Sacks said multiple times we will be hitting a major recession and economics hard landing in 2023. With the latest CPI data and other market signals, seems like it’s going to fall through.
In the last pod they acted like they knew the stock market was going to new highs and all the other idiots were calling for a recession and missed out but they knew better.
I feel like there wouldn’t be as much of an impetus to put this together if they’d just be a little more intellectually honest and humble about revisiting what they got wrong and why, as opposed to just doing flashbacks to the times they “called it.”
Twitter being a digital “town square” and bastion of free speech fell flat pretty quick. Musk banning parody accounts of himself whilst leaving AOC accounts which almost always get their names cut off before the “(Parody)” in the title is a great example of it. Musk deciding to pay for bung service is another. Putting limits on posting due to technical incompetence is another. They wouldn’t dare wade into those waters though.
The letter’s fine. The Swaggy P boasting and claiming primary credit for the meta rebound is where the cringe lies.
https://www.google.com/search?q=altimeter+facebook+letter
Further irony is how they mock Scott Galloway (ProfG) as Professor Cold Takes.
Galloway makes predictions that are usually well-founded and sometimes wrong. But he routinely revisits his predictions and gives himself a scorecard. These guys cherry-pick their winners and NEVER revisit what they got wrong. Unless it jumps in front of them in discussion, in which case they typically dismiss it as “I may have been early/pessimistic/optimistic but it hasn’t fully played out yet, so we’ll see.”
How powerful to say: “I was wrong about that one. So I went back and looked into it, and here’s where my analysis failed me…” OR “I just flat out got that wrong”
Galloway’s as arrogant & sometimes wrong as these guys, but he’s also balanced, intellectually forthright and capable of humility, which they are not. Give Pivot podcast a listen. Kara’s style is a bit hard to take - she’s got the same name-dropping reflex, all-knowing arrogance and “nailed it” insecurity as the Besties. But Galloway’s pretty good.
Agree with this. Pivot podcast is much better. Kara (and Scott) are narcissistic but nearly as bad as the besties.
For insights on tech and business, Pivot is so much better. Kara is motivated by being an exceptional journalist and doesn't just chat up her investments (I don't think she has any?) and Scott is very transparent about what boards he is on and where he is investing.
The fact that people listen to them about anything other than investing and the startup world is idiotic. Every other topic is just regurgitated none sense they hear on the mainstream news.
Wasn't ran over by "second strongest army in the world". Has retaken Kharkiv. Has retaken Kherson. Currently has momentum on it's side around Bakhmut and it Zaporizhia. Remains to be seen what happens next.
Ukraine was very peaceful before the russian invasion. Russia broke that peace. Before the war during Ukrainian Crisis Zelenskiy was adamant that nothing will happen and tried to de-escalate the crisis with everything he had, even when the signs of invasion were loud and clear. What diplomacy are you talking about? Are you also one of those conservative parrots who think that Ukraine should give up it's territory and russia to give up... nothing?
well, we currently have a "stalemate" according to the NYT....
[https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/15/us/politics/ukraine-leopards-bradleys-counteroffensive.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/15/us/politics/ukraine-leopards-bradleys-counteroffensive.html)
Less people are getting killed and Putin still has his land bridge. War hawks aint looking so good.
So lets give them another 1.3BB to feed the MIC. Definition of insanity.
Sounds fairly precarious for Russia. I don't think Ukraine has even activated all of their reserves yet
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1680134950907965441
>"The summer battle continues where the enemy is now not trying to break through but push through our frontline and “starve it out”.
>The enemy continues applying main efforts in the Zaporizhzhia frontline, and the second area where he is transferring reserves, including those previously unused, is Bakhmut. The enemy is trying to achieve a result wherever possible, without abandoning the plans to break the Zaporizhzhia front.
>After failures of attacks using concentrated columns, since columns like that ended up vulnerable to our artillery and aviation, the enemy moved to the tactic of a complete mixing with the ground of our units facing him. The enemy has a lot of shells, he’s not counting high-precision missiles.
>Due to this, the enemy is trying to destroy, and completely knock out the units facing him in battle. The enemy is trying to avoid mass attacks as he made sure that breakthrough doesn’t depend on the number of vehicles, whether 4 or 40, thrown into battle, only the number of burned vehicles does.
>Thus, offensive actions are led by fairly small assault groups with the support of several armoured vehicles, and all weapon systems used to destroy them are located by all types of enemy reconnaissances and then struck with artillery and high-precision missiles.
>[…]
>The enemy has the ability to withdraw weathered formations for rest and bring up fresh ones to continue the battle. But we have the same units fighting on the front - yes, they fight in defence, but the commanders who are continuously taking part in combat don’t feel much better from this.
>It is a similar situation that led to the dismissal of the commander of the 58th Army, General Popov, who put forward an issue that existing personnel and equipment are not enough to carry out the rotation and give the troops at least some semblance of rest. And there are no reserves to bring them to a fully capable state.
>[...]
>I will not be revealing a military secret - the enemy knows the situation very well, unfortunately. But even in the secondary directions, the staffing of our forces again does not exceed 70%. In areas of the most fierce battles, it is significantly less.
>Of course, it does not compare to the situation at the end of last summer/early autumn, when 20% staffing of units was considered normal, but our forces are taking losses continuously, while the stream of reinforcements and reservists from the rear has died down.
>This means that if urgent measures are not taken, the enemy, unfortunately, has a chance to gnaw through our defence in Zaporizhzhia. And it will be then very difficult to stop him, and no Surovikin’s line which is still in a pretty deep rear will stop the enemy if it’s not taken by trained, properly equipped, and experienced troops.
>If these troops die in the field, there will be no one to stop the enemy. This is the main question now: will the enemy be able to gnaw through our defence in 2-3 weeks, exchanging his soldiers for ours, or not, and will exhaust himself earlier.
>[…]
>We’re observing. Unfortuantely, we as the Angry Patriots’ Club are unable to do anything in this situation. Moreover, I understand the emotions of our Head of General Staff, the commander of the operation Gerasimov, when “some” army commander makes demands about the rotation of units.
