The Exchanges

Q Indeed, but I would love to kick off with a little context. So for those that maybe haven't read some of your incredible work, how did you make your way into the wonderful world of startups and come to be one of the most prominent figures in the Valley today?

A Well, I had a couple decades career as a serial entrepreneur. I had spent four years in the Air Force during the Vietnam War before I became an entrepreneur. Came out to Silicon Valley in the early 19 seventies. Did eight startups in 21 years, two semiconductor companies, supercomputers, enterprise software, video games, military intelligence, and then ended up retiring in the midst of the dot-com bubble. And I think I have a t-shirt that said, the luckiest man on earth, number 125 or something. But when I retired, I started to think about the nature of innovation and entrepreneurship. How did this work? This business that was so good to me and I had so much fun in, I just kind of did it, never quite questioning how people gave us money and what they told us to do, etc. And it turned out that when you're doing a startup or when you're doing a company, your head is down, mostly doing execution of your current business. There's very little time for great thoughts or what's this about? But I finally had time to kind of ponder the nature of innovation and entrepreneurship and In a nutshell, what I realized is in the 20th century, investors basically told startups without ever using these words that startups are nothing more than smaller versions of large companies. So they were saying everything a large company did, you do. A large company writes a five-year plan. We want you to fo…

AI assessment note: “Came out to Silicon Valley in the early 19 seventies. Did eight startups in 21 years”

Q Yeah, it's one of my favorites too, I have to admit. Tell me, the best board member that you've sat on a board with or observed at board meetings, and what made them so good?

A This one, I'm going to vote for two, and like every entrepreneur you offer one, they'll take two or more. The best one on a non-profit board is when I was a public official in California. I sat on a board with someone named Mark Stone, who was a coastal commissioner with me, and Mark had probably the best ethical center I've ever seen in In anyone, even though we were dealing with lobbyists all the time and had the governor screaming in our ears for how to vote, Mark was pretty centered and in fact was a pretty good role model for me there. On the commercial board, it was Doug Leoni of Sequoia Capital. It was great to watch Doug channel his mentor in Sequoia, Don Valentine, so he was a force of nature.

AI assessment note: “The best one on a non-profit board is... Mark Stone... On the commercial board, it was Doug Leoni”

Q Yeah, it's one of my favorites too, I have to admit. Tell me, the best board member that you've sat on a board with or observed at board meetings, and what made them so good?

A This one, I'm going to vote for two, and like every entrepreneur you offer one, they'll take two or more. The best one on a non-profit board is when I was a public official in California. I sat on a board with someone named Mark Stone, who was a coastal commissioner with me, and Mark had probably the best ethical center I've ever seen in In anyone, even though we were dealing with lobbyists all the time and had the governor screaming in our ears for how to vote, Mark was pretty centered and in fact was a pretty good role model for me there. On the commercial board, it was Doug Leoni of Sequoia Capital. It was great to watch Doug channel his mentor in Sequoia, Don Valentine, so he was a force of nature.

AI assessment note: “I sat on a board with someone named Mark Stone, who was a coastal commissioner”

Q societal behaviors and the kind of opportunities that that creates. I guess the question for me is then when you look at the founders who are innovating within these markets and maybe the ones who are already existing in them, I've heard you say there are kind of three things that determine startup survival today that's in the hands of leadership. In your mind, what are those three things, Steve?

A Number one is the speed in which you could assess what's going on and what do you think is going to happen. Number two is the actions you take to get your company in shape. To do that, and number three, again, the speed in which you execute those actions. Notice the word speed occurred at least twice, if not in everything you do. What I've seen is that the companies that are going to survive and then thrive in the recovery are driven by CEOs who could assess rapidly, come up with rapid strategies, and then take action and seize the opportunities, or else you just kind of have what's going on happen to you rather than you take as much control as you can. And by control, I mean, not only the things necessary to have your business survive, making sure you have enough cash and runway to make it through, but there will be a morning after, and there will be a recovery, but it's going to be a new normal. What does your company look like after that? And if you happen to be one of those companies that happen to have more cash or more customers now, how do you take advantage of the fact that you do? There's a ton of people that you could never hire, that you could hire before. There are a ton of assets that You could buy that you couldn't have gotten before. Lots of opportunities for those who actually were coming out of this in good shape.

