EP #8 Eric Schmidt's AMA: AI, National Security, and Cyborgs

Given that governments seem to be distracted by other less important things, in my opinion, it's the rule for the philanthropists among us, including myself, to give as much. So we collectively agreed the vast majority of the money that I was fortunate enough to make at Google will go to science and science related things, climate change, those sorts of things that you care. Going back to the tagline of the smartest people working on the hardest problems is what science really is and a.

Massive transformative purpose is what you're doing telling the world it's like, this is who I am, this is what I'm going to do. This is the dent I'm going to make in the universe. We have time for a few questions. We've got a mic here. Dina, I'm going to start with you and then pass the mic. You choose the next person, we'll do it that way.

Okay. Hi Eric, I'm Dina. I'm a co founder and CEO of a biotech company. We use cell therapeutics to make drugs for diseases affecting the female reproductive system.

Wonderful.

So my question is regarding some of your work in synthetic bio recently. So we're for example backed by some of the world's best investor in deep tech and biotech. And just before this event I was in Miami as part of the Miami Tech Week and Jack Kiddery was there as well. He was talking about quantum sensing and drug discovery. And then there were a few really large biotech funds from the east coast multibillion dollar and some of them were saying, well, oh, I'm so fed up with this deep tech west coast investors investing in biotech, they think this piles up as transistors and software is going to eat the world. And I can code biology, but this is not how biotech works and it's a lot more complex after studying it for a little bit. My question for you is what do you think are going to be the actual technologies impacting patient care in seeing clinical impact in the next five years, taking into account the regulatory aspect as well.

So first place, when you add regulatory, you add a decade anyway because that's how and $2 billion to do the human trials. I've been working with some people to try to get that cost down. So I think because it's drugs in humans, it should have a lag. I'm actually much more interested in the non drug side of this because I think that you can move very quickly. I'll give you an example. I'm going to use incorrect terms so the biologist can correct me later. I like to Think of what synthetic biologists do is basically like a brewery. And what they're doing is they're taking essentially critters and they're growing stuff inside of these critters. I'm not using correct terms. If you look at the problems that they have, they have problems where they can build it in a small vat, but they can't build a big one. If this works, you'll have a grown environment that is larger than a built environment. That means literally bricks grown, airport runways grown, all that kind of stuff. Why is this so important? It solves a number of problems. If you think about biomass, which we have, which you need as the feedstock into these, the biomass is spread across our country in a lot of the rural states. So not only is this technologically interesting and very, very powerful and a lot of money's going to go into it and there'll be lots of spinoffs that will affect you, but it also solves a political problem because it creates jobs in the heartland. And when I say jobs, I mean millions of jobs that are essentially traditional blue collar manufacturing jobs, but in this new area. So we may with the bioeconomy, and particularly if it's a circular bioeconomy where everything gets recycled, we may end up with an almost perfect in American system solutions where the Democrats and the Republicans will both agree unanimously that this is good for America, it's good for climate, it's good for jobs, it's good for innovation, it's good for wealth, it's good for venture capitalists, so forth. So I've decided to work on this for a while. I think it's a very powerful time to unify these concepts.

What's up, Eric? I'm Julian, I'm a new CEO. I started a company named Mindflow three and a half months ago. We're building a learning platform that rewards people with crypto for integrating personal development knowledge into their own lives, which crypto we're creating our own token.

Your own token. Are you a pure Web3 company?

No, not necessarily. The Web2 element is the learning. Make learning fun, exciting, valuable, and the web3 element is the learn to earn component. Okay, so my question is, I'd love if you could reflect on your time as the CEO at Google. Like, what do you think you did that led to your success? What do you think were some of your shortcomings? And maybe an interesting angle to think about this from is what have you learned since you, since you're no longer the CEO at Google that if you knew now it could have empowered you to be a better leader then I.