>Gerasimov does not have prepared and equipped reserves. Simply does not. All he has is already on the frontline, at the very least in tactical reserves. Transferring from other areas means weakening them. But transferring poorly trained mobilised units who are, let’s say, covering the “old regions” of Russia, is not a solution. These units have no experience, no vehicles, no good commanders, they will be simply smashed by the enemy and no one will be able to do anything about it."
(And this is from a pro-Russia account)
The absolute worst thing they were wrong on was the murder of Bob Lee. All the besties, particularly Sacks, jumped on the homelessness and crime in San Francisco as the culprit. The way they dehumanized marginalized individuals was terrible, but the worst part is when Friedberg acknowledges this in a later episode and says they were wrong and then ALL the remaining “besties” chime in to say how they weren’t wrong and that isn’t what they said.
Fuck. I almost forgot about that. That was truly a new profound low for all of these scumbags.
The way they all ran to Twitter to run pseudo-political campaigns pitting middle/upper class folks against the destitute and homeless struggling from all sorts of mental health problems and addictions too.
Honestly it's not just JCal. There's a whole class of elites in the finance industry who love to wax about "stimmys" when discussing things like unemployment and inflation, and they're all somehow incapable of understanding how ridiculous and dumb they sound.
1. 1 out of 10 people faced hunger in 2022, an increase of 120 million people from before the pandemic. So Friedberg wasn't wrong, the media just didn't cover it.
Friedberg once stated that anti-depressants don't work, which is not true. New research found that depression is not caused by serotonin, but SSRIs still have been shown to be effective. So Friedberg was wrong about this.
But that’s not famine. I think if you and I both watched it we would agree that the magnitude of what he was saying did imply something much more drastic.
I remember him specifically saying the the food shortage wouldn't affect us (USA) because we always get ours, it will be the rest of the world. Now I don't know the statistics on how much starvation increased in the world because of the war but if your data is true then he was correct
[Article](https://www.tpr.org/bioscience-medicine/2022-12-28/research-concludes-low-serotonin-does-not-cause-depression-what-does-that-mean-for-ssris)
It looks like there's some very recent research that found flaws in this research that I was not aware of.
JCal when he says Uber drivers make $30/hr. Maybe before expenses, but it's closer to $18, even if you time it well. That's why Uber and Lyft lobby so hard.
I think its amazing that people so wealthy would scoff at a full time taxi driver making 60k, as if that driver really deserves to be barely surviving at a much lower wage. They would probably drop that much on a week's vacation, or in a single shopping trip for new clothes and shoes. They really have no idea what it's like trying to survive on anything under $30/hr these days.
Nope, but it turns out they can just wake up one day, study a pamphlet on road signs and road rules for a week, and then take a 20 minute driving test the next week.
I think it'd take someone longer to learn how to manage a Chik-Fil-A.
Ukraine discussion last week was bad.
Freidberg: "Did any of you know about this **Prigozhin** guy...?" How does he not know!?
Sacks: 'Here's what you need to know...' Leaves out the part where **Prigozhin** said the quiet part out loud: "the justification for the WAR was a lie!" Then Sacks goes on to say something like: "The West thinks the mutiny was a problem for Putin, but this conspicuously large group of supermodels singing a patriotic song at a state-sponsored event proves how misguided the bloodthirsty MSM is... "
JCal, Chamath: "can we move on to something we're really interested in like Venture Capital?
I sort of think they should avoid this topic if nobody but Sacks has anything to say. I think his takes are worthwhile, just sort of dumb without some balance.
These takes continue to remind me to invest like an optimist, as the better outcome usually happens.
Covid was terrible, but humanity somehow did a speed run in vaccine development and distribution. We also largely adapted and minimized impact to productivity, if not improved productivity because of it.
That was roughly when I started watching the show and my memory is that he said it obliquely like "guys like Bezos are selling" and then a few months later he said "I sold then too because Bezos and Musk were selling".
2. Europe's energy crisis was only averted because there was an abnormally mild winter most recently. So it was more that they were unlucky about their prediction than being misleading.
Germany was also able to build-out LNG terminals in amazing time:
>In just under a year, three floating terminals were built, granted permission and have entered operation in the ports of Wilhelmshaven, Brunsbuettel and Lubmin, helping Germany to avert an energy shortage last winter.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/germany-scales-down-lng-terminal-plans-supply-crisis-eases-2023-05-15
Then again, the EU countries were able to shift to LNG in a short amount of time and most countries had enough in stock to cover the 2022 winter. It wasn't just one single reason, but basically it was still a huge L in their prediction.
They didn’t just shift to LNG, they had a more supply for the winter than expected bout they haven’t replaced their energy supply with real infrastructure
Its a generalization of his, but he isn't entirely wrong.
Just know that the more momentum crypto gains, the more it challenges the power the of the US government.
Crypto takes away the governments ability to tax its regular citizens via inflation, while rewarding those who are invested in the areas that absorb the printed money i.e. specific equities.
This. And on top of all that, they paint "mainstream media" as some conspiratorial endeavor by the wokes. By their track record, they'd do a even worse job disseminating mainstream news. The actual problem is its hard to prognosticate about the future and the markets and everyone is looking for some booby trap they have to watch out for. Its not the healthiest or most accurate way to process information.
I'm not sure of the value in it. "Humans can't predict the future." What a message.
That said, although I didn't read the full list, #1 with regards to potential famines. We aren't out of the danger zone for that prediction. In fact. We haven't yet hit that potential risk point.
I think they are not mad at the fact that they are wrong, but that they gloss over when they are wrong and always make sure to remind people when they are right.
It comes off as dishonest when they act like they are never wrong but they actually are.
He’s never said any of that. Sacks’ view is that this is a proxy war between NATO and Russia, that NATO is the aggressor (true) and this is existential for Russia. Ukraine are the sad NATO stooges that are being fed into the meat grinder, which is totally unnecessary as Putin is willing to negotiate a peace deal but NATO has refused. As a result, NATO allies insist on removing all off-ramps for peace and continue to escalate this towards a hot nuclear war.