AI assessment note: “Number one is the speed... Number two is the actions... number three, again, the speed”

Q that to be narrow in terms of who makes it. I guess my question to you is, it makes me think of Ben Horace's wartime versus peacetime CEO. How do you think about the wartime versus peacetime And I guess from working with some of the best CEOs in the business, how have you seen how they operate and think about wartime versus peacetime in terms of their leadership styles?

A Yeah. Number one is business people who use that analogy. I'm not sure too many of them have been in the fight. If you lose in a wartime, it's measured and killed in action. And if you lose in business, it's maybe you lose your corner office. So I'm not sure that's the right analogy, but even more so if you're in the army or Marines, you train for the fight all the time. You're running battlefield drills. As part of what you do, what peacetime CEOs have encountered, and business schools and your current job never trained you for this type of crisis, so you're kind of thrown into this environment where you have to act differently than you acted before, and I think I articulated a couple of those differences. You have to act with speed and urgency, or else you will be overrun, in this case, by the circumstances of the market. You have to make decisions at speed and sometimes unpopular, and more importantly, You're not sitting there voting as kind of like the world moves on. And as a matter of survival, you need to be able to personally assess what's going on around you by either getting firsthand data, my preferred method, or validating the data you're getting. So, for example, in the beginning of the pandemic, I heard from a bunch of CEOs, oh, my VP of sales says the forecast is just fine. They went, really? Well, have you personally gone through the pipeline list and called the…

AI assessment note: “you're kind of thrown into this environment where you have to act differently”

Q Indeed, but I would love to kick off with a little context. So for those that maybe haven't read some of your incredible work, how did you make your way into the wonderful world of startups and come to be one of the most prominent figures in the Valley today?

A Well, I had a couple decades career as a serial entrepreneur. I had spent four years in the Air Force during the Vietnam War before I became an entrepreneur. Came out to Silicon Valley in the early 19 seventies. Did eight startups in 21 years, two semiconductor companies, supercomputers, enterprise software, video games, military intelligence, and then ended up retiring in the midst of the dot-com bubble. And I think I have a t-shirt that said, the luckiest man on earth, number 125 or something. But when I retired, I started to think about the nature of innovation and entrepreneurship. How did this work? This business that was so good to me and I had so much fun in, I just kind of did it, never quite questioning how people gave us money and what they told us to do, etc. And it turned out that when you're doing a startup or when you're doing a company, your head is down, mostly doing execution of your current business. There's very little time for great thoughts or what's this about? But I finally had time to kind of ponder the nature of innovation and entrepreneurship and In a nutshell, what I realized is in the 20th century, investors basically told startups without ever using these words that startups are nothing more than smaller versions of large companies. So they were saying everything a large company did, you do. A large company writes a five-year plan. We want you to fo…

AI assessment note: “Did eight startups in 21 years”

Q venture funds and the best investments are made in the downturns. Look at Ask myself, yeah, but actually that was a technology inflection point with the rise of smartphones and the advancement of GPSs that led to some of those incredible companies, not the macroeconomic conditions. How do you think about that being technology inflection point versus macroeconomic conditions, and are we different today? How do you think about that?

A Yeah, I have a slightly different view. I think entrepreneurs and their investors tend to operate the idea that out of every crisis is an opportunity, and this is Certainly a large crisis. And I think some of the opportunities of just, if you're an entrepreneur, are just massive here. And while they're not tech opportunities, as you point out, they're market opportunities. I'll give you an example. The nature of work will never be the same. I mean, there are tens of millions of people and their CEOs who are now questioning, let's see, I commute to work for an hour or to sit in front of a computer to read email and get on Zoom. And then I go back home and I commute for another hour to return home. Why am I doing that? I might need to be in work a day a week to have meetings, but there's no rational reason anymore since I've just been working remotely for the last three months to show up every day into a place of business. So the shape of commercial office space is going to change now. And by the way, for those who physically have to come back for office work, the amount of space you need is in potentially a lot more. So we're going to need less space in one hand and maybe more space on another. But I think number one, the nature of remote work. And therefore the nature of remote tools. Anybody who's used video conferencing, Zoom or Teams or anything else has now discovered that …

AI assessment note: “while they're not tech opportunities, as you point out, they're market opportunities.”

Q though, because you said there about the incredible history as an operator and seeing the multiple different market cycles, and we're in this very precarious position today, and you said before, and in Mike Maples' episode, actually, this is not a recession, this is a mass extinction event. I wanted to dig in on this. What did you mean by this, and what does a mass extinction event look like?

