Latest / Giant Ideas / a16z General Partner, Katherine Boyle: American Dynamism and the Rise of Defense Tech

Transcript

a16z General Partner, Katherine Boyle: American Dynamism and the Rise of Defense Tech · Giant Ideas

• 0:01
  SPEAKER_02: I actually think that when we talk about things like polarization, when we talk about things like where is the culture, the online world matters more.
• 0:09
  SPEAKER_02: If you're terminally online, you're probably a better predictor of the future.
• 0:15
  SPEAKER_01: Hello, and welcome to Giant Ideas with me, Cameron McLean, and me, Tommy Stadlin.
• 0:20
  SPEAKER_01: We're co-founders of Giant Ventures, which builds and backs purpose-driven companies.
• 0:24
  SPEAKER_00: At Giant, we're lucky to meet extraordinary people with giant ideas that are changing the world.
• 0:29
  SPEAKER_00: This podcast brings you behind-the-scenes access to those ideas and the inspiring stories of the people behind them.
• 0:35
  SPEAKER_01: We explore how one giant idea can kickstart a billion-dollar company, shape culture, and transform life as we know it.
• 0:48
  SPEAKER_01: Today on the Giant Ideas Podcast, we're joined by Catherine Boyle, general partner at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.
• 0:55
  SPEAKER_01: In 2022, Catherine unveiled her thesis, Building American Dynamism, which transformed the tech landscape in the US.
• 1:03
  SPEAKER_00: American dynamism is defined as embodying the spirit of innovation, progress, and resilience that drives the United States forward.
• 1:10
  SPEAKER_00: Putting her money where her mouth is, Catherine co-founded Andreessen Horowitz American Dynamism Fund, which invests in companies supporting the American national interest across aerospace, defense, manufacturing, energy, and critical infrastructure.
• 1:23
  SPEAKER_00: She has backed the wildly successful defense tech company, Andoril, SpaceX, and many more.
• 1:28
  SPEAKER_01: Catherine previously led seed investing at another top firm, General Catalyst.
• 1:32
  SPEAKER_01: She's a big advocate of free speech.
• 1:34
  SPEAKER_01: She started a career as a reporter on the Washington Post, and she now serves on the board of the Free Press.
• 1:39
  SPEAKER_01: Business shapes the Trump agenda so fundamentally.
• 1:43
  SPEAKER_01: And I think Catherine is one of the most influential thinkers in America today.
• 1:48
  SPEAKER_00: Well, Catherine, thank you so much for joining us here on Giant Ideas today.
• 1:52
  SPEAKER_00: Despite my accent, I am actually proudly half American myself.
• 1:55
  SPEAKER_00: But let's start by asking you about your upbringing and what being an American means to you.
• 2:00
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, so my my upbringing.
• 2:02
  SPEAKER_02: So I grew up uh in northern Florida um in a in a college town called Gainesville.
• 2:07
  SPEAKER_02: Um and, you know, it's interesting.
• 2:09
  SPEAKER_02: When I think about sort of my background, what America means to me.
• 2:12
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, I had a lot of family who served in the military.
• 2:15
  SPEAKER_02: I'd say the the most unique thing about my background um is actually uh my my father was a Jesuit priest before uh leaving the Jesuits and deciding that he wanted to um do something else with his life.
• 2:26
  SPEAKER_02: And I feel like uh when when I when I look at my investing career, I was a journalist before I was an investor.
• 2:32
  SPEAKER_02: When I think about sort of my nature, I think it all comes from the fact that he was deeply trained in the Socratic method.
• 2:38
  SPEAKER_02: When he was in the Jesuits, it was the late 40s, early 50s.
• 2:41
  SPEAKER_02: And there was sort of a way of being in the Jesuits where they asked, um, you know, it was all Socratic method, it was all argument, it was all sparring.
• 2:48
  SPEAKER_02: Uh he often described it as one of the best sort of times and decades of his life.
• 2:52
  SPEAKER_02: And when I think about sort of how I was raised, I was raised in a Socratic household.
• 2:57
  SPEAKER_02: Um I don't think, uh, I don't think my family knew how to have a conversation without making it into an argument or a sparring match.
• 3:03
  SPEAKER_02: And that has actually proven really good for an investing career where uh where you know a lot of uh I think a lot of the big ideas and a lot of the important things that are that are debated um are often controversial, contrarian.
• 3:15
  SPEAKER_02: Uh, you have to kind of see where the the puck is headed and and kind of hold your own on sort of you know what what what's happening.
• 3:22
  SPEAKER_02: And I think uh I think that when I think about my background, that's probably the thing that stands out to me the most is that you know, a lot of the jobs that I've had, whether it be journalism or investing, are deeply tied to that Socratic method.
• 3:33
  SPEAKER_01: Catherine, we're here today to talk about your giant idea, American dynamism.
• 3:37
  SPEAKER_01: Tell us a little bit about what was going on in 2020 and 2021 that led to this thesis emerging.
• 3:43
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, so you know, it's it was actually earlier than 2020 uh 2021 because my my background is I spent a decade in in Washington, D.C.
• 3:51
  SPEAKER_02: I was a journalist and left the the Washington Post where I was a reporter and moved to Silicon Valley right as I thought the paper was dying.
• 3:59
  SPEAKER_02: It was 2014.
• 4:00
  SPEAKER_02: Um I left just as Jeff Bezos was buying the paper and sort of reviving it.
• 4:04
  SPEAKER_02: And so I had this view that, you know, every industry was being turned on its head by technology and I should go learn about technology and the epicenter of it.
• 4:10
  SPEAKER_02: So moved out to Silicon Valley and I had, you know, I've lived all over the world.
• 4:13
  SPEAKER_02: I had lived in Europe, I had traveled all over the world.
• 4:16
  SPEAKER_02: And when I got to Silicon Valley, I described it as the worst culture shock of my life.
• 4:19
  SPEAKER_02: Uh it felt like I was in a different planet.
• 4:22
  SPEAKER_02: Um, you know, the things that Washington thought were technology, when you think of what DC cares about, you know, aerospace, defense, these sort of big categories of innovation.
• 4:30
  SPEAKER_02: Getting to Silicon Valley in 2014, everything was apps, it was, you know, it was, it was every, you know, no one read the newspaper.
• 4:37
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, that was something that was really shocking to me.
• 4:39
  SPEAKER_02: It was like no one cared about the news cycle.
• 4:41
  SPEAKER_02: It was this sort of little divorced area of America where the ideas and the things that were really important to the rest of the country or even the East Coast just didn't make it to the West.
