Podcasts about Googleplex

I det 388:e avsnittet är det Hans och Johan som möts i ett samtal med lätt touch of geografi. Inledningsvis pratar de dock retro tech, AI-forskning, desinformation och nya jobb. I veckans verktygssegment är de båda oförstående till Silent review, prtar de bildredigering i Designify, Brush Ninja och Hans försöker sälja in Neural Love som AI-verktygens 123Apps. Det blir även digitalt klotter, Google-nyheter och planeringsstöd. Här bjuds det även på ett geografi-tips i form av Guess where you are som kanske är det gratisverktyg som på allvar kan ersätta Geoguessr. Efter det får Hans berätta om hans Kalifornien-resa. Det pratas cybertrucks, förarlösa taxis, eSIM, Googleplex, Sam Altman och baksidan med AI. Även denna vecka är det mesta sig likt då samtalet handlar om skola, digitalisering och lite annat. 

The Helpful Content Update wasn't about the content and the hope of recovery wasn't about to happen. Web publishes hit by the Helpful Content Update in September 2023 who attended Google's Web Creator Summit at the Googleplex this week were told the hope they'd held for seeing their rankings recover were likely in vain and that those placements were gone and not likely coming back. Oh, and it wasn't about the content. Jim Hedger and Kristine Schachinger talk about the disappointment and what disappointed publishers might do. They also talk about how Google has rolled AI Overviews out to over 100 countries, how Google is looking at similarity of content across websites, the no-data bug in GSC, SearchGTP, and the costs to Microsoft of growth through the development OpenAI. The show also looks at a number of pre-election issues and laughs about the 20 decillion dollar decision the Russian courts have leveled against Google. A fun news banter sort of show.Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/webcology/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

In this episode, Aaron walks us through the painful process of reinventing himself, a journey that leads him from NYC to the Midwest to LA, from the Ivory Tower to the Googleplex.

Rebecca Goldstein is a philosopher and novelist. She received her Ph.D. in philosophy from Princeton University and studied with Thomas Nagel. She is a MacArthur Follow and was awarded the National Humanities Medal by Barack Obama. Rebecca is also an expert on Spinoza and Gödel, and has a whole bevy of other wide-ranging interests. In this episode, Robinson and Rebecca discuss her novel the Mind-Body Problem, atheism, Spinoza, and what makes life meaningful in a godless world. Rebecca's most recent book is Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away (Pantheon, 2014). Rebecca's Website: https://www.rebeccagoldstein.com Thirty-Six Arguments for the Existence of God: https://a.co/d/dAoDqbU Plato at the Googleplex: https://a.co/d/c1vvVaw OUTLINE 00:00 In This Episode… 00:45 Introduction 02:40 Publishing a First Novel 14:01 Philosophy and Literature 22:11 From Judaism to Atheism 42:36 Arguments Against the Existence of God 01:02:45 On Spinoza 01:16:14 Mattering Robinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.com Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. Join him in conversations with philosophers, scientists, weightlifters, artists, and everyone in-between.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support

#iphone15 #galaxys24 #google #pixel #jmatuk  Te invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Correo Surface con Matuk: surfaceconmatuk@outlook.comTwitter: https://twitter.com/jmatukInstagram: https://instagram.com/jmatukFacebook: https://facebook.com/matukjavierLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/javiermatukOnlyFans: https://ahhverdad, qué dijiste...

#apple #starlink #tiktokshop #uap #jmatuk Te invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Link de OVNIS o UAPS https://acortar.link/yR2n0DTwitter: https://twitter.com/jmatukInstagram: https://instagram.com/jmatukFacebook: https://facebook.com/matukjavierLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/javiermatukOnlyFans: https://ahhverdad, qué dijiste...

Te invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Twitter: https://twitter.com/jmatukInstagram: https://instagram.com/jmatukFacebook: https://facebook.com/matukjavierLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/javiermatukOnlyFans: https://ahhverdad, qué dijiste...

Te invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Twitter: https://twitter.com/jmatukInstagram: https://instagram.com/jmatukFacebook: https://facebook.com/matukjavierLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/javiermatukOnlyFans: https://ahhverdad, qué dijiste...

#inteligenciaartificial #iphone15 #bing Te invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Estamos también en versión podcast:Apple Podcast: https://cutt.ly/ZOxxmAgSpotify: https://cutt.ly/BOxxRbEGoogle Podcast: https://cutt.ly/HOxxAHPAmazon Music: https://cutt.ly/1OWdmkfTwitter: https://twitter.com/jmatukInstagram: https://instagram.com/jmatukFacebook: https://facebook.com/matukjavierLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/javiermatukOnlyFans: https://ahhverdad, qué dijiste...