A Well, this is a self-created mass extinction event. I've lived through a couple of other Financial crisis in the 20th century, and as I said, the dot-com bubble, but this one, we shut down the economies across the world to kind of save potentially millions of lives, and it looks like at the current rate, we still might have lots of bodies on the street, but in shutting down the economy, obviously, some segments were impacted a lot more than others, obviously, if you're in travel or hospitality or restaurants or even major business segments have just kind of gone dark, and so by mass extinction event, I mean, we literally have put Segments of the economy, not only on pause, but potentially never to return. What that means, though, is that just like when the dinosaurs became extinct, those little mammals that scurried underfoot, in fact, realized that there was a niche that now opened up that they could become the dominant species, and they did. And the analogy means that there are new opportunities for startups or even existing companies to kind of take over, and they could do that by understanding the new normal of How people will shop and buy, or that people got used to using those types of services that might have taken a decade or more previously to kind of get adopted. So the world is no longer the same, is what I meant by a mass extinction event.

AI assessment note: “by mass extinction event, I mean, we literally have put Segments of the economy”

Q In terms of kind of that communication and that data gathering with that team, in terms of switching ties to a different communication channel, which is the leaders communicating with the investor base, how do you think about the best founders and how they communicate well with their investors more specifically?

A Well, I think in normal times, founders have figured out how to communicate both the To their investors and down to their employees. But I will contend now that isn't optional. That's a skill. If you didn't have it, you need to learn it quickly. Or if you do have it, you need to figure out how to make it a regular cadence and a regular tempo. And what I mean by that is you want to, as you're doing an assessment of what's going on outside your building and the economy and the recovery, you want to share your view of what you think is going to happen with your investors. A, because you want to inform them, but B, Well, you're seeing one company that they might be seeing a portfolio of CEOs who might be seeing something different. So you want to get their feedback on your assessment. And then the second thing you want to share with them, maybe not in the same call or could be in the same call, is you want to share with them is, well, here's how we're going to kind of pivot our business model based on what we see going on. Either we're going to lay people off, or we're going to hire people, or we're going to change our products and services, or this is we're going to be spending money, or this is where we're Cutting back our marketing activities, et cetera. And you want to make sure they validate that that's a good new going forward plan, because that wasn't the plan they thought y…

AI assessment note: “share your view of what you think is going to happen with your investors”

Q though, because you said there about the incredible history as an operator and seeing the multiple different market cycles, and we're in this very precarious position today, and you said before, and in Mike Maples' episode, actually, this is not a recession, this is a mass extinction event. I wanted to dig in on this. What did you mean by this, and what does a mass extinction event look like?

A Well, this is a self-created mass extinction event. I've lived through a couple of other Financial crisis in the 20th century, and as I said, the dot-com bubble, but this one, we shut down the economies across the world to kind of save potentially millions of lives, and it looks like at the current rate, we still might have lots of bodies on the street, but in shutting down the economy, obviously, some segments were impacted a lot more than others, obviously, if you're in travel or hospitality or restaurants or even major business segments have just kind of gone dark, and so by mass extinction event, I mean, we literally have put Segments of the economy, not only on pause, but potentially never to return. What that means, though, is that just like when the dinosaurs became extinct, those little mammals that scurried underfoot, in fact, realized that there was a niche that now opened up that they could become the dominant species, and they did. And the analogy means that there are new opportunities for startups or even existing companies to kind of take over, and they could do that by understanding the new normal of How people will shop and buy, or that people got used to using those types of services that might have taken a decade or more previously to kind of get adopted. So the world is no longer the same, is what I meant by a mass extinction event.

AI assessment note: “by mass extinction event, I mean, we literally have put Segments of the economy”

Q societal behaviors and the kind of opportunities that that creates. I guess the question for me is then when you look at the founders who are innovating within these markets and maybe the ones who are already existing in them, I've heard you say there are kind of three things that determine startup survival today that's in the hands of leadership. In your mind, what are those three things, Steve?

