents that

think for hours to understand

enterprisecale code bases with millions

of lines of code. Engineers start every

development sprint with the Blitzy

platform, bringing in their development

requirements. The Blitzy platform

provides a plan, then generates and

pre-ompiles code for each task. Blitzy

delivers 80% or more of the development

work autonomously while providing a

guide for the final 20% of human

development work required to complete

the sprint. Enterprises are achieving a

5x engineering velocity increase when

incorporating Blitzy as their preIDE

development tool, pairing it with their

coding co-pilot of choice to bring an AI

native SDLC into their org. Ready to 5x

your engineering velocity? Visit

blitzy.com to schedule a demo and start

building with Blitzy today.

>> All right. Uh, amazing. All right, let's

move to our next story here. Let's put

some financial figures on this. Um

SpaceX valuation is uh right now in poly

market expected to hit 2.13 trillion at

the close of the first day of market. Uh

and here's the news. Morgan Stanley

projects SpaceX revenue could grow from

get this 18.7 billion in 2025. That's

the last number we have on the books to

3.4 trillion by 2040. Uh at those

revenues at 3.4 4 trillion by 2040. That

puts SpaceX's value at some place

between 50 trillion to 100 trillion.

Right? We're seeing the birth

potentially the first hundred trillion

dollar company. Uh and and these charts

down below tell the story, right? So

here's the revenue numbers today. You

know, uh Starlink is 11 billion of

revenue. Launch revenue is a measly 4

billion. Uh AI revenue from XAI at 3.2

billion. And here comes Google at 11

billion and then SpaceX uh you know

total of $18 billion. So uh crazy

numbers. Any thoughts on this? I mean I

don't think people again no no company

in history has ever hit a trillion

dollars of revenue. So just to put this

in context, you're talking about the

really really big guys like Walmart and

Amazon. You know they're getting close

but they're not at a trillion yet. Uh so

this four trillion.

>> Yeah. On the on the other hand, a

trillion is what, like 3% of US GDP. So,

and that's today's GDP. If if we undergo

his predicted uh 3xing year-over-year or

10xing year-over-year of GDP, that still

makes this a relatively small drop in

the bucket. I I think it not investment

advice obviously but I I think it is

very much a conceivable scenario and one

in which maybe the Dyson swarm gets

built and most of or a large chunk of

civilization runs on the compute that

the Dyson swarm provides. Yeah, sure. A

few trillion dollars makes total sense.

>> Seem, you want to close us out?

>> I got nothing.

>> Okay. All right. Fair.

>> I I have a question for Brian though,

just on that narrow point. So let's say

we do build the Dyson swarm. Uh let's

say uh most of the compute in our solar

system is no longer earth-based and

presumably most of our economy consists

of AI agents trading. What do you think

will be the role if any of

cryptocurrency in that future?

>> Well, I think Bitcoin will be the new

gold standard and then the payments will

be happening on chain. So um capital

formation will probably happen on chain.

borrowing and lending, you know,

that's that's the financial system that

the AI agents would end up using. So

that's the most likely outcome in my

point of view.

>> So So you think basically uh there's

almost no impact on margin regarding

whether our compute is terrestrial or

orbital on how the crypto rails or or

broader financial rails of our

civilization operate. no latency

considerations, no trust based

considerations, no decentralization

considerations like doesn't make a

difference.

>> Well, I think a lot of those things will

get better on a crypto-based system like

the decentralization characteristics,

this um soundness of money, right? Um if

you're talking about syncing up a

blockchain between multiple planets like

Mars and Earth, there would be some

delay in that. But I don't see any

reason why, you know, if you need to

transfer money between Mars and Earth,

um it couldn't happen on chain and have

a laser link between them or something

like that. And you know, um so they're

not going to be real-time payments

between those planets, but there could

be uh appropriately delayed payments. Uh

they won't need to settle as often. So

>> are these conversations you're having in

your executive committee every day?