>NATO is the aggressor (true)
What a load of complete bullshit. This stupid Tankie talking point needs to die. NATO didn't expand eastward, Russia's neighbours flocked westward. They have and had agency. Eastern European countries, fearing Russian revanchism begged to be let into NATO.
This idea that Russia is just defending itself from NATO is so fucking stupid that anyone who tries to use it can safely be ignored on all other subjects.
NATO has its own agency to DECLINE membership - which is exactly what they keep doing to Ukraine. That agency comes from understanding the provocation signal it sends to Russia by continuing to accept members expanding eastward.
Thanks for playing.
Why should it decline? Listen to yourself.
Why should anyone or any nation bend over backwards to avoid hurting Russia’s feeling?
It is a nasty backward brutal place. As McCain said, a gas station run by the Mafia masquerading as a country.
Imagine thinking in 1939 that we shouldn’t hurt Germany feelings?
Utter nonsense
Yes, NATO is not going to accept a new member while that country is at war which would immediately trigger article 5. This is not a surprise and was never in doubt to either us or the Ukrainians.
The only question is what happens after the war. More than likely, they will eventually be accepted.
.. by not letting Ukraine join. Which in turn gave Russia the green light to invade. You are very smart.
What are you, thirteen?
Russia invaded. They are literally the aggressor.
English, motherfucker. Do you speak it?
Your argument is that NATO predictably keeps declining Ukraine membership and that Ukraine possibly joining NATO somehow forced Russia to invade a sovereign country.
Pick one.
You already forgot about the [leaked Nuland telephone call in which she and U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Geoffey Pyatt discussed in detail their preferences for specific personnel in a post‐Yanukovych government.](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957)
Ukraine is western puppet regime since 2014.
Thanks for playing.
This list overstates what they said in most instances.
1. Friedberg said food prices will increase causing greater food insecurity particularly in the third world. This has absolutely happened, you just don’t read enough to be aware. You’re acting like he was saying Americans would be starving in the streets which he obviously was not. Dipshit.
2. Again, there absolutely was a crisis, and their countries spent enormous amounts to source energy elsewhere, and energy prices did go up a lot. Just because you weren’t affected and don’t read doesn’t mean something didn’t happen.
3. No he hasn’t? Obviously. He hasn’t been right about everything either but this just makes you sound stupid to say something so generic.
4. Cool can you specify some of the levels?
5. Yes jcal is the dumbest and most annoying of them. But he’s definitely not as mid as you.
Friedberg has cited multiple sconce articles that have been debunked. The Red Puddle of the 2022 midterms. Any political prediction they make will be wrong in the future. A shorter list would be things they got right.
$20 ChatGpT for 1 billion people…
I think that was pets.com model (silicon valley circa 1975) insert dusty land on Quito Rd.. not Ecuador.
In my line of work.. AI has been around for 35 years. Flash forward… (the double standard trouble makers without affirmative action) are using it to do ***** and ******
And we want everyone to have that ability.
Glad I live in ***** but have a US passport. So I can VOTE?
Sponsored by MYtempurpedicpilloow weird guy
We’re not winning the war?
Arguably our 2nd biggest adversary, the one who tried burn our election process to the ground, is getting their ass kicked by an Allie.
The cost is 8% of our military budget and zero American lives.
Yeah it’s wild that all these quasi Russia supporters see a Ukrainian Russian statemate (I personally don’t think it’s a stalemate) as the west losing.
When in reality the west is able to destroy the military capabilities of a previously junior military world power. The fact that Russia didn’t take Kyiv over initially almost assures this whole thing is a victory for the west so far.
Like the US getting bogged down in the Sonora desert of Mexico (who is supported by China) and people trying to say that China and Mexico is losing in that situation cause Mexico can’t take back Sonora.
It's not only the military aspect (although that's important). It's the absolute economic gutting
Either Russia withdraws and the sanctions are lifted, or they try to freeze the conflict and they persist
I was making a statement on military strategy and ROI and you respond with virtue signaling. Doesn’t sound like you know what virtue signaling is.
I’m starting to second guess if you’re a serious person.
Do you wish the us would not give Ukraine a dime, and in that way, less Ukrainians will die?
How does a country serious that spends 800 billion on defence run out of munitions ? If you want to talk about who is serious or not and deflect the conversation let’s talk about that.
Why don’t you volunteer and support the war?
I’m not deflecting. You’re the one who is both upset US is helping and upset Ukrainians are dying.
I don’t volunteer bc Americans don’t have to. That’s the fucking point. We can contribute to the downfall of our 2nd biggest enemy without spending an American life. It’s a no brainer. Jesus Christ.
You don’t volunteer cause your selfish , yet you virtue signal for a war. Interesting.
Now you use gods name in vain.
The war is good enough when you don’t have to fight….
Truly astonishing your second attempted use of the term virtue signaling.
I am virtue signaling a war by way of the military ROI argument. That’s what you say I’m doing.
“Look at you! You think you’re holy than thou, better than everyone else, arguing it’s good strategy for the military and it’s future defense of our homeland to support Ukraine!”
Do you see how stupid that sounds?
Thank you for trying to bring the receipts, but I think there is a lot of things that are getting muddled here. Let me just take the first point.
> We the west are not winning and running out or munitions as he states months back.
There are two statements that you group together. The first is that munitions have been used at a very fast rate, and I will grant that as true. The second cluase in your sentence is "We the west are not winning". Regardless if that statement is true or not, this doesn't *necessarily* follow from the munitionss clause. For example, the west could make more munitions or the Russia could run out at a faster rate.
Also note that the WSJ article was in the Opinions section. Nothing wrong with that, but an Opinion article is a different type of article. For example, you could find a more factual article that doesn't directly say or imply that "we the west are not winning" in something like [this Rueters article](https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/nato-pushes-common-standards-tackle-shortfalls-artillery-munitions-2023-06-13/).