• 4:50
  SPEAKER_02: I now see that as a feature of the system of the country being so big and Silicon Valley being so kind of, you know, I would say different and able to kind of build and work without, you know, thinking about sort of the ideas that are on the minds of everyone in Washington.
• 5:04
  SPEAKER_02: But I still cared very deeply about Washington.
• 5:07
  SPEAKER_02: I still cared deeply about sort of what are the issues and the things that America cares most about.
• 5:11
  SPEAKER_02: And what I saw was that people weren't investing in those.
• 5:14
  SPEAKER_02: Uh, there was no category of investment that was focused on, you know, the sort of national security risks that were kind of bubbling up at the time.
• 5:22
  SPEAKER_02: There was no sort of investment firm that was really talking about these big um areas that really do need investment from the private sector.
• 5:30
  SPEAKER_02: Um, so I, you know, I joined a venture firm in 2016, started investing heavily in these categories.
• 5:35
  SPEAKER_02: One of my first uh investments was a company called Andoral Industries, which I think was one of the kind of first early loudest defense companies talking about the need for private sector capital to go into autonomous weapon systems.
• 5:48
  SPEAKER_02: Um but at 2017, when you know, when we were investing in those areas, I can tell you like that was not a popular thing to be talking about.
• 5:56
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and so the idea sort of of American dynamism, of us starting the practice in 2021, of really saying and signaling that Andreessen Horowitz is going to be investing in these areas, like that came from, I would say, you know, almost a decade of realizing that this is an area that that really needs to have a dedicated practice where where the founders are are equally excited and enthusiastic about supporting the national interest.
• 6:20
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and you know, but it but it was it was definitely a sort of a journey to see Silicon Valley move from not being at all interested in these categories to post-Ukraine saying this is the most important category that we can be investing in, um, and we need to start building for the national interest.
• 6:36
  SPEAKER_01: Fantastic.
• 6:37
  SPEAKER_01: So, Catherine, maybe to define it for us, what does American dynamism mean to you as a sort of broader philosophy for a country, if you will?
• 6:44
  SPEAKER_01: And then what are the specifics as it pertains to the investment fund?
• 6:47
  SPEAKER_01: What is American dynamism as an investment thesis?
• 6:51
  SPEAKER_01: Sure, sure.
• 6:51
  SPEAKER_02: So so we always say like there's a very specific reason why we named it American dynamism and not defense tech, deep tech, hard tech, sort of naming it after the technology.
• 7:00
  SPEAKER_02: And it's because dynamism is is a word that can mean many things, but most importantly, it means movement, it means growth, it means constantly um moving into sort of it's directional as well.
• 7:10
  SPEAKER_02: It's it's it's growth in a positive way.
• 7:12
  SPEAKER_02: And so I think the the sort of naming of the practice as American dynamism is understanding that the national interest is important, uh, the interests of our allies are important, uh, but also we need to be focused on the things that are positive.
• 7:26
  SPEAKER_02: So not just saying, okay, we're we're only going to invest in defense, but we're also gonna invest in things that Americans care about, like education, they care about housing supply, they care about transportation, all of these categories that really I would say are sort of the focal points of sort of almost American policy, I would describe it as.
• 7:43
  SPEAKER_02: We all we always say, you know, when when found when we first announced the practice, founders said, okay, like, am I an American dynamism company?
• 7:48
  SPEAKER_02: And we we would always say, if there is an executive department in Washington that exists to regulate your industry, we would classify that as American dynamism.
• 7:57
  SPEAKER_02: And I should go a step a step back and also say, you know, a lot of firms have, you know, marketing around, you know, saying that they care about these issues or or, you know, or a thesis around it.
• 8:08
  SPEAKER_02: But I think what what is is very unique to Andreess and Horowitz is that we build products for our founders around a certain category of innovation.
• 8:15
  SPEAKER_02: And so the thing that we realize, and the reason why it's a separate fund, why it's a separate practice is because these companies are different than traditional consumer companies or enterprise companies.
• 8:25
  SPEAKER_02: They have to start thinking about government affairs and lobbyists when they're a seed stage company.
• 8:31
  SPEAKER_02: And so one of the reasons why we decided that this is not just a thesis or something that, you know, I'm deeply interested in investing in, that it's actually a category of innovation is because we saw a host of founders saying, okay, we want to build in the national interest and we want to sell to government, but they need products to help them do that.
• 8:47
  SPEAKER_02: And what we mean by product is, you know, we support our founders, we we try to bring them to Washington as early as possible.
• 8:52
  SPEAKER_02: We try to make those introductions to the DoD.
• 8:54
  SPEAKER_02: Um, we try to help them understand, you know, what does that first key business development hire look like if you're selling to government?
• 9:01
  SPEAKER_02: So it really is not just a thesis.
• 9:05
  SPEAKER_02: Um, it is an investment category where there is a product motion, a business development motion, a government motion that these founders have in common.
• 9:12
  SPEAKER_02: That is what we're super excited to help build as the American Dynamism practice, is to really help founders understand that that seed through series C stage, where a lot of these companies flounder because it's so hard to figure out who is the person in the DoD that can help me or who are the people in Congress who care about my issue.
• 9:29
  SPEAKER_02: If we can shorten that, what the DoD calls valley of death and really help them get through that process, that's going to lead to just a flourishing of American innovation in these categories.
• 9:40
  SPEAKER_00: You mentioned Andro as one example, but maybe for the benefit of our listeners, maybe some other examples of companies that you think really typify this American dynamism uh view of view of the world.
• 9:50
  SPEAKER_02: Sure, sure.
• 9:51
  SPEAKER_02: So I so I should start by saying, you know, we we we we classify it very broadly.
• 9:54
  SPEAKER_02: So everything from aerospace, defense, national security, but also things like transportation, energy, infrastructure, all of the categories that governments around the world truly care about.
• 10:04
  SPEAKER_02: Um, not just US government.
• 10:05
  SPEAKER_02: When you think about what is a civic duty, what are the things that that governments really are supposed to supply their citizens, this is this is the category of innovation.
• 10:13
  SPEAKER_02: And there's been just a flourishing of new technologies in these categories that can help people do their jobs.
• 10:18
  SPEAKER_02: I like to point to, you know, defense is a is a huge area that we focus on, but but public safety is also an area that has gone through a tremendous transformation in the US.
• 10:28
  SPEAKER_02: We're investors in a company called Flock Safety that was started actually in Atlanta, Georgia, which is you know not necessarily a well-known tech hub, but it was started in 2018 by a second-time founder who went through YC and wanted to create a license plate reader.