Think it's always the case. When you're in the middle of something, you don't realize you're making history, good or bad, in my case. I like Larry and Sergey a lot. We're really close. And I was fortunate that I had their vision to adopt. It was their vision to found the company, it was their vision to do the ads model, it was their vision to do search. What I did is I essentially implemented it at scale and the rest is computer science history. So the things that I learned are mostly the same things I already knew, which is the scaling of these systems is so fast that you have a week or a day to make a decision and you have to get it right. Google video, we launched two months later, YouTube came out. YouTube blew past us. We shut down Google video, we bought YouTube. Best decision. Similarly with Facebook competition, they blew past us. We couldn't catch up over and over again because the scaling is so quickly. Time is everything. And had I understood that and we were working hard, I would have worked even harder and even with greater of a hammer of we've got to make this decision now. We've got to make this decision now. I have been looking and investing in Web two, Web three stuff for the audience who may not be familiar with the terms Web one is ready, Web two is read write and Web three is read write own. And the theory of Web three is that you'll have essentially a digital identity which will be cross chain and that you can actually have that manipulate the world that you care about, that you can own the assets and content and so forth.

We had a great presentation by Eric Poulier earlier.

I introduced him and he's very good. So in that structure, the issues with Web3 are all about is it ready for scale. And the simplest example I would offer you is that in a centralized system, when you get efficiency and increased use, the transaction cost should go down. If you look at gas and Ethereum, as demand goes up, the price of gas goes up and it goes up fundamentally because the Network is spending 90% of its time trying to make sure the Sybil effect doesn't happen. That problem's got to get fixed. There are plenty of people working on it. But from your perspective, you're going to have a scale success when the system underneath you can scale.

Hi, Eric, nice to meet you. My name is Maya. I've been building technology ecosystems in Nigeria for the past decade.

Excellent.

I run a $10 million fund, one $50 million fund two and a nonprofit that actually Google backed that trains about 100,000 people a year in technical skills, African youth. So I'm sure, you know, I mean, obviously Sundar last year announced a billion dollars of investment capital into Africa. And over the last, since 2016, there's been about a 2x every year in the growth of venture capital dollars coming into the African technology ecosystem. 2016 it was 129 million. 2017 it was 560 and so on. And just recently, Google and Andreessen Horowitz backed one of our portfolio companies, Carry first and Stripes acquired one of our assets. And it's all good and good and well, but what do you think is the role of big tech in Africa and other emerging markets? And then specifically, what are you most interested in? Whether that be sector or just general themes in Africa specifically. And for those others working in emerging markets, emerging markets more broadly.

So I spent a fair amount of time in Africa as CEO and then as chairman and 10 years, sorry, when I was CEO. So this would have been 15 years ago, I announced that I would give $100 million, which was a lot of money at the time, to anyone within Google who could spend it legally in Africa. And we couldn't find the targets. That's right. Well, this was a while ago and today we see incredible leadership from Sundar to do the same thing at a much larger number, but the targets are better. So the history in Africa, which you well know, is the development of basically the mobile phones and MTN in particular, created that platform. I spent a fair amount of time with African governments trying to convince them of a simple model, fiber to the city, fiber to the towers, and then basically get your populations online and with some success and some failure, because a lot of the governments are kleptocratic in one way or the other. And one of the worst performing sectors in Africa is the telco, the traditional government telcos. So a simple rule is that in Africa, the first money will be made in communications and on web services that are on phones. So that's why Google did the cheap phone initiatives and so forth and so on. So I think it's fantastic what's happening now. One of the things that I would do in hindsight is I would say we have all of the, the shantytowns. Each of them has a different name. They are among the densest places on earth. That is a great place for cell towers. And furthermore, the people who are very poor will guard the cell towers because they're so important for economics. And that's how I would grow that. Plus, of course, the other issue in Africa is language. And at the time I was looking at this, there wasn't enough either Swahili or other language models, which again, these universal translations can fix. So I think we're at a point now where you can have all the world's information in every African student's phone. That's a real step forward. The governments are still going to be a problem. You know, from the history of the 35 or 36 countries that are in Africa, some of them are doing great, some of them are still doing poorly. We have to fix that problem.

