第 422 期·中文精讀

馬克·庫班:創智贏家、DEI 與覺醒文化之爭、埃隆·馬斯克、政治與藥物

Mark Cuban: Shark Tank, DEI & Wokeism Debate, Elon Musk, Politics & Drugs

投資人馬克·庫班談創智贏家的創業投資、DEI 與覺醒文化爭議、與馬斯克的分歧,以及政治與藥物監管。

官方音訊00:00 / --:--
中文精讀由 AI 基於原始訪談改寫,非官方翻譯,可能存在偏差或錯誤;表述以原音訊與官方文稿為準。說明

12 歲的馬克·庫班(Mark Cuban)挨家挨戶賣垃圾袋,被拒絕的比例接近於零。原因很簡單:開門的大人看到一個小孩站在門口,問一句“你家需要垃圾袋嗎?我每週給你送一次”,很少有人能說“不”。他後來在訪談裡回憶這段經歷,語氣輕描淡寫。可這其實是他整個商業方法論的原點:銷售的本質是把自己放進對方的處境,問一句我能不能幫你省點事。說服是這裡面最沒用的部分。

這一期 Lex Fridman 播客裡,庫班聊了將近三個小時。資訊量極大:從怎麼判斷一個創業想法值不值得做,到 1999 年他如何用一次對沖保護了賣掉 Broadcast.com 拿到的 57 億美元股票;從在 X 上和埃隆·馬斯克、喬丹·彼得森圍繞 DEI(多元、公平、包容)和跨性別議題的爭論,到為什麼他認為美國的醫藥系統是一個由三家 PBM(藥品福利管理機構)控制的黑箱。

裡面有不少判斷值得細看,也有他自己承認的誤判。整理下來,最有價值的部分大概是這樣。

創業者的三個特質,以及一個被誤解的能力

庫班被問到“什麼樣的人能成為偉大的創業者”,答案只有三條:極度好奇、足夠敏捷、能賣東西。

好奇是因為商業世界永遠在變。他引用父親的話:我們並不生活在自己出生的那個世界裡。如果你不是一個資訊的貪婪消費者,無論銷售能力多強,最後都會變得毫無用處。敏捷是因為學到新東西、環境變化之後,你得能改。銷售則是因為沒有任何一家企業不靠賣東西活下來。

他特別強調,銷售可以後天培養。12 歲賣垃圾袋的時候,他要做的就是問出那個答案顯而易見的問題。後來做 MicroSolutions,賣的是把 PC 接入區域網、提升客戶的生產力和利潤率,走進一家公司問“這對你重要嗎”,答案永遠是重要,接下來才是你能不能幹、能不能有成本效益地幹。

所謂銷售,就是把自己放進別人的鞋裡,問一句我能不能幫到你。這句話聽起來像雞湯,但他把它拆得很具體:你願不願意花時間把那個行業搞懂,這才是最難的部分。

庫班說自己真正的核心技能是閱讀量驚人。隨便給他一個生意,兩秒鐘能看出它怎麼賺錢、怎麼讓它更有效率。這個能力靠練,天生佔的比重很小。

第一桶金之前,他先學會了怎麼被拒絕

他在訪談裡承認,年輕時候的自己比現在更像個混蛋。原因是他對“在我看來沒用常識的人”毫無耐心,總在趕路,總想著快點成功、快點獲得獨立。他跟人說的話是:你要麼趕緊上車,要麼我們在下一站把你放下。

但他從不親自開除人。他面試過的人裡 99% 都想錄用,腦子裡總想著“我能想辦法讓這個人行得通”,結果往往行不通,公司裡的人直接跟他說,馬克,你這方面真的很爛。於是他乾脆把招聘和開除都交給合夥人。

一個創始人對自己弱點的誠實程度,決定了他能走多遠。庫班說自己是個“先開槍再瞄準”的人,所以他專門找那些極度較真、追求完美的人做搭檔,讓他們把自己按在跑道內。

關於邁出創業第一步,他的判斷很直接:取決於你的個人處境。他自己是被解僱的,睡在三個人合租公寓的地板上,已經沒什麼可失去的了,所以沒有下行風險。25 歲創立 MicroSolutions 的時候,他去找之前工作時接觸過的潛在客戶,其中一家叫 Architectural Lighting 的公司給了他 500 美元讓他買軟體,他就這麼開始了,毛利率 50%。

他收到過太多郵件問“我該創什麼業”。他的回答是:這個問題本身就說明你還沒準備好。準備充分的人自己知道,不需要問。美國夢的敘事讓每個人都有一個想法,然後去找朋友家人聊,所有人都說太好了;再上谷歌一搜,發現沒人做這個,卻不去想已經有十家公司試過同樣的事然後死掉了。真正讓人停下來的,是下一步意味著要改變自己現在的生活。