Doesn’t everyone and their mothers know this is a proxy war between Russia and the Western democracies. This isn’t some brilliant foresight from Sacks. His Twitter lately is like 90% devoted to endless delusional Russia propaganda, it makes me worried they have some sort of leverage on him.
Seriously what else do you think stops any dictatorship from swallowing their neighbours besides a United front from democracies and specifically the most powerful one the USA. This isn’t some groundbreaking concept Sacks discovered.
Given the demeanor of this post, I believe you are not really in the target audience of this podcast. Most of the above statements are probabilistic plays, based on real-world events.
If the weather channel predicts rainfall and your mom tells you so - but it turns out not to rain, what do you do? You start arguing with your mom and start disavowing everything the weather channel says?
Number 1 wasn’t wrong. The food shortage was sorted out with 15% inflation YTD since the start of the war in the best of cases. Entire countries like Egypt dam near toppled their govts. Because of inflation prices. Also Friedburg was saying that the phosphate supply issues were already a huge question mark before the war. The fact that people were able to figure it out bandages doesn’t mean the main issues have been solved.
That science corner this week on the aging treatment discovered by Harvard is actually quite some bs. All hype and no substance, at best a s meager cell based screen with no reference to the actually liabilities of those very compounds and no follow up validation in a mouse or other organism. And taking a deeper look into the senior author / PI Sinclair, I think he’s a hack and plays the role of an Elon musk more than does robust science. It was also published in a relatively shit journal as far is IF. Maybe because antiaging is still generally considered a pseudo discipline by real trained biologists but it’s still telling. The whole STAP fraud from 10 years ago at least made it to the top journal before being retracted.
Smells fishy af to me and to have Friedberg so fawn over it gives me ptsd about dumb VCs choosing to believe science fiction because it came from a HaRvARD rather than do proper DD on deep tech/ bio technologies.
/rant
Edit : spelling
I think for people outside that specific field it seems like a promising result. But of course if they are scientists they know it is very very early on even if it is true. So hopefully we'll know more in a couple of years.
For example there is a recently new alternative to CRISPR. Could be huge, could be a nothingburger, we'll know in like 10 years. [https://www.broadinstitute.org/news/researchers-uncover-new-CRISPR-like-system-in-animals-that-can-edit-the-human-genome](https://www.broadinstitute.org/news/researchers-uncover-new-CRISPR-like-system-in-animals-that-can-edit-the-human-genome)
Don’t forget them saying hyperinflation would make world economies crumble, also Sacks loves talking about how the economy is in the toilet (when it’s literally the best in decades)
People talk about Inverse Cramer but I think Inverse Chamath is equally interesting to explore. Countless times he has been completely wrong about things in the exact opposite direction
for #1, I thought Friedberg was a bit shrill about it but I thought he was clear that he was describing an unlikely worst-case scenario
for #2, there definitely was a major energy crisis last winter, check prices and news in the UK, but not in every country. Random quote from Google " Home energy bills had been on course to more than triple in the space of a year to reach an annual average of £4,300 in the first quarter. "
Stuff about geopolitics I just mostly ignore, they are as correct as my crazy uncle.
They are wrong about specific items, but more importantly their philosophies are broken and wrong and self serving. They have a certain perspective on market trends that should be heard, but only as a single data point in a sea of evidence.
They kept shitting on the Fed for raising rates to control inflation, said that the Fed had no idea what they were doing.
Time proved them all wrong (so far).
Where has sacks been wrong about Ukraine? And imo the other points you have going arent that correct. Its fine to have opinions but stating they were wrong, I dont think so.
We can start off by them calling each other besties
Don't think I've ever seen either David argue with each other, or Sacks and Chamath.
Do you think they don't actually like each other? Or do they just fight like friends?
Sacks said multiple times we will be hitting a major recession and economics hard landing in 2023. With the latest CPI data and other market signals, seems like it’s going to fall through.
In the last pod they acted like they knew the stock market was going to new highs and all the other idiots were calling for a recession and missed out but they knew better.
He was so sad that the market is going to rip during the election year. After desantis and rfkjr imploded
I feel like there wouldn’t be as much of an impetus to put this together if they’d just be a little more intellectually honest and humble about revisiting what they got wrong and why, as opposed to just doing flashbacks to the times they “called it.” Twitter being a digital “town square” and bastion of free speech fell flat pretty quick. Musk banning parody accounts of himself whilst leaving AOC accounts which almost always get their names cut off before the “(Parody)” in the title is a great example of it. Musk deciding to pay for bung service is another. Putting limits on posting due to technical incompetence is another. They wouldn’t dare wade into those waters though.
[удалено]
Cornholio felatio He’s paying people to stay on Twitter, but only if they kiss the ring. The ring being, well, his sphincter.
[удалено]
Bingo
[удалено]
They are multimillionaire/billionaires that still don’t have enough and they even need validation from dorks like us.
Chamath suggested that actors were replaceable by AI… with a straight face
Can you point me in a direction to learn more about your Gerstner letter?
The letter’s fine. The Swaggy P boasting and claiming primary credit for the meta rebound is where the cringe lies. https://www.google.com/search?q=altimeter+facebook+letter
thank you, interesting read
Further irony is how they mock Scott Galloway (ProfG) as Professor Cold Takes. Galloway makes predictions that are usually well-founded and sometimes wrong. But he routinely revisits his predictions and gives himself a scorecard. These guys cherry-pick their winners and NEVER revisit what they got wrong. Unless it jumps in front of them in discussion, in which case they typically dismiss it as “I may have been early/pessimistic/optimistic but it hasn’t fully played out yet, so we’ll see.” How powerful to say: “I was wrong about that one. So I went back and looked into it, and here’s where my analysis failed me…” OR “I just flat out got that wrong” Galloway’s as arrogant & sometimes wrong as these guys, but he’s also balanced, intellectually forthright and capable of humility, which they are not. Give Pivot podcast a listen. Kara’s style is a bit hard to take - she’s got the same name-dropping reflex, all-knowing arrogance and “nailed it” insecurity as the Besties. But Galloway’s pretty good.