One of my best episodes ever. Lars Doucet is the author of Land is a Big Deal, a book about Georgism which has been praised by Vitalik Buterin, Scott Alexander, and Noah Smith. Sam Altman is the lead investor in his new startup, ValueBase.Talking with Lars completely changed how I think about who creates value in the world and who leeches off it.We go deep into the weeds on Georgism:* Why do even the wealthiest places in the world have poverty and homelessness, and why do rents increase as fast as wages?* Why are land-owners able to extract the profits that rightly belong to labor and capital?* How would taxing the value of land alleviate speculation, NIMBYism, and income and sales taxes?Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here.Follow Lars on Twitter. Follow me on Twitter.Timestamps(00:00:00) - Intro(00:01:11) - Georgism(00:03:16) - Metaverse Housing Crises(00:07:10) - Tax Leisure?(00:13:53) - Speculation & Frontiers(00:24:33) - Social Value of Search (00:33:13) - Will Georgism Destroy The Economy?(00:38:51) - The Economics of San Francisco(00:43:31) - Transfer from Landowners to Google?(00:46:47) - Asian Tigers and Land Reform(00:51:19) - Libertarian Georgism(00:55:42) - Crypto(00:57:16) - Transitioning to Georgism(01:02:56) - Lars's Startup & Land Assessment (01:15:12) - Big Tech(01:20:50) - Space(01:23:05) - Copyright(01:25:02) - Politics of Georgism(01:33:10) - Someone Is Always Collecting RentsTranscriptThis transcript was partially autogenerated and thus may contain errors.Lars Doucet - 00:00:00: Over the last century, we've had this huge conflict. All the oxygen's been sucked up by capitalism and socialism duking it out. We have this assumption that you either have to be pro worker or pro business that you can't be both. I have noticed a lot of crypto people get into Georgism, so not the least of which is Vitalik Buterin and you endorse my book. If you earn $100,000 in San Francisco as a family of four, you are below the poverty line. Let's start with just taxing the things nobody has made and that people are gatekeeping access to. Let's tax essentially monopolies and rent seeking. The income tax needs to do this full anal probe on everyone in the country and then audits the poor at a higher rate than the rich. And it's just this horrible burden we have. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:00:39: Okay, today I have the pleasure of speaking with Lars Doucet, who developed the highly acclaimed Defender's Quest game and part two is coming out next year, but now he's working on a new startup. But the reason we're talking is that he wrote a review of Henry George's progress and poverty that won Scott Alexander's Book Review Contest and now it has been turned into an expanded into this book Land is a Big Deal. So Lars, welcome to the podcast. New Speaker: Great to be here, Dwarkesh . Okay, so let's just get into it. What is Georgism? Lars Doucet - 00:01:12: Okay, so the book is based off of the philosophy of a 19th century American economist by the name of Henry George from once we get George's and basically George's thesis is kind of the title of my book that land is a big deal. Georgism is often reduced to its main policy prescription that we should have a land value tax, which is a tax on the unimproved value of land, but not a tax on any buildings or infrastructure on top of the land, anything humans add. But the basic insight of it is that it's kind of reflected in the aphorisms you hear from real estate agents when they say things like the three laws of real estate or location location location and buy land, it's the one thing they're not making any more of. It's basically this insight that land has this hidden role in the economy that is really underrated. But if you look at history through the right lens, control over land is the oldest struggle of human history. It goes beyond human history. Animals have been fighting over land forever. That's what they're fighting over in Ukraine and Russia right now, right? And basically the fundamental insight of Georgism is that over the last century, we've had this huge conflict. All the oxygen's been sucked up by capitalism and socialism duking it out. We have this assumption that you either have to be pro worker or pro business that you can't be both. And Georgism is genuinely pro pro worker and pro business. But what it's against is is land speculation. And if we can find a way to share the earth, then we can solve the paradox that is the title of George's book, progress and poverty, why does poverty advance even when progress advances? Why do we have all this industrialized technology and new methods and it in George's time it was industrial technology in our time its computers and everything else? We have all this good stuff. We can make more than we've ever made before. There's enough wealth for everybody. And yet we still have inequality. Where does it come from? And George answers that question in his book. And I expand on it in mine. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:03:15: Yep. OK, so yeah, I'm excited to get into the theory of all of it in a second. But first I'm curious how much of your interest in the subject has been inspired with the fact that as a game developer, you're constantly dealing with decentralized rent seekers, like Steve or iOS app store. Is that part of the inspiration behind your interest in Georgism or is that separate? Lars Doucet - 00:03:38: It's interesting. I wouldn't say that's what clued me into it in the first place. But I have become very interested in all forms of rent seeking. In this general category of things we call land-like assets that come to first mover advantages in these large platform economies. I've started to think a lot about it basically. But the essence of land speculation is you have this entire class of people who are able to basically gatekeep access to a scarce resource that everybody needs, which is land, that you can't opt out of needing. And because of that, everyone basically has to pay them rent. And those people don't necessarily do anything. They just got there first and tell everyone else, it's like, well, if you want to participate in the world, you need to pay me. And so we're actually the actual connection with game development, actually clued me into Georgism. And I'd heard about Georgism before. I'd read about it. I thought it was interesting. But then I started noticing this weird phenomenon in online multiplayer games going back 30 years repeatedly of virtual housing crises, which is the most bizarre concept in the world to me, like basically a housingcrisis in the Metaverse and predecessors to the Metaverse. And as early as the Alt Online (?)online when I was 19, this is this online game that you could play. And you could build houses in the game and put them down somewhere. And so what I found was that houses were actually fairly cheap. You could work long enough in a game to be afford to buy blueprints for a house, which will be put it somewhere. But there was no land to put it on. And at the time, I thought, oh, well, I guess the server failed up. I didn't really think much about it. I was like, this stinks. I didn't join the game early enough. I'm screwed out of housing. And then I kind of forgot about it. And then 20 years later, I checked back in. And that housing crisis is still ongoing in that game. That game is still running a good 25 years later. And that housing crisis remains unsolved. And you have this entire black market for housing. And then I noticed that that trend was repeated in other online games, like Final Fantasy 14. And then recently in 2022, with all this huge wave of crypto games, like Axi Infinity, and that's Decentral Land and the Sandbox. And then Yuga Labs' Board-Ape Yacht Club, the other side, had all these big land sales. And at the time, I was working as an analyst for a video game consulting firm called Novik. And I told my employers, it's like, we are going to see all the same problems happen. We are going to see virtual land speculation. They're going to hit virtual. They're going to reproduce the conditions of housing crisis in the real world. And it's going to be a disaster. And I called it, and it turns out I was right. And we've now seen that whole cycle kind of work itself out. And it just kind of blew my mind that we could reproduce the problems of the real world so articulately in the virtual world without anyone trying to do it. It just happened. And that is kind of the actual connection between my background in game design and kind of getting George Pilled as the internet kids call it these days. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:06:43: There was a hilarious clip. Some comedian was on Joe Rogan's podcast. I think it was like Tim Dillon. And they're talking about, I think, Decentraland, where if you want to be Snoop Dogg's neighbor in the Metaverse, it costs like a couple million dollars or something. And Joe Rogan was like, so you think you can afford to live there. And then Tim Dillon's like, no, but I'm going to start another Metaverse and I'm going to work hard. But OK, so let's go into Georgism himself. So Tyler Cohen had a blog post a long time ago who was comparing taxing land to taxing unimproved labor or unimproved capital. And it's an interesting concept, right? Should I, so I have a CS degree, right? Should I be taxed at the same level as an entry level software engineer instead of a podcast or because I'm not using my time as efficiently as possible. And so leisure in another way is the labor equivalent of having an unimproved parking lot in the middle of San Francisco or capital. If I'm just keeping my capital out of the economy and therefore making it not useful, maybe I should have that capital taxed at the rate of the capital gains on T-Bill. And this way, you're not punishing people for having profitable investments, which you're kind of doing with a capital gains, right? What would you think of that comparison? Lars Doucet - 00:08:07: Yeah, so really, before you can even answer that question, you've got to go back to ground moral principles you're operating on. Like, is your moral operating principle like we just want to increase efficiency? So we're going to tax everyone in a way to basically account for the wasted opportunity cost, which brings up a lot of other questions of like, well, who decides what that is. But I think the Georgist argument is a little different. We're not necessarily like it is efficient, the tax we propose, but it actually stems kind of from a more, from a different place, a more kind of fundamental aspect of justice, you know? And from our perspective, if you work and you produce value, your work produced that value, right? And if you save money and accumulate capital in order to put that capital to work to receive a return, you've also provided something valuable to society, you know? You saved money so a factory could exist, right? You saved money so that a shipping company could get off off the ground. You know, those are valuable, contributed things, but nobody made the earth. The earth pre-exists all of us. And so someone who provides land actually does the opposite of providing land. They unprovide land, and then they charge you for opening the gate. And so the argument for charging people on the unimproved value of land is that we want to tax unproductive rent seeking. We want to tax non-produced assets because we think we want to encourage people to produce assets. We want to encourage people to produce labor, to produce capital. We want more of those things. And there's that aphorism that if you want less of something, you should tax it. So I mean, maybe there is a case for some kind of galaxy brain take of, you know, taxing unrealized opportunity costs or whatever, but I'm less interested in that. And my moral principles are more about, let's start with just taxing the things nobody has made and that people are gatekeeping access to. Let's tax essentially monopolies and rent seeking. And then if we still need to raise more taxes, we can talk about that later. But let's start with, let's start with just taxing the worst things in society and then stop taxing things we actually want more of because we have this mentality right now where everything's a trade off and we have to accept the downsides of income taxes, of sales taxes, of capital taxes because we just need the revenue and it has to come from somewhere. And my argument is it's like, it can come from a much better somewhere. So let's start with that.Dwarkesh Patel - 00:10:39: Yeah, yeah. So I guess if it was the case that we've implemented a land value tax and we're still having a revenue shortfall and we need another kind of tax and we're going to have to keep income taxes or capital gains taxes. Would you in that situation prefer a sort of tax where you're basically taxed on the opportunity costs of your time rather than the actual income you generated or the returns you would interest your generate in your capital? Lars Doucet - 00:11:04: No, I think probably not. I think you would probably want to go with some other just like simpler tax for the sake of it there's too many degrees of freedom in there. And it's like, we can talk about why I will defend the Georgist case for property tax assessments, you know, for land value tax. But I think it gets different when you start like judging what is the most valuable use of your time because that's a much more subjective question. Like you're like, okay, are you providing more value to society as being a podcaster or being a CS computer science person or creating a startup? It's like that may not be evident for some time. You know what I mean? Like I can't think of an example, but like think of people who were never successful during their lifetimes. I think the guy who invented what was it? FM radio, right? He threw himself out a window because he never got it really adopted during his lifetime but it went on to change everything, you know? So if we were taxing him during his lifetime based off of what he was doing of being a failure, like if Van Gogh was taxed of his like wasting his life as an artist as he thought he was, which ultimately led to his suicide, you know, a lot of these things are not necessarily realized at the time. And so I think that's, and you know, it would need a much bigger kind of bureaucracy to like figure that all out. So I think you should go with a more modest. I mean, I think after land value tax, you should do things like severance tax on natural resources and other taxes on other monopolies and rents. And so I think the next move after land value tax is not immediately to capital and income taxes and sales taxes, but to other taxes on other rents seeking and other land like assets that aren't literally physically land. And then only after you've done all of those, if you still, you know, absolutely then, then move on to, you know, the bad taxes. What is this, severance tax? Severance tax is a tax on the extraction of natural resources. Is what Norway does with their oil industry that has been massively successful and a key reason that Norway has avoided the resource curse? Yeah. Basically, it's, Georgist purist will say it's essentially a land value tax but of a different kind. A land value tax like you can't normally like extracts just like land like on this, in this house you're living on, you're like, you're not using up this land, but non-renewable resources you can use up. Yeah. You know, and so a severance tax is basically, Nestle should be charged a severance tax for the water they're using, for instance, you know, because all they're doing is enclosing a pre-existing natural resource that used to belong to the people that they've essentially enclosed and now they're just putting it in bottles and selling it to people. You know, they should be able to realize the value of the value add they give to that water, but not to just taking that resource away. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:13:53: No that makes sense. Okay, so let's go deep into the actual theory and logic of Georgism. Okay. One thing I was confused by is why property owners who have land in places that are really desirable are not already incentivized to make the most productive use of that land. So even without a property, sorry, a land tax, if you have some property in San Francisco incentives, let's go, why are you not incentivized to construct it to the fullest extent possible by the law, to, you know, collect rents anyways, you know what I mean? Like why are you keeping it that as a parking lot? Lars Doucet - 00:14:28: Right, right, right. So there's a lot of reasons. And one of them has to do with, there's an image in the book that this guy put together for me. I'll show it to you later. But what it does is that it shows the rate of return. What a land speculator is actually optimizing for is their rate of return, right? And so if land appreciates by 10% a year, you know, you're actually incentivized to invest in vacant land or a tear down property because the building of a tear down property is like worth negative value. So the land's cheaper because there's garbage on it, you know? Then you are to necessarily invest in a property and you're basically your marginal dollar is better spent on more land than it is on building up. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:15:16: But eventually shouldn't this be priced into the price of land so that the returns are no longer 10% or they're just like basically what you could get for any other asset. And at that point, then the rate of return is similar for building thingson top of your existing land than buying a new land because like the new land is like the, you know, that return has been priced into other land. Lars Doucet - 00:15:38: Well, I mean, arguably, empirically, we just don't see that, you know, and we see rising land prices as long as productivity and population increases. Those productivity and population gains get soaked into the price of the land. It's because of this phenomenon called Ricardo's Law of Rent and it's been pretty empirically demonstrated that basically, and it has to do with the negotiation power. But like why some people do of course, build and invest, you know, there's a lot of local laws that restrict people's ability to build. But another reason is just like, it also has to do with the existing part of it. It part of the effect is partially the existing property tax regime actively incentivizes empty lots because you have a higher tax burden if you build, right? So what actually happens is a phenomenon that's similar to oil wells, right? You have, it's not just because of property taxes, those do encourage you to keep it empty. But there's this phenomenon called land banking and waiting for the land to ripen, right? Sure, I could build it now, but I might have a lot of land parcels I've got. And I don't need to build it now because I think the prices might go up later and it would be better to build on it later than it is now. And it's not costing me anything to keep it vacant now. If I build now, I'm gonna have to pay a little bit more property taxes. And I know in three years that the price is gonna be even better. So maybe I'll wait to incur those construction costs then and right now I'm gonna focus more on building over here. And like I've got a lot of things to do, so I'm just gonna squat on it here. It's the same way I have, I'm squatting like, you know, I bought to my shame, like about 30 domain names, you know, most of them bought before I kind of got ontoGeorgism. And it's like, yeah, I'll pay 15 bucks a year to just hold it, why not? You know what I mean? I might use that someday. Right. And it's like, I should probably release all the ones I have no intent of using because I was looking for a domain for my startup the other day and every single two word.com is taken. Right, right. And it has been for like 10 years, you know, and it's a similar phenomenon. It's just like some of it is economic, rational following of incentives. And some of it is just it's like, well, this is a good asset. I'm just gonna hold on to it because why not? And no one is, and I don't have any pressure to build right now. And this happens on the upswing and on the downswing of cities. So while the population's growing and while the population's declining, people will just buy a lot of land and hold it out of use. Cause it's also just a great place to park money because it's an asset that you know if the population ever starts growing, it's gonna keep its value better than almost any other hard asset you have. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:18:16: Yep yep. I guess another like broader criticism of this way of thinking is, listen, this is all, and sorry for using these like podcast lingo of scarcity mindset, but this is all like scarcity mindset of, you know, land is limited. Well, why don't we just focus on the possibility of expanding the amount of usable land? I mean, there's like not really a shortage of land in you. Maybe there's a shortage of land in urban areas. But you know, why don't we like expand into the seas? And why don't we expand into the air and space? Why are we thinking in this sort of scarce mindset? Lars Doucet - 00:18:48: Right. Okay, so I love this question because actually our current status quo mindset is the scarcity mindset. And Georgism is the abundance mindset, right? And we can have that abundance if we learn to share the land. Because right now, you know, why don't we expand? And the answer is we've tried that. We've done it twice. And it's the story of America's frontier, right? And so like right now there's plenty of empty land in Nevada, but nobody wants it. And you have to ask why, right? You also have to ask the question of how did we have virtual housing crises in the Metaverse where they could infinitely expand all they want? Like how is that even possible, you know? And the answer has to do with what we call the urban agglomeration effect. What's really valuable is human relationships, proximity to other human beings, those dense networks of human beings. And so the idea is not necessarily that like, in a certain sense, the issue is that land is not an indistinguishable, fungible commodity. Location really matters. Or America has a finite amount of land, but it might as well be an infinite plane. We're not going to fill up every square inch of America for probably thousands of years if we ever do, right? But what is scarce is specific locations. They're non-fungible, you know? And to a certain extent, it's like, okay, if you don't want to live in New York, you can live in San Francisco or any other like big city. But what makes New York New York is non-fungible What makes San Francisco San Francisco is non-fungible That particular cluster of VCs in San Francisco until or unless that city completely explodes and that moves somewhere else to Austin or whatever, you know, at which point, Austin will be non-fungible. I mean, Austin is non-fungible right now. And so the point is that the way Georgism unlocks the abundance of it, let me talk about the frontier. We have done frontier expansion. That is why immigrants came over from Europe, you know, and then eventually the rest of the world, to America to, you know, settle the frontier. And the losers of that equation were, of course, the Indians who were already here and got kicked out. But that was theoriginal idea of America. And I like to say that America's tragedy, America's problem is that America is a country that has the mindset of being a frontier state, but is in fact a state which has lost its frontier. And that is why you have these conversations with people like boomers who are like, why can't the next generation just pull itself up by its bootstraps? Because America has had at least, I would say two major periods of frontier expansion. The first was the actual frontier, the West, the Oregon Trail, the covered wagons, you know, the displacement of the Indians. And so that was a massive time, that was the time in which Henry George was writing, was right when that frontier was closing, right? When all that land, that free land was being taken, and the advantages of that land was now being fully priced in. That is what it means for a frontier to close, is that now the good productive land, the value of it is fully priced in. But when the frontier is open, you can just go out there and take it, and you can get productive land and realize the gains of that. And the second frontier expansion was after Henry George's death, was the invention of the automobile, the ability to have a job in the city, but not have to live in the city. The fact that you could quickly travel in, like I commuted in to visit you here, right? That is because of the automobile frontier opening that has allowed me to live in some other city, but be able to do productive work like this podcast by driving in. But the problem is, sprawl can only take you so far, before that frontier as well closes, and by closes I don't mean suburban expansion stops. What I mean is that now, suburban homes, you fully price in the value of the benefits are able to accrue by having that proximity to a city, but still being able to live over here, through of course, for Ricardo's Law for it. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:22:37: Yeah, but I feel like this is still compatible with the story of, we should just focus on increased in technology and abundance, rather than trying to estimate how much rent is available now, given current status quo technologies. I mean, the car is a great example of this, but imagine if there were like flying cars, right? Like there's a, where's my flying car? There's like a whole analysis in that book about, you know, if you could, if people are still commuting like 20 minutes a day, you know, a lot more land is actually in the same travel distance as was before, and now all this land would be worth as much, even in terms of relationships that you could accommodate, right? So why not just build like flying cars instead of focusing on land rent? Lars Doucet - 00:23:21: Well, because these things have a cost, right? The cost of frontier expansion was murdering all the Indians and the cost of automobile expansion was climate change. You know, there has to be a price for that. And then eventually, the problem is you eventually, when you get to the end of that frontier expansion, you wind up with the same problem we had in the first place. Eventually, the problem is the first generation will make out like gangbusters if we ever invent flying cars, even better like Star Trek matter teleporters. You know, that'll really do it. Then you can really live in Nevada and have a job in New York. Yeah. There are some people who claim that Zoom is this, but it's not, you know, we've seen the empirical effects of that and it's like, it's the weakest like semi-frontier we've had and it's already closed. Because, because of Zoom, houses like this over in Austin have gone up in value because there is demand for them and there's demand for people to telecommute. And so anyone who, so the increased demand for living out in the suburbs is now basically priced in because of the Zoom economy. And so the thing is the first people who did that, who got there really quick, the first people to log in to the ultimate online server were able to claim that pace of the frontier and capture that value. But the next generation has to pay more in rent and more in home prices to get that. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:24:34: Actually, that raises another interesting criticism ofGeorgism, this is actually a paper from Zachary Gouchanar and Brian Kaplan, where it was titled the Cerseioretic critique of Georgism, and the point they made was one of these, like one way of thinking about the improvement to land is actually identifying that this land is valuable. Maybe because you realize it has like an oil well in it and maybe you realize that it's like the perfect proximity to these like Chinese restaurants and this mall and whatever. And then just finding which land is valuable is actually something that takes capital and also takes, you know, like you deciding to upend your life and go somewhere, you know, like all kinds of effort. And that is not factored into the way you would conventionally think of the improvements to land that would not be taxed, right? So in some sense, you getting that land is like a subsidy for you identifying that the land is valuable and can be used to productive ends. Lars Doucet - 00:25:30:Right, yeah, I know. So I've read that paper. So first of all, the first author of that Zachary Gouchanar yeah, I'm not been able to pin him down on what exactly meant on this, but he's made some public statements where he's revised his opinion since writing that paper and that he's much more friendly to the arguments ofGeorgism now than when he first wrote that paper. So I'd like to pin him down and see exactly what he meant by that because it was just a passing comment. But as regards Kaplan's critique, Kaplan's critique only applies to a 100% LVT where you fully capture all of the land value tax. And the most extreme Georgists I know are only advocating for like an 85% land value tax. That would still leave. And Kaplan doesn't account at all for the negative effects of speculation. He's making a speculation is good actually argument. And even if we grant his argument, he still needs to grapple with all the absolutely empirically observed problems of land speculation. And if we want to make some kind of compromise between maybe speculation could have this good discovery effect, there's two really good answers to that. First, just don't do 100% LVT, which we probably can't practically do anyway because of natural limitations just empirically, you know, in the signal. It's like you don't want to do 115% land value tax. That drives people off the land. So we want to make sure that we like have a high land value tax but make sure not to go over. And so that would leave a sliver of land rent that would still presumably incentivize this sort of thing. There's no argument for why 100% of the land rent is necessary to incentivize the good things that Kaplan was talking about. The second argument is when he talks about oil, well, we have the empirical evidence from the Norwegian massively successful petroleum model that shows in the case of natural resources how you should deal with this. And what Norway does is that they have a massive, massively huge severance tax on oil extraction. And according to Kaplan's argument, this should massively destroy the incentive for companies to go out there and discover the oil. And empirically, it doesn't. Now what Norway does is that they figured out, okay, so the oil companies, their argument is that we need the oil rents, right? We need these oil rents where we will not be incentivized for the massive capital cost of offshore oil drilling. Well, Norway's like, well, if you just need to cover the cost of offshore oil drilling, we'll subsidize that. We'll just pay you. We'll just pay you to go discover the oil. But when you find the oil, that oil belongs to the Norwegian people. Now you may keep some of the rents but most of it goes to the Norwegian people. But hey, all your R&D is free. All your discovery is free. If the problem is discovery, we just subsidize discovery. And then the oil companies are like, okay, that sounds like a great deal. We don't have to, because without that, what the oil companies do is that they're like, okay, we're taking all these risks. So I'm gonna sit on all these oil wells like people sitting on domain names because I might use them later and the price might go up later. But now because there's a huge severance tax, you're forced to drill now and you're actually, you're actual costs of discovery and R&D and all those capital costs are just taken care of. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:28:26: But isn't there a flip side to that where I mean, one of the economic benefits of speculation, obviously there's drawbacks. But one of the benefits is that it gets rid of the volatility and prices where our speculator will buy when it's cheap and sell when the price is high. And in doing so, they're kind of making the asset less volatile over time. And if you're basically going to tell people who have oil on their land, like we're gonna keep taxing you. If you don't take it out, you're gonna keep getting taxed. You're encouraging this massive glut of a finite resource to be produced immediately, which is bad. If you think we might need that reserve in the ground 20 years from now or 30 years from now, you know, went oil reserves were running low. Lars Doucet - 00:29:10: Not necessarily, you know? And so the problem is that speculation in the sense you're talking about if like encouraging people to do arbitrage is good for capital because we can make more capital. But we can't make more land and we can't make more non-renewable natural resources. And the issue in peer, and I just think the evidence just doesn't support that empirically because if anything, land speculation has causes land values to just constantly increase, not to find some natural part, especially with how easy it is to finance two thirds of bank loans just chase real estate up. And that's just like, if you just look at the history of the prices of, you know, of residential real estate in America, it's like, it's not this cyclical graph where it like keeps going back down. It keeps going back down, but it keeps going up and up and up, just on a straight line along with productivity. And it underlines and undergirds, major issues, everything that's driving our housing crisis, which then undergirds so much of inequality and pollution and climate change issues. And so with regards to speculations, like even if I just bite that bull and it's like, okay, speculation is good actually, I don't think anyone's made the case that speculators need to capture a hundred percent of the rents to be properly incentivized to do anything good that comes out of speculation. I think at some small reasonable percentage, you know, five to 10 percent of the rents, maybe 15 if I'm feeling generous, but I don't think anyone's empirically made the case that it should be a hundred percent, which is more or less a status quo. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:30:31:I mean, with regards to that pattern of the fact that the values tend to keep going up implies that there's nothing cyclical that the speculators are dampening. Lars Doucet - 00:30:41: Well, there are cycles to be sure, but it's not like, it's something that resets to zero. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:30:45: Yeah, but that's also true of like the stock market, right? Over time that goes up, but speculators are still have like an economic role to play in a stock market of making sure prices are, Lars Doucet - 00:30:55: I mean, the difference is that people are now paying an ever increasing portion of their incomes to the land sector. And that didn't used to be the case. And if it keeps going, it's going to be, I mean, you have people are now paying 50% of their income just for rent. And that's not sustainable in the long term. You're going to have the cycle you have there is revolution. You know, you, you know, Dwarkesh Patel - 00:31:16: (laughing) Lars Doucet - 00:31:17: I'm serious. like what happens is like you look through history, you either have land reform or you have revolution. And you know, it's, it's either like either you have a never ending cycle of, of, of transfers of income from the unlanded to the landed. And eventually the, the unlanded will not put up with that. You know, there was a real chance in the 19th century, at the end of the 19th century of America going full on socialist or communist and the only thing that saved us. What, and George's argument was like, it's either Georgism or communism. And if you want to save capitalism and not go toTotalitarian, we need Georgismand then what George failed to anticipate was, you, of course, the automobile. And the automobile kicked the can down another generation, another couple generations, right? And it came at the cost of sprawl. And that made everyone feel like we had solved the issue. But basically we just, and the cost of sprawl are enormous in terms of pollution and poor land use. Just look at Houston right now, right? But now we've come at the end of that frontier and now we're at the same question. And it's like, you see this research in interest in leftism in America and that's not a coincidence, right? Because the rent is too damn high and poor people and poor people and young people feel really, really shoved out of the promise and social contract that was given to their parents and they're jealous of it and they're wondering where it went. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:32:36: Yeah, yeah. Actually, you just mentioned that a lot of bank loans are given basically so you can like get a mortgage and get a house that's like towards land. There was an interesting question on Twitter that I thought was actually pretty interesting about this. I can't find the name of the person who asked it. So sorry, I can't give you credit, but they basically asked if that's the case and if most bank loans are going towards helping you buy land that's like artificially more expensive, but now you implement a land value tax and all these property values crash. Oh yeah. Well, when we see just, and then all these mortgages are obviously they can't pay them back. Lars Doucet - 00:33:13: Right, right, right. Are we gonna destroy the banking sector? Dwarkesh Patel - 00:33:15: Exactly. We'll have like a great, great depression.Lars Doucet - 00:33:17: Well, I mean, if you, okay, so like this is, this is kind of like, I mean, I'm not, I'm not trying to compare landlords to slave owners or something, but it's like, it's like the South had an entire economy based off of slavery. This thing that like we now agree was bad, right? And it's like we shouldn't have kept slavery because the, the South, the, like it really disrupted the Southern Economy when we got rid of slavery, but it was still the right thing to do. And so I mean, there is no magic button I could push as much as I might like to do so that will give us 100% land value tax everywhere in America tomorrow. So I think the actual path towards a Georgist Future is gonna have to be incremental. There'll be enough time to unwind all those investments and get to a more sane banking sector. So I mean, like if we were to go overnight, yeah, I think there would be some shocks in the banking sector and I can't predict what those would be, but I also don't think that's a risk that's actually gonna happen. Because like we just, we just cannot make a radical change like that on all levels overnight. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:34:13: Yeah yeah, yeah. Okay, so let's get back to some of these theoretical questions. One I had was, I guess I don't fully understand the theoretical reason for thinking that you can collect arbitrarily large rents. Why doesn't the same economic principle of competition, I get that there's not infinite landowners, but there are multiple landowners in any region, right? So if for the same reason that profit is competed away in any other enterprise, you know, if one landowner is extracting like $50 a profit a month, and another landowner is extracting, you know, like whatever, right? Like a similar amount of $50. One of them, and they're both competing for the same tenant. One of them will decrease their rent so that the tenant will come to them and the other one will do the same and the bidding process continues until all the profits are, you know,bidded away. Lars Doucet - 00:35:04: Right, so this is Ricardo's law front, right? And there's a section on in the book with a bunch of illustrations you can show. And so the issue is that we can't make more land, right? And so you might be like, well, there's plenty of land in Nevada, but the point is there's only so much land in Manhattan. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:35:19: But the people who have land inManhattan, why aren't they competing against themselves or each other? Lars Doucet - 00:35:23: Right, well, what they do is because the nature of the scarcity of there's only so many locations in Manhattan and there's so many people who want to live there, right? And so all the people who want to live there have to outbid each other. And so basically, so like, let me give a simple agricultural example model. And then I will explain how the agricultural model translates to a residential model. Basically, when you are paying to live in an urban area, or even a suburban area like here in Austin, what you're actually paying for is the right to have proximity to realize the productive capacity of that location. IE, I want to live in Austin because I can have access to a good job, you know what I mean? Or whatever is cool about Austin, a good school, those amenities. And the problem is you have to pay for those and you have to outbid other people who are willing to pay for those. And Ricardo's Rolf Rent says that the value of the amenities and the productivity of an area, as it goes up, that gets soaked into the land prices. And the mechanism by that is that it's like, okay, say I want to buy a watermelon, right? And there's only one watermelon left out bid that guy. But the watermelon growers can be like, oh, a lot of people want watermelon. So next season, there's going to be more watermelons because he's going to produce more watermelons. But because there's only so many locations in Austin, you know, within the natural limits of our transportation network, basically it forces the competition on the side of the people who are, essentially the tenants, right? It forces us into one side of competition with each other. And that, and so there's an example of like, a simple agricultural example is like, okay, say there is a common field that anyone can work on and you can make 100 units of wealth if you work on it, right? So, and there's another field that you can also learn 100 units of wealth in, but it's owned by a landowner. Why would you, why would you go and work on the landowners when you're going to have to pay them rent? You wouldn't pay them any rent at all. You would work on the field that's free, but if the landowner buys that field and now your best opportunity is a field that's only worth a free field that will produce 10 units of wealth, now he can charge you 90 units of wealth becauseyou have no opportunity to go anywhere else. And so basically as more land gets bought and subject to private ownership in an area, landowners over time get to increase the rent, not to a maximum level, there are limits to it. And the limits is what's called the margin of production, which is basically you can charge up to, and this is where the competition comes in, the best basic like free alternative, you know, and that's usually, you can realize that geographically, like out on the margins of Austin, there's marginal land that basically is available for quite cheap, you know, and it might be quite far away, and it used to be not so quite far away 20, 30 years ago, you know, and so as that margin slowly gets privatized, landowners can charge up to that margin. The other limit is subsistence, that can't charge more than you're actually able to pay, but the basic example is that, so this is why this is how frontier expansion works. When the entire continent's free, the first settler comes in, strikes a pick in the ground, keeps all of their wealth, but as more and more of it gets consolidated, then landowners are able to charge proportionately more until they're charging essentially up to subsistence. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:38:51: Yeah, does that explain property values in San Francisco? I mean, they are obviously very high, but I don't feel like they're that high where this offer engineers were working at Google or living as subsistence levels, neither are they at the margin of reduction where it's like, this is what it would cost to live out in the middle of California, and then commute like three hours to work or something. Lars Doucet - 00:39:13: Right, well, so it has to do with two things. So first of all, it's over the long run, and so it's like, you've had a lot of productivity booms in San Francisco, right? And so it takes some time for that to be priced in, you know, and it can be over a while, but given a long enough time period it'll eventually get there. And then when we're talking about stuff, it's also based off of the average productivity. The average resident of San Francisco is maybe not as productive as a high, and like basically doesn't earn as high an income necessarily as a high income product worker. And so this means that if you are a higher than productive, higher than average productivity person, it's worth it to live in the expensive town because you're being paid more than the average productivity that's captured in rent, right? But if you're a low, if you're lower than average productivity, you flee high productive areas. You go to more marginal areas because those are the only places you can basically afford to make a living. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:40:06: Okay, that's very interesting. That's actually one of the questions I was really curious about. So I'm glad to hear an answer on that. Another one is, so the idea is, you know, land is soaking up the profits that capitalists and laborers are entitled to in the form of rent. But when I look at the wealthiest people in America, yeah, there's people who own a lot of land, but they bought that land after they became wealthy from doing things that were capital or labor, depending on how you define starting a company. Like sure, Bill Gates owns a lot of land in Montana or whatever, but like the reason he has all that wealth to begin with is because he started a company, you know, that's like basically labor or capital,however you define it? Right. So how do you explain the fact that all the wealthy people are, you know, capitalists or laborers? Lars Doucet - 00:40:47: Well, so the thing is, one of the big missed apprehensions people have is that, when they think of billionaires, they think of people like Bill Gates and Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, those are actually the minority billionaires, most billionaires or hedge funds are people involved in hedge funds. You know, bankers and what are bankers, most what are two thirds of banks? It's real estate, you know? And so, but more to your point, like if I, if it is like point that directly into it, it's like, I don't necessarily have a problem with the billionaire existing. You know what I mean? If someone like genuinely like bring something new into the world and like, you know, I don't necessarily buy the narrative that like billionaires are solely responsible for everything that comes out of their company, you know, I think they like to present that image. But I don't necessarily have a problem with a billionaire existing. I have a problem with, you know, working class people not being able to feed their families, you know, and so like the greater issue is the fact that the rent is too high rather than that Jeff Bezos is obscenely rich. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:41:45:No, no, I guess my point was in that, like, I'm not complaining that your solution would not fix the fact that billionaires are this. I also like that there's billionaires. What I'm pointing out is it's weird that, if you're theory of, like, where all the sort of plus in our society is getting, you know, given away is that it's going to landowners. And yet the most wealthy people in our society are not landowners. Doesn't that kind of contradict your theory? Lars Doucet - 00:42:11: Well, a lot of the wealthy people in our society are landowners, right? And it's just like, it's not the, so the, so the thing is is that basically making wealth off land is a way to make wealth without being productive, right? And so my point is is that, so like you said in your interview with Glazer that it's like, okay, the Googleplex, like the value of that real estate is probably not, you know, compared that to like the market cap of Google. But now compare the value of all the real estate in San Francisco to the market caps to some of those companies in there, you know, look at the people who are charging rent to people who work for Google. That's where the money's actually going, is that, and, and, you know, investors talk about this is that it's like, I have to, like, if you earn $100,000 in San Francisco as a family of four, you are below the poverty line, right? You know, the money is going to basically upper middle class Americans and upper class Americans who own tons of residential land and are basically, and also the old and the wealthy, especially, are essentially this entire class of kind of hidden landed gentry that are extracting wealth from the most productive people in America and young people, especially. And, and it is creates really weird patterns, especially with like service workers who can't afford to live in the cities where their work is demanded. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:43:30: Yeah. Okay. So what do you think of this take? This might be economically efficient. In fact, I think it probably is economically efficient, but the effect of the land value tax would be to shift, to basically shift our sort of societal subsidy away from upper middle class people who own, happen to own land in urban areas and shift that to the super wealthy and also super productive people who will like control the half acre that Google owns and like mountain view. So it's kind of like a subsidy, not subsidy, but it's easing the burden on super productive companies like Google and so that they can make even cooler products in the future. But it is in some sense that's a little aggressive, you're going from upper middle class to like, you know, tech billionaire, right? But it's still be economically efficient to do that. Lars Doucet - 00:44:18: Well, no, I don't quite agree with that because it's like, although there are a lot of upper middle class Americans who own a lot of the land wealth, it's not the case that they own where the majority of the land wealth is. The majority of the land wealth in urban areas is actually in commercial real estate. Is the central business district, if you, and I work in mass appraisal, so I've seen this myself in the models we build is that if you look at the transactions in cities and then you plot where the land value is and like a graph, it looks like this. And this is the city center and that's not a residential district. So the residential districts are sucking up a lot of land value and the rent is toodamn high. But the central business district and this even holds even in the age of Zoom, it's taken a tumble, but it's starting from a very high level. That central residential, I'm not residential, but commercial real estate is super valuable. Like orders, like an order of magnitude more valuable than a lot of the other stuff. And a lot of it is very poorly used.In Houston especially, it's incredibly poorly used. We have all these central parking lots downtown. That is incredibly valuable real estate. And just a couple of speculators are just sitting on it, doing nothing with it. And that could be housing, that could be offices, that could be amenities, that could be a million sorts of things. And so when you're talking about a land value tax, those are the people who are going to get hit first. And those are people who are neither nice, nice, friendly upper middle class Americans, nor are they hardworking industrialists making cool stuff. They're people who are doing literally nothing. Now, if you do a full land value tax, yeah, it's going to shift the burden in society somewhat. But I feel that most analyses of property taxes and land value taxes that conclude that they are regressive, I think that's mostly done on the basis of our current assessments. And I feel like our assessments could be massively approved and that if we improve the assessments, we can show where most of our land values actually concentrated. And then we can make decisions about exactly, are we comfortable with these tax shifts? Dwarkesh Patel - 00:46:18: Yeah, yeah. Hey guys, I hope you're enjoying the conversation so far. If you are, I would really, really appreciate it if you could share the episode with other people who you think might like it. Put the episode in a group chat you have with your friends, post it on Twitter, send it to somebody who think might like it. All of those things helps that a ton. Anyways, back to the conversation. So a while back I read this book, how Asia works. You know,Lars Doucet - 00:46:45: I'm a fan. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:46:47: Yeah, and one of the things, I think Joseph Steadwell was going out there, what are the things he talks about is he's trying to explain why some Asian economies grew, gangbusters in the last 20th century. And one of the things he points to is that these economies implemented land reform were basically, I guess they were distributed land away from, I guess the existing aristocracy and gentry towards the people who are like working the land. And while I was reading the book at the time, I was kind of confused because, you know, we've like, there's something called like the Kostian. The Kostian, I forget the name of the argument. Basically, the idea is, regardless of who initially starts off with a resource, the incentive of that person will be to, for him to like give that resource, lend out that resource to be worked by that person who can make most productive use of it. And instead of what was pointing out that these like small, you know, like these peasant farmers basically, they will pay attention to detail of crop rotation and making the maximum use of this land to get like the maximum produce. Whereas if you're like a big landowner, you will just like try to do something mechanized. It's not nearly as effective. And in a poor country, what you have is a shitton of labor. So you want something that's like labor intensive. Anyways, backing up a bit, I was confused while I was reading the book because I was like, well, wouldn't the, wouldn't, what you would expect to happen in a market that basically the peasants get alone from the bank to work to, I guess, rent out that land. And then they are able to make that land work more productively than the original landowner. Therefore, they are able to like make a profit and everybody benefits basically. Why isn't there a co-scient solution to that? Lars Doucet - 00:48:24: Because any improvement that the peasants make to the land will be a signal to the landowner to increase the rent because of Ricardo's law of rent. Yep. And that's exactly what happened in Ireland when, and George talks about this in progress and poverty, is that a lot of people were like, why was there famine in Ireland? It's because the Irish are bad people. Why didn't they, they're lazy? Why didn't they improve? And it's like because if you improve the land, all that happens is you still are forced into one side of competition and the rent goes out. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:48:50: Yep. OK. That makes sense. Is the goal that the taxes you would collect with the land value tax? Are they meant to replace existing taxes or are they meant to give us more services like UBI? Because they probably can't do both, right? Like you either have to choose getting rid of existing taxes or getting more.. Lars Doucet - 00:49:08: Well, it depends how much UBI you want. You know what I mean? It's like you can, you know, it's a sliding skill. It's like how many taxes do you want to replace versus how much? Like, I mean, you can have a budget there. It's like if you can raise, you know, I show in the book the exact figures of how much I think land value tax could raise. And I forget the exact figures, but like you can pull up a graph and overlay it here of, you know, whether you're talking about the federal level or federal local and state, you know, there's $44 trillion of land value in America. And I believe we can raise about $4 trillion in land rents annually with 100% land value tax. And we would probably do less than that in practice. But even on the low end, I forget what figure I quote for the low end, like you could fully pay for any one of social security, Medicare plus Medicaid together, so the second one is healthcare or defense. Entirely with the lowest estimate of what I think land rents could raise. And then I think you can actually raise more than that because I think, and I give an argument in the book for why I think it's closer to like $4 trillion. And that could pay for all three and have room over for a little bit of extra. And so I mean, it's up to you, like, that's a policy decision of whether you want to spend it on spending, whether you want to spend it on offsetting taxes or whether you want to spend it on UBI. I think the best political solution, because like if I bite the bullet that there might be some regressivity issues left over, you want to do what's called a UBI or what, you know, in George's time was called a citizen's dividend, right? You know, this will smooth over any remaining regressivity issues. And then, but I very much am in favor of getting rid of some of these worst taxes, you know, not just because they have dead weight loss and land value tax doesn't, but also because there's this tantalizing theory called ATCORE- All taxes come out of rent, which suggests that if you reduce other taxes, it increases land values, which means that if it's true in the strongest sense, it means the single tax,right? Land value tax replaced all taxes would always work. And I'm not sure if I buy that, I want to see some empirical evidence, but I think at least some weak form of it holds, so that when you offset other worst taxes, not only do you get rid of the dead weight loss from those, but you also wind up raising at least a little bit more in land value tax revenue. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:51:20: Yes, yeah. I mean, as a libertarian, or I guess somebody who has like libertarian tendencies, my concern would basically be like, this obviously seems better than our current regime of taxing things that are good, basically capital income. But my concern is the way I'm guessing something like this would be implemented is it would be added on top of rather than repealing those taxes. And then, yeah, I guess like we would want to ensure. Lars Doucet - 00:51:44: I get this one a lot. Yeah, no. And so I have, you know, I've been a libertarian in my past, and I have a soft spot for libertarianism. I used to be a Ron Paul guy, I went back in the day for a hot minute. And so I think the thing to suede your concerns there is what is land value tax? It's property tax without a tax on buildings. Yep. So the natural path to actually getting land value tax comes from reforming existing property tax regimes by reducing an entire category of taxation, which is the tax on buildings. And so that's what I think is the most plausible way to get a land value tax, like in Texas here, if we were to start by just capture the same, like what I actually proposed for our first step is not 100% land value tax federally. I don't know, even know how you get to there. I think what you actually do is you start in places like Texas and like here, legalized split-rate property tax, thus, re-tax buildings and land at separate rates, set the rate on buildings to zero, collect the same dollar amount of taxes. Let's start there. There's proposals to do this in various cities around the nation right now. I think there's one in Virginia. There's a proposal to do in Detroit. I think there's some talk of it in Pennsylvania and some places. And I'd like to see those experiments run and observe what happens there. I think we should do it in Texas. And that would be something that I think would be very friendly to the libertarian mindset, because very clearly we're no new revenue, right? And we're exempting an entire category of taxation. Most people are gonna see savings on their tax bill and the people who own those parking lots downtown in Houston are gonna be paying most of the bill. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:53:14: Yeah, by the way, what do you make of, is there a good, Georgist's critique of government itself? In a sense that government is basically the original land squatter and it's basically charging the rest of us rents or staying on rent that. It's neither productively improving. As much as at least it's getting rents or must work. Like if you think about, even your landlord usually is not charging you 40%, which is what the income tax rate is in America, right? And it's like almost, you can view the land lord of America. Lars Doucet - 00:53:46: Well, I mean, it's like, I mean, if you wanna take the full, like if you're asking is Georgism compatible with full anarcho capitalist libertarianism, probably not 100%, I think we can have a little government as a treat. But I think it's not a coincidence that if you look throughout America's founding, I don't think it's a coincidence that originally, like people talk about it's like, oh, it used to be only white men who could vote. White land-owning men could vote. Like a government by the landowners for the landowners of the landowners, right? And that's very much kind of the traditional English system of government, just neo-feudalism, right? And so I think Georgism certainly has a critique of that, that it's like government is often instituted to protect the interests of landowners. But what's interesting is that if you look throughout history, I'm very much a fan of democracy, rule of the people. And it's like, I think we, you know, I kind of sympathize with Milton Friedman here, where he's like, you know, he might want to have less government than we have now, but he doesn't believe we can have no government. And then he goes on to endorse, you know, the land value taxes, the least worse tax, because income tax especially, I feel like is a gateway drug to the surveillance state, you know, one of the advantages of land value taxes you don't even care necessarily who owns the land. You're just like, hey, 4732 Apple Street, make sure the check shows up in the mail. I don't care how many shell companies in the Bahamas, you've like obscured your identity with, just put the check in the mail, Mr. Address, you know, whereas the income tax needs to do this full anal probe on everyone in the country, and then audits the poor at a higher rate than the rich, and it's just this horrible burden we have, and then it'll, it gives the government this kind of presumed right to know what you're doing about everything you're doing in this massive invasion of privacy.Dwarkesh Patel - 00:55:42: Yeah, no, that's fascinating. I speak to you, I have shell companies in the Bahamas, by the way. Yes. There's an interesting speculation about what would happen if crypto really managed to divorce and private, I guess, make private your log of transactions or whatever. And then, I guess the idea is the only legible thing left to the government is land, right? So it would like force the government to institute a land value tax, because like you can't tax income or capital gains anymore, that's all on like the blockchain and the right, right? It's cured in some way. And yeah, yeah, so that, I mean, it's like crypto the gateway drug to George's own, because it'll just move income and capital to the other realm. Lars Doucet - 00:56:20: Yeah, it's just so weird. I've gone on record as being a pretty big crypto skeptic. But I have noticed a lot of crypto people get into Georgism home. I mean, not the least of which is Vitalik Buterin and you endorse my book, who's a huge fan of Georgism home. It's like, I'll take fans from anywhere, even from people I've had sparring contests with. I'm generally pretty skeptical that crypto can fulfill all its promises. I am excited by those promises, and if they can prove me wrong, that would be great. And I think there's some logic to what you're saying is that if we literally couldn't track transactions, then I mean, I guess we don't have much the tracks accept land. I don't think that'll actually come to pass just based off of recent events. You know, and that's basically my position on it. But I have noticed a lot of crypto people, just they're some of the easiest people to convince about George's home, which was completely surprising to me. But I've learned a lot by talking to them. It's very interesting and weird. Yeah, yeah. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:57:16: So there was some other interesting questions from Twitter. Ramon Dario Iglesias asks, how do you transition from a world today where many Americans have homes where it really starts sparring to have homes to a world where, I mean, obviously, it would be like a different regime. They might still have homes, but who knows? Like, their property will be just be like, think I thought I'm going to complete a different way. How do you transition to that? Like, what would that transition look like for most Americans? Lars Doucet - 00