如果這件事對你足夠重要,你會存下錢,會放棄該放棄的東西,把資金留出來。如果你有責任在身,你會在晚上、週末、午休時間,開始打電話,看看有沒有人願意給你寫支票。(馬克·庫班)

57 億美元到手之後,他做的第一件事是買保險

1995 年,庫班和搭檔 Todd Wagner 在達拉斯的 California Pizza Kitchen 吃飯,聊的是怎麼用剛出現的網際網路聽印第安納大學的籃球賽。當年他們的做法是:在布盧明頓找個人把揚聲器放在收音機旁邊,達拉斯這邊再放一個揚聲器,配上一打啤酒,一群人圍坐著聽。因為除此之外沒有別的辦法。

於是有了 AudioNet,後來改名叫 Broadcast.com,成為網際網路上第一個流媒體內容公司。技術路徑很土:家裡第二間臥室放一臺伺服器,拉一根 128K 的 ISDN 線,下載 Netscape 伺服器,用漸進式載入的檔案格式,讓使用者在下載音訊的同時就能聽。音質很差,經常緩衝,但沒有別人在做這件事。

他們去本地電臺,在伺服器旁邊放一臺 49 美元的 FM 收音機,用兩根模擬線把音訊訊號接進伺服器編碼,再上 CompuServe、Prodigy、AOL 到處發帖告訴人:達拉斯的 KLIF 電臺現在可以線上聽了,你在辦公室也能聽。從一天 10 個使用者,到 100 個、1000 個、幾十萬、上百萬,四年時間,一分錢廣告沒花。

真正賺錢的地方在消費者端之外。他們拿著已經驗證過的網路,去找大公司:1996 到 1998 年,企業要跟全球員工溝通,做法是找有衛星上行鏈路的禮堂,讓員工去酒店的宴會廳透過衛星下行觀看,一次幾百萬美元。庫班說,付我們 50 萬美元,我們直接推到員工的 PC 上。英特爾釋出 P90 晶片、摩托羅拉釋出新手機,都是他們的客戶。

1998 年 7 月上市,創下當時股市歷史上首日漲幅紀錄。一年後賣給雅虎,57 億美元,全部是雅虎股票,庫班持股約 30%。

訪談裡最精彩的一段,出現在他講 1999 年那次對沖的時候。他沒有選擇繼續持有,因為他見過太多次泡沫。PC 製造商的泡沫、網路裝置商的泡沫,都是先一路上漲,然後在一夜之間跌回去,因為有人越過去了。

我名字旁邊有個 B 就夠了,這就是我需要的,也是我想要的。我不想貪。(馬克·庫班)

當時他的全部身家都是雅虎股票。他和經紀人去賣空一個包含雅虎的指數,法律規定不能賣空權重超過 5% 的指數,他用了當時幾乎所有的現金,2000 萬美元。後來雅虎暴跌,這筆對沖保護了他。這被稱為史上最偉大的十筆交易之一。

他在 CNBC 上講了自己做的事,主持人 Joe Kernen 問他:雅虎又漲了這麼多,你不覺得自己很蠢嗎?他的回答是:是啊,坐在我的私人飛機上,我覺得自己蠢透了。

“我不想貪”這四個字,在泡沫裡比任何估值模型都管用。庫班說的判斷依據很樸素:他打計程車,司機都在聊網際網路股票;有人只做了一個網站就上市,根本沒人想著做出運營利潤,只想利用股市的熱度。那種局面就是泡沫。而現在,沒有任何 IPO 處於這種狀態,所以他判斷當下沒有 AI 泡沫,儘管他 14 歲的兒子在 Robinhood 上買英偉達,跟他說“一直在漲”。

成為億萬富翁,運氣佔多大比重

庫班的回答乾脆:沒有哪份商業計劃書能讓你寫下“我肯定會成為億萬富翁”。如果從頭再來,他知道怎麼做出百萬美元的公司,因為會銷售、懂技術;千萬美元大概也行;億美元他希望可以;但十億美元,必須得有什麼好事發生。

這個“好事”就是時機。網際網路股市在他們創業時正好發瘋,這既無法預測也無法控制。就像現在的 AI,這項技術存在了很長時間,沒人能預測到 GPU 會在這個時間點變得足夠便宜、能訓練模型。GPU 原本是給遊戲和挖礦用的,突然成了 AI 模型的基礎。