>> My my conversations are sometimes a lot

more mundane about like how do I get

these two people to work together, you

know? But um we still got to solve all

the human problems uh before we start

building interplanetary financial

systems.

>> By the way, I have to point out, you

know, this projection by Morgan Stanley

is definitely a fundraising tool ahead

of the IPO. You know, Morgan Stanley is

one of the banks that's going to profit

from this deal. Uh there's, you know,

I'm reading every day on X that players

are opting out of SpaceX. It's

overvalued. They're valuing it at 700

million, not, you know, 1.7 trillion.

So, we're going to see. I you know I I

fundamentally believe in the long-term

value of SpaceX. Uh I just hope retail

investors don't get hit uh in the in the

process. So while we have Brian uh Brian

Longevity and Biotech, one of my

favorite stories. So first off,

congratulations on your recent raise at

New Limit, $435

million to push us towards uh age

reversal. if you don't mind, uh, tell

us, you know, origin story of New Limit

and, uh, why you and Blake started it

and what are you guys doing there?

>> Yeah. Well, actually, Jacob Kimmel and

Blake and I all started it together as

co-founders and Jacob's the CEO now, so

he's really he's brilliant.

>> He is. Um, yeah. Yeah. So, the origin

story goes actually back to the IPO of

Coinbase, believe it or not, and 2021.

Having gotten some liquidity from

Coinbase and thinking about the next 10

years and what were going to be the big

technology trends that could drive

civilizational progress, I kind of felt

like a lot of the big ones had good

teams working on it, right? AI and

fusion energy and brain machine

interfaces and all the rest space. Um,

one I one that I didn't see great teams

working on as much and that maybe seemed

underfunded was longevity. And so I I

reached out to a few folks, started

hosting some dinners um with just top

scientists and biotech CEOs and kind of

went around the table and said, "All

right, what's on the horizon that's most

exciting to you, but it's underfunded?"

And one of the folks mentioned

epigenetic reprogramming, which is this

area that talks about how you can

reprogram cells. Um Shina Yamanaka

famously won the Nobel Prize for this in

2012, showing you could reprogram an old

skin cell into a young uh embryionic

stem cell. And he by doing so with just

these four proteins added to the cell he

had this kind of remarkable discovery

that he changed both the age of the cell

and the type of the cell. So at new

limit we're trying to do half of what

Shiny Yamanaka did. We don't want to

change the type of the cell we just want

to change the age. And what we mean by

that is really just restoring the

function that the cell had when it was

younger. And um we built a uh high

throughput screening system. It starts

with AI to talk explore the you know 10

quadrillion different possibilities and

combinations of different proteins you

could use to reprogram a cell and it

starts to it it originally it ingested

all the existing literature. Now it's

been ingesting the the wet lab data

that's been coming out of New Limit

which we have the largest data set out

there by far. And so it recommends the

next set of experiments that we run in

our wet lab. We do these poolled screens

and see if phenotypically we can we can

make cells look younger. Then we take

the best hits out of that in the funnel

and we put them through functional

assays which are a little slower and

more expensive to see if they actually

act younger. Um, for instance, we might

take a reprogrammed liver cell and see

if it can process caffeine and

acetaminophen and alcohol or whatever

kind of like a young a young liver cell.

And then the the best functional assay

candidates we then are starting to run

through um non-human primate and and

human trials. So yeah, the process has

gone faster than I would have expected.

I thought this was going to be like a 5

or 10 year kind of basic research

endeavor, but um we've actually been

able to demonstrate successful

reprogramming of human cells now in our

first drug candidates going into the

clinic next year, hopefully followed by

a bunch more.

>> Amazing. Human trial next year and you

and Blake put in the first 100 million.

I remember that. I remember coming to

your lab and and seeing it. Uh full

disclosure, I'm also a shareholder, an

investor in UI. Very proud of that. So,

congrats on the progress. And uh other

news related in epigenetic reprogramming

uh Life Bioscience is another one of my

portfolio companies announced they've uh

they've dosed their first patient with

their OSK treatment today. So yes, we're

on the verge of uh longevity escape

velocity. Brian, what do you what do you

hold as a target for, you know, when do

we hit LE? Do you have a number in your

head? Do you have a a goal?