• 10:43
  SPEAKER_02: He he was doing research on, you know, where how do most crimes happen in the US in particular?
• 10:48
  SPEAKER_02: And something like 70% of crimes happen with a vehicle.
• 10:51
  SPEAKER_02: So if you can track vehicles and not people, um, you could help law enforcement across different agencies, you know, share data and do their jobs.
• 10:58
  SPEAKER_02: And so it it they he he founded this, this uh a hardware device.
• 11:02
  SPEAKER_02: He built a hardware device that's a license plate reader that they put around city or around streets in Atlanta, Georgia.
• 11:08
  SPEAKER_02: It's I think it's what, six, seven years later, it's solving 10% of all crimes in the US because there are so many of these cameras all over the US tracking cars, again, not people.
• 11:19
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and and the the stories coming out of what Flock Safety is able to do are incredible.
• 11:24
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, they've they've solved multiple kidnappings, they've solved multiple um, you know, unsolved murders.
• 11:29
  SPEAKER_02: Um, you know, it it's it's pretty incredible what that what this what this company has been able to do as a little company that had this idea of how can we support law enforcement.
• 11:37
  SPEAKER_02: Um so we see that as a perfect example of, you know, uh it's a it's an American dynamism company that's that's really focused on how do we support citizens in our local communities.
• 11:47
  SPEAKER_02: The other thing that we like about a company like that and Andorral is these are not companies that are based in Silicon Valley.
• 11:53
  SPEAKER_02: These are companies that are based all over the country, um, and and they're building for very specific civic needs for the communities that they're born out of.
• 12:01
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and I think that's something that that's that's different than say 10 years ago, where if you were a technologist in the US, and frankly, a technologist in the world, you would say, okay, like I want to go to San Francisco, I want to go to Silicon Valley.
• 12:12
  SPEAKER_02: I think that's very much changed in the American dynamism practice.
• 12:15
  SPEAKER_00: Thank you.
• 12:16
  SPEAKER_00: That gives a good picture.
• 12:17
  SPEAKER_00: I mean, Andreessen Horowitz became famous for backing software.
• 12:19
  SPEAKER_00: Famously, Mark said, software is eating the world.
• 12:22
  SPEAKER_00: A lot of these companies you're describing involve hardware, they're quite capital intensive.
• 12:26
  SPEAKER_00: Obviously, the the job at the end of the day for Andreessen and yourself is to deliver returns.
• 12:31
  SPEAKER_00: How do you kind of square that equation when many of these capitals have to raise large rounds?
• 12:35
  SPEAKER_00: It can be quite dilutive for the early investors.
• 12:38
  SPEAKER_00: How do you think about that investment opportunity and making that work?
• 12:42
  SPEAKER_02: So I think it's a great question.
• 12:43
  SPEAKER_02: So on both the companies, Andrew and Flot that I mentioned are software companies, right?
• 12:48
  SPEAKER_02: Like the core of what they are doing is software, but they are but they are also hardware.
• 12:52
  SPEAKER_02: So we we do like these sort of hardware software hybrids where the secret sauce of what they're doing is software, but say like the government needs a hardware solution as well.
• 13:01
  SPEAKER_02: Um, you know, that there's sort of this meme of put the software in a box.
• 13:04
  SPEAKER_02: The treasure.
• 13:05
  SPEAKER_02: And like that, that's how the DOD buys.
• 13:07
  SPEAKER_02: And I and I think in many cases, you have what the brilliance of a company like Andoril is that it's the same software suite and the same sort of autonomy suite across all sorts of different products that sort of unify what they're what they're doing in their lattice core offering.
• 13:20
  SPEAKER_02: So I think that's something that that you know we we uh take into account when we're investing.
• 13:25
  SPEAKER_02: But then we've also invested in, you know, small modular nuclear reactors.
• 13:29
  SPEAKER_02: Uh we've invested in hypersonic weapons.
• 13:31
  SPEAKER_02: Like we've invested in companies that I would say are hardware companies and and we should we should look at them as investment opportunities that they are hardware companies.
• 13:38
  SPEAKER_02: And I think, you know, when when we we talk about the the dilution that some of these companies take, um, I think it they do take more capital early on.
• 13:46
  SPEAKER_02: But I think the the interesting thing about these companies is they also reach a moat earlier that is is very different than say software companies.
• 13:54
  SPEAKER_02: Because if you're building something that is very complex, that requires um, you know, all of the best talent to come together around building something that that's, you know, that that takes more capital, there are just fewer and fewer companies competing with those.
• 14:07
  SPEAKER_02: And so I look at something like Android or Flock or SpaceX is obviously the canonical example, where they become the dominant player much earlier in their life cycle once they achieve whatever their technical milestone is.
• 14:20
  SPEAKER_02: And they're not competing in the same way that, you know, a lot of early stage software companies have fast followers.
• 14:25
  SPEAKER_02: There aren't as many fast followers in the American dynamis in practice because so many of these companies are both technically difficult to build, but also they they do require capital, which means that they require people who are pretty good at fundraising.
• 14:38
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and I and I think that's that's been something, you know, for us as investors to look at, we have probably a different methodology of how we assess investments than, say, our AI team or a crypto team or our bio team, because it is a very different category of innovation.
• 14:52
  SPEAKER_01: Catherine, if we think about the kind of social acceptability of defense tech, I think it's undergone a huge transition, particularly after the Ukraine war.
• 14:59
  SPEAKER_01: So I guess previously, institutional investors into venture funds like yours or ours, often they would say, you know, you can't invest in three things.
• 15:07
  SPEAKER_01: You can't invest in porn gambling and defense.
• 15:09
  SPEAKER_01: And defense would be right down there as something, you know, seen as a real negative, a social negative.
• 15:14
  SPEAKER_01: And I think a lot of people after Ukraine said, actually, hold on a minute, you know, before solving climate or health or or these other themes that are traditionally associated with impact, I think some people are, you know, waking up to the fact that the fundamental layer of democracy is defense and a real interest in funding European and American defense.
• 15:34
  SPEAKER_01: How have you seen that evolve in terms of the acceptability of defense tech for the investors in Andresen and then just more broadly in the venture ecosystem?
• 15:43
  SPEAKER_02: So, so I will say it's evolved greatly.
• 15:46
  SPEAKER_02: Um I, you know, having been um, you know, a seed investor in Android, I can tell you there were founders in Silicon Valley who called me when they found out I invested in Android and said they would never work with me.
• 15:55
  SPEAKER_02: Uh, there were co-investors who called me names that I shouldn't repeat on on family-friendly podcasts.