他補充了一個容易被忽略的變數:距離。扎克伯格在哈佛,如果同樣的想法、同樣的執行力,放在俄亥俄州的邁阿密大學或者某所社群學院,什麼都不會發生。他說這話的時候也承認,工具和資源的可及性確實有差別。唯一的差距是規模,並非所有人都有機會揮出那記全壘打。

買下達拉斯獨行俠之後,他先問了一個問題

2000 年 1 月,庫班以 2.85 億美元買下達拉斯獨行俠的多數股權,當時這支球隊的戰績在聯盟裡墊底。他的覆盤分兩條線。

籃球這條線:他手下有個又高又大的傢伙叫德克·諾維茨基(Dirk Nowitzki),他做的事就是讓德克做德克,自己閃開。同時他做了一個當時所有人都覺得瘋了的決定:僱 15 個專項發展教練,一個球員配一個。理由是,公司花在培訓員工用 PC 軟體上的錢,比培養業務中最重要的資產還多,這說不通。這個動作傳遞的訊號很清楚:贏球才是目標,賺錢排在後面。

商業這條線更關鍵。他問自己:我們到底在做什麼生意?頭幾個月他想明白了,整個 NBA 都以為自己在做籃球生意,其實他們在做體驗生意。

你去過體育比賽現場,你不會記得比分,不會記得本壘打或者扣籃,你記得的是你和誰一起去的,以及你為什麼去。那是我和後來成為我妻子的女孩的第一次約會,或者我和哥們兒一起去,他吐在了前排觀眾身上。(馬克·庫班)

所以球場外發生的事和球場上一樣重要,甚至更重要。如果是一個家長帶著 10 歲的孩子來,你得讓孩子有事可做,小孩的注意力很短。當比賽打到最後,球在空中飛,進了,全場陌生人在擁抱擊掌;沒進,你和從沒見過的人一起嘆息。這種體驗只有體育能給。

他順帶吐槽了聯盟:當年 NBA 裡全是律師,沒有營銷人才。他說這話的時候也沒少跟裁判吵架,罰款交了不少。

關於 DEI 的爭論,他真正想說的是什麼

庫班和馬斯克、喬丹·彼得森(Jordan Peterson)在 X 上有過幾輪交鋒。他先給了定義:

D,多元,就是把候選人池子擴大到你原本接觸不到的人群,去別人沒找過的地方找優秀員工。E,公平,員工入職之後,把他放在能成功的位置上。I,包容,當一個人不那麼“典型”的時候,給他支援,讓他能做好工作、有安全感和信心去上班。

關於“配額導致逆向歧視”這個說法,他直接把它稱為稻草人。配額是非法的,除非是為了修復歷史上發生過的歧視。他承認當然有執行得很差的 DEI 專案,但銷售、市場、人力資源,任何環節都能找到執行得差的公司,這正是自由市場的好處:做錯了,你會失去最好的人,招不到最好的人,商業計劃執行不下去。

他也承認逆向歧視確實會發生,因為人不可能 100% 客觀,而且極少有崗位能純量化評估:你怎麼判斷兩個清潔工誰更好?你怎麼判斷一個還沒賣過你產品的銷售員誰更強?

但他堅信,對有色人種的歧視遠遠多於對白人的歧視,“DEI 導致逆向歧視普遍存在”這個說法被誇大了。

他提到一個細節:他和比爾·阿克曼(Bill Ackman)聊過,問對方,你自己經營公司,誰在逼你?對方說是大學、是持有這套意識形態的人。他接著問,他們強迫你了嗎?威脅你了嗎?你失去對公司的控制了嗎?答案是沒有,是“發生在別人身上”。他又去私信裡問了很多保守派朋友同樣的問題,得到的也是類似的回答。

我從來沒遇到過任何人試圖把我往這個方向推。這是我的商業選擇,我也沒告訴別人必須這麼做。(馬克·庫班)

他引用《華爾街日報》的一項資料:一家公司訪談了 200 萬人,其中 40% 被解僱的人認為解僱是錯的,認為自己乾得很好。他的推論是,如果你覺得因為自己是白人所以不能說話,這種感受會進入績效評估,HR 和老闆必須處理,最終會有決策。不能只是因為一個人說了話就開除他,總得有人跟他溝通。

Lex 在這裡提出了一個有力的反問:美國歷史上有過劇烈的種族主義和性別歧視,後來出現了糾偏,現在批評的聲音是說糾偏過頭了。而且 DEI 專案的免疫系統很強,在公司內部批評它,很容易被貼上種族主義或者性別歧視的標籤,這個標籤很黏。