In this week's episode of Living in the Sprawl: Southern California's Most Adventurous Podcast, host Jon Steinberg shares his list of 10 headquarters to see the next time you're in Silicon Valley. His list includes: The Tesla Factory in Fremont, Intel in Santa Clara, Electronic Arts in Redwood City, LinkedIn in Sunnyvale, HP in Palo Alto, EBAY in Palo Alto, Netflix in Los Gatos, Facebook/Meta in Menlo Park, GooglePlex in Mountain View and Apple in Cuppertino.Instagram: @livinginthesprawlpodcastEmail: livinginthesprawlpodcast@gmail.comWebsite: www.livinginthesprawlpodcast.comCheck out our favorite CBD gummy company...it helps us get better sleep and stay chill. Use code "SPRAWL" for 20% off.  https://www.justcbdstore.com?aff=645Check out Goldbelly for all your favorite US foods to satisfy those cravings or bring back some nostalgia. Our favorites include Junior's Chessecakes from New York, Lou Malnati's deep dish pizza from Chicago and a philly cheesesteak from Pat's. Use the link https://goldbelly.pxf.io/c/2974077/1032087/13451 to check out all of the options and let them know we sent you.Use code "SPRAWL" for (2) free meals and free delivery on your first Everytable subscription.Support the podcast and future exploration adventures. We are working on unique perks and will give you a shout out on the podcast to thank you for your contribution!Living in the Sprawl: Southern California's Most Adventurous Podcast is on Podfanhttps://www.buymeacoffee.com/sprawlSupport the show