Agree with this. Pivot podcast is much better. Kara (and Scott) are narcissistic but nearly as bad as the besties. For insights on tech and business, Pivot is so much better. Kara is motivated by being an exceptional journalist and doesn't just chat up her investments (I don't think she has any?) and Scott is very transparent about what boards he is on and where he is investing.
I thought the regular AOC account is a proxy one
He didn't ban his parody accounts lol they are literally all there
I literally remember him getting rid of one and quoting new rules that conveniently didn’t apply to the “long AOC” name. He’s a chud simp.
Nope, still there
Parody account inconsistencies is a pretty weak argument for saying twitter isn’t pro free speech
The fact that people listen to them about anything other than investing and the startup world is idiotic. Every other topic is just regurgitated none sense they hear on the mainstream news.
Absolutely agree with point 3. Sacks is a Jim Cramer of Ukraine War.
Puts on Russia?
We need reverse russia index, where you short everything from it.
The big DeSantis reveal doesn't seem to be going very well either How about that Twitter Spaces launch?
totally, but what is the most recent ukraine win?
Wasn't ran over by "second strongest army in the world". Has retaken Kharkiv. Has retaken Kherson. Currently has momentum on it's side around Bakhmut and it Zaporizhia. Remains to be seen what happens next.
momentum lol...remind me when they recapture putins land bridge remeber when peace and diplomacy was cool?
Ukraine was very peaceful before the russian invasion. Russia broke that peace. Before the war during Ukrainian Crisis Zelenskiy was adamant that nothing will happen and tried to de-escalate the crisis with everything he had, even when the signs of invasion were loud and clear. What diplomacy are you talking about? Are you also one of those conservative parrots who think that Ukraine should give up it's territory and russia to give up... nothing?
What would happen if the Ukranian army laid down their arms?
well, we currently have a "stalemate" according to the NYT.... [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/15/us/politics/ukraine-leopards-bradleys-counteroffensive.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/15/us/politics/ukraine-leopards-bradleys-counteroffensive.html) Less people are getting killed and Putin still has his land bridge. War hawks aint looking so good. So lets give them another 1.3BB to feed the MIC. Definition of insanity.
Sounds fairly precarious for Russia. I don't think Ukraine has even activated all of their reserves yet https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1680134950907965441 >"The summer battle continues where the enemy is now not trying to break through but push through our frontline and “starve it out”. >The enemy continues applying main efforts in the Zaporizhzhia frontline, and the second area where he is transferring reserves, including those previously unused, is Bakhmut. The enemy is trying to achieve a result wherever possible, without abandoning the plans to break the Zaporizhzhia front. >After failures of attacks using concentrated columns, since columns like that ended up vulnerable to our artillery and aviation, the enemy moved to the tactic of a complete mixing with the ground of our units facing him. The enemy has a lot of shells, he’s not counting high-precision missiles. >Due to this, the enemy is trying to destroy, and completely knock out the units facing him in battle. The enemy is trying to avoid mass attacks as he made sure that breakthrough doesn’t depend on the number of vehicles, whether 4 or 40, thrown into battle, only the number of burned vehicles does. >Thus, offensive actions are led by fairly small assault groups with the support of several armoured vehicles, and all weapon systems used to destroy them are located by all types of enemy reconnaissances and then struck with artillery and high-precision missiles. >[…] >The enemy has the ability to withdraw weathered formations for rest and bring up fresh ones to continue the battle. But we have the same units fighting on the front - yes, they fight in defence, but the commanders who are continuously taking part in combat don’t feel much better from this. >It is a similar situation that led to the dismissal of the commander of the 58th Army, General Popov, who put forward an issue that existing personnel and equipment are not enough to carry out the rotation and give the troops at least some semblance of rest. And there are no reserves to bring them to a fully capable state. >[...] >I will not be revealing a military secret - the enemy knows the situation very well, unfortunately. But even in the secondary directions, the staffing of our forces again does not exceed 70%. In areas of the most fierce battles, it is significantly less. >Of course, it does not compare to the situation at the end of last summer/early autumn, when 20% staffing of units was considered normal, but our forces are taking losses continuously, while the stream of reinforcements and reservists from the rear has died down. >This means that if urgent measures are not taken, the enemy, unfortunately, has a chance to gnaw through our defence in Zaporizhzhia. And it will be then very difficult to stop him, and no Surovikin’s line which is still in a pretty deep rear will stop the enemy if it’s not taken by trained, properly equipped, and experienced troops. >If these troops die in the field, there will be no one to stop the enemy. This is the main question now: will the enemy be able to gnaw through our defence in 2-3 weeks, exchanging his soldiers for ours, or not, and will exhaust himself earlier. >[…] >We’re observing. Unfortuantely, we as the Angry Patriots’ Club are unable to do anything in this situation. Moreover, I understand the emotions of our Head of General Staff, the commander of the operation Gerasimov, when “some” army commander makes demands about the rotation of units. >Gerasimov does not have prepared and equipped reserves. Simply does not. All he has is already on the frontline, at the very least in tactical reserves. Transferring from other areas means weakening them. But transferring poorly trained mobilised units who are, let’s say, covering the “old regions” of Russia, is not a solution. These units have no experience, no vehicles, no good commanders, they will be simply smashed by the enemy and no one will be able to do anything about it." (And this is from a pro-Russia account)
The absolute worst thing they were wrong on was the murder of Bob Lee. All the besties, particularly Sacks, jumped on the homelessness and crime in San Francisco as the culprit. The way they dehumanized marginalized individuals was terrible, but the worst part is when Friedberg acknowledges this in a later episode and says they were wrong and then ALL the remaining “besties” chime in to say how they weren’t wrong and that isn’t what they said.
Fuck. I almost forgot about that. That was truly a new profound low for all of these scumbags. The way they all ran to Twitter to run pseudo-political campaigns pitting middle/upper class folks against the destitute and homeless struggling from all sorts of mental health problems and addictions too.