All right, one more question up front, then we're moving the mic.

One more comment about Nigeria. I hope everyone knows the numbers. By the year 2100, the expectation is that Africa will be 41% of the world's population and that Nigeria will have 950 million people, roughly speaking. Yeah, when I was in Lagos, that was enough people already. Hi, I'm Yali. I'm from Israel. I want to ask about basic science research. I have the notion that we don't invest as a civilization in this, and I think it's going to come and bite us back.

You're hitting a really sweet point for Eric here.

So I think this is one thing that I would like to hear what you think. The other thing is that there is a huge gap. We are here very fortunate. We know about technology. Most of the world doesn't know. I'm extremely concerned about this, so I would like to hear what you think about. Thank you. Great question. I worked for the Obama administration as one of the science advisors, and we looked very carefully at this question of science funding. And today the science funding as a percentage of GDP is as low as it was before Sputnik. As a percentage, where is the money going? It's going elsewhere. Why should the government fund basic science? Because there's not an economic justification, except for extremely wealthy countries. Excuse me. To fund purely the pure joy of research. I am here today because of Vannehar Bush, who I never met. Vanne Rvar Bush set up the National Science Foundation. And what happened was in 1949, they had all this extra money around, and I guess at the time they didn't know what to do with it. And so they created these funding mechanisms which are the things that got me into undergraduate programs and graduate programs and funds funded me along with ARPA and DARPA work. So I'm incredibly grateful to the government funding of basic research. Given that governments seem to be distracted by other less important things. In my opinion, it's the rule for the philanthropists among us, including myself, to give as much. So we collectively agreed that the vast majority of the money that I was fortunate enough to make at Google will go to science and science related things. Climate change, those sorts of things that the, that you care. Going back to the tagline of the smartest people working on the hardest problems, which is what sort of science really is. Eric, thank you so much for all that you've done. You brought up a lot of national security things. My name is Michael Blockston. I have a company called Nebula. We're putting data centers in space. Going on the outside of the ISS this year, thinking about national security and speaking with generals, being pulled into the DoD conversations, looking at getting, getting inside of the OODA loop, observer oriented side act of our unfriendly adversaries. What keeps you up at night that you don't think enough smart people are thinking about? So I spent five years working for the Secretary of Defense in the US with all the clearances and traveling around and doing this. And I came away with a great deal of respect for the leaders and the people who are in our national security apparatus, including the intelligence communities. These are people who serve our nation to keep us protected and they care and they're great human beings. I also developed a great disgust for the systems that they have inside because the systems were designed for a bad 1980s corporation. And I can give you embarrassing story after embarrassing story about how the they don't have enough email storage to store their emails, the networks go down, just stuff like that. And I can give you more concerning things about cost overruns and bad design. So in our most recent set of recommendations, we came back with lots of statements about talent. The way you're going to solve this problem is by getting a new generation of talent that is more technically trained basically, frankly, this group and your friends who want to help the nation's national security, the things that are. There's a lot of scary things when you're in these meetings. And I think that the easiest thing to explain is let's ignore nuclear, which is in itself so scary. I was like shaking after visiting StratCom for conventional stuff. The improvement in the speed of weapons and the targeting of weapons compared to the defense systems is a real gap. So every war game that we did and every conflict management, if you make an assumption that the opponent has the fastest missiles and the best targeted missiles, our systems don't defense. So if I could, and I don't know how to do this. I would create a company that built purely defensive systems. Think of this Iron Dome. Iron dome done 20 years later. Because I think that without that it's going to be really hard to have any kind of military doctrine. Give you another example in this horrific Russian attack on Ukraine. Let's do a thought experiment. Let's imagine that we had a suitcase that a Ukrainian citizen could put near a building that would somehow protect that building. That would change the war in a really fundamental way. Purely defensive. So I want people to think about this kind of stuff.