庫班的回應是把公司和大學切開。他說自己在 X 上爭論的從來都是企業側,大學是另一個世界。他完全同意大學花錢做 DEI 的方式有問題,學費漲得比通脹快那麼多,學校的管理水平本身就成問題。但企業側,他問了一圈,沒人能說出是誰在強迫自己。

Lex 又舉了谷歌 Gemini 生成黑人喬治·華盛頓、黑人納粹的例子,問這會不會是矽谷意識形態氣泡的體現。庫班的回應是:Grok 也被人指出過“woke”,馬斯克的反應是“會改,弄錯了,我們在修”。到了 Gemini 就成了世界末日,成了谷歌文化的全面反映。他說,谷歌後來也承認是自己做錯了,然後產品經理被扒出舊推文,被證明偏左、支援 DEI,於是又成了世界末日。

他還講了一個自己的經歷:直到一個月前,在谷歌搜“keto gummies Shark Tank”,出來的全是詐騙廣告,一個接一個。他不斷收到老年人郵件,問為什麼軟糖沒效果、為什麼按月扣費取消不掉,對方說這是《創智贏家》史上排名第一的交易。他和谷歌一起排查,發現同一個頁面,在谷歌內網看是一個樣子,在外網看是另一個樣子,必須兩邊同時看才能發現。他的結論是:有很多技術問題真的很難修,用一句“他們有偏見”解釋不了。

迪倫·馬爾瓦尼、彼得森和奧斯維辛

話題轉到跨性別議題。百威淡啤找迪倫·馬爾瓦尼(Dylan Mulvaney)做推廣,引發保守派大規模抵制。庫班的判斷是:如果看曝光來源,他敢打賭 90% 以上來自右翼媒體。馬爾瓦尼當時大概 25 萬粉絲,如果 Kid Rock 沒有對著百威淡啤的罐子開槍,她早就被忘了。

彼得森的觀點是,馬爾瓦尼的走紅會讓跨性別轉變看起來像一種潮流,對孩子造成傷害,因為轉變會徹底改寫一個人的人生軌跡,用在未成年人身上可能造成很大傷害。

庫班的回應分幾層。他找不到證據表明馬爾瓦尼影響了誰去轉變性別,她的轉變在 TikTok 上記錄了一年,播放量並不算大。他引用《美國醫學會雜誌》(JAMA)的資料,2021 到 2022 年轉變的數字是下降的,而 2023 年馬爾瓦尼事件之後的資料還沒有,所以無法判斷這個斷言是否成立。他還打了個比方:有人說特朗普可能影響人去注射漂白劑,然後就真找到一個人這麼做了,於是說“看,這是潮流”。他認為這種推理跳躍太大。

他自己的立場是:真正做手術應該等到 18 歲,如果父母同意可以更早,那要跟醫生談。但如果說整個流程裡所有人,醫生、心理醫生、醫院、付錢的保險公司,全都被這股潮流腐蝕了,他不信。

醫院現在因為州法律不做某些手術,阿拉巴馬州在判決之後立刻停止了 IVF。你覺得他們會不注意做跨性別手術可能帶來的後果?他們在拿整個生意、生計和人際關係冒險,就為了不檢查這個 14 歲孩子是不是真的準備好了?我不這麼看。(馬克·庫班)

Lex 在這裡把話題引向了更深的地方:二戰那段歷史值得反覆琢磨,它揭示了人性的某些東西,人可以在周圍人都在作惡的時候選擇不說話,可以做一個“好的德國人”。彼得森提到了奧斯維辛,庫班的反應是:這太荒謬了。

Lex 補充說,把任何事情類比成大屠殺基本都是荒謬的,有個規則叫“戈德溫法則”,一旦你提到希特勒,對話就結束了。庫班同意,但他還是區分了一點:戰爭時期有民族主義、愛國主義、自保的壓力,而 DEI、wokeness、跨性別議題裡沒有自保的成分,把它們類比成奧斯維辛是瘋狂的。

拜登、特朗普,和一個不承認錯誤的人

庫班在 X 上說過一句狠話:如果今天是拜登的臨終儀式,對手是特朗普,他也會投拜登。馬斯克模仿他的句式回了一句:如果拜登是吃人的殭屍,只剩五秒鐘可活,連任後地球會陷入一千年黑暗,他還是會投他。庫班的回應很妙:謝謝你有空理我,順便說一句,特斯拉的顧問已經跟進過用 Cost Plus Drugs 幫公司省錢的事了,非常感謝。(我的極限是三百年黑暗。)