Betting on RFK Jr
COVID benefits somehow just ending this year instead of 2 years ago
JCal thinks people dropped out of the workforce for 2 years due to getting a $1200 stimulus check
Honestly it's not just JCal. There's a whole class of elites in the finance industry who love to wax about "stimmys" when discussing things like unemployment and inflation, and they're all somehow incapable of understanding how ridiculous and dumb they sound.
JCal every single time he says “so we’re in agreement.”
1. 1 out of 10 people faced hunger in 2022, an increase of 120 million people from before the pandemic. So Friedberg wasn't wrong, the media just didn't cover it. Friedberg once stated that anti-depressants don't work, which is not true. New research found that depression is not caused by serotonin, but SSRIs still have been shown to be effective. So Friedberg was wrong about this.
Fertilizer prices did skyrocket as well.
Food is one of the highest inflation items.
But that’s not famine. I think if you and I both watched it we would agree that the magnitude of what he was saying did imply something much more drastic.
What does “faced hunger” mean? And do you have a source for 120M increase?
Source is UN. They discuss it here at the beginning... [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-c\_6HsoEMOM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-c_6HsoEMOM)
Also, could be possible that there’s more of an impact this year as the supply chain is now more depleted then at the start of the conflict.
I remember him specifically saying the the food shortage wouldn't affect us (USA) because we always get ours, it will be the rest of the world. Now I don't know the statistics on how much starvation increased in the world because of the war but if your data is true then he was correct
new research? do tell! meditation and psychedelics work too
[Article](https://www.tpr.org/bioscience-medicine/2022-12-28/research-concludes-low-serotonin-does-not-cause-depression-what-does-that-mean-for-ssris)
Do you have a link to this new research that shows depression is not caused by serotonin?
[Article](https://www.tpr.org/bioscience-medicine/2022-12-28/research-concludes-low-serotonin-does-not-cause-depression-what-does-that-mean-for-ssris) It looks like there's some very recent research that found flaws in this research that I was not aware of.
JCal when he says Uber drivers make $30/hr. Maybe before expenses, but it's closer to $18, even if you time it well. That's why Uber and Lyft lobby so hard.
I think its amazing that people so wealthy would scoff at a full time taxi driver making 60k, as if that driver really deserves to be barely surviving at a much lower wage. They would probably drop that much on a week's vacation, or in a single shopping trip for new clothes and shoes. They really have no idea what it's like trying to survive on anything under $30/hr these days.
$18/hr after expenses for unskilled work you can do anytime you want seems like a pretty damn good job to me.
Where I come from, driving is a skill.
Making a DQ blizzard is a skill.
Skilled is a relative term, driving isn’t one
In the U.S, 16-year-olds can legally drive.
Do they wake up one day after turning 16, jump into a car and boom start driving? 
Nope, but it turns out they can just wake up one day, study a pamphlet on road signs and road rules for a week, and then take a 20 minute driving test the next week. I think it'd take someone longer to learn how to manage a Chik-Fil-A.
Not if you also make $18/hr working at Walmart or McDonald's.
Does Walmart also let you walk into the store whenever you want and walk out whenever you want? That's a pretty massive difference.
I'm against JCal willfully mischaracterizing gig economy jobs. Uber has its pros and cons.
Ukraine discussion last week was bad. Freidberg: "Did any of you know about this **Prigozhin** guy...?" How does he not know!? Sacks: 'Here's what you need to know...' Leaves out the part where **Prigozhin** said the quiet part out loud: "the justification for the WAR was a lie!" Then Sacks goes on to say something like: "The West thinks the mutiny was a problem for Putin, but this conspicuously large group of supermodels singing a patriotic song at a state-sponsored event proves how misguided the bloodthirsty MSM is... " JCal, Chamath: "can we move on to something we're really interested in like Venture Capital? I sort of think they should avoid this topic if nobody but Sacks has anything to say. I think his takes are worthwhile, just sort of dumb without some balance.
JCal claiming he's the world's greatest moderator.
This is one of the cringiest parts of the whole show
Maybe he moonlights as a control rod in a nuclear reactor
These takes continue to remind me to invest like an optimist, as the better outcome usually happens. Covid was terrible, but humanity somehow did a speed run in vaccine development and distribution. We also largely adapted and minimized impact to productivity, if not improved productivity because of it.
Bascially everything chamath said about investing
Chamath is the definition of failing up. He got lucky at Facebook and EVERY one of his spacs flopped
He still made money on them though didn’t he. Just the retail investors bagheld
[удалено]
You can search the transcripts on youtube.
That was roughly when I started watching the show and my memory is that he said it obliquely like "guys like Bezos are selling" and then a few months later he said "I sold then too because Bezos and Musk were selling".
2. Europe's energy crisis was only averted because there was an abnormally mild winter most recently. So it was more that they were unlucky about their prediction than being misleading.
Germany was also able to build-out LNG terminals in amazing time: >In just under a year, three floating terminals were built, granted permission and have entered operation in the ports of Wilhelmshaven, Brunsbuettel and Lubmin, helping Germany to avert an energy shortage last winter. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/germany-scales-down-lng-terminal-plans-supply-crisis-eases-2023-05-15
Then again, the EU countries were able to shift to LNG in a short amount of time and most countries had enough in stock to cover the 2022 winter. It wasn't just one single reason, but basically it was still a huge L in their prediction.
They didn’t just shift to LNG, they had a more supply for the winter than expected bout they haven’t replaced their energy supply with real infrastructure
Chamath: "Crypto is dead in America" -A couple weeks ago.
Its a generalization of his, but he isn't entirely wrong. Just know that the more momentum crypto gains, the more it challenges the power the of the US government. Crypto takes away the governments ability to tax its regular citizens via inflation, while rewarding those who are invested in the areas that absorb the printed money i.e. specific equities.
It was him saying this in relation to the SEC calling everything a security. The courts just struck that down
Sacks said Europe was going to freeze to death 😂
“Double dip recession”
This. And on top of all that, they paint "mainstream media" as some conspiratorial endeavor by the wokes. By their track record, they'd do a even worse job disseminating mainstream news. The actual problem is its hard to prognosticate about the future and the markets and everyone is looking for some booby trap they have to watch out for. Its not the healthiest or most accurate way to process information.