I saw that in Star Trek. Yeah, it's going to happen.

Hi, Eric, I'm Dave Asprey, the bulletproof.

Guy and a former 3 com guy from back in the day. We remember it well. How do you spot narcissists when you're hiring and managing leader teams? Because the scale of people at Google was much harder, I think, than scaling the tech.

What was your trick?

We distinguished between divas and knaves and we wrote a book about this called How Google Works. This came from Bill Campbell, who we also wrote, wrote a book about and has unfortunately since died from cancer. And a diva is somebody who, they may be difficult, they're the person you were talking about, but they're committed to a principle and they may be hard to work with, but they're on it and they're devoted to it and their principles are right. And they may be difficult to talk to, they may have trouble explaining themselves, they may be rude or whatever, but they're, they're driven by principle. Whereas a knave is somebody with the same kind of appearance but is self optimizing. Right. It's all about himself or herself. The divas in a big company get thrown out and they get thrown out because they don't like the HR rules. They don't really like the HR people. They're sort of hard to manage. They cause all sorts of press problems. They just, they're just difficult. Right. There's an old saying from IBM that you have to find the wild duck, the one that doesn't fly with the other ducks and protect them. That's the point. As an executive, it was pretty clear when somebody was in one camp versus the other. And Bill Campbell said the moment you identify that, fire them and fire them brutally. Which the other thing the HR and legal won't let you do because it sends a signal that there's a line you can't cross. That model worked for us. And I think what happened was once we got that principle set down in practice, it produced hundreds and hundreds of these very, very talented people. And the other thing is true is this is just from an age point. The next generation of executives behind me were so much better at doing what I did right. We used to spend years at sun trying to figure out how to get products released and test them and so forth. These people, they knew exactly what to do. They had the tools, they had the culture and so forth. Everything happened faster. So my guess is that the next generation, you know, the web three generation in your case, will operate even more quickly. You'll still have the naves versus Diva problem, but it's a clear separation. Eric, when you consider food production around the planet, what are the things that you see as opportunities and challenges for food production? Where are you putting your money in ESG and food production? I'm a big investor in Plenty, which is one of the companies.

Vertical Farm.

Vertical farming. One of the things to understand in history is almost all of the land in our history that was available was used for food production. And so the fact that you could free up land using these new techniques is in and of itself very interesting to me. Plus the fact that these foods are unlikely to have pesticides on them and unlikely to have, you know, foreign invaders. Part of the problem we have is that the word GMO has been. Has taken on this sort of negative meaning. But in fact, as. And you would certainly know this, pretty much all farming is now done using various GMO techniques to make the plants stronger and so forth and so on. So I think we need to come up with a new name. I don't know if you remember that. Nuclear nmr, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance was the original name for what NMRI is, and they took the nuclear out because it had this negative stigma. So I think there's a renaming problem.

Superfoods.

Hi, Eric, My name is Yash. I'm a venture capitalist back from India. I just wanted to get your sense on how do you look at the opportunity in India. How do you see technologies rolling out to solve for the problems of India? On India, I was just there two weeks ago and spent quite a bit of time with the technical people that I knew. India's growth rate is slowing down. It's a very difficult democracy for the reasons that you understand and the languages and the different things, but the underlying investments that were done, the 4G networks and so forth, are really powerful now. So I have every reason to believe that you can create the same wave of companies that then emerged in China now in India. So literally, as a Venture capitalist from India. What I would do is list every company in China, it was a copycat of every company in the US And I would copy every one of them in India. And I'm not just talking about fast food delivery. There's lots of things. And what is the right way to create the infrastructure to do this? So that is one. And the second thing is because time is so important to you, it would be lovely to understand how do you spend your time and how do you create exponentiality through, through your time? On the time question, it helps to be a person who's a workaholic. And I am not a person who believes in balance. And so.

I think most everybody here resembles that.