A Number one is the speed in which you could assess what's going on and what do you think is going to happen. Number two is the actions you take to get your company in shape. To do that, and number three, again, the speed in which you execute those actions. Notice the word speed occurred at least twice, if not in everything you do. What I've seen is that the companies that are going to survive and then thrive in the recovery are driven by CEOs who could assess rapidly, come up with rapid strategies, and then take action and seize the opportunities, or else you just kind of have what's going on happen to you rather than you take as much control as you can. And by control, I mean, not only the things necessary to have your business survive, making sure you have enough cash and runway to make it through, but there will be a morning after, and there will be a recovery, but it's going to be a new normal. What does your company look like after that? And if you happen to be one of those companies that happen to have more cash or more customers now, how do you take advantage of the fact that you do? There's a ton of people that you could never hire, that you could hire before. There are a ton of assets that You could buy that you couldn't have gotten before. Lots of opportunities for those who actually were coming out of this in good shape.

AI assessment note: “Number one is the speed in which you could assess what's going on”

Q In terms of kind of that communication and that data gathering with that team, in terms of switching ties to a different communication channel, which is the leaders communicating with the investor base, how do you think about the best founders and how they communicate well with their investors more specifically?

A Well, I think in normal times, founders have figured out how to communicate both the To their investors and down to their employees. But I will contend now that isn't optional. That's a skill. If you didn't have it, you need to learn it quickly. Or if you do have it, you need to figure out how to make it a regular cadence and a regular tempo. And what I mean by that is you want to, as you're doing an assessment of what's going on outside your building and the economy and the recovery, you want to share your view of what you think is going to happen with your investors. A, because you want to inform them, but B, Well, you're seeing one company that they might be seeing a portfolio of CEOs who might be seeing something different. So you want to get their feedback on your assessment. And then the second thing you want to share with them, maybe not in the same call or could be in the same call, is you want to share with them is, well, here's how we're going to kind of pivot our business model based on what we see going on. Either we're going to lay people off, or we're going to hire people, or we're going to change our products and services, or this is we're going to be spending money, or this is where we're Cutting back our marketing activities, et cetera. And you want to make sure they validate that that's a good new going forward plan, because that wasn't the plan they thought y…

AI assessment note: “share with them is, well, here's how we're going to kind of pivot”

Q Yep. No, I do agree in terms of really synthesizing and concentrating on the things that matter. Can I ask, you're at the epicenter of both kind of funding and entrepreneurial communities today. What would you most like to change about the Valley and the tech ecosystem?

A The startup ecosystem is actually, and I mean it half facetiously, a giant Ponzi scheme. You know, while you're a founder thinking that the reason you're starting the company is to change the world or your industry or make people's lives better, that's not what your investor's job is, and nor is it their investor's job. It's kind of an impedance mismatch. Their job is to make the most money without any rules. And what they're looking for out of you, whether they personally like you or not, is a liquidity event. That is how to make the most money. So there are literally no rules from the financial side about what you invest, what you'll do, et cetera. And I wish there was a little more oversight because there are essentially no rules for what we invest in, who we hire, how we hire, et cetera. I think it lacks a moral center.

AI assessment note: “I wish there was a little more oversight because there are essentially no rules”

Q venture funds and the best investments are made in the downturns. Look at Ask myself, yeah, but actually that was a technology inflection point with the rise of smartphones and the advancement of GPSs that led to some of those incredible companies, not the macroeconomic conditions. How do you think about that being technology inflection point versus macroeconomic conditions, and are we different today? How do you think about that?

A Yeah, I have a slightly different view. I think entrepreneurs and their investors tend to operate the idea that out of every crisis is an opportunity, and this is Certainly a large crisis. And I think some of the opportunities of just, if you're an entrepreneur, are just massive here. And while they're not tech opportunities, as you point out, they're market opportunities. I'll give you an example. The nature of work will never be the same. I mean, there are tens of millions of people and their CEOs who are now questioning, let's see, I commute to work for an hour or to sit in front of a computer to read email and get on Zoom. And then I go back home and I commute for another hour to return home. Why am I doing that? I might need to be in work a day a week to have meetings, but there's no rational reason anymore since I've just been working remotely for the last three months to show up every day into a place of business. So the shape of commercial office space is going to change now. And by the way, for those who physically have to come back for office work, the amount of space you need is in potentially a lot more. So we're going to need less space in one hand and maybe more space on another. But I think number one, the nature of remote work. And therefore the nature of remote tools. Anybody who's used video conferencing, Zoom or Teams or anything else has now discovered that …

AI assessment note: “while they're not tech opportunities, as you point out, they're market opportunities.”