• 16:02
  SPEAKER_02: Um, that there was a lot of um anger and heat, um, you know, and and sort of vitriol pointed at the people who were early defense investors.
• 16:11
  SPEAKER_02: And I think, you know, to the credit of some founders who called me, they actually called me years later and said, actually, now I understand.
• 16:17
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and and I give them credit for that, for saying, hey, like I didn't realize it at the time.
• 16:22
  SPEAKER_02: And I think that that says something too about kind of the world we were living in where people thought we were in this sort of post-history, post-violence um world.
• 16:30
  SPEAKER_02: And Ukraine did change the calculus and wake people up and make people realize actually, this is the most important thing is defending, defending, you know, the national interests, defending our countries.
• 16:40
  SPEAKER_02: And we have to have technology do that because we don't want to be fighting a 20th century trench war.
• 16:45
  SPEAKER_02: Like that, like we we want, we want to use technology to deter violence, to deter these types of conflicts in the future.
• 16:52
  SPEAKER_02: And so, in some ways, I think, you know, the the early companies in our portfolio at Andreasen Horowitz.
• 16:56
  SPEAKER_02: So we were early investors in Shield AI, we were early investors in Andoril, um, you know, in some ways, their theses about where the world was headed um, you know, were 100% true.
• 17:07
  SPEAKER_02: And that sort of led to, you know, I think uh, you know, a lot a lot of other firms and a lot of other people recognizing this is an important category to invest in, and here are the reasons why.
• 17:17
  SPEAKER_02: But, you know, we we invested in in Shield AI in in, I think, late 2016.
• 17:21
  SPEAKER_02: Um, you know, so so I I don't think our our investment, you know, our our limited partners or our firm really had a problem with defense um at that time because we we were investing in it.
• 17:31
  SPEAKER_02: But I think more and more firms are now seeing sort of what the the thesis of those companies were.
• 17:37
  SPEAKER_02: Um and so I, you know, I I think in many ways um it has been a 180 for Silicon Valley.
• 17:43
  SPEAKER_02: I don't hear anyone say, you know, the things they were saying in 2017, but it did take this sort of dramatic wake-up call for people to realize actually investing in defense deters violence.
• 17:52
  SPEAKER_02: Um having, you know, having these, having, you know, autonomous systems will will help save lives.
• 17:58
  SPEAKER_02: You know, and I think that that was something that people just didn't want to listen to until they saw um, you know, a ground war in Europe um and how how destructive it can be.
• 18:06
  SPEAKER_00: In many ways, that's a return to kind of the roots of venture capital, right?
• 18:10
  SPEAKER_00: Which which did have strong, strong, strong connection to the military when it was, it was born in the US in the kind of the 1950s and such.
• 18:16
  SPEAKER_00: But do you think you kind of got to that worldview sooner than others because partially because of your your your familial ties to the military and and what have you?
• 18:24
  SPEAKER_02: So I you know, I think it's partially familial ties to the military, but I also think, you know, there's something specific about having spent so much time in Washington where a lot of the people who I think understood the category of investment um didn't see it as controversial because they lived in Washington.
• 18:38
  SPEAKER_02: So if you live in Washington, DC, or if you've spent time um living there, you know, it's like you you take the metro and a lot of the people who are going to the Pentagon are on your metro, they're in uniform.
• 18:49
  SPEAKER_02: You you are surrounded by people who are working as part of the Department of Defense.
• 18:53
  SPEAKER_02: Um, it's not sort of seen as a political thing.
• 18:56
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, what, you know, we always say like if you're if you live in the only thing that people in across the aisle, Republicans and Democrats agree on are national defense.
• 19:03
  SPEAKER_02: Um it's it is not controversial to support the US military.
• 19:07
  SPEAKER_02: And if you see it every day because you live in Washington, um, it doesn't feel controversial.
• 19:12
  SPEAKER_02: And I think that's sort of what I was sensing when I came out to Silicon Valley is like, you know, there there is no um there's no, you know, there's no press military presence in San Francisco anymore.
• 19:21
  SPEAKER_02: Um, it's not something that sort of the West Coast sees every day in the same way.
• 19:26
  SPEAKER_02: Um, these these issues of of national security that may be talked about over over brunch in Washington, D.C.
• 19:33
  SPEAKER_02: because your friends or your neighbors are involved in that community, it just doesn't exist or it didn't exist in Silicon Valley.
• 19:39
  SPEAKER_02: And so I actually think it's more a function of the fact that, you know, American innovation really comes from this small community and in Silicon Valley, or it had come from the small community in Silicon Valley where certain ideas took hold and where people, you know, was sort of, I would say, a homogenous group of people.
• 19:54
  SPEAKER_02: And what is great about American dynamism as a practice is now we have companies.
• 19:59
  SPEAKER_02: I, you know, I have two companies out of probably two dozen that are based in Silicon Valley and San Francisco.
• 20:04
  SPEAKER_02: The rest are based all over the country.
• 20:05
  SPEAKER_02: And that is very good for American innovation because the ideas that matter to people who live in Austin, Texas, or Atlanta, Georgia, or Washington, D.C.
• 20:13
  SPEAKER_02: or New York City are very different than the ideas that that matter to San Francisco and Silicon Valley.
• 20:18
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and I think that that's a huge part of it.
• 20:20
  SPEAKER_02: That the people who kind of understood that national defense was important were people who were already steeped in that community or lived in Washington and really understood that it's not a controversial thing to care about.
• 20:31
  SPEAKER_00: Clear.
• 20:31
  SPEAKER_00: Well, shift shifting gears a little bit, you talked about AI being an arms race with China, and Mark Andreessen recently called Deep Seek a spotnik moment.
• 20:38
  SPEAKER_00: We had Mustafa Sullivan on the podcast uh more recently, and he he kind of took the view that that's a bit of a red herring.
• 20:44
  SPEAKER_00: Nation state shouldn't be in a war over AI.
• 20:46
  SPEAKER_00: The real kind of potential bogeyman in the room is that proliferation of power.
• 20:50
  SPEAKER_00: So why do you think that we're in an arms race and that that's an important thing for America?
• 20:56
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah, I, you know, I think it was a Sputnik moment because it wakes people up.
• 21:01
  SPEAKER_02: Um and people, you know, the the interesting thing about the what I think people mean by and what Mark meant and also my part partner Alex Rampel wrote an amazing piece for the free pass that I think is worth reading.
• 21:11
  SPEAKER_02: The Sputnik moment is actually, you know, if you look at what happened after that, um, the amount of investment that went into US agencies um, you know, during the space race in the next six months after after the Sputnik moment um was extraordinary.