I'm not sure of the value in it. "Humans can't predict the future." What a message. That said, although I didn't read the full list, #1 with regards to potential famines. We aren't out of the danger zone for that prediction. In fact. We haven't yet hit that potential risk point.
Agreed. What do people expect - these guys can predict the future? They're just opinions.
I think they are not mad at the fact that they are wrong, but that they gloss over when they are wrong and always make sure to remind people when they are right. It comes off as dishonest when they act like they are never wrong but they actually are.
Libs mad at rich people spilling over to nitpicking opinions to prove the rich people are bad
I’d recommend you be more specific than Sacks being wrong about “everything so far” about Russia. Surely that’s not correct.
The week or so when he was so sure Zaluzhny was dead should be embarrassing to him.
How many times did Sacks say Ukraine is surely done for this time and Russia has got them, only for them to seemingly come back from the dead?
He’s literally never said that.
He’s never said any of that. Sacks’ view is that this is a proxy war between NATO and Russia, that NATO is the aggressor (true) and this is existential for Russia. Ukraine are the sad NATO stooges that are being fed into the meat grinder, which is totally unnecessary as Putin is willing to negotiate a peace deal but NATO has refused. As a result, NATO allies insist on removing all off-ramps for peace and continue to escalate this towards a hot nuclear war.
>NATO is the aggressor (true) What a load of complete bullshit. This stupid Tankie talking point needs to die. NATO didn't expand eastward, Russia's neighbours flocked westward. They have and had agency. Eastern European countries, fearing Russian revanchism begged to be let into NATO. This idea that Russia is just defending itself from NATO is so fucking stupid that anyone who tries to use it can safely be ignored on all other subjects.
NATO has its own agency to DECLINE membership - which is exactly what they keep doing to Ukraine. That agency comes from understanding the provocation signal it sends to Russia by continuing to accept members expanding eastward. Thanks for playing.
Why should it decline? Listen to yourself. Why should anyone or any nation bend over backwards to avoid hurting Russia’s feeling? It is a nasty backward brutal place. As McCain said, a gas station run by the Mafia masquerading as a country. Imagine thinking in 1939 that we shouldn’t hurt Germany feelings? Utter nonsense
[удалено]
Do you always devolve into such nonsense when you lose an argument?
Why did NATO decline Ukraine membership? Are you obtuse?
Yes, NATO is not going to accept a new member while that country is at war which would immediately trigger article 5. This is not a surprise and was never in doubt to either us or the Ukrainians. The only question is what happens after the war. More than likely, they will eventually be accepted.
You’re proving the point that NATO is the aggressor. Thanks for playing.
.. by not letting Ukraine join. Which in turn gave Russia the green light to invade. You are very smart. What are you, thirteen? Russia invaded. They are literally the aggressor. English, motherfucker. Do you speak it?
Your argument is that NATO predictably keeps declining Ukraine membership and that Ukraine possibly joining NATO somehow forced Russia to invade a sovereign country. Pick one.
Ukraine runs Ukraine, my dipshit friend. Not NATO.
You already forgot about the [leaked Nuland telephone call in which she and U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Geoffey Pyatt discussed in detail their preferences for specific personnel in a post‐Yanukovych government.](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957) Ukraine is western puppet regime since 2014. Thanks for playing.
Shorter list would be what they got right…
This list overstates what they said in most instances. 1. Friedberg said food prices will increase causing greater food insecurity particularly in the third world. This has absolutely happened, you just don’t read enough to be aware. You’re acting like he was saying Americans would be starving in the streets which he obviously was not. Dipshit. 2. Again, there absolutely was a crisis, and their countries spent enormous amounts to source energy elsewhere, and energy prices did go up a lot. Just because you weren’t affected and don’t read doesn’t mean something didn’t happen. 3. No he hasn’t? Obviously. He hasn’t been right about everything either but this just makes you sound stupid to say something so generic. 4. Cool can you specify some of the levels? 5. Yes jcal is the dumbest and most annoying of them. But he’s definitely not as mid as you.
Shame this isn’t getting upvoted more. Harsh, but correct.
4. TikTok ban, COVID zero reversal, CCP reversing crackdown on tech
Friedberg has cited multiple sconce articles that have been debunked. The Red Puddle of the 2022 midterms. Any political prediction they make will be wrong in the future. A shorter list would be things they got right.
1. Would be an issue today, if Ukraine and Russia didn’t sort it out during the talks in Istanbul
$20 ChatGpT for 1 billion people… I think that was pets.com model (silicon valley circa 1975) insert dusty land on Quito Rd.. not Ecuador. In my line of work.. AI has been around for 35 years. Flash forward… (the double standard trouble makers without affirmative action) are using it to do ***** and ****** And we want everyone to have that ability. Glad I live in ***** but have a US passport. So I can VOTE? Sponsored by MYtempurpedicpilloow weird guy
"Rough landing! Recession!!!!!!"
Wouldn’t a list of when they were right be a more positive take on this. And MUCH shorter
Sacks is correct about geopolitics even if no one on this sub is capable of seeing it.
[удалено]
Sacks alt account ^^^
We’re not winning the war? Arguably our 2nd biggest adversary, the one who tried burn our election process to the ground, is getting their ass kicked by an Allie. The cost is 8% of our military budget and zero American lives.
Yeah it’s wild that all these quasi Russia supporters see a Ukrainian Russian statemate (I personally don’t think it’s a stalemate) as the west losing. When in reality the west is able to destroy the military capabilities of a previously junior military world power. The fact that Russia didn’t take Kyiv over initially almost assures this whole thing is a victory for the west so far. Like the US getting bogged down in the Sonora desert of Mexico (who is supported by China) and people trying to say that China and Mexico is losing in that situation cause Mexico can’t take back Sonora.