You know, man, we need Kurszswall to

come plot another curve for us, don't

we?

>> He's got his prediction. His prediction

is 2033.

>> Huh.

>> So,

>> I'd have to go look at his data on that.

I actually I haven't looked at the exact

year that it would be projected to

happen. I'm just been again trying to

solve more mundane problems like how do

we hire how do we hire the next uh you

know bioinformaticist or whatever. But

um yeah, I hope he's right. I mean, he

has been right on so many things. It

wouldn't surprise me if he's right

again. I have an idiosyncratic position.

Uh perhaps unsurprisingly, I I will go

out on a limb and say that I think LEV

is going to be spiky in the same sense

that AGI is spiky and that on certain

spikes it seems possible it might be

achieved later this year. And the reason

why I say that is and I I wrote about

this in my newsletter and I know Peter

you immediately said, "Oh, but but but

uh Uh in the past few weeks there were

uh there was a really interesting paper

published on the first uh placebo uh

rather double blinded study on HIV

patients receiving GLP1s looking at

epigenetic clocks and and I know all the

caveats. Epigenetic clocks orth style

clocks aren't uh as as good assays at

determining biological age as a variety

of functional measures. I know all of

that.

>> Okay. Nonetheless, with all of those

caveats out the way, out of the way, for

the first time, to my knowledge, in the

literature, I'm starting to see evidence

of some sort of measurable at least

double-digit age reversal as a result of

GLP1s. And that makes me ask whether as

we're we're now with Redat True Tide and

and other uh Chinese have their own I

think second and third generation GLP1s

whether we're going to start to see

hidden under our noses in the same sense

that we flew past the touring test

without remarking that AGI basically

passed the touring test. Did we with a

whimper or not with a bang whether this

year maybe next year but as soon as this

year we're going to in a spiky way in a

subpopul

fly bath fly past lev without broader

notice that it just happened.

>> Well, we're going to have some level of

proof, right? We have this $101 million

healthpan prize going on where we're

measuring functional reversal of age.

Right? Again, the biomarkers right now,

you know, you can test your biomarkers

on a whole clock and many different

clocks. The problem is if you test

yourself in the morning and test

yourself at night, you'll get different

answers. And so, I don't think there's a

reliable biioarker for aging. Brian, I

don't know if you agree with that or

not, but what I care about is less a

number on a page, but more functional.

Do you have the ability to process um

you know liver function that you did

earlier in life? Do you have the

cognition, the immune, the muscle that

you had 20 years younger? So I think

we're at the beginning of that curve and

just like in the singularity we're we're

you know living through it. I think

we're in the process and I agree GLP-1

drugs are probably one of the very first

longevity drugs out there. Brian, any

thoughts or maybe a question to Peter

and Brian on this? You think we're going

to be arguing n years from now? Let's

say it's not this year. Let's say it's

the early 2030s. We're going to be

arguing over whether we've passed LEV or

not. And we're going to bring folks onto

the pod years from now saying, "Oh, no,

it definitely hasn't been hit because my

favorite vanity benchmark hasn't been

passed yet." While others will say, "No,

it was actually passed 5 years ago."

>> Brian, I like your theory. I like your

theory on that, Alex. I I would agree

with the touring test comparison where

we probably will go past it and people

won't nobody will react. Um I I think

that's probably likely. I don't think

it'll happen this year or next year, but

um 2033 could could potentially happen.

I mean, it's like the FDA approval part

is the is the slow part, right? The AI

part is going really fast.

>> I will fly anywhere for the treatment.