Te invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Gadget curioso: https://acortar.link/HgIpnlLos más ricos del mundo: https://acortar.link/wEgAbcEncuesta de la semana: https://acortar.link/keVa91Twitter: https://twitter.com/jmatukInstagram: https://instagram.com/jmatukFacebook: https://facebook.com/matukjavierLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/javiermatukOnlyFans: https://ahhverdad, qué dijiste...

#jmatuk #twitter #metaTe invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Gadget curioso: https://cutt.ly/ON0UEMJEncuesta: https://cutt.ly/sN0IfSrTwitter: https://twitter.com/jmatukInstagram: https://instagram.com/jmatukFacebook: https://facebook.com/matukjavierLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/javiermatukOnlyFans: https://ahhverdad, qué dijiste...

Te invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Estamos también en versión podcast:Apple Podcast: https://cutt.ly/ZOxxmAgSpotify: https://cutt.ly/BOxxRbEGoogle Podcast: https://cutt.ly/HOxxAHPAmazon Music: https://cutt.ly/1OWdmkf

Te invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Gadget curioso ping pong: http://t.ly/5DbEVideo viral: http://t.ly/e-HlEstamos también en versión podcast:Apple Podcast: https://cutt.ly/ZOxxmAgSpotify: https://cutt.ly/BOxxRbEGoogle Podcast: https://cutt.ly/HOxxAHPAmazon Music: https://cutt.ly/1OWdmkfTwitter: https://twitter.com/jmatukInstagram: https://instagram.com/jmatukFacebook: https://facebook.com/matukjavierLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/javiermatukOnlyFans: https://ahhverdad, qué dijiste...

This week's episode brought to you by Slice on Broadway, and Sidekick Media Services and listeners like you at www.patreon.com/awesomecast Sorg visits Apple Park (Visitor Center) and the GooglePlex in Silicon Valley! https://www.facebook.com/mikesorg/posts/pfbid0rRntHLBk5jqSvbiYrV9vnnJ2RFNR2fJAeJAhq8Ls4dThbD5fcEXHGzu1nSKvjSchl?cft[0]=AZXiM3sFL77GcfEwsHRe4hGV-2xIYlrH95mtVU0nCCTYA5jrUnhQudMEUcCdRI83MXJjViHCuo3kXvTm4oCEWQrXMDqsPajnveiHdYh8HIKPUCOQ5GObiM9Q1kbZyvIaTJF2LdxH2Xmdyy6ACXV8p-Q3SDqjyzS57Spqndb93OKpuR8eOGBYjuOKdetaew98pGYskEE49NlbNPrOv42mA6IQ6LuT9iYvSbkyhqXR3wNhAPhNz1i9OsU7C39E-A8bA&tn=-UC%2CP-Rhttps://www.facebook.com/mikesorg/posts/pfbid02ZxXfz8ypMxdsnEj6shrPCTE9XNg4eCLZGqWtcumsv6HKLZsbuGuvEjavGWc3L2t6l MailChimp  Marketing Success SEason: Guess Less Sell More Day 1  https://guesslessandsellmore.registration.mailchimp.com/events/f15b8159-9e83-4c6e-b413-0d109dc8044c Customer service week gifts with Dave Podnar: Logitech Lift Vertical Ergonomic Mouse and Logitech G935 Wireless DTS Headphones https://amzn.to/3e9uoIohttps://amzn.to/3SHa28g Googly eyes on self-driving cars makes them safer https://www.facebook.com/news.com.au/videos/googly-eyes-on-self-driving-cars-makes-them-safer/761536221576833/ Adult happy meals with weird toys https://mashable.com/article/mcdonalds-adult-happy-meal Katie's odd iPhone problems on the road Subscribe to the Podcast: awesomecast.fireside.fm Sorgatron Media Podcast Network Feed: sorgatronmedia.fireside.fm Join our AwesomeCast Facebook Group to see what we're sharing and to join the discussion! You can support the show at Patreon.com/awesomecast! SPECIAL THANKS to our Executive Producer Brian Crawford! Join our live show Tuesdays around 7:00 PM EST on AwesomeCast Facebook

What after-work activity will unify a team of Google employees? A trip to the nearby, great outdoors proves more adventure than anticipated. Fiction short story with text and audio. The post Duck, Duck, Google first appeared on 500 Ironic Stories.

#netflix #apple #google    #JmatukTe invito a enterarte de las noticias de la semana en esta edición de Inbox.Gadget curioso: https://cutt.ly/7X8pQsSStarlink: https://cutt.ly/BX7KKuOVideo viral, Samsung: https://cutt.ly/FX35z93Estamos también en versión podcast:Apple Podcast: https://cutt.ly/ZOxxmAgSpotify: https://cutt.ly/BOxxRbEGoogle Podcast: https://cutt.ly/HOxxAHPAmazon Music: https://cutt.ly/1OWdmkfTwitter: https://twitter.com/jmatukInstagram: https://instagram.com/jmatukFacebook: https://facebook.com/matukjavierLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/javiermatukOnlyFans: https://ahhverdad, qué dijiste...

This week we welcome Alex Pang, advocate of the 4-day workweek. Alex has spent two decades studying people, technology, and the worlds they make. A Silicon Valley-based futurist and consultant, he is also the best-selling author of Shorter: Work better, smarter and shorter - here's how, Rest: Why You Get More Done When You Work Less, and The Distraction Addiction. A growing number of businesses are shortening their working week to address problems with low productivity, poor mental health, and unequal working opportunities. Workers are still paid the same salary for a four-day week and the results are revolutionary. In this episode we explore this movement with Alex, and discuss: Why companies are moving to a 'shorter' week How working less increases creativity, productivity and reduces burn-out What culture changes are needed to move to a 4DWW How a shorter working week fits with the future of work Alex, runs a consultancy company, strategy.rest, where he has worked with governments and Fortune 500 companies; spoken at venues ranging from CIA headquarters to Shakespeare's Globe Theatre to the Googleplex; and held academic positions at Stanford and Oxford universities. You can find Alex: At his business, Strategy.Rest: https://www.strategy.rest/?page_id=8650 On LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/askpang/ Or @askpang on Twitter and Instagram This episode is part of our new mini-series on the Future of Work. Listen to episodes with Chase Warrington and forthcoming with Rebecca Seal and Shamsi Iqbal to hear more. Host and Producer: Georgie Powell https://www.sentientdigitalconsulting.com/ Music and audio production: Toccare https://spoti.fi/3bN4eqO

Brian Yacktman, President and Chief Investment Officer of YCG, LLC Yacktman is the President and Chief Investment Officer of YCG, LLC which he founded in 2007 in Austin, TX. YCG is an active management firm that has seen assets grow from $1 million to nearly $1.3 billion as of September 30, 2021, while achieving market beating performance since its inception. YCG offers separate account management and is the adviser to the YCG Enhanced Fund (ticker: YCGEX). Prior to starting YCG, Brian was an Associate at Yacktman Asset Management, the adviser to The Yacktman Funds. He joined them in 2004 from Brigham Young University where he graduated cum laude with a B.S. in Economics and an M.B.A with an emphasis in finance. Brian has been quoted and highlighted in financial media outlets such as CNBC, Fox, WSJ, Bloomberg, Barron's, MarketWatch, CNN, Reuters, and Forbes. He also has served as a panelist for Institutional Investor and as a guest lecturer at Brigham Young University, University of Texas, Texas Lutheran University, Gurufocus Value Conference, American Society of Appraisers and at the Googleplex. Elliott Savage, Partner and Portfolio Manager at YCG, LLC Savage is a Partner of YCG since 2012 and is a Portfolio Manager for the YCG Enhanced Fund since the inception of the fund. Prior to joining YCG, Elliott was a senior analyst at Highside Capital Management, a multi-billion dollar long/short equity hedge fund located in Dallas, TX. Prior to joining Highside in 2003, Elliott worked as an investment banker at Salomon Smith Barney in New York. Elliott joined Salomon Smith Barney from the University of Virginia where he was an Echols Scholar and graduated with distinction with B.A.'s in both Economics and Cognitive Science and a minor in Biology. Value Investing Live: Brian Yacktman https://youtu.be/6I1wlDdRa4M Check out the YCG Investments Channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5cFLAZCwvYWVAym-61LTtw Learn more about YCG Investments: https://ycginvestments.com/ Not a Premium Member of GuruFocus? Sign up for a free 7-day trial here: https://www.gurufocus.com/membership/new/index.html#/?utm_campaign=podcast Watch the full live stream: https://youtu.be/UBQNa1wy-Ys

Ähm… ja viel Spaß euch die Zeit zu verschwenden

Big Tech Companies ki baat jab hoti hai, then Google is always the first name. Their growth from their college dorms, to a garage to a huge campus in California is truly commendable. But did you know that Google actually was born due to a mistake? Listen to this episode of the AGyaani podcast to find out how google went from a dorm to a GooglePlex and how it was a mistake. PLEASE NOTE: All and any kind of music used in this podcast is for educational purposes only. Finally, Drop your reviews, suggestions, requests, memes on: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/wowagyaani Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/wowagyaani/ Music Credits: https://rb.gy/p65efc Adios!