• 21:28
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, we the the the billions of dollars that went into science research, to into STEM education, that went into uh, you know, build building DARPA, uh, all of that came within six months after the Sputnik moment.
• 21:41
  SPEAKER_02: And so what I think actually, it and and and it probably, you know, bears going a little bit deeper into this.
• 21:46
  SPEAKER_02: What I think Mark and and what I mean when I say that it was a Sputnik moment as well, is that I think we're going to see an extraordinary amount of investment in the US, both on the public and the private sector in AI because of this.
• 21:58
  SPEAKER_02: And that will be Exceptionally good for American innovation.
• 22:02
  SPEAKER_02: And yeah, I mean, I think of things, you know, I co-founded the American Dynamism practice.
• 22:07
  SPEAKER_02: I think of things in terms of national interest.
• 22:09
  SPEAKER_02: That's that's my perspective and worldview.
• 22:11
  SPEAKER_02: And I think that this is going to be incredibly good for American AI.
• 22:14
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and that it was a Sputnik moment, and that we're about to see a ton of not just private investment, but public investment go into these categories with the realization that it is so important.
• 22:24
  SPEAKER_01: Catherine, you wrote recently that it's the first time in your adult life that the right is truly ascendant in America.
• 22:29
  SPEAKER_01: Our advisory board member David Millerband spoke on giant ideas about the difference between a polarized society and a balkanized society, where a polarized society, you disagree fundamentally with the other side, and the balkanized society where you see the other side's views as a threat to your way of life.
• 22:45
  SPEAKER_01: And America to me feels pretty balkanized today.
• 22:48
  SPEAKER_01: But I thought it'd be interesting to explore with you if the differences are truly so stark.
• 22:52
  SPEAKER_01: So there's a really interesting example that you tweeted about that I'd love to unpick with you.
• 22:57
  SPEAKER_01: So you you retweeted a photo from an FBI building where a word cloud on a wall is being painted over in this kind of thick grey paint.
• 23:05
  SPEAKER_01: And the words on the wall are things like integrity, leadership, stability, initiative, as well as diversity.
• 23:12
  SPEAKER_01: And I guess diversity is the key word there.
• 23:14
  SPEAKER_01: And you write that it reminds you of the scene in the gangster movie Casino where uh I quote, the the feds come in, there are desperate attempts to escape fate.
• 23:24
  SPEAKER_01: It's two minutes of an elaborate, decades-long unwinding of a scheme.
• 23:29
  SPEAKER_01: And the guitar, the organ, it's a southern wake for the bitter unraveling of something the viewer knew wouldn't last.
• 23:37
  SPEAKER_01: What did you mean by that?
• 23:38
  SPEAKER_02: So Casino is one of the best films ever made.
• 23:41
  SPEAKER_02: I'm a huge Scorsese fan.
• 23:43
  SPEAKER_02: I would encourage everyone listening to watch it who haven't seen it.
• 23:46
  SPEAKER_02: Um, but what what I'm really talking about is catharsis.
• 23:49
  SPEAKER_02: Um, so that film is, you know, it is basically a buildup to this extraordinary scene where everything unravels.
• 23:57
  SPEAKER_02: And it and the the juxtaposition of everything unraveling with this, you know, beautiful, I sounds like a southern wake if you know the song.
• 24:06
  SPEAKER_02: It's actually by the animals.
• 24:07
  SPEAKER_02: It's a one-hit wonder, The House of the Rising Sun, which is a beautiful song.
• 24:11
  SPEAKER_02: Um, but you know, it it it would it's this, it's this sort of catharsis that you can only feel if you watch the whole film.
• 24:18
  SPEAKER_02: So I would encourage everyone to watch the whole film.
• 24:20
  SPEAKER_02: It's, you know, it's it's one of one of the greatest.
• 24:22
  SPEAKER_02: Um but what I what I meant by that is you are you are seeing probably the most elaborate preference cascade um of my lifetime that I've ever experienced of people having, you know, finally being able to say what they truly think, um, things kind of shifting back in a different direction after a pendulum perhaps swung too far.
• 24:43
  SPEAKER_02: Um and I think, you know, that what people are experiencing online, what people are experiencing in their own lives, and and when you actually look at sort of the election results um of you know of the last, you know, of the last election, you are seeing a dramatic what what is known as a preference cascade, which is you know, people, the the theory of preference falsification is that people will say something different than what they mean to be in line with the dogmatic view.
• 25:09
  SPEAKER_02: And once it becomes socially acceptable to say what people actually think, you actually see that people have been falsifying their preferences for a long time.
• 25:17
  SPEAKER_02: And the kind of, you know, that that sort of that tweet that that you know that I sort of um spat out on a Saturday morning is sort of on a like this, this is kind of how it feels to see sort of you know images and videos like this, is that I think people are are finally saying what they think again.
• 25:36
  SPEAKER_02: And you definitely see that on X.
• 25:38
  SPEAKER_02: Um X is a perfect example of where you you would you could not say what you thought.
• 25:42
  SPEAKER_02: You were, you know, that you were banned from X if you said certain things or kind of crossed over dogma too much.
• 25:48
  SPEAKER_02: Um, I would say that particularly in Silicon Valley, the last four or five years were were a group chat phenomena where people had a public face that was very boring and that was, you know, it was sort of how they felt about things, but privately they were saying something completely different in the group chats.
• 26:03
  SPEAKER_02: And, you know, one of the things I said to a friend recently is this is the first time in my life where the things that are being said in the group chats are actually being said on X.
• 26:10
  SPEAKER_02: You know, in my professional life, where people are finally comfortable because the things that they're saying publicly, they're not afraid of losing their job, they're not afraid of losing their livelihood, they're not afraid of getting completely canceled from the online world, which in our world is, you know, it completely would ruin your life.
• 26:26
  SPEAKER_02: Um, so so that's sort of what I mean by it feels like a decades-long unraveling.
• 26:31
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and the preference cascade that that I think is happening across the US is one that, you know, it's ultimately a good thing.
• 26:38
  SPEAKER_02: Like prep the prep the theory of preference falsification was actually written about the fall of the Berlin Wall.
• 26:42
  SPEAKER_02: It was written about, you know, the that once the Soviet Union fell, it became very clear that that the people who were saying that they felt one way didn't feel that way.
• 26:51
  SPEAKER_02: And it sort of happened immediately overnight.
• 26:54
  SPEAKER_02: And that's sort of what you're seeing in the US to a much, you know, a lesser extent.