I mean, you know, like life is short and then you're dead, right?

So life is short until you extend it.

Okay, thank you. Peter, where have you been? But there's an old rule, if you want something done, give it to somebody who's busy.

Yes, it's true.

And what I learned, and again, this is maybe just the luck of me, but I was a pretty slow moving intellectual type. But the pressures of these tech companies make you learn to move quickly. So there's a set of techniques, it's simple. For example, if I have a meeting, I immediately follow up at the end of the meeting because I know I'll forget by the next meeting. Watch politicians is how they operate with time. For example, I've been invited to have meetings in the hallway with a politician because the only thing they really had to do is say they had a meeting with me and I said something to them and they said no, right? It was completely efficient. It was efficient on my time and on theirs. I accepted the meeting. So there's a bunch of techniques about that. And when you look at these very, very, very high performing people, they've all developed those techniques.

Hi Eric. Really enjoyed the discussion. So my name's Ekram and I run a neural technology company, a biotechnology company, developing neural interfaces to eventually connect the human mind, biological mind, to artificial intelligence. With a long term view for us to transcend our limitations. So my question, a little bit tongue in cheek, but I'm curious is for first of all, would you be connecting your mind to AI and becoming a cyborg in the future? And then the more serious question is you spoke about something that seems to be imbued in our evolutionary heritage. Predator, prey relationships or a competitive arms race back from the pre Cambrian era, hundreds of millions of years ago. Today we see it collectively as a social species manifesting in abstract concepts that we collectively share in our consciousness, such as nation states, capital. These are abstract concepts that animals don't necessarily understand, but we share them. Do you see then that if we upgrade our consciousness by connecting to AI, which is a different type of intelligence, we would also transcend beyond those abstract concepts that, as hominids, we currently hold? Or do you see those armed races.

Continuing those outdated operating systems?

Exactly.

I wish I could be as optimistic as the tone of your question, and this, of course, is something that each of us should debate. But I think that the way in which humans react, especially under stress, is pretty well biologically determined. And I think you see this in the Russia, Ukraine situation, which we haven't seen, thank goodness, in a very long time. And I think we need to take note of that. I am an optimist about the impact of the technology, but I think that humans will continue to make a mess of it for the reasons. And the answer to you is, yes, I am very happy to be one of your subjects. The thought experiment is, let's imagine I've got your computer here and my head here. How does it actually work? Here I am thinking and I say, let me ask the AI accelerator. Then I ask it, and then I wait, and then the insight comes back. How long is that latency in your system? Well, what happens if I get bored and then I start thinking about something else? And then the answer comes back and I go like, what are you answering? Because I forgot what you were talking about. So there's all sorts of problems of consciousness. Remember, we can't define consciousness, and yet we all understand that we're conscious. Now, what you're adding to my brain is presumably not conscious, but is going to affect my consciousness, right?

So, Eric, in response to that, I think what you said is very, very interesting in terms of the evolutionary hierarchy of the brain, right? Which you have your limbic system, and then you've got the neocortex, the latest part of our brain that allows us to communicate with language, something unique to the human species. If you've ever meditated, a lot of people, when they first start meditating, they actually have a moment where they're like, do I have a mental illness here? I have a million voices chattering in my head. So I'm imagining when you add another digital cortex, and what you've just said in that scenario is that you potentially would have a similar phenomena of intercommunication.

You might want to try psilocybin instead. Oh, Eric, I cannot wait to use your device.

Eric, Very, very last Point. I said this over lunch to Peter. The concept for this company actually came to me on a psilocybin trip.

Even better. I didn't know. Congratulations.

Thank you very much.

While we're waiting, Eric, what book are you reading now? What's your favorite book that you're reading?

I'm just reading Emmy Webb's book on. She is fantastic. It's on the Biological Revolution. It's probably the best.

I'm sorry, the Witch.

Amy Webb. What's the title? The Genesis Machine. Yeah, it's very, very good. And it just came out.

Awesome.