Brian Yacktman, President and Chief Investment Officer of YCG, LLC Yacktman is the President and Chief Investment Officer of YCG, LLC which he founded in 2007 in Austin, TX. YCG is an active management firm that has seen assets grow from $1 million to nearly $1 billion as of September 30, 2020, while achieving market beating performance since its inception. YCG offers separate account management and is the adviser to the YCG Enhanced Fund (ticker: YCGEX). Prior to starting YCG, Brian was an Associate at Yacktman Asset Management, the adviser to The Yacktman Funds. He joined them in 2004 from Brigham Young University where he graduated cum laude with a B.S. in Economics and an M.B.A with an emphasis in finance. Brian has been quoted and highlighted in financial media outlets such as CNBC, Fox, WSJ, Bloomberg, Barron's, MarketWatch, CNN, Reuters, and Forbes. He also has served as a panelist for Institutional Investor and as a guest lecturer at Brigham Young University, University of Texas, Texas Lutheran University, Gurufocus Value Conference, American Society of Appraisers and at the Googleplex. YCG seeks to invest in global champions, believing the key to successful investing is to compound capital at high rates of return for long periods of time. Businesses with this capability are extremely rare because competition and innovation drive down real pricing. Therefore, we pay particular attention to identifying businesses with enduring pricing power, most often found amongst globally networked businesses with long-term volume growth opportunities that are growing at least as fast as GDP. We also want these businesses to be conservatively capitalized with owner minded management teams, trading at prices we believe will achieve attractive rates of returns. Not a Premium Member of GuruFocus? Sign up for a free 7-day trial here: https://www.gurufocus.com/membership/new/index.html#/?utm_campaign=podcast Watch the full live stream: https://youtu.be/6I1wlDdRa4M Check out the YCG Investments Channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5cFLAZCwvYWVAym-61LTtw

Crafting a San Francisco bucket list? Or just looking for Bay Area places to visit? In the session of the Everyday Bucket List Podcast, I chat w/ Lisa Thompson of Coupons.com.  She's got you covered w/ places to eat including Ayesha Curry's restaurant (Steph Curry's wife) & exciting things to do at a variety of price points. Also, get the scoop on the wineries, cioppino, Googleplex, ways to save for travel, great tips for cutting costs & more. Listen in on her bucket list ideas & her own personal journey to solo travel. Show Notes: Click the link below or you can copy and paste it into the browser. https://karencordaway.com/bay-area-places-to-visit/

Amazon buys James Bond. Is Valve working on a Nintendo Switch clone? Google's new campus in San Jose will make the Googleplex look puny. Tesla is dropping radar. The new standard for USB is beefing up power-wise. And is Microsoft moving on from Windows 10 branding?Sponsors:Masterworks.io promocode RIDECybereason.comLinks:Amazon to buy MGM Studios for $8.45 billion (CNBC)Exclusive: Valve is making a Switch-like portable gaming PC (Ars Technica)Google's San Jose mega-campus wins city approval. Will it change Bay Area development? (San Francisco Chronicle)Tesla is already shipping cars without radar sensors (The Verge)USB-C power upgrade delivers a whopping 240W for gaming laptops and other devices (CNET)Lightrun raises $23M for its debugging and observability platform (TechCrunch)Microsoft support for Linux GUI apps on Windows 10 coming later this year (ZDNet)Microsoft unveils developer-focused Teams, Outlook, and Search updates (VentureBeat)See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

iTunes - Stitcher - Google - Spotify - RSS - Twitch - YouTube Check out all of our podcasts Support us on patreon Join our chat Panel: Producer Dave, The Councilman Members’ Show

Matt speaks to the artist Dina Kelberman about her 2019 film ‘The Goal is to Live'. The feature length film is made entirely of clips from the Canadian TV series ‘How It's Made', and we discuss the process of making the film, including the soundtrack made by musicians Rod Hamilton & Tiffany Seal. We also geek out about ‘How It's Made' more generally, and talk about its relationship to the capitalist production processes it purports to explain.Dina's website with a trailer for the film - http://dinakelberman.com/#thegoalistoliveManufactured Landscapes by Jennifer Baichwal -https://www.edwardburtynsky.com/projects/films/manufactured-landscapesRod Hamilton & Tiffany Seal - https://soundcloud.com/rod_and_tiffanyTerry Riley - A Rainbow in Curved Air - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy3W-3HPMWgWorkers Leaving the Factory (1995) - Harun Farocki - https://vimeo.com/59338090Images of the World and the Inscription of War, Harun Farocki - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjOl8TY8GkUWorkers Leaving the Googleplex by Andrew Norman Wilson - http://www.andrewnormanwilson.com/WorkersGoogleplex.html

¡Muy buenas! Hoy vamos con una nueva sección dentro del podcast. En esta sección que la llamaremos "la historia de" os hablaré sobre casos de empresas y emprendimiento; hoy como podéis ver toca la historia de Google. En este episodio encontraréis cómo se creó Google, sus productos, cómo es su campus (Googleplex) al que tuve ocasión de ir y alguna que otra cosa interesante y divertida más

Meet a Grade 11 student at Riverview High School who caught the attention of the tech giant - Google. Jack Mugridge participated in something called Project Villager, he was invited to Googleplex in California, and now, corresponds regularly with members of the Google team.

Happy New Year and thanks for joining Workspace Recap for our inaugural show! In this episode we discuss the top updates to Google Workspace from 2020, reminisce how we almost met back in 2016 at the Googleplex meetup and what to expect from this year's episodes. Updates Discussed in order of appearance Google Workspace Rebranding from Gsuite and the new SKU's introduced with it New Google Vault interface macOS login using Google credentials Enhanced security for Windows 10 devices now generally available New Google Groups interface Folder sharing in shared drives New Gmail Experience Phones as security keys Join us each week as we discuss What’s New in Google Workspace, Upcoming releases, and answer your questions. Hit the subscribe button, engage with us and send us your feedback/questions on Twitter at @WorkspaceRecap twitter.com/workspacerecap and on our website at workspacerecap.com Hosted by @MrJNowlin and @larsen161 Disclaimer: Podcast and Hosts are Not affiliated with Google

Rebecca Newberger Goldstein -- philosopher, author, and Genius-grant recipient -- returns to the Rationally Speaking podcast to discuss her latest book, "Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away." Rebecca, Julia and Massimo argue over the value of philosophy in modern science, and whether it makes sense to designate "experts" in ethical reasoning. Sped up the speakers by ['1.0', '1.09']

Google says a lot of things. Sometimes the search engine’s spokespersons are incredibly transparent and sometimes they’re bizarrely opaque. Sometimes they contradict each other and sometimes the effects of technologies being innovated on the far side of the Googleplex aren’t as well known by their spokespersons around the world. Today Jim and Dave discuss a number of things Google’s said in the last week that directly contradict things they told webmasters previously, focusing on core-update recoveries and the importance of core web vitals as potential or future ranking signals. We also talk about a terrible case of negative SEO, the Change.org petition for Google to restore hidden search term data for SEMs, and congratulate John Mueller for being named Search Personality of the Year. We also noted the panel hosted by Ginny Marvin, “The SEO Gender Gap and How to Close It”, being held online, Sept. 11, 2020.

Google says a lot of things. Sometimes the search engine's spokespersons are incredibly transparent and sometimes they're bizarrely opaque. Sometimes they contradict each other and sometimes the effects of technologies being innovated on the far side of the Googleplex aren't as well known by their spokespersons around the world. Today Jim and Dave discuss a number of things Google's said in the last week that directly contradict things they told webmasters previously, focusing on core-update recoveries and the importance of core web vitals as potential or future ranking signals. We also talk about a terrible case of negative SEO, the Change.org petition for Google to restore hidden search term data for SEMs, and congratulate John Mueller for being named Search Personality of the Year. We also noted the panel hosted by Ginny Marvin, “The SEO Gender Gap and How to Close It”, being held online, Sept. 11, 2020.

We are in strange and uncertain times. The technology industry has always managed to respond to strange and uncertain times with incredible innovations that lead to the next round of growth. Growth that often comes with much higher rewards and leaves the world in a state almost unimaginable in previous iterations. The last major inflection point for the Internet, and computing in general, was when the dot come bubble burst.  The companies that survived that time in the history of computing and stayed true to their course sparked the Web 2.0 revolution. And their shareholders were rewarded by going from exits and valuations in the millions in the dot com era, they went into the billions in the Web 2.0 era. None as iconic as Google. They finally solved how to make money at scale on the Internet and in the process validated that search was a place to do so. Today we can think of Google, or the resulting parent Alphabet, as a multi-headed hydra. The biggest of those heads includes Search, which includes AdWords and AdSense. But Google has long since stopped being a one-trick pony. They also include Google Apps, Google Cloud, Gmail, YouTube, Google Nest, Verily, self-driving cars, mobile operating systems, and one of the more ambitious, Google Fiber. But how did two kids going to Stanford manage to become the third US company to be valued at a trillion dollars? Let's go back to 1998. The Big Lebowski, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, There's Something About Mary, The Truman Show, and Saving Private Ryan were in the theaters. Puff Daddy hadn't transmogrified into P Diddy. And Usher had three songs in the Top 40. Boyz II Men, Backstreet Boys, Shania Twain, and Third Eye Blind couldn't be avoided on the airwaves. They're now pretty much relegated to 90s disco nights. But technology offered a bright spot. We got the first MP3 player, the Apple Newton, the Intel Celeron and Xeon, the Apple iMac, MySQL, v.90 Modems, StarCraft, and two Stanford students named Larry Page and Sergey Brin took a research project they started in 1996 with Scott Hassan, and started a company called Google (although Hassan would leave Google before it became a company).  There were search engines before Page and Brin. But most produced search results that just weren't that great. In fact, most were focused on becoming portals. They took their queue from AOL and other ISPs who had springboarded people onto the web from services that had been walled gardens. As they became interconnected into a truly open Internet, the amount of diverse content began to explode and people just getting online found it hard to actually find things they were interested in. Going from ISPs who had portals to getting on the Internet, many began using a starting page like Archie, LYCOS, Jughead, Veronica, Infoseek, and of course Yahoo! Yahoo! Had grown fast out of Stanford, having been founded by Jerry Yang and David Filo. By 1998, the Yahoo! Page was full of text. Stock tickers, links to shopping, and even horoscopes. It took a lot of the features from the community builders at AOL. The model to take money was banner ads and that meant keeping people on their pages. Because it wasn't yet monetized and in fact acted against the banner loading business model, searching for what you really wanted to find on the Internet didn't get a lot of love. The search engines or portals of the day had pretty crappy search engines compared to what Page and Brin were building.  They initially called the search engine BackRub back in 1996. As academics (and the children of academics) they knew that the more papers that sited another paper, the more valuable the paper was. Applying that same logic allowed them to rank websites based on how many other sites linked into it. This became the foundation of the original PageRank algorithm, which continues to evolve today. The name BackRub came from the concept of weighting based on back links. That concept had come from a tool called RankDex, which was developed by Robin Li who went on to found Baidu.  Keep in mind, it started as a research project. The transition from research project meant finding a good name. Being math nerds they landed on "Google" a play on "googol", or a 1 followed by a hundred zeros. And within a year they were still running off University of Stanford computers. As their crawlers searched the web they needed more and more computing time. So they went out looking for funding and in 1998 got $100,000 from Sun Microsystems cofounder Andy Bechtolsheim. Jeff Bezos from Amazon, David Cheriton, Ram Shriram and others kicked in some money as well and they got a million dollar round of angel investment. And their algorithm kept getting more and more mature as they were able to catalog more and more sites. By 1999 they went out and raised $25 million from Kleiner Perkins and Sequoia Capital, insisting the two invest equally, which hadn't been done.  They were frugal with their money, which allowed them to weather the coming storm when the dot com bubble burst. They build computers to process data using off the shelf hardware they got at Fry's and other computer stores, they brought in some of the best talent in the area as other companies were going bankrupt.  They also used that money to move into offices in Palo Alto and in 2000 started selling ads through a service they called AdWords. It was a simple site and ads were text instead of the banners popular at the time. It was an instant success and I remember being drawn to it after years of looking at that increasingly complicated Yahoo! Landing page. And they successfully inked a deal with Yahoo! to provide organic and paid search, betting the company that they could make lots of money. And they were right. The world was ready for simple interfaces that provided relevant results. And the results were relevant for advertisers who could move to a pay-per-click model and bid on how much they wanted to pay for each click. They could serve ads for nearly any company and with little human interaction because they spent the time and money to build great AI to power the system. You put in a credit card number and they got accurate projections on how successful an ad would be. In fact, ads that were relevant often charged less for clicks than those that weren't. And it quickly became apparent that they were just printing money on the back of the new ad system. They brought in Eric Schmidt to run the company, per the agreement they made when they raised the $25 million and by 2002 they were booking $400M in revenue. And they operated at a 60% margin. These are crazy numbers and enabled them to continue aggressively making investments. The dot com bubble may have burst, but Google was a clear beacon of light that the Internet wasn't done for. In 2003 Google moved into a space now referred to as the Googleplex, in Mountain View California. In a sign of the times, that was land formerly owned by Silicon Graphics. They saw how the ad model could improved beyond paid placement and banners and acquired  is when they launched AdSense. They could afford to with $1.5 billion in revenue.  Google went public in 2004, with revenues of $3.2 billion. Underwritten by Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse, who took half the standard fees for leading the IPO, Google sold nearly 20 million shares. By then they were basically printing money. By then the company had a market cap of $23 billion, just below that of Yahoo. That's the year they acquired Where 2 Technologies to convert their mapping technology into Google Maps, which was launched in 2005. They also bought Keyhole in 2004, which the CIA had invested in, and that was released as Google Earth in 2005. That technology then became critical for turn by turn directions and the directions were enriched using another 2004 acquisition, ZipDash, to get real-time traffic information. At this point, Google wasn't just responding to queries about content on the web, but were able to respond to queries about the world at large. They also released Gmail and Google Books in 2004. By the end of 2005 they were up to $6.1 billion in revenue and they continued to invest money back into the company aggressively, looking not only to point users to pages but get into content. That's when they bought Android in 2005, allowing them to answer queries using their own mobile operating system rather than just on the web. On the back of $10.6 billion in revenue they bought YouTube in 2006 for $1.65 billion in Google stock. This is also when they brought Gmail into Google Apps for Your Domain, now simply known as G Suite - and when they acquired Upstartle to get what we now call Google Docs.  At $16.6 billion in revenues, they bought DoubleClick in 2007 for $3.1 billion to get the relationships DoubleClick had with the ad agencies.  They also acquired Tonic Systems in 2007, which would become Google Slides. Thus completing a suite of apps that could compete with Microsoft Office. By then they were at $16.6 billion in revenues. The first Android release came in 2008 on the back of $21.8 billion revenue. They also released Chrome that year, a project that came out of hiring a number of Mozilla Firefox developers, even after Eric Schmidt had stonewalled doing so for six years. The project had been managed by up and coming Sundar Pichai. That year they also released Google App Engine, to compete with Amazon's EC2.  They bought On2, reCAPTCHA, AdMob, VOIP company Gizmo5, Teracent, and AppJet in 2009 on $23.7 Billion in revenue and Aardvark, reMail, Picnic, DocVerse, Episodic, Plink, Agnilux, LabPixies, BumpTop, Global IP Solutions, Simplify Media, Ruba.com, Invite Media, Metaweb, Zetawire, Instantiations, Slide.com, Jambool, Like.com, Angstro, SocialDeck, QuickSee, Plannr, BlindType, Phonetic Arts, and Widevine Technologies in 2010 on 29.3 billion in revenue. In 2011, Google bought Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion to get access to patents for mobile phones, along with another almost two dozen companies. This was on the back of nearly $38 billion in revenue.  The battle with Apple intensified when Apple removed Google Maps from iOS 6 in 2012. But on $50 billion in revenue, Google wasn't worried. They released the Chromebook in 2012 as well as announcing Google Fiber to be rolled out in Kansas City.  They launched Google Drive They bought Waze for just shy of a billion dollars in 2013 to get crowdsourced data that could help bolster what Google Maps was doing. That was on 55 and a half billion in revenue.  In 2014, at $65 billion in revenue, they bought Nest, getting thermostats and cameras in the portfolio.  Pichai, who had worked in product on Drive, Gmail, Maps, and Chromebook took over Android and by 2015 was named the next CEO of Google when Google restructured with Alphabet being created as the parent of the various companies that made up the portfolio. By then they were up to 74 and a half billion in revenue. And they needed a new structure, given the size and scale of what they were doing.  In 2016 they launched Google Home, which has now brought AI into 52 million homes. They also bought nearly 20 other companies that year, including Apigee, to get an API management platform. By then they were up to nearly $90 billion in revenue. 2017 saw revenues rise to $110 billion and 2018 saw them reach $136 billion.  In 2019, Pichai became the CEO of Alphabet, now presiding over a company with over $160 billion in revenues. One that has bought over 200 companies and employs over 123,000 humans. Google's mission is “to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful” and it's easy to connect most of the acquisitions with that goal. I have a lot of friends in and out of IT that think Google is evil. Despite their desire not to do evil, any organization that grows at such a mind-boggling pace is bound to rub people wrong here and there. I've always gladly using their free services even knowing that when you aren't paying for a product, you are the product. We have a lot to be thankful of Google for on this birthday. As Netscape was the symbol of the dot com era, they were the symbol of Web 2.0. They took the mantle for free mail from Hotmail after Microsoft screwed the pooch with that.  They applied math to everything, revolutionizing marketing and helping people connect with information they were most interested in. They cobbled together a mapping solution and changed the way we navigate through cities. They made Google Apps and evolved the way we use documents, making us more collaborative and forcing the competition, namely Microsoft Office to adapt as well. They dominated the mobility market, capturing over 90% of devices. They innovated cloud stacks. And here's the crazy thing, from the beginning, they didn't make up a lot. They borrowed the foundational principals of that original algorithm from RankDex, Gmail was a new and innovative approach to Hotmail, Google Maps was a better Encarta, their cloud offerings were structured similar to those of Amazon. And the list of acquisitions that helped them get patents or talent or ideas to launch innovative services is just astounding.  Chances are that today you do something that touches on Google. Whether it's the original search, controlling the lights in your house with Nest, using a web service hosted in their cloud, sending or receiving email through Gmail or one of the other hundreds of services. The team at Google has left an impact on each of the types of services they enable. They have innovated business and reaped the rewards. And on their 22nd birthday, we all owe them a certain level of thanks for everything they've given us. So until next time, think about all the services you interact with. And think about how you can improve on them. And thank you, for tuning in to this episode of the history of computing podcast. 