• 26:58
  SPEAKER_02: It's not a physical falling of a wall, but it's it's it's the it's it's people finally being able to say the things that, you know, for their professional life, in my case, you know, 15, 20 years, like you didn't necessarily feel like you could say some things publicly.
• 27:11
  SPEAKER_02: So I think that, you know, and there, and there's it's degrees as well, right?
• 27:15
  SPEAKER_02: Like it's it's certain things might just be, oh, I I feel like I can say the word America in Silicon Valley.
• 27:20
  SPEAKER_02: That's a very good example of it.
• 27:22
  SPEAKER_02: You know, I I often say like the that when we when we announced the practice in 2022 and called it American dynamism, that was seen as like America?
• 27:31
  SPEAKER_02: Like you're saying the word America?
• 27:34
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and now, and now, you know, every company that I invest in has a massive American flag behind them.
• 27:39
  SPEAKER_02: So that's only a three-year um sort of cascade that we've seen around.
• 27:43
  SPEAKER_02: Like, is it okay to say, you know, that that American dynamism is a good thing?
• 27:47
  SPEAKER_02: But I think we're gonna see so many more, you know, ideas flourish, both online and offline, um, given, given sort of the, I think the the preference cascade that's happening in in the US, but probably across the world.
• 28:00
  SPEAKER_01: I find it fascinating.
• 28:01
  SPEAKER_01: I I was reading the replies to your very eloquent tweet, which were not quite as eloquent and diplomatic as you had been, right?
• 28:08
  SPEAKER_01: And so folks on the right were kind of like, yeah, you know, let's get rid of diversity, and and then folks on the left could be outraged that you compare the the sort of the diversity actions of the FBI to a bunch of gangsters and and sort of rather simplistic um r replies.
• 28:22
  SPEAKER_01: But my my sense is actually.
• 28:25
  SPEAKER_02: I don't think those replies characterize uh the tweet at all.
• 28:28
  SPEAKER_02: Uh but but but we can we can continue.
• 28:30
  SPEAKER_01: Let's let's actually let's unpick it.
• 28:32
  SPEAKER_01: Because I my sense is that you know often on some of these platforms the the differences are are probably more extreme than actual most people's sensible beliefs.
• 28:40
  SPEAKER_01: Because I guess you know, in that example, you you'd have a lot of people in the center who would think that the sort of the extreme nature of some of the DEI stuff that's gone on in the US and Europe went too far, and whether it's people being kind of shamed into using pronouns or whatever.
• 28:55
  SPEAKER_01: But I think also a lot of people in the center would would think that there have been systematically racist and sexist hiring practices in American corporates, European corporates for a very long time.
• 29:05
  SPEAKER_01: And it's a really good thing that we've had diversity initiatives.
• 29:08
  SPEAKER_01: I guess for you, like specifically with with DEI, when you look at the FBI, for example, and many corporates championing diversity, what what do you feel about that?
• 29:18
  SPEAKER_01: Do you do you feel like it just all needs to go, it's it's completely out of control and the whole thing needs to be cut away?
• 29:24
  SPEAKER_01: Or do you go, no, actually, like some of it is really important, we have to retain this, we can't just completely get rid of it?
• 29:30
  SPEAKER_02: So, so I I I want to step back because I think in many ways you're you're completely misinterpreting uh online culture.
• 29:37
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and I think online culture and and sort of what has happened with X is probably a good place to start this because you said something interesting about polarization.
• 29:45
  SPEAKER_02: People tweet things that they don't believe, or maybe they're more extreme online than they are in their daily life.
• 29:50
  SPEAKER_02: And like I actually think like it's the opposite.
• 29:54
  SPEAKER_02: When I'm I like when I'm talking about preference falsification, I actually think that X has been um both in terms of pseudo-anonymous accounts and in terms of um the, you know, the the way that X is used, X is actually a more accurate predictor of culture and where culture is going.
• 30:12
  SPEAKER_02: Um if you if you look at the, you know, I I don't know if you you were following you know US elections very closely, but a lot of the people who kind of called um very elections right this year, um you know, they they have attributed their understanding of the you know the online culture as what allowed them to really understand where the puck was headed, not only on, you know, not only on the presidential election, but on a lot of minor elections, where it's like you could actually like the the the use of X and the use of um what would be sort of a hive mind in internet culture was actually a lot more predictive of where America is than you know what people say to their colleagues, what people say on the phone tour pollster.
• 30:55
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, I think that was actually the lesson of the US election, which I think is is incredibly fascinating, which means that online life is a lot more predictive of sort of where the culture is headed than say, you know, you and I having this conversation today.
• 31:10
  SPEAKER_02: I actually think podcasts are in between, podcasts are like sort of online and sort of offline.
• 31:15
  SPEAKER_02: So if we if we kind of move back from from sort of your your the premise of your question, which I'm not sure that I agree with or understand, I actually think that when we talk about things like polarization, when we talk about things like, you know, where where is the culture, on like the online world matters more.
• 31:31
  SPEAKER_02: I think if anything, like I've been more convinced, like if you just like you know, there's a phrase in the US which is um, you know, like you're you're you're so terminally online, touch grass.
• 31:41
  SPEAKER_02: I don't know if you've heard that.
• 31:42
  SPEAKER_02: Yeah.
• 31:43
  SPEAKER_02: Um yeah, you're you're so terminally online, touch grass and understand the real world.
• 31:47
  SPEAKER_02: Well, if you're terminally online, you're probably a better predictor of the future than than if you're you know taking in-person meetings and having conversations with people on a day, because there's something about sort of the screen that is actually I would say more predictive, um, or maybe it gives us a little bit more comfort that we can actually, you know, be be part of, you know, say say the things that we're thinking.
• 32:09
  SPEAKER_02: Um so I I would I would start there where I where I think we probably disagree on the importance of online culture, but online culture in particular matters for our world, for investing, it matters for understanding um young people.
• 32:22
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, I think like, you know, I'm I'm a I'm what's known as an elder millennial, um, where it's like I'm born in that sort of six-year period where, you know, the I remember the world before the internet, um, but I also would consider myself digitally native.
• 32:36
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and you know, the the generation below me, they very much understand this.
• 32:41
  SPEAKER_02: They very much understand that online culture and sort of the way that people act online and their personas online are likely more indicative of their real selves than the way that they act, you know, in a in a boardroom or in a meeting or or or you know, in sort of the physical world.
• 32:57
  SPEAKER_02: So I think we we should never we should never discount it if if that's what if that's what you were saying.
• 33:03
  SPEAKER_00: What's your uh Mark and Reese and the and the firm sort of famously came out in support of President Trump?
• 33:09
  SPEAKER_00: What's your take on President Trump?