>> I want to make a couple of com I want to

make a couple of comments here. Um, you

know, if you look, if we talk about LEV,

we won't know for a long time because

people won't be dying for quite a long

time. We won't really know when it's hit

except for medical certain medical

tests, etc. So, I think this is going to

drag out by definition. My favorite

comment from the life extension world is

that the baby that's going to live to a

thousand years old is already alive and

that just blows your mind.

>> Yeah. And and I agree with you, right?

The the whole basis of the la of our

health span prize was not to be a

longevity prize where you have to wait

30 years to award a winner. It's an age

reversal, right? Do you have the

function that you had earlier? You know,

one of my favorite things right now that

we haven't reported on and I'm working

to get Martin Rothblat on the pod. Um

Martine's the CEO of United

Therapeutics. Uh is work she has been

working on uh restoring your thymus. So

going from your own uh IPSC stem cells,

your induced pleot potent stem cells and

regrowing a thymus and of course you

lose your thymus in your 20s completely

and it's one of the most important

organs for regrowing. Have you been

thinking about uh about thymus uh

capabilities at new limit?

>> It's not one of the ones we've targeted

yet, but uh yeah, I think it's it's on

the list somewhere. Um we're going to

have to get to all the major tissues at

some point. I

>> I was arguing with Jacob. I want muscle

rejuvenation, please. Yeah.

>> Yeah. I mean, that would pair nicely

with the GOP ones, right?

>> For sure.

>> I want to say something I've been

wanting to say for months and months,

and I can only say on this episode,

>> which is, you know, as we talk about

life extension, there's been two things

true in the world for the history of

humanity, death and taxes. And we may,

this will crack death and Bitcoin is

going to crack taxes. So, there you go.

>> I love this tweet. I saw

>> I love it. I love it when a when a

brilliant successful entrepreneur from

outside of biotech gets into biotech

because you get that fresh view kind of

you know what is possible you know

you're not jaded you're not calloused

you're just like what is possible really

curious to know what you buy for 435

million and does it surprise you like

where that money goes

>> yeah well on the on the idea of going

into biotech I mean there's definitely

some Elon inspiration there which is

like we're we're living through a golden

age of software where fortunes are being

made And so I think the these hard tech

problems deserve more capital and you

know it's almost to like SpaceX probably

would not have existed unless some a

wealthy individual like Elon who had had

an exit had at least some of his own

capital to go try and do it. Same thing

with Tesla, right? So venture capital

sometimes doesn't get you all the way

there. It's almost like to do these real

moonshots, you have to like find someone

who made a billion dollars in software

and then and then go found step two go

found the moonshots. But I I hope that

that's not the case forever. I think a

lot of the money that's been made in

crypto and AI will actually go into the

next moonshots and and all of that

stuff. Um but sorry your question was

about um which part again? Sorry.

>> Well, 435 million you know that automate

a bunch of wet lab tests or does that

give you like concurrent many many lines

of research or what does it

>> run a human trial?

>> It's trials a lot of trials. I mean in a

software company most of your costs are

people and then some AWS and stuff like

that. Um in a biotech company typically

it's like it's people and then materials

like re like reagents and things. Um but

in this case now that we're getting

ready to go into the clinic yeah it's

you know your average phase one trial

might be I don't know 10 or 20 million

and you can kind of go up from there on

phase two and phase three. So you need

to get enough shots on goal to get some

of these candidates to come out the

other side and have a big impact. So,

we've got enough capital now to run a

number of trials, which is good.

>> Alex, I love this tweet I saw uh from

Sam Suare starting to mourn all the

people who died before the singularity.

>> Yeah,

>> I'm mourning all the the people who've

died period. And I I think you know when

to Brian's point about all of the grand

challenges that there aren't yet

billionaires solving, I think I'll throw

this out to the the universe, to the

economy. I would love to back or

otherwise support someone building a

company to use advanced compute to

digitally resurrect everyone who's ever

died. I think it's a tragedy that we've

had so many billions of deaths over the

millennia. Let's fix it.

>> I love that. I love that. All right. Our

next story here is a fun one. Our last