Eric Chasen is a resiliency coach and a turnaround expert. Having suffered adversity, he has put those lessons to work in his new book, From Despair To Millionaire. In this episode you can learn from Eric about: It's not about life's events, it's how you react to them Why mentoring in leadership is so valuable How gratitude can unlock fulfilment in your life and work Eric's ABC of leadership Follow us and explore our social media tribe from our Website: https://leadership-hacker.com Music: " Upbeat Party " by Scott Holmes courtesy of the Free Music Archive FMA Transcript: Thanks to Jermaine Pinto at JRP Transcribing for being our Partner. Contact Jermaine via LinkedIn or via his site JRP Transcribing Services Find out more from Eric: Eric on Linkedin Websites: www.ericchasen.com www.fromd2m.com ----more----   Steve Rush: Some call me Steve, dad, husband or friend. Others might call me boss, coach or mentor. Today you can call me The Leadership Hacker.   Thanks for listening in. I really appreciate it. My job as the leadership hacker is to hack into the minds, experiences, habits and learning of great leaders, C-Suite executives, authors and development experts so that I can assist you developing your understanding and awareness of leadership. I am Steve Rush and I am your host today. I am the author of Leadership Cake. I am a transformation consultant and leadership coach. I cannot wait to start sharing all things leadership with you.   Eric Chasen is the special guest on today's show. He is a resiliency coach and turnaround expert, and he is the author From Despair To Millionaire. Before we get a chance to meet with Eric, it is The Leadership Hacker News.   The Leadership Hacker News   Steve Rush: In today's news, we explore how Google has created its high performance culture. Take one, looking signed, incredible Googleplex, and it's pretty obvious why they receive an average of two and a half million CVS and resumes every year. From having nap pods, offering onsite massage to providing every employee with three square meals a day. Google really got this absolutely boxed off. Yet, it is not only the indoor swimming pools, the beach volleyball courts and the free onsite laundry that has led to the 300 billion pounds, giant tech getting a 93% CEO approval rating for its CEO and Glassdoor. This company doesn't need to be generating millions in revenue to hack the fundamental principles that Google set the team apart. Here are the top three lessons that every business can learn from. Number one, psychological safety is a necessity. In 2012, Google launched an in depth study to determine what sets the teams part that struggled to work together and those that effectively meet their outcomes. Google put together a team of statisticians, organizational psychologists, and engineers to solve the dilemma. The project was called project Aristotle and it reviewed study spanning over 50 years, as well as every possible characteristic of the teams within the organization. They look for patterns of how the team is socialized outside of work, as well as inside of work. Personality traits, Jungian in it style of introverts and extroverts, and it soon became clear that these traits, the ones that are most of us would think most logically that would impact our ability to form weren't the key ones. And as they dig deeper, they found the understanding of the groups, norms, underwritten rules, by which the team governs itself almost, and the characteristics start with number one, psychological safety. Psychological safety is defined as the individual's perception of the consequences of taking an interpersonal risk. In other words is how any team member of the team perceives our ability to be innovative and admit to mistakes when it goes wrong.   Number two, it starts with the leader. The impact of having a strong manager wasn't new to Google, but a project that they launched called project oxygen back in 2008 was an undertaking to determine the best qualities of the best managers. And in the Google team, they gathered over 10,000 observations of their managers to determine what traits that their employers found most helpful and which were most unattractive and unhelpful. And on the back of Stephen Covey famous, Highly Effective Habits Theme. Created the 8 Habits Of Highly Effective Google Managers and of those 8 habits. Number one was to be a good coach. Two was to empower your team and to not micromanage. Three was to express an interest in your team members success and personal wellbeing. Four, they titled it don't be a sissy, be productive and results focused. Five, be a communicator, and listen to your team. Six, help employers with career development. Seven, have a clear vision for your team within the organization and eight, have the technical skills so you can help them advise your team.   And the third thing that contributes to high performance culture was data is empowering. It should come as no surprise to a tech company that creates enormous amounts of data, complicated algorithms and makes their decisions based on data that Google takes this really seriously, but they take it to another level. In fact, Google Human Resources Department is called, People Analytics Department because of their commitment to making decisions that flow from data. Google attention to detail and willingness to look at data from all angles, fully to understand how their people are operating and behaving is highly sought after. Whilst Google has spent millions of dollars, analysing every aspect of their employee's lives inside and outside of work. The big lesson that smaller companies can take from this is just the importance of regular performance reviews and employee surveys. That has been The Leadership Hacker News. Please get in touch with us, if you have insights and information that you think our listeners would love to hear.   Start of Podcast   Steve Rush: I am joined on, today show by Eric Chasen. He is a resiliency coach, a turnaround expert, and author of From Despair To Millionaire. Eric, welcome to the show, my friend. Eric Chasen: Thank you very much, Steve. Really glad to be here. Steve Rush: Delighted to have you on the show. We have been talking about this for months now, so I am excited to get into a little bit, about what you do in the backstory. So for folks that are listening today, just tell us a little bit about. What does a resiliency coach and turnaround expert actually do? Eric Chasen: Sounds good, Steve. Yeah, so I have spent the last year or so working on my book that we are going to talk a little bit about. And at the same time, my book and my story are kind of interchangeable one on the same. I went from entry-level positions in just two careers, really that I have worked in. Two industries related ones, but two distinct ones to having a great opportunity to be part of one start up and then a subsequent start up, you know, both of them doing quite well, and so very, very fortunate for that. At the same time I experienced quite a bit of adversity in particular during the first start up in, you know, that was sort of the motivation and the thought behind creating the program and the book really to help people. So what I'm doing these days is I'm working with people and with teams helping them, you know. I like to say helping them bounce back, even bounce back higher. If they are going through a tough patch of adversity, if they're needing some extra grit, some extra determination, some extra resilience, I particularly enjoy working with teams and also you know, individuals on their quest for bouncing back and bouncing back higher. Steve Rush: That sounds awesome. Now, I guess there is a little clue in the title here, “From Despair To Millionaire”, that there's been some adversity in that backstory of helping you get to where you get to now. Just give us a little sense of kind of what it was that gave you that focus. That drive that you have now. Eric Chasen: Steve, back in 1999-2000. Previous to that, I had left, you know, one of two careers that I sort of work my way up in. I was a phone sales agent and at the time the director of sales and a couple of other partners started a company in the same industry and Invited me in with a small equity position to help build. Because I had experience, you know, working on the phones, and I had also had previous for about 10 years before that in a management position. So I was invited in, I was the fourth person in the start-up. To build out their sales, training, hiring, in performance of the call centre. About two months into that new start up, I was engaged and we were planning our wedding. This was in April 99 and we planned our wedding for July of 99, and my fiancé very suddenly and unexpectedly died in automobile accident, April 25th of 1999. So obviously that was, you know, devastating and it was just two or three months into beginning this new company. So on one hand it was very, very difficult. On the other hand, it was a blessing that I had the distraction of a new start up and all the demands of that. Even with all the opportunity that the start-up provided, including a small equity position, you know, it was a start-up wage. So I was struggling financially as well as struggling, emotionally with a loss. And about six months after that in and around the beginning of 2000, 99-2000. Struggling financially to get some relief, I actually filed personal bankruptcy, which was, you know, a bit of a everything that comes along with you know, financial failure in sort of hanging, giving that up. And shortly after that in early 2000, basically a year from when I lost my fiancé and my mom who I am very, very close with, in fact, I've dedicated. My second chapter of my book is to her and there is a saying there my mum was diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer and that was March or April of 2000. And she passed away in August of 2000, so within a year, you know, 99-2000 I suffered significant personal loss that I've never experienced before or since, as well as you know, the financial. So it was really a low point in my life. And, you know, having mentioned earlier that I was part of a start-up and there was lots of opportunity there to throw myself into my work you know, ask for help in you know, I certainly needed it, you know, professionally, colleague wise anybody family at the time. And that's really where my story starts. The book starts really is around those, there is this 12 chapters in the book and really the first two chapters sort of talk about the loss and the despair around the loss. The subsequent 10 chapters are really what I feel are some of the tools and opportunities and blessings really that propelled me forward to six or seven years later, being able to literally become a millionaire. And part of the next start up was pivotal in that and then actually retire in my late forties, Steve Rush: It is really fascinating story Eric, and one that, you know, we've spoken about before and every time I hear you tell that story, that despair is still really quite vivid for you. I can almost feel you emotionally going through that as you kind of describe that. What is it you think that creates that resiliency at that time? Because ultimately when you look back, you could probably connect the dots, but I think for many people, I suspect they go one of either way, right? Eric Chasen: Yes. You know, I think it has around, you know, they say hindsight is 20/20, right? When you're living through it, sometimes you just, you know, I can remember trying to read books on, you know, why, you know, why bad things happen to good people? And you know how to go on living when somebody you love dies? And I was joining grief support groups, even silly as it sounds and I talk about this in my book. I joined several months after I lost my fiancé. I joined at the time it was before online dating. It was much more awkward other than that back 20 years ago. I had such, you know, love and admiration for my fiancé. Feeling like it was the love of my life up to that point that I wanted to see if I could to fill that void. And I was silly thinking, you know, just a few months after her loss that, so, you know, you do a lot of different things. And fortunately, I had a supportive at the time. My mom, she was alive for about a year after or so, and, you know, close with my brother and we became closer and in subsequent became business partners on the next endeavour. I had supportive colleagues at work and I had supportive of professionals, you know, psychologists, that type of thing as well as, you know family and some close friends. And that's really, you know, that's what gets you through the initial stage. And I think there's no substitute for time though Steve. Time is an amazing, I got that from my mother when I said to my mom shortly after losing Jen, I said to my mother the oldest in my family at 13 years old, my oldest brother was killed riding his bicycle. And I said to my mother, you know, I'm a parent now of a 17 year old. I said to my mom back then 20 years ago, I said, mom, how do you go on? I mean, how do you get over rather losing somebody so close and so suddenly, and she said to me, Eric, you never get over it. You just learn to live with it. And that's, you know, that really sums it up Steve. I have the resilience, the long answer to your very good question though. Steve Rush: It is a really poignant answer, Eric too, because I think the whole philosophy of learning through time is part of that healing process. If that is what you call it or the realization that you still have jobs of work to do for your family and people around you. right? Eric Chasen: Yeah, for sure. Yup, It's a classic one day, one step at a time, one day at a time and time is an amazing, you can't rush it but time really and it's by no means overstated. Time is really an amazing healer. Steve Rush: Sure and when did you notice the pivotal time then for you, Eric? When things were moving in the right direction, you were getting that momentum behind you and you're on the upward trajectory. Eric Chasen: It wasn't a straight line, or you know or you're continuing, it was more of a take a few steps forward, back, up, down. A little bit more like a crazy EKG than, an even blips. So after a few years with that initial start-up that I was with when I lost both my fiancé and my mom, and then had the personal bankruptcy. My brother had this idea after being in high tech, doing very, very well with a high tech company, he sort of wanted to leave the corporate grind and saw what I was doing. I was living in Maine at the time, originally from Massachusetts and he was still in mass, but commuting about an hour and a half each way, having done that for about 10 years had enough. He was going to start a similar type company that I was working for, which was a service based call centre, sales centre. He looked at the technology, so to answer what was really pivotal. What was a pivotal move Steve was actually relocating back from the state of Maine to Massachusetts and, you know, becoming partners with my brother, you know. I left a perfectly good job, and that start-up was doing well in Maine and they went on to do very, very well. They did well in two and a half, three years that I was there, and they went on to do very well after I left. And we used to kid my brother and I, and a third partner. We all left perfectly good jobs to do the start up here in Massachusetts, that we, you know, we went through like you know not unusual to start-ups. We went through a few years of sort of hopping from Lily pad to Lily pad to stay afloat, and then subsequent to the three really challenging initial years, we had three very good years and made the decision to actually sell the company after three to four really good years. Steve ush: That is great news and it gives you the evidence, I guess, that perhaps what you didn't realize at the time you were going through was building up those tactile foundations of resilience, right? Eric Chasen: Yes, you know, and it is like I said, it is like most things. It is not a straight line. There is, you know, you got to be fortunate for the peaks that you have and you got to be not too disappointed in the valleys. Because that is really, what it is about, the peaks and the valleys and to the extent that you can stay. I have a chapter in my book called guts, grit, and resilience and that is really, what it takes. Sometimes it just takes hard work. I think entrepreneurial endeavours always take hard work and sometimes that is just enough, the hard work. And other times it really takes guts, grit and resilience, which is an extra commitment over and above hard work. There is other factors too, which is surrounding yourself with good people that we were very, very fortunate to be able to do and acquire, which was besides the three of us co-founders of the company. We had some other partners that were very helpful. Some came, and went and certainly had some incredible people that came to work with us that were just superb. Steve Rush: That is great to hear too. So in the book, From Despair To Millionaire. You talk a couple of things within that. I just wanted to just to pick apart, so I think it would be really helpful for our listeners to get your lens on those Eric. One of which is mentor and mentoring, and you mentioned you had some really good people around you. What role do you think mentors played in your journey to becoming a millionaire? Eric Chasen: I one of the real joys of deciding to write my business memoir was chapter three of it, which is dedicated to the mentors. It is dedicated to mentorship in general, but in particular to a handful. Unfortunate, I wasn't able to get all the mentors in their cause there's more that I had along the way, but I was able to talk about four or five significant ones. And to me, that's the difference of sitting here talking right now and having a story to write of, you know, a success story to write and not having one potentially. Two things, one is having people, my first mentor, which was before the business world was when I was interested in weightlifting and bodybuilding as a teenager. I talk about this David Berman in my book who has since passed but point is, that he taught me some attributes that were very, very helpful along the way, onward and upward in the business world. To My first business mentor, Paul Leary, who I may talk about the most in there other than my brother. He was somebody that when I went to work for him at 21 years old as a college dropout, he was a guy that I looked at and said. I want to be like him. You know, he was a consummate entrepreneur, rags to riches story himself and a super successful guy that went on to build a number of companies from nothing. He wasn't the easiest guy in the world to work for, again a consummate sort of hard driving entrepreneur, but just an incredible motivator, leader. I learned a lot from him in my early and mid-twenties. It is one of those things; I lost touch with him for 25 years, and after writing the book, I was such an honour and such a joy. I found his email address, sent them a note and we were able to reconnect through email after about 25 years. He was very happy to hear from me and sort of obviously thrilled to be honoured, and it was meant a lot to me to be able to do that because, you know, if it wasn't for him, my trajectory may have been different. And I talk about some other mentors along the way, right up into my, perhaps maybe the sort of my last mentor in business, which was my older brother, who's 10 years older, and he was very pivotal in sort of the home stretch of my story, basically. Steve Rush: So really a thoughtful reflection, because as you were talking about your brother being a mentor as well, I guess people often have that misconception that brothers and business partners can't actually mentor each other, but actually you can, can't you? Eric Chasen: It is a great point, Steve, my brother and I early on. So again, I was always a little brother until, you know, you get to a certain age and then we had some similar interests. Then ultimately, he invited me into his company for a good ownership stake, and that was in 2001. And we went on to again, struggled together for a few years and then do very, very well for the next several. But the point is, is that early on, we said that we were never going to let anything come between our brotherhood and friendship and it never did. And we rarely, we rarely even had any arguments. You know, he was the CEO of the company and he had the experience. He was the Chief Operating Officer of a publicly held company that high tech company, I talked about a little bit earlier and he had the business acumen, you know, he was excellent at building culture and excellent problem solving skills. And he was just a real outstanding person to be the CEO of the company. I don't know if you have a love the job because of all the other added stuff that came along, he was the best sales person in terms of acquiring new business that we ever had. So he was excellent, very, very passionate about our business and our ability to deliver for our clients. And I was fortunate enough, Steve. He actually, I asked him and he wrote. Some of this is summarized in the foreword From Despair To Millionaire. My brother wrote the forward, Steve Jason, again, a real, I am grateful that we have the kind of relationship that he was able and willing to write that. Steve Rush: That is great, and gratitude also plays a key part of your book and you call it the key to fulfilment. Tell us a little bit. About why that is so important to you? Eric Chasen: I think it is critical that we recognize it is all about the old saying there of treating the person that serves you coffee, the same as CEO or, you know, that treating everybody basically the same. My default mode really is treating everybody with kindness and respect that. That is my default mode. Whether, again, whether I am getting my coffee or talking to the CEO of a company that is interested in training or coaching, what have you. And again, the gratitude really comes from recognizing that, you know, we're not able to do it alone. You know, mentorship comes in to play there as well. So I think gratitude really is just in humility, really go hand in hand, you know, being humble enough, being humble enough to be grateful and realizing that, you know, you can't do it alone. And there's a lot to be said for expressing gratitude, whether it's somebody that helped you go up the ladder to success, or somebody that cares enough to make your coffee well enough each day and delivers that kind of service. It is the old saying of the attitude of gratitude. I try to express that throughout my life. I think it comes back to me in the form of fulfilment. You know what I mean? Form of people tend to act in kind in return. Steve Rush: I love the attitude of gratitude. I love the notion of attitude is gratitude because it just makes you realize that it's a choice that we make and people are putting themselves out there to do jobs that can sometimes be less than thankful, but the smallest bit of gratitude and recognition can go a long way, can't it? Eric Chasen: It's paid me dividends throughout my life because you know, a lot of times, Steve, I didn't have a lot of things. Along list of things to bring to the party. You know, I dropped out of college. I started entry level in one industry and worked my way up into supervisory and management probably before I should have. Again, that mentor that I mentioned earlier was very, very pivotal and helpful there. And then after about 10 years in that industry, Again I started entry level in the subsequent industry that I went on to be in management and in equity and ownership and ultimately early retirement and then onto coaching, mentoring, and offering. But the point is, is that, you know, there's a lot of people that helped along the way, and there's a lot of people that I couldn't have done it without them. And I think it's having that attitude of gratitude in treating others well. I was not always the easiest leader, a manager to work for because of course, you know, results are important. However, I thought being fair was critical and treating others well and which includes treating others fairly and treating others well is really the best investment you can make in yourself, treating others well. Steve Rush: And you call it an investment, and I think it is a right word too Eric because many people don't see that gratitude as an investment. Being fair, being appreciative of people can actually, directly transfer to bottom line results in revenue, as much as just making people feel good, right? Yeah. Eric Chasen: And don't wait for the other person, you know, a lot of times people they're waiting for the other party or the other person or the other employee or the other colleague or the other neighbour to treat them kindly and treat them well. I find that it works really well, if you make the first move, you know, 9 out of 10 times, like I said, people respond in kind and they can't do enough for you because they, you know, that's the way kind of like the way of the world, right? You get what you want in life by helping others get what they need. Steve Rush: Yeah, the gift of reciprocity. Give to receive, isn't it? Eric Chasen: Yeah, that is reciprocity. Respect and reciprocation are some of my core values, actually, Steve, I am glad you mentioned that word reciprocity. I believe in that reciprocation sort of very important for me to return, and that comes back to your original question of gratitude Steve. Reciprocity is a demonstration of gratitude. Steve Rush: It is, and I hold those values true myself too. We will give the folks at the end of the show, an opportunity to find out where they can get a copy of From Despair To Millionaire, but before we do that, we're going to turn the leadership lens on you. And this is part of the show where we hack into your leadership mind, so as a resiliency coach and turnaround expert now. You have also been a leader of large-scale businesses as well, so we want to hack into some of those leadership experiences. So from your perspective, Eric, in leading others, what would be your top three leadership hacks? Eric Chasen: Great, great question, Steve. And, you know, since I only have three I like to keep things really, really simple. You know, I learned in simple terms, I try to teach in simple terms and I find that is very duplicable and replicable. I like to think of things like in threes in this case ABC. So, you know, A being attitude as a leader and as a leadership hack here that we're talking about. Lead with the right attitude, attitude is one of those intangible qualities. We can't measure it, but we certainly know when it's there and we can tell for sure when it's not there. So if you want a team of people operating with a can do attitude and then lead with that attitude as well. Not too much different than being a parent, actually, you know, if you want your child or family to have a good attitude, if you want your team or employees to have a good attitude, it all starts with you as a leader, having the right attitude, so that's one. Also belief. Believe in your team. Believe in your colleagues. You know, believe. Belief is in faith. If you hired the right people, you know, believe in them. My brother used to say, you know, I like people that I can give them a rope and they bring you back a horse. I don't have to tell them, you know, how to do that. Steve Rush: I like that. Eric Chasen: Belief that is my next hack, so hire the right people, you know, work along the right colleagues, if you can, and hire the right people and have faith and have belief in them. That is the second one, and the third one really is communication. You know keep it simple, ABC, communication is paramount. It all starts with listening. Listen first, listen often and that's a oftentimes missing part of communication, but communicate expectations, listen for feedback, listen to some more and do the best you can to communicate in the way that you and I are Steve, which is, you know, talking or nowadays, you know, I always love face to face communication. That is not always so realistic. You know, you are over in England; I am in the East coast of Massachusetts, and so we were not going to necessarily be face to face, and on top of that, nowadays is not so much face to face with a COVID in that. So, but that does not change the fact that communication is really, really critical, starting with being a very active and attentive The listener. Steve Rush: I love the simplicity of your ABC Eric and easy to remember, but bang on and relevant too Eric Chasen: Thank you. Steve Rush: The next bit of the show, we are going to turn to is what we affectionately call Hack to Attack, so this is where something in your work life has perhaps not worked out as well. And it's fair to say, you've shared with us a number of stories already that could align to this as an approach, but we've taken that situation that hasn't worked out well or hasn't been good, but we now use that as a key foundation in our work as a force of good. What would be your Hack to Attack? Eric Chasen: Steve I think it is around responsiveness actually and that is such a long list treating others well, reciprocation, respect, which are all sort of are interchanged in connected. Responsiveness is an amazing differentiator. Responsiveness is if somebody sends you an email and it languishes for a while, you know, that sends a message. If somebody sends you a voicemail or any kind of communication, and it doesn't get a quick response, conversely, if you are responsive, mean even if you don't have the answer yet, but you say. Hey, Steve I got your email and I am working on it, and then you follow up with the answer or an update. That builds value, so in other words, what you are doing is, it is really making sort of deposits in the bank. You can struggle with performance. You can struggle with results, although those are ultimately, what we get measured by, which is, you know, performance. Results, delivery of things but you can earn a lot of deposits in the bank of trust, so to speak by being ultra-responsive. And you can also set yourself apart from the competition whether it be a, you know, you work in a niche market or a highly competitive market or industry serving coffee, as an example, you can really set yourself apart by being ultra-responsive. And that can be the difference between a competitive advantage, in times that we were not necessarily performing great, but we were very, very responsive, communicative to our clients that would go a long way in building, maintaining trust and building up, I call it the sort of the deposit of trust. That can be drawn upon at times of maybe not peak performance. Steve Rush: Yeah, that is great and the other kicker of course, to that is. That if you are responsible, you will also be on their mind and therefore that recency of your deposits of trust, if you like will be in the front of their mind, when they are thinking of who do I need to engage to do this next bit of work. Eric Chasen: You are excellent Steve and I find that even in this day and age of ultra-high tech and Zoom calls, and I still find that a huge competitive advantage and a major differentiator is responsiveness. Steve Rush: Yeah, me too. Love it, sounds great, Eric. So the last thing we want to do with you is to invite you to do a bit of time travel. You get a chance now to go back to meet with Eric when you were 21 and you get a chance to give them some advice, what would it be? Eric Chasen: Yeah and I knew this coming in and I still struggle a little bit with it Steve, but I would have, it is kind of sounds silly being an entrepreneur, right? That I would have done anything differently in somebody that was blessed and fortunate enough to, you know, I don't say retired anymore. I say took a few years off, which was like six or seven years. It started to be a year off and it turned into six or seven. But the point is, is that when I go back to 21, you know what I would've done, I would've gotten a trade. I really respect people and I work with people in the trades too, that are looking to sort of advance themselves professionally. I would have acquired a trade, where I could fall back on, you know, after being retired for five, six, seven years. Would have been wonderful to have a trade, whether it's, you know, electrician or a plumber or, you know, something to that effect. And that's maybe something I would have done differently in my early twenties. Steve Rush: And I wonder how you would have done that though? Would you have unlocked that entrepreneurial spirit? Eric Chasen: Well, you know what; there is plenty of super entrepreneurial and successful trade's people too. And I know some of them and work with others that have the trade, but maybe they're looking to build on perhaps some of the you know, soft skills and executive type skills, you know, to further their entrepreneurial career. A lot of those people that are ultimately very, very successful. That is one of those things that is transferable, and you can do a lot of these trades are recession proof as well, especially things like electrician and plumber and things like. Steve Rush: Certainly, entrepreneurial spirit isn't devoid, is it of what you do? If it is in you, it is in you. Eric Chasen: Very well said. Steve Rush: And therefore, whether you are a plumber, whether you are an IT Geek or whatever the case may, be in terms of what you have as a job or what you do with your work, it is the spirit, the driver tenacity, the guts scripts, and resiliency. You call it in your book that will get you there, right? Eric Chasen: You bet, Steve. I said earlier, I had oftentimes a short list of things to bring to the party. Communication skills, attitude, belief in myself, belief in others. You know, although they are soft skills are intangibles that are not measurable. They are oftentimes high on the short list of things that I could bring before I had money to bring or certainly any skills, any formal training rather. Steve Rush: Got it, ao as folks have been listening to this, I am pretty certain they're going to be thinking, how do I get myself a copy From Despair To Millionaire? How do I find out more about Eric work? How can I connect with him? If we are to direct our listeners to you, Eric, where's the best and how's the best place to do that? Eric Chasen: Thank you very much for mentioning that Steve. It is very simple. You could go to my website, which is my name, ericchasen.com, E-R-I-C C-H-A-S-E-N.com or the actual landing page for the book is www.fromd2m.com but it is available right now through either of those two sites I just mentioned or directly with Amazon. Thank you for asking about that. Steve Rush: You have also got growing following on LinkedIn as well and I know that we collaborate on various different bits of activity within LinkedIn as well, so I'd encourage anybody who wants to see a bit more broader work that you do, and some of your insights Eric to also follow you on LinkedIn.   Eric Chasen: Thank you very much for that Steve. Steve Rush: I just wanted to top off the show by saying, Eric, thank you ever so much for coming to share your story and share your lessons from leadership with our listeners. It has been a real pleasure in having you join The Leadership Podcast. Eric Chasen, thanks for being on the show, Eric Chasen: Steve thank you very much.     Closing   Steve Rush: I genuinely want to say heartfelt thanks for taking time out of your day to listen in too. We do this in the service of helping others, and spreading the word of leadership. Without you listening in, there would be no show. So please subscribe now if you have not done so already. Share this podcast with your communities, network, and help us develop a community and a tribe of leadership hackers. Finally, if you would like me to work with your senior team, your leadership community, keynote an event, or you would like to sponsor an episode. Please connect with us, by our social media. And you can do that by following and liking our pages on Twitter and Facebook our handler their @leadershiphacker. Instagram you can find us there @the_leadership_hacker and at YouTube, we are just Leadership Hacker, so that is me signing off. I am Steve Rush and I have been the leadership hacker    