Q that to be narrow in terms of who makes it. I guess my question to you is, it makes me think of Ben Horace's wartime versus peacetime CEO. How do you think about the wartime versus peacetime And I guess from working with some of the best CEOs in the business, how have you seen how they operate and think about wartime versus peacetime in terms of their leadership styles?

A Yeah. Number one is business people who use that analogy. I'm not sure too many of them have been in the fight. If you lose in a wartime, it's measured and killed in action. And if you lose in business, it's maybe you lose your corner office. So I'm not sure that's the right analogy, but even more so if you're in the army or Marines, you train for the fight all the time. You're running battlefield drills. As part of what you do, what peacetime CEOs have encountered, and business schools and your current job never trained you for this type of crisis, so you're kind of thrown into this environment where you have to act differently than you acted before, and I think I articulated a couple of those differences. You have to act with speed and urgency, or else you will be overrun, in this case, by the circumstances of the market. You have to make decisions at speed and sometimes unpopular, and more importantly, You're not sitting there voting as kind of like the world moves on. And as a matter of survival, you need to be able to personally assess what's going on around you by either getting firsthand data, my preferred method, or validating the data you're getting. So, for example, in the beginning of the pandemic, I heard from a bunch of CEOs, oh, my VP of sales says the forecast is just fine. They went, really? Well, have you personally gone through the pipeline list and called the…

AI assessment note: “You have to act with speed and urgency, or else you will be overrun”

Q mentioned the layoffs there, Stephen. It's the one thing that's challenging me is when founders ask, absolutely. We do need to do layoffs. But I'm not sure as to the severity of which we should do them. And so when you think about advising founders today, how do you advise founders on the magnitude to with which they should approach cutting and layoffs and what's too much and what's sufficient?

A Well, what's sufficient is if when this is over, you're still in business. And more importantly, you're able to kind of rebound and grow and scale layoffs kind of depend on, I guess, number one is what's your burn rate and what's your runway. And how much cash do you want to have in the bank that you'll feel comfortable your business could ride this out? Typically, people say you should have somewhere between 18 months and two years of cash. If you were startup cash flow negative and you had no revenue, you kind of giggle about that. Well, that's nice, but only cash I'm getting is my next round of funding, which may or may not be here. Remember, as startup CEO, you were playing life, so were your investors, trying to figure out their portfolio and what companies do they need to Put their money in to help survive if their revenue have fallen off. And so you need to make a set of assessments about is your burn rate. That is how much you're spending each month. Does it need to be radically reduced because your customers have gone away or your business has changed radically, et cetera. And sometimes some of that biggest expense is people. And so you need to assess is what do I need to do? Can I apply for government assistance, payroll protection program, or any other programs? Who are the most vulnerable people? A lot of CEOs just kind of look at the headcount and throwing out the …

AI assessment note: “what's sufficient is if when this is over, you're still in business.”

Q Yep. No, I do agree in terms of really synthesizing and concentrating on the things that matter. Can I ask, you're at the epicenter of both kind of funding and entrepreneurial communities today. What would you most like to change about the Valley and the tech ecosystem?

A The startup ecosystem is actually, and I mean it half facetiously, a giant Ponzi scheme. You know, while you're a founder thinking that the reason you're starting the company is to change the world or your industry or make people's lives better, that's not what your investor's job is, and nor is it their investor's job. It's kind of an impedance mismatch. Their job is to make the most money without any rules. And what they're looking for out of you, whether they personally like you or not, is a liquidity event. That is how to make the most money. So there are literally no rules from the financial side about what you invest, what you'll do, et cetera. And I wish there was a little more oversight because there are essentially no rules for what we invest in, who we hire, how we hire, et cetera. I think it lacks a moral center.

AI assessment note: “I wish there was a little more oversight because there are essentially no rules”

Q mentioned the layoffs there, Stephen. It's the one thing that's challenging me is when founders ask, absolutely. We do need to do layoffs. But I'm not sure as to the severity of which we should do them. And so when you think about advising founders today, how do you advise founders on the magnitude to with which they should approach cutting and layoffs and what's too much and what's sufficient?