• 33:12
  SPEAKER_02: So I I would refer, I mean, so Mark and Ben had a three-hour podcast where they talked about the I, you know, the the um the policies and the you know the the the the kind of journey that they both took that I would encourage all of your listeners to listen to.
• 33:27
  SPEAKER_02: It is very in-depth.
• 33:28
  SPEAKER_02: It goes through every technology issue that we have.
• 33:31
  SPEAKER_02: Um we also wrote a report called the the Little Tech Agenda that I think is very you know thorough in terms of kind of how does the firm make decisions about which candidates we support.
• 33:42
  SPEAKER_02: And, you know, uh in in US politics, we are we are 50-50 in terms of the candidates we've support.
• 33:48
  SPEAKER_02: Um, you know, we we you know invested in in many, or I shouldn't say we invested, we we we donated to many candidates in many elections.
• 33:55
  SPEAKER_02: Um and the question that we ask of every candidate um that we that we donate to is are you in favor of little tech?
• 34:02
  SPEAKER_02: It's a very simple thing.
• 34:03
  SPEAKER_02: So we don't look at social policy, and and and Mark and Ben say this much more eloquently than me, but we don't look at social policy.
• 34:09
  SPEAKER_02: We don't look at um things that are not related to our area of expertise, which is technological innovation.
• 34:15
  SPEAKER_02: And so, you know, the it's a it's a sort of a very thorough investigation of where people stand on critical issues.
• 34:21
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and I think it's very interesting because I think, you know, the the sort of you know, the the podcast that they did on supporting Trump, you know, is is what a lot of people point to.
• 34:30
  SPEAKER_02: But when we look at sort of US politics in general, um, it is 50-50 in that there are many, many Democrats who are very pro-technology.
• 34:37
  SPEAKER_02: Um, in our world of American dynamism, I would say, you know, it is very bipartisan in terms of, you know, wanting to invest in in critical weapon systems and wanting to invest in aerospace.
• 34:48
  SPEAKER_02: It's not something where, you know, only Democrats care about aerospace and only Republicans care about energy.
• 34:54
  SPEAKER_02: I mean, it's it is it is very, I would say, evenly split.
• 34:57
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and that's sort of how the firm makes decisions.
• 35:00
  SPEAKER_02: Um, but in terms of the the question of you know, why did they make a decision to support uh President Trump and the election, you know, Mark has been on pretty much every podcast explaining the the why of the previous administration, which in in his view and in Ben's view was extremely anti-technology on a number of different fronts, not just American dynamism fronts, but on um fintech, on cryptocurrency, on categories of innovation, on AI.
• 35:27
  SPEAKER_02: You know, I think the the AI executive order was sort of the tipping point if you go back and listen to to Mark's thoughts on that, where it was it was really existential for American innovation.
• 35:38
  SPEAKER_02: Um and so I would encourage all of your listeners, if they're if they're wanting to know more about sort of the nitty-gritty policy issues and the policy issues as it pertained to technological innovation in the United States, that they would go back to those podcasts which were on the Mark and Ben show.
• 35:52
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and and they're very thorough in terms of sort of how policy is likely going to change.
• 35:58
  SPEAKER_02: One thing I'll say about what you know, my expectation of how policy is changing.
• 36:01
  SPEAKER_02: And again, we're we're 14 days into uh the administration, um, but I was I was very pleasantly surprised by the inaugural address.
• 36:09
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and in the inaugural address, um, there were probably five or six uh mentions of technology.
• 36:15
  SPEAKER_02: So there was the split atom, uh, the fact that you know that uh all of the world's information is now in the palm of our hand, um, thanks to a handful of US-based companies.
• 36:25
  SPEAKER_02: Um, I thought that that was a very, very important call-out to the work that Silicon Valley has done for the last 50 years, the importance of Silicon Valley for the last 20 years in terms of the um, you know, the sort of innovation that's being done.
• 36:38
  SPEAKER_02: Um and I think uh, you know, I think in some ways that sort of call out to technology, you know, it didn't happen in 2016.
• 36:45
  SPEAKER_02: Um, it doesn't happen very often in Washington.
• 36:48
  SPEAKER_02: And so the fact that I think a lot of people, both Democrat and Republican, are excited about technological advancements and sort of how, you know, the private sector in particular can help support the needs of the American citizen as it relates to technology is is an exceptionally good thing.
• 37:04
  SPEAKER_02: Um and and I and I was pleasantly surprised to hear those words in the address.
• 37:09
  SPEAKER_00: But it'd be interesting to see because I was struck by what the inauguration that you know behind obviously President Trump were the biggest faces of big tech, right, not little tech.
• 37:17
  SPEAKER_00: So it will be interesting to see how that that plays out because obviously they're pretty highly involved.
• 37:21
  SPEAKER_00: Elon obviously is is is very involved.
• 37:23
  SPEAKER_00: So we'll we'll be interesting to see if it's technology more generally that's pushed forward as the US agenda, including the very large companies that exist today, or more of a focus on entrepreneurship.
• 37:32
  SPEAKER_00: But just one question and then I'm gonna hand it over to Tommy to wrap it up.
• 37:35
  SPEAKER_00: But um, you know, I'm I'm uh, as I said, proudly half American.
• 37:38
  SPEAKER_00: I'm also proudly half Danish, born here in the UK.
• 37:41
  SPEAKER_00: So when Trump recently announced his sort of uh, I guess gambit for Greenland, I was a little bit uh a bit shocked.
• 37:47
  SPEAKER_00: You know, there is something inherently, I guess, nationalistic about American dynamism, you know, and I think that makes sense to put forward the nation's interests.
• 37:56
  SPEAKER_00: How do you kind of think about balancing the nation's interests with the global common good, which there's been a lot of kind of dialectic about?
• 38:04
  SPEAKER_02: So, so so what I'll say is, you know, the the line that we always say about what is American dynamism, it is companies that are actively supporting the national interests and the interests of our allies.
• 38:14
  SPEAKER_02: So one of the things that we've built for our founders that I think is exceptionally important, and this is important around American defense as well, is we are trying to help our founders and have been successful in helping our founders go international much earlier.
• 38:26
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and of course, there is a large, you know, I would say regulatory regime around how the US works with our allies, how how we sell you know weapons systems to allies and important, you know, important regions.
• 38:38
  SPEAKER_02: Like that is something that is clearly said by law.
• 38:41
  SPEAKER_02: But it is the you know, the the focal point of the American dynamism practice to make sure that we are also helping our allies.
• 38:48
  SPEAKER_02: Um and one of the things that I think is is is you know really beneficial to our founders is oftentimes our founders have to figure that out themselves.