This is the FOCUS Points photography podcast where we will talk on how you can start your photography adventure with a budget and have fun doing it You can find us in Instagram @focuspointspodcast and on Twitter @focuspointspod. You can visit www.focuspointspod.com for a list of all our episodes You can find Amaurie Ramirez also on www.amaurierazphoto.com . There you can find all his social media accounts also a large variety of prints for sale. If you have any questions about the show or anything related to photography you can always contact us to focuspointspodcast@gmail.com or in any of our social media accounts ORIGINS In 2013 we took a flight to San Francisco to do a Northern California road trip. We wanted two things: First, to travel to new locations with amazing sights not available in Florida. Second, to experience good coffee. As already mentioned, we chose to travel to Northern California for 8 days. I found a route through a website called TakeMyTrip.com that took us through Northern California, Nevada, and Southern Oregon. We modified the route based on our interest, for example by starting and finishing in San Francisco. (For show notes: http://takemytrip.com/trip-crater-lake-yosemite/) From the start we knew this trip had to be as inexpensive as possible in order to maximize the places we could visit and stay. Since we would be on the road the majority of the time, we knew we would stay in economic (but not cheap) hotels that could be booked anytime; we would book a room depending wherever we might be that night. We wanted to start in San Francisco because one of our first shared interests was Tech. We were and still are to varying degrees so we HAD to visit Silicon Valley and check out—first and foremost—the Apple campus and then the Googleplex. WHAT WE DID Our route took us from San Francisco to Lake Tahoe, Reno, Pyramid Lake, Lassen Volcanic National Park, Crater Lake, Redwood & Humboldt National Parks, a last minute trip to Yosemite, and back to SF. Because we didn't have reservations, we could alter the schedule depending on the situation—for example, if we planned to stay at a place for 2 hours but it actually took us 1. We added places or removed some, depending on the situation. * San Francisco and Half Moon Bay * Silicon Valley * Weather * Lake Tahoe * Reno, Pyramid Lake, and getting lost. * McArthur-Burney Falls * Crater Lake * Oregon scenery * The winding roads at night near redwoods * Crescent City and Klamath Cove * Yosemite * All the good coffee shops Pyramid Lake was alright but I wouldn't visit again. I would rather visit a place like Mount Shasta or some of the Oregon coast We want to give a shoutout to Geramel Castellanos—on Instagram as @geramel88—that submitted two photos to our previous project Sunrise and Sunsets. He submitted a wide shot of a sunset in the park. Keep up the good work Geramel We want to give a small project for those first listeners that want to start something and don't know how: * An easy project to start creating — roadscapes. Upload your photo to Instagram with the hashtag #focuspointspodproject * We want to see your work and give you a shout out on our next episode. For our lens art in the logo go to https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/technology --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/focuspointspodcast/support