A Well, what's sufficient is if when this is over, you're still in business. And more importantly, you're able to kind of rebound and grow and scale layoffs kind of depend on, I guess, number one is what's your burn rate and what's your runway. And how much cash do you want to have in the bank that you'll feel comfortable your business could ride this out? Typically, people say you should have somewhere between 18 months and two years of cash. If you were startup cash flow negative and you had no revenue, you kind of giggle about that. Well, that's nice, but only cash I'm getting is my next round of funding, which may or may not be here. Remember, as startup CEO, you were playing life, so were your investors, trying to figure out their portfolio and what companies do they need to Put their money in to help survive if their revenue have fallen off. And so you need to make a set of assessments about is your burn rate. That is how much you're spending each month. Does it need to be radically reduced because your customers have gone away or your business has changed radically, et cetera. And sometimes some of that biggest expense is people. And so you need to assess is what do I need to do? Can I apply for government assistance, payroll protection program, or any other programs? Who are the most vulnerable people? A lot of CEOs just kind of look at the headcount and throwing out the …

AI assessment note: “what's sufficient is if when this is over, you're still in business.”

Q Sorry, I'm too intrigued. How would you like to see that implemented? Would it be like guidebooks? Would it be governing body? What would your thoughts be on how you can place that kind of moral compass, so to speak?

A Well, you know, in the United States, the word national industrial policy is like a third rail, meaning you touch it, you die. And the reason why is that we live in a deep pockets democracy where the deep pockets get to affect legislation. There's no possible way that Any of the people who invest in VC funds want to be told how and why their money should and where it should go, and if they did, they might put their money elsewhere. But if you think about it, and I'll just take the non-social aspects, in the 20th century, venture capitalists and the things they invested in happened to be aligned with the things that actually, I think, made our society better. Better computers, but more importantly, the side that typically doesn't get press in the, at least the same press, in the life sciences. Therapeutics, medical devices, diagnostics, etc. In fact, it's amazing to think in the 20th century, every hardware and software VC also did life sciences. And then by the end of the century, they had become so specialized. It's almost, you could count in one hand the number of VCs that still today do both. And so therefore, and the reason I just make this point is if you look at how many dollars are going into social media apps and entertainment versus How many dollars are going to things that actually make the world better? You could immediately see was, well, let's not use sticks, but m…

AI assessment note: “let's not use sticks, but maybe some carrots to kind of incentivize”

Q Sorry, I'm too intrigued. How would you like to see that implemented? Would it be like guidebooks? Would it be governing body? What would your thoughts be on how you can place that kind of moral compass, so to speak?

A Well, you know, in the United States, the word national industrial policy is like a third rail, meaning you touch it, you die. And the reason why is that we live in a deep pockets democracy where the deep pockets get to affect legislation. There's no possible way that Any of the people who invest in VC funds want to be told how and why their money should and where it should go, and if they did, they might put their money elsewhere. But if you think about it, and I'll just take the non-social aspects, in the 20th century, venture capitalists and the things they invested in happened to be aligned with the things that actually, I think, made our society better. Better computers, but more importantly, the side that typically doesn't get press in the, at least the same press, in the life sciences. Therapeutics, medical devices, diagnostics, etc. In fact, it's amazing to think in the 20th century, every hardware and software VC also did life sciences. And then by the end of the century, they had become so specialized. It's almost, you could count in one hand the number of VCs that still today do both. And so therefore, and the reason I just make this point is if you look at how many dollars are going into social media apps and entertainment versus How many dollars are going to things that actually make the world better? You could immediately see was, well, let's not use sticks, but m…

AI assessment note: “let's not use sticks, but maybe some carrots to kind of incentivize”

Q The trouble is though for me, like I'm an investor stay in London and I shiver at ed tech and I shiver at healthcare because I know the pains of selling into these large monolithic archaic institutions. So I guess like, do we need to change the infrastructure behind these hugely important sectors to make them more amenable to innovation and startup sales?

A One would have said the auto business was completely monolithic and hadn't changed for a hundred years, and one would have said, at least in the U.S., the monopoly on rockets were monolithic, and one guy changed both. Or take a look at what happened with mobile phones and music. One guy there changed both. So I don't think the industry or even regulation needs to change. I think the entrepreneurs need to see and investors need to see there's an opportunity. And then on the social side, there's obviously been no reason to invest in First people of color, and then women, and then anything else. It was like, we invest in who we want to invest, and okay, we see the consequences of that in multiple countries. I'm not suggesting we need government rules. You just asked me, what would I like to change? And what I'd like to change is we've gone, and we live in a completely laissez-faire type of investing environment with no social conscience and no national interests, and I think that's a mistake. After four decades, I've Absolutely convinced it's a mistake. And by the way, there's no responsibility for what happens to tech either. No entrepreneur, there's very few entrepreneurs who start a company thinking about how do I do evil? But of all the things that are probably going to destroy a democracy, it happens to be Facebook. And there's no consequence to the people on the boards who'v…

AI assessment note: “So I don't think the industry or even regulation needs to change.”