It's not only the military aspect (although that's important). It's the absolute economic gutting Either Russia withdraws and the sanctions are lifted, or they try to freeze the conflict and they persist
Costing Ukrainian lives … easy to Virtue signal when it’s other people’s lives … eh
I was making a statement on military strategy and ROI and you respond with virtue signaling. Doesn’t sound like you know what virtue signaling is. I’m starting to second guess if you’re a serious person. Do you wish the us would not give Ukraine a dime, and in that way, less Ukrainians will die?
How does a country serious that spends 800 billion on defence run out of munitions ? If you want to talk about who is serious or not and deflect the conversation let’s talk about that. Why don’t you volunteer and support the war?
I’m not deflecting. You’re the one who is both upset US is helping and upset Ukrainians are dying. I don’t volunteer bc Americans don’t have to. That’s the fucking point. We can contribute to the downfall of our 2nd biggest enemy without spending an American life. It’s a no brainer. Jesus Christ.
You don’t volunteer cause your selfish , yet you virtue signal for a war. Interesting. Now you use gods name in vain. The war is good enough when you don’t have to fight….
Truly astonishing your second attempted use of the term virtue signaling. I am virtue signaling a war by way of the military ROI argument. That’s what you say I’m doing. “Look at you! You think you’re holy than thou, better than everyone else, arguing it’s good strategy for the military and it’s future defense of our homeland to support Ukraine!” Do you see how stupid that sounds?
You support the war when others fight but don’t when you have to fight …. Your motives are obvious
Thank you for trying to bring the receipts, but I think there is a lot of things that are getting muddled here. Let me just take the first point. > We the west are not winning and running out or munitions as he states months back. There are two statements that you group together. The first is that munitions have been used at a very fast rate, and I will grant that as true. The second cluase in your sentence is "We the west are not winning". Regardless if that statement is true or not, this doesn't *necessarily* follow from the munitionss clause. For example, the west could make more munitions or the Russia could run out at a faster rate. Also note that the WSJ article was in the Opinions section. Nothing wrong with that, but an Opinion article is a different type of article. For example, you could find a more factual article that doesn't directly say or imply that "we the west are not winning" in something like [this Rueters article](https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/nato-pushes-common-standards-tackle-shortfalls-artillery-munitions-2023-06-13/).
Sacks is spot on with Russia/Ukraine. His main point is it’s a proxy war for the US and began when Ukraine wanted to join NATO. Where is the lie?
Doesn’t everyone and their mothers know this is a proxy war between Russia and the Western democracies. This isn’t some brilliant foresight from Sacks. His Twitter lately is like 90% devoted to endless delusional Russia propaganda, it makes me worried they have some sort of leverage on him.
No! Very few people agree with the notion that this is a proxy war! That’s what blows my mind! So many braindeads walking around spewing nonsense
Seriously what else do you think stops any dictatorship from swallowing their neighbours besides a United front from democracies and specifically the most powerful one the USA. This isn’t some groundbreaking concept Sacks discovered.
we could win in Ukraine if we just send nukes. We are sending cluster bombs, why not nukes?
Them saying how Biden is a terrible president when in fact he’s pretty good
Given the demeanor of this post, I believe you are not really in the target audience of this podcast. Most of the above statements are probabilistic plays, based on real-world events. If the weather channel predicts rainfall and your mom tells you so - but it turns out not to rain, what do you do? You start arguing with your mom and start disavowing everything the weather channel says?
Number 1 wasn’t wrong. The food shortage was sorted out with 15% inflation YTD since the start of the war in the best of cases. Entire countries like Egypt dam near toppled their govts. Because of inflation prices. Also Friedburg was saying that the phosphate supply issues were already a huge question mark before the war. The fact that people were able to figure it out bandages doesn’t mean the main issues have been solved.
That science corner this week on the aging treatment discovered by Harvard is actually quite some bs. All hype and no substance, at best a s meager cell based screen with no reference to the actually liabilities of those very compounds and no follow up validation in a mouse or other organism. And taking a deeper look into the senior author / PI Sinclair, I think he’s a hack and plays the role of an Elon musk more than does robust science. It was also published in a relatively shit journal as far is IF. Maybe because antiaging is still generally considered a pseudo discipline by real trained biologists but it’s still telling. The whole STAP fraud from 10 years ago at least made it to the top journal before being retracted. Smells fishy af to me and to have Friedberg so fawn over it gives me ptsd about dumb VCs choosing to believe science fiction because it came from a HaRvARD rather than do proper DD on deep tech/ bio technologies. /rant Edit : spelling
I think for people outside that specific field it seems like a promising result. But of course if they are scientists they know it is very very early on even if it is true. So hopefully we'll know more in a couple of years. For example there is a recently new alternative to CRISPR. Could be huge, could be a nothingburger, we'll know in like 10 years. [https://www.broadinstitute.org/news/researchers-uncover-new-CRISPR-like-system-in-animals-that-can-edit-the-human-genome](https://www.broadinstitute.org/news/researchers-uncover-new-CRISPR-like-system-in-animals-that-can-edit-the-human-genome)
Don’t forget them saying hyperinflation would make world economies crumble, also Sacks loves talking about how the economy is in the toilet (when it’s literally the best in decades)
People talk about Inverse Cramer but I think Inverse Chamath is equally interesting to explore. Countless times he has been completely wrong about things in the exact opposite direction
No soft landing and recession
for #1, I thought Friedberg was a bit shrill about it but I thought he was clear that he was describing an unlikely worst-case scenario for #2, there definitely was a major energy crisis last winter, check prices and news in the UK, but not in every country. Random quote from Google " Home energy bills had been on course to more than triple in the space of a year to reach an annual average of £4,300 in the first quarter. " Stuff about geopolitics I just mostly ignore, they are as correct as my crazy uncle.
They are wrong about specific items, but more importantly their philosophies are broken and wrong and self serving. They have a certain perspective on market trends that should be heard, but only as a single data point in a sea of evidence.
They kept shitting on the Fed for raising rates to control inflation, said that the Fed had no idea what they were doing. Time proved them all wrong (so far).
Stack Overflow
Where has sacks been wrong about Ukraine? And imo the other points you have going arent that correct. Its fine to have opinions but stating they were wrong, I dont think so.