• 38:55
  SPEAKER_02: It's hard to go international as a small company.
• 38:58
  SPEAKER_02: Um, it's hard to work with other countries and to build a new facility when you're, you know, you have one facility and you're 500 or you know, 50 people and then you have two facilities and you're 500.
• 39:07
  SPEAKER_02: And so part of the thesis of the American dynamism practice is that supporting our allies across the world, you know, and and aerospace is a is is a is a similar area, you know, I would say similar focus where, you know, these are these are companies that operate around the globe.
• 39:22
  SPEAKER_02: They sell to various countries, um, you know, and there's there's a a wide array of allies which our early stage companies work with very closely.
• 39:30
  SPEAKER_02: Um so I so I would never want anyone to think that American dynamism doesn't mean that we don't invest in other countries.
• 39:35
  SPEAKER_02: We do.
• 39:35
  SPEAKER_02: Um so it doesn't mean that we would only invest in in in inside the US borders.
• 39:40
  SPEAKER_02: Like we we we've looked at many, many companies, and I think we'd be we we have you know investments across the world as as in Drees and Horowitz.
• 39:47
  SPEAKER_02: But the the reason we've named it American dynamism is because many of these, you know, many of these companies, they see the US as their market.
• 39:55
  SPEAKER_02: They are selling to the US government.
• 39:56
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and then they, you know, if they get to a certain size, then they sell to the Allies.
• 40:00
  SPEAKER_02: But like it is a very different thing than say being a software company where you can sell software doing, you know, say, say you're a consumer software company, you can sell anywhere in the world.
• 40:09
  SPEAKER_02: Um say you're an enterprise software company, you sell to anywhere where their business is done.
• 40:14
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and there's a different regulatory regime over that.
• 40:17
  SPEAKER_02: But if you are, you know, working on weapon systems, working on aerospace, working on um critical energy resources, you know, the US has very strict guidelines on how that works.
• 40:26
  SPEAKER_02: Um, but it doesn't mean that the US doesn't have export laws that allow us to work with our allies.
• 40:31
  SPEAKER_02: So I would definitely want your listeners to understand that like we are we are super excited for our companies to support America's allies.
• 40:39
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and we think that that that's an area that you know we can actually help our founders do earlier in their trajectory as well.
• 40:45
  SPEAKER_01: I think what you've just described has certainly been the experience we've had working with Andreessen, one of our companies, Synonym, where Giant and Andreessen co-led the seed round.
• 40:53
  SPEAKER_01: And you know, that company is highly international and doing lots of great work in the US, but also in actually in countries like Denmark.
• 40:59
  SPEAKER_01: Uh and so I think that that certainly has played out in our experience teaming up, which has been fantastic.
• 41:04
  SPEAKER_02: Absolutely.
• 41:05
  SPEAKER_02: And and having them be able to do that earlier is something that I think uh, you know, it's for so long in in technology, there's this there's this view that you know you you you can't go international until you you've raised hundreds of millions of dollars.
• 41:20
  SPEAKER_02: That is definitely not the case in the American dynamism practice.
• 41:24
  SPEAKER_02: A lot of our companies um are supporting allied nations and working closer at the behest of the US government too.
• 41:29
  SPEAKER_02: Um it's something that, you know, I think uh um we try to make possible for our companies earlier rather than later.
• 41:35
  SPEAKER_01: Absolutely.
• 41:36
  SPEAKER_01: Catherine, you've had a phenomenally successful career.
• 41:39
  SPEAKER_01: And with American dynamism, as we've just described and spoken about, I think you really have kind of reshaped what people think about when they think about venture capital and the types of company that can receive venture funding, uh, I think has changed in in large part because of what you've done with American dynamism.
• 41:54
  SPEAKER_01: We ask all of our guests on giant ideas, what is it about you that has allowed you to have such a successful career?
• 42:00
  SPEAKER_01: So sparing your blushes, tell us what do you think it is about you that's allowed you to achieve in life, whether it's your background, uh, sort of the things your parents taught you, things you've learned along the way, how have you done what you've done?
• 42:15
  SPEAKER_02: Goodness.
• 42:16
  SPEAKER_02: Um, again, as you could probably see, I am blushing.
• 42:19
  SPEAKER_02: Um, uh, but I but what I would say is uh, you know, I I always say I like every job I've ever done, whether it was a I was a culture journalist, you know, at the Washington Post, and you know, and now I'm an investor.
• 42:31
  SPEAKER_02: And a lot of people ask the question, well, what do those things have in common?
• 42:34
  SPEAKER_02: And like the real thing that they have in common is sort of listening, is being really open-minded, putting like finding many, many different pieces of you know, data sources and trying to piece them together to understand what's really going on.
• 42:46
  SPEAKER_02: There was there's this uh this sort of meme that existed in culture journalism that I one of my editors taught me, which is like if you're gonna write an incredible, say New Yorker style 10,000-word piece, there's two questions that matter that the reader wants to know, which is what does it mean?
• 43:02
  SPEAKER_02: And then under that, what does it really mean?
• 43:04
  SPEAKER_02: And I think like that actually is something that has like stayed with me probably throughout my entire life and career, which is you see something happening and it's like, well, what does it mean?
• 43:14
  SPEAKER_02: And then, but what does it really mean?
• 43:16
  SPEAKER_02: What is it really saying about where the world is headed?
• 43:18
  SPEAKER_02: What is it really saying about what people care about?
• 43:20
  SPEAKER_02: What is it saying about the culture?
• 43:22
  SPEAKER_02: Um, and I think that question is something that I'm constantly trying to answer and constantly trying to figure out.
• 43:29
  SPEAKER_02: And, you know, I'm I'm one of these, again, terminally online people.
• 43:32
  SPEAKER_02: I am constantly trying to find data sources, constantly trying to understand where the world is headed.
• 43:38
  SPEAKER_02: And um, and I and I think if if anything, you know, if if anything has stayed with me, it's it's really that sort of open-mindedness and curiosity and really just trying to get to ground truth, um, but also really understand what's going on under the surface.
• 43:51
  SPEAKER_01: Fantastic.
• 43:52
  SPEAKER_01: Great words of wisdom for the audience and and for us.
• 43:54
  SPEAKER_01: Catherine, thank you so much for sharing your giant idea today.
• 43:57
  SPEAKER_01: We really enjoyed the conversation.
• 43:58
  SPEAKER_01: Fascinating.
• 43:59
  SPEAKER_01: Thank you, Catherine.
• 44:00
  SPEAKER_02: Thanks so much for having me.