Hi Eric, I have to say this as a Cal engineer Go Bears of course. My name's Annie. I am a co founder of Unity. We are working as an ecosystem to help mindful innovators create triple bottom blind companies where we're benefiting people, planet and profit. So we have a group of really creative crazy people. Some worked for Paul Allen at Vulcan, some work as music strategists, gamers, you name it. And we have had a lot of ethical questions about AI. We're working on a number of projects including with the great Dr. Ben Gertzel where we're looking at AGI and a number of us come from the early side of blockchain and defi and crypto. And so my question to you is what is your perspective on human in the loop design? We have a number of really amazing Gen Z people that are working for us that have a lot of questions and concerns about what where AI is going and where AGI may be going.

And the reason I gave you those examples earlier is to make this point that this technology is very very powerful. It will clearly exceed some people's ability to understand what it's doing. It may exceed everyone's ability to understand it and it may not be able to explain it. On the bias question and the sort of bad outcomes behavior there are techniques where you can take the data that you have and you can basically do a synthetic gan where you basically fit the data you have with what you understand the distribution into the normal distribution of the actual people and then you can discover the bias and then attempt to handle it algorithmically. So people are working hard on these questions. The hardest questions are the ones that you just posed which is what happens when the decision making time is too quick? What happens when there isn't agreement on what the outcome should be? What happens when we can't have it explain how it made the decision? What do you think will happen? Do you think it's going to end up being the plutonium place with all the guns? Or do you think it'll be banned by law? Do you think it will be regulated? I think it's obvious these things will be regulated in some way. I also think you're going to have regulation that's different by country. I also think that one of the greatest things in our lives has been the creation of the Internet. Thanks to Bob Kahn and Vint Cerf and all the people who made that happen, there's going to be enormous pressure on decoupling these countries from things because of the potential danger and harm from these things. So we've got a lot ahead of us over the next 20 years.

So thank you for giving me the opportunity to ask this question. Alex Zhavankov I was born in Latvia and I'm Canadian. Just to justify the name, nowadays you have to do that. But I spend a lot of time in China and I'm in drug discovery. Our job is to accelerate drug discovery in every way possible.

I was the CEO of In Silico Medicine.

Excellent.

And we've set several, to my knowledge, world records and drug discovery. And one of the reasons why it was possible was China. So Chinese managed to synthesize, test and produce the molecules we managed to take into the clinic for novel targets. And I think that China is moving very, very rapidly in drug discovery, drug design and biotechnology in general. You've mentioned them several times as a rival.

Why?

Why do we see China as maybe a negative force? Maybe we can collaborate with the Chinese and at least in life sciences, to extend human life.

So I agree with you and I'm actually considered a pro China person in the debates. Most of our government is proposing things which are generally known as decoupling, where we essentially stop the collaboration with China, which I think would be ruinous for America. We study this very carefully. For example, we benefit enormously by having Chinese students, graduate students in our research programs in America. We should give them PhD green cards, et cetera.

By the way, the comment made about we should staple a green card in the back of every PhD versus give someone a doctorate and send them out of the country is just so important, right?

Of the many stupidities of American political system, this has got to be one of the worst, right? Educate these people to the teeth and then allow them to go to another country to compete with us either on a business or a national security basis. Like, duh, how stupid are you? But I digress. So I don't think the model of essentially integration is going to work because the two political systems are Fundamentally at odds, and that drives them apart. I think you will be able to see some level of collaboration in biotech, such as the way you described it, but there are going to be concerns. If you look at the biobank, for example, that China is building, which is a national resource, what access will we have to the biopanic? How will we participate in it? These are all sort of the really.

Hard questions, but you can get access to that. You just have to collaborate with.