Q The trouble is though for me, like I'm an investor stay in London and I shiver at ed tech and I shiver at healthcare because I know the pains of selling into these large monolithic archaic institutions. So I guess like, do we need to change the infrastructure behind these hugely important sectors to make them more amenable to innovation and startup sales?

A One would have said the auto business was completely monolithic and hadn't changed for a hundred years, and one would have said, at least in the U.S., the monopoly on rockets were monolithic, and one guy changed both. Or take a look at what happened with mobile phones and music. One guy there changed both. So I don't think the industry or even regulation needs to change. I think the entrepreneurs need to see and investors need to see there's an opportunity. And then on the social side, there's obviously been no reason to invest in First people of color, and then women, and then anything else. It was like, we invest in who we want to invest, and okay, we see the consequences of that in multiple countries. I'm not suggesting we need government rules. You just asked me, what would I like to change? And what I'd like to change is we've gone, and we live in a completely laissez-faire type of investing environment with no social conscience and no national interests, and I think that's a mistake. After four decades, I've Absolutely convinced it's a mistake. And by the way, there's no responsibility for what happens to tech either. No entrepreneur, there's very few entrepreneurs who start a company thinking about how do I do evil? But of all the things that are probably going to destroy a democracy, it happens to be Facebook. And there's no consequence to the people on the boards who'v…

AI assessment note: “So I don't think the industry or even regulation needs to change.”

Q Yeah, I totally agree. I'm always concerned that we're actually going to see this kind of civil revolution or civil revolt at such income inequalities. Do you think it goes quite that far, or am I being overly pessimistic and overly concerned?

A Well, I think it goes in multiple ways. As I said, in China, it's not people on the streets. It's actually the government using the tools to take control of people's lives in a way that, as I said, we're just only imagined in science fiction. In other places where people are freer, it ends up in chaos. And in other places, it ends up Being manipulated by outside players, like the 2016 election in the United States, and as a tool for others to sow divisiveness and discord in your own society. And when the only goal is, well, I don't really care because I'm making tens or hundreds of billions of dollars, that's when you go, this is out of control. Or if you're in the UK, the equivalent was what happened when all the Russian money flooded into London. All of a sudden, Russia's our best friend, and we're not going to pay attention. Or not only have the Russians used social media to interfere in the US elections and Their hand was all over Brexit, and yet that was because there's so much money in London. No one wants to talk about that. Everybody, at least who knew, knew what happened, but it seemed to be a too divisive subject to talk about. My point is, is that tech has now been used and mostly misused in ways that the founders just couldn't imagine, and I think that's kind of a story all the way back to, you know, the first rock, the first wheel, is that, hey, look what I could d…

AI assessment note: “Well, I think it goes in multiple ways. As I said, in China”

Q Yeah, I totally agree. I'm always concerned that we're actually going to see this kind of civil revolution or civil revolt at such income inequalities. Do you think it goes quite that far, or am I being overly pessimistic and overly concerned?

A Well, I think it goes in multiple ways. As I said, in China, it's not people on the streets. It's actually the government using the tools to take control of people's lives in a way that, as I said, we're just only imagined in science fiction. In other places where people are freer, it ends up in chaos. And in other places, it ends up Being manipulated by outside players, like the 2016 election in the United States, and as a tool for others to sow divisiveness and discord in your own society. And when the only goal is, well, I don't really care because I'm making tens or hundreds of billions of dollars, that's when you go, this is out of control. Or if you're in the UK, the equivalent was what happened when all the Russian money flooded into London. All of a sudden, Russia's our best friend, and we're not going to pay attention. Or not only have the Russians used social media to interfere in the US elections and Their hand was all over Brexit, and yet that was because there's so much money in London. No one wants to talk about that. Everybody, at least who knew, knew what happened, but it seemed to be a too divisive subject to talk about. My point is, is that tech has now been used and mostly misused in ways that the founders just couldn't imagine, and I think that's kind of a story all the way back to, you know, the first rock, the first wheel, is that, hey, look what I could d…

AI assessment note: “tech has now been used and mostly misused in ways that the founders just couldn't imagine”