Dr Kandiah is a social entrepreneur with a vision to help solve some of society's seemingly intractable problems through building partnerships across civil society, faith communities, government and philanthropy. He is the founding director of Home For Good, a charity seeking to find loving homes for children in the care system. He is a passionate advocate for family reunification, fostering and adoption in order to make a real difference in the lives of vulnerable children worldwide. Krish has written 13 books including the catalytic “Home for Good: Making a Difference for Vulnerable Children” and the award-winning “Paradoxology.” Dr Kandiah is a regular contributor to The Times of London and The Guardian, and is a regular broadcaster on BBC Radio 4 and Radio 2. Dr Kandiah is in demand as a speaker at both national and international conferences. He has spoken at the Q conference in Nashville and to a full house at TEDx Oxford on the topic “Can Hospitality Change the World?” He is a member of the Global Leadership Summit faculty and has spoken in places as diverse as Apple HQ in Cupertino, the GooglePlex, the Cabinet Office in Westminster and the Royal Albert Hall. Krish is a consultant offering both creativity and academic reflection to bring strategic change, culture shift and innovation. He has expertise in the connections between international development, faith literacy and communication. Dr Kandiah is an ambassador for the UK aid and development charity Tearfund.Dr Kandiah holds degrees in Chemistry, Missiology and Theology. His PhD is from Kings College, London. He currently holds faculty positions at Regent College, Vancouver and Regents Park College, Oxford University, is an Honorary Research Fellow at the National Centre for Post-Qualifying Social Work at Bournemouth University and is an Honorary Reader in Theology at St Andrews University, Scotland. Dr Kandiah lives in Oxfordshire with his wife and 6 children (through birth, fostering and adoption).Click to view: show page on Awesound

In this Poddy I chat with the larger than life Nick Dimattina and we explore his progression to spiritual. Following a journey from the hectic lifestyle of NYC to yoga and meditation in Googleplex. This poddy takes turn for the rabbit hole where we get into the information less conveyed in main stream media and go off road off grid and off radar but can't escape starlink tracking systems.. enjoy

Lot of info fresh from the Swamp in today’s new episode — what is Satanic ritual abuse (SRA) and why do “elites” practice it? Is this what was done at Jeffrey Epstein’s Island? (Hint: yes, yes it was.) Why has Trump gone after none of this at the highest levels? Just routine human trafficking arrests of nobodies — not Podesta, not the Clintons, and no one at the pedo Googleplex. None of the silly adrenoheads in Silicon Valley have yet been booked by authorities; not even one. And Durham is a sad sham whose time in the national limelight is drawing to a close, just as Huber was before him… how many times can the public be duped by this “next week” utter psychological abuse? How long? And how many times? 2020 is shaping up to be “game day” for a certain desired elite-driven collapse, and then re-imagining, of how international politics should be governed. A new order before your very eyes. Where was the Q drop on that one? 2020 is the year it all breaks, folks. The West breaks down, big time, and it’s largely by precise design.Wild if true!ABOUT FULCRUM NEWS w/ DAVID SEAMAN: David Seaman was a regular guest on the Joe Rogan Experience, Duncan Trussell Family Hour, Coast to Coast, HuffPost LIVE, and elsewhere. Now host of the Top Downloaded daily news update from FULCRUM, reaching a smart, politically diverse listenership throughout the United States, Canada, Europe, and everywhere else politics is discussed.

Rebecca Goldstein wrote a book of Platonic dialogues, in which Plato is on a 21st-century book tour in America. It’s called Plato at the Googleplex.We talk about Plato and whether you can do philosophy and politics at the same time, and the Harper’s letter in favour of “open debate” that Goldstein signed and Twitter got mad about. We discuss when, if ever, it’s a good idea to constrain free speech and inquiry. https://www.rebeccagoldstein.com/ Art: Marijke BouchierMusic: David Zikotivz and Clayton TappEditing, episode art and social: SepidehSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/user?u=35146517&fan_landing=true)

A flaw in Thunderbolt basically means no computers are secure. Qualcomm’s new flagship chip. Eric Schmidt has finally left the Googleplex. Detecting malware via grayscale images. Apple is reopening stores, and we might have a new tech IPO as soon as next month.Sponsors:Tinycapital.comLinks: Thunderbolt Flaws Expose Millions of PCs to Hands-On Hacking (Wired)Qualcomm's latest mobile gaming chip packs faster graphics and global 5G (Engadget) Eric Schmidt, who led Google's transformation into a tech giant, has left the company (CNET) Microsoft and Intel project converts malware into images before analyzing it (ZDNET) Microsoft adds protection against Reply-All email storms in Office 365 (ZDNET) Apple plans gradual reopening of US retail stores beginning next week (9to5Mac) Apple to reopen stores in US starting next week (CNBC) Online Car Seller Vroom Files Confidentially for IPO (WSJ)Book mentioned: Atrocities by Matthew White

Younes Qassimi, Co-fondateur et CEO de Synergie Media est notre invite aujourd'hui. Younes a longtemps fait le globe-trotter avant de créer Synergie Media. Après des études universitaires à Rotterdam, il enchaine avec un Master en Web Marketing à Paris, une visite du Googleplex en Californie et un poste dans les technologies de l’information à Dubai. Il ne rentre qu’en 2006 dans sa ville natale d’Agadir afin de parcourir bénévolement le Maroc et promouvoir la culture des blogs et d’Internet. La Genèse Tout a réellement commencé en 2007 avec la création de Synergie Media dans une cave de 12m 2 . Nos prestations de bases incluaient le Web, le Print et la création de Contenus (à la pige), en parallèle de la gestion du site d’actualité locale : agadir-souss.com L'Evolution Si la première édition du Blogotour avait permis à Synergie Media d’exister, la deuxième édition initia un autre événement, les Maroc Blog Awards, financés partiellement par Google. C’est également l’année où nos premiers gros clients furent livrés, GPA (Maroc) et Global Valve Center (Pays-Bas) en faisaient partie. Nouvelles recrues L’aventure gagnait en intensité. Notre besoin en sang frais se faisant ressentir, nous renforcions nos rangs avec de nouvelles recrues. L’équipe passa de trois collaborateurs à six, et notre cave devenait de plus en plus encombrée. D’un autre côté, les Maroc Blog Awards accentuaient leur notoriété en suscitant l’intérêt de Maroc Telecom. L’Internationalisation Synergie Media commençait à exporter avec succès ses prestations à l’étranger. Les premières livraisons des clients internationaux étaient de francs succès, réaffirmant notre intérêt pour l’offshoring. En parallèle de cela, la troisième édition des Maroc Blog Awards fut une grande réussite avec l’arrivée de nouveaux partenaires, dont le finlandais Nokia. Changement de décor Synergie Media avait besoin de s’agrandir davantage, d’où notre premier déménagement vers des locaux plus spacieux et mieux aménagés. L’équipe passa rapidement de 6 à 12 collaborateurs, et tout le processus de travail fut restructuré de façon à répartir efficacement les effectifs entre chefs de projets et profils juniors et séniors. La Restructuration Arrivés à un certain stade de maturité, il était temps d’initier un pivot stratégique en investissant dans l’incubation de projets et en réduisant progressivement les effectifs pour se concentrer sur l’essentiel. L’application mobile Ev.ma fut lancée, et les Maroc Blog Awards devinrent les Maroc Web Awards. More on: Synergie-media.com

Part 3 of the talk by Inspirational Speaker Simerjeet Singh at Googleplex, Mountain View, California. Links of YouTube videos in this series: Video 1: Focus on what's available: https://youtu.be/-qLqyd-2u2Q Video 2: Activating the Inspiration Reflex: https://youtu.be/sSypQ_2fzog Video 3: You are Complete!: https://youtu.be/0OOFQklpBgQ Video 4: 5 Discovery Skills of Innovators: https://youtu.be/REB2AKYK_3c Video 5: What are your Priorities?: https://youtu.be/Cx2DqiLIzpE Video 6: Creative Destruction: https://youtu.be/F44ojAtD0sg Video 7: Growth is a Choice: https://youtu.be/FmpaveIICNo Video 8: Your next BIG opportunity?: https://youtu.be/4c0tFiZ_VPc For more information about Simerjeet's work as a motivational speaker, please visit his website: https://www.simerjeetsingh.com/ Follow us on: Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/cuttingedgeINDIA Blog: http://www.simerjeet.wordpress.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/cuttingedgeindia/ Instagram: @speakersimer (https://www.instagram.com/speakersimer/) Twitter: @SimerjeetSingh (https://twitter.com/simerjeetsingh) Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/simerjeetsingh Subscribe to our YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/CuttingEdgeINDIA

Well, we had so much to talk about this interview is in 2 parts! In this second part we talk about how to work less hours as an individual - so how can we get ourselves down to 4 - 5 hour working days (and still get more done), how to reclaim our evenings and weekends and the best things we can do to alleviate stress, overwhelm and overload. So so much of this is in our hands.I love the way Alex talks about this - he has so much proof that this works - not just for individuals but also for organisations. He gives so many examples of organisations that have radically altered how they work by slimming down to 4-day weeks. They still pay employees exactly the same and the effect is the opposite of what you might think: increased productivity, increased mental health and wellbeing, better ideas, better work-life balance and performance.If you missed part 1 catch up on your podcast player.Alex was in London to promote his new book and it was an honour to interview him - and fab to be in Penguin Book’s dedicated podcast studio!. He is one of the recommended resources and references in several chapters in the book, especially critical thinking and empathy. He works with an amazing array of companies from Shakespeare’s globe to Googleplex, as well as governments and Fortune 500 companies. Alex's book Shorter is out NOW and in all major bookstores.#rest #shorter #alexpang #happiness #productivity #performance #shorter #silicon valley #futurist #workingless See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In October, Google celebrated a breakthrough that CEO Sundar Pichai likened to the Wright brothers' first flight. Company researchers in Santa Barbara, California, 300 miles from the Googleplex, had achieved quantum supremacy—the moment that a quantum computer performs a calculation impossible for any conventional computer.

Home, Sweet...RV? More than 100 Mountain View residents are living in their vehicles. Meet three of them, who are parked just steps away from our corner: a Google engineer in a deluxe RV parked on campus, an older Google shuttle driver in a leaky trailer on the street, and a guy living in a van while he's on the outs with his family. Plus, hear how the city of Mountain View is responding.  Hear more: www.theintersection.fm  Twitter: @IntersectionFM  Facebook: fb.com/IntersectionFM --- Producer: David Boyer Editor: Ben Trefny Engineer: Chris Hoff and David Boyer Music: Erik Pearson Associate Producer: Lucy Kang Associate Editor: Ashleyanne Krigbaum Launch Guru: Megan Jones Special thanks to Lisa Morehouse, Alex Brown, Jessie Weiner, Above & Beyoncé, and the folks of Sullivan & Company. Produced with the technical and emotional support of KALW, and the financial support of SF Arts Commission and California Humanities, a non-profit partner of the NEH.

I'm so proud to have Dominique Barnes and Michelle Wolf on the show. They are the founders of New Wave Foods. They create seafood in a lab not the ocean. Their first product is recreating shrimp using plant proteins and marine algae. This interview blew my mind. Fresh out of IndieBio, a biotech accelerator, and a $250,000 grant, they are currently raising capital with investors. Their first customer: Google. The lead vegan chef at Googleplex put in an order for 200 pounds. The environmental and social issues of commercial seafood production are numerous and serious. It is precisely what makes New Wave so important. Listen to their story and be inspired: The why behind New Wave Foods Getting the shrimp texture and nutritional profile right Demo day @ IndieBio Fundraising, marketing, and their blueprint to grow the company Stopping slave labor + shrimp fishing The muscular structure of a shrimp Why marine algae is amazing Behind the scenes of the day-to-day @ New Wave Foods On being founders AND roommates Selected links from the episode:New Wave FoodsIndieBioWhy Everyone (Else) Is a Hypocrite: Evolution and the Modular MindSarcomereGoogle

Deb Evans and Jack Monson are very excited to attend the 3rd annual Google International Franchise Association Assembly (GIFA) Summit. Franchise members are hosted at Googleplex in Mountain View Calfornia for a few days of networking and learning! Google has planned forums hosted by some of Google's top executives and will be joined by franchise industry leaders where attendees will discover new ideas and possibilities for their franchise brands and customers.  It will be an incredible experience and Deb and Jack are anxious to share it with you!  Follow Deb and Jack on Twitter, Periscope and Instragram and the hashtag #GIFA2015.

Who is on the show today: In today's episode, we host Mitch Joel. Mitch is the President of a Digital media agency – Mirium. He is the author of two books –Ctrl Alt Delete and Six Pixels of Separation.He was a part of my list of insanely interesting people I discovered in 2014. He hosts a podcast called the Six Pixels of Seperation and blogs every single day here. Why is he on the show When Google wants someone to explain the latest developments in marketing to the top brands in the world, they bring Mitch Joel to the Googleplex in Mountain View, California. Marketing Magazine dubbed him the “Rock Star of Digital Marketing” and called him, “one of North America's leading digital visionaries.” Back in 2006 he was named one of the most influential authorities on blog marketing in the world. Mitch Joel is President of Mirum – a global digital marketing agency operating in close to 20 countries with over 2000 employees (although he prefers the title, Media Hacker) What are we talking about In this free wheeling conversation, we talk about a wide range of topics around digital marketing for not digital savvy entrepreneurs and CEO's. He gives us a work book on how to go about crafting a digital marketing strategy and succeed. Most important learnings from the conversation: The importance of doing the basics right – Know who your customers are and what they like and don't like, where they hang out and what are they concerned about. He also shares that digital strategy is not separate from the marketing strategy and it is just a part of the overall marketing plan. He also talks about how CEO's and business owners need to engage with multiple agencies and know clearly what they want to. You can reach Mitch on Twitter,  Facebook and Google+.

Welcome to episode #370 of Six Pixels Of Separation - The Twist Image Podcast. I spent a few days in Silicon Valley this week. I was invited there to give the keynote address for Haystack Digital Marketing's Digital Summit At Mountain View, which took place at the Googleplex. Since I was in the neighborhood, I had to spend some quality time with a close friend and someone I consider to be one of the smartest minds in marketing today: Avinash Kaushik. Kaushik is the Digital Marketing Evangelist at Google and the bestselling author of Web Analytics - An Hour A Day and Web Analytics 2.0. Along with that, he is one of the most powerful marketing bloggers on the planet. His blog, Occam's Razor is a site to behold (intentional spelling). On July 22nd, he published another monster post (close to 4000 words) titled, See-Think-Do: A Content, Marketing, Measurement Business Framework and, once again, it's a blog post worthy of pushing further and deeper into a book. I hope he does just that. In the meantime, here's an in-depth conversation about this new marketing framework. It's an important discussion, so enjoy...   Here it is: Six Pixels Of Separation - The Twist Image Podcast - Episode #370 - Host: Mitch Joel. Running time: 50:04. Please send in questions, comments, suggestions - mitch@twistimage.com. Hello from Beautiful Montreal. Subscribe over at iTunes. Please visit and leave comments on the Blog - Six Pixels of Separation. Feel free to connect to me directly on Facebook here: Mitch Joel on Facebook. or you can connect on LinkedIn. ...or on twitter.  Six Pixels of Separation the book is now available. CTRL ALT Delete is now available too! In conversation with Avinash Kaushik. See-Think-Do: A Content, Marketing, Measurement Business Framework. Occam's Razor. Web Analytics - An Hour A Day. Web Analytics 2.0. Follow Avinash on Twitter. This week's music: David Usher 'St. Lawrence River'. Get David's song for free here: Artists For Amnesty. Download the Podcast here: Six Pixels Of Separation - The Twist Image Podcast - Episode #370 - Host: Mitch Joel. Tags: advertising podcast avinash kaushik blog blogging brand business book business framework business podcast content content marketing david usher digital marketing digital marketing evangelist digital summit at mountain view facebook google googleplex haystack digital marketing itunes marketing blogger marketing framework marketing podcast occams razor podcast podcasting see think do silicon valley twitter web analytics web analytics 20 web analytics an hour a day