And what I found in my negotiations. So I was the executive that was pro staying in China. I lost that battle. I then negotiated for a decade to try to reenter China under different terms and failed largely. And what I learned is that in China, the paranoia about the US starts at the very top. That it is essentially impossible for American companies to do partnerships with other Chinese companies without an agreement from a bureaucrat. The bureaucrats are unlikely to give it unless they get a signal from the very top. So unless something changes, and there's no evidence that it's changing, Trump tried to get a half a trillion dollars of tariffs out of China. Biden has not fundamentally changed that direction. Until that changes, I think we're on an oppositional path. My name is Altin and I grew up in Albania. I've been home for the last 25 years in New York. I have an easy question for you. I think it's Einstein that said imagination is more important than knowledge. If you were to give up one, which one would it be? My imagination is not very good. I'm really focused on knowledge. I think the founders are the imaginative ones. I'm just the helper.

When I think about wisdom versus knowledge versus even intelligence. If I were to think of wisdom, I think of a wise person, someone who has heard a lot, seen a lot of experience, has gone through a lot of things in life, and therefore can give a considered answer. Is that a reasonable. So if I think an AI can run a million simulations or a billion simulations on a situation and see a situation from all sides, can we imagine that AI will offer wisdom?

Well, you can imagine intuition because the AI does something that it can't explain. And that's what intuition is. Based on its training, you can imagine the AI system can pattern match against the history, which can produce wisdom based on having seen the patterns in the past. As an executive, I've been a CEO for so long, there's nothing you can do to me that has not already been done to me. Every crisis that you get in some office, including work from home crises, I've Dealt with that pattern matching really helps keep you calm in the middle of all this stuff. Just in favor of people like me, in praise of people like me. You need people who can stick with the program even with all the incredible complaints and fear, feedback and pressure on them. Now it's so much harder today to do what I did 20 years ago for all the reasons that we all know. So that means that the people that we have now in these jobs, sort of stereotypically 30 and 40 year olds, they're going to develop wisdom even faster than I did because they see it faster. So if you go back to life is about compression of time, everything happens faster. Right. You learn quicker, you achieve things quicker, you're over quicker, your wisdom occurs quicker and so forth. And that favors the people who have symbolic reasoning, deep thinking number two kind of thinking, according to Kahneman, etc. Another Alex, this one is from Ukraine actually. Yes. So Eric, huge honor to meet you. I'm actually a CEO, co founder of one of Google Analytics partners. Excellent. We're one of the largest Google Analytics and Google marketing platform partners. Where are you from in Ukraine? Kharkov. Okay. And we're based in Cincinnati here. I've lived in the US for 20 years. And what is going on with your hometown? Well, my parents were actually in Ukraine when the war started and fortunately they were able to get out, thank God. But for three weeks I basically, you know, couldn't live. So probably the most difficult three weeks of my life. I can't imagine. Yeah. So my question is actually very professional, if you will, how do you see advertising in search of engine marketing industry adopting Web3 technologies and decentralizing some of the data. Yeah, it's a very good question. So the current advertising model, so called Web2 models, are very, very, very well understood. Right. So the targeting, we built a series of AI systems that developed the algorithms to do the targeting and so forth. So the ads that you get today are incredibly good. My favorite example of this is in my first few months I was working with Larry and Sergey and Larry printed out all the ads and said, these ads suck. And he wrote it on an office on a Friday afternoon. And I thought, now that's a very interesting way to manage. Right. So he printed it out, he wrote, these ads suck. It was clearly his handwriting. And he posted it on the wall in the engineering room. And I thought, let's see what happens over the weekend. The engineers that were not in the ads team said, we agree with Larry. So they built the first ad targeting system over the weekend. So I learned something, which was that if you state a problem, you can really get. If you get the right people in the room who turned out to not be the current ADS engineers, they can really build something revolutionary. That these ads suck is now $150 billion business. So that gives you a sense of that. Literally. Piece of paper. My favorite ad, by the way, was only one death this year. Atlanta Skydiving Center. And I'm not making that happen.

Ladies and gentlemen, give it up for Eric Schmidt.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Peter, thank you so much.

Thank you, buddy.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you all.