認真談理由的時候,他的判斷標準很具體:看這個人僱了誰,看團隊有沒有人反水。拜登的內閣沒有一個人離職後出來寫書、公開說他對國家有害。特朗普身邊最親近的人,幾乎都反了,除非中間有金錢關係。

如果你要成為世界上最有權力的人,你最好知道怎麼管理和領導。(馬克·庫班)

他也批評拜登:移民和邊境是嚴重的錯誤,他也不喜歡拜登不肯承認錯誤,不管是阿富汗還是別的什麼。總統和總司令一定會犯錯,問題在於承不承認。另一邊那位,從來不認錯,而且清單很長。

關於“非法移民會投票”的說法,他的回應只有一句:這太瘋狂了,非法移民不能投票。德州投票要出示州身份證,你不能以非法移民身份登記投票。他擔心的是這個故事真正的功能:它讓人們對選舉的合法性產生懷疑。他回憶起 2016 年特朗普和希拉里辯論時說的話:如果我輸了,我們甚至不知道這場選舉是否合法。那是在他當選之前。

他提到自己讀過羅伊·科恩(Roy Cohn)的傳記,科恩的核心策略是否認、否認、否認,而科恩是特朗普的導師之一。特朗普處理事情的方式,幾乎都能在科恩身上看到。

但他也承認,移民問題的現狀讓這個故事變得可信。他猜測拜登團隊當初看統計資料,認為在出生率持平或下降的情況下需要更多移民,從財政角度講得通,而且移民的犯罪率並不比本土公民高。他們犯了一個經過計算的錯誤,現在必須修,不修會嚴重傷害選情。

誰控制演算法,誰就控制世界

訪談裡有一段關於 X 演算法的討論,庫班的判斷很直接:

控制演算法的人控制世界。如果你只把一個平臺或者關聯平臺作為唯一的資訊來源,那麼控制那裡演算法或節目編排的人,很大程度上就控制了你。(馬克·庫班)

他說自己和馬斯克之間沒什麼“beef”,這是馬斯克的平臺,他怎麼運營是他的權利,他為此付了錢,所以即使不同意也完全尊重。但正因為這是他的平臺,人們不太願意公開反對他,尤其當反對者自己也有平臺的時候。

他給 Lex 提了個建議:註冊一個小號,看看推特給你推薦誰。不只是馬斯克,還有馬斯克互動多的人。他解釋說,這些推薦由演算法本身產生,馬斯克並沒有手動往名單裡塞人:誰的賬號最大,誰就有最多的“最近鄰”,最近鄰又有最近鄰,層層擴散,決定了你看到什麼。

他認為馬斯克應該把自己從演算法裡拿出去,至少看看輸出會變成什麼樣。他承認,馬斯克收購之前 X 不開源,外人看不到,所以沒法判斷哪一方更佔主導。但他注意到一個現象:保守派覺得以前左傾內容佔主導,現在右傾內容佔主導,而馬斯克自己互動的人群幾乎全是右傾的,這本身就會影響演算法。

Cost Plus Drugs:一個外行闖進黑箱

被問到美國醫療系統哪裡壞了,庫班的回答只有四個字:沒有透明。沒有透明就沒有信任,除了你的醫生,你誰都信不了。系統到這一步,就已經壞掉了。

Cost Plus Drugs 的做法是:你輸入藥名,如果在我們經營的 2500 多種藥裡,我們先給你看我們的進價,再給你看 15% 的加價,然後藥房配藥費和運費,加起來就是總價。就這一層透明,已經在改變美國的藥價結構。有研究比較過他們的價格和 CMS(聯邦醫保)的價格,他們比政府談判的價格還便宜。數百萬人因此省下了數億美元。

真正的對手是三家 PBM:CVS Caremark、Cigna 旗下的 Express Scripts、聯合健康旗下的 Optum Rx。庫班說,跟這些公司簽約,第一條就是你不能披露任何資訊。不能披露意味著,他們可以告訴 A 公司你拿到的是好價格,只收了你 X;告訴 B 公司你也拿到了好價格,收的是 X 加一點。B 不知道,因為沒法知道。

他舉了修美樂(Humira)的例子。這是全美收入第一的藥物,返利前價格大約每月 8000 美元,返利後根據公司規模在 3000 到 6000 美元之間。而他們經營的一款生物類似藥 Yusimry,患者自付 594 美元。但那三家 PBM 不讓客戶用 Yusimry,因為 Yusimry 沒有返利。他們寧願把藥留在處方集裡,排除掉更便宜的選項,因為這樣賺得更多。

CVS Caremark 的發言人 Phil Blando 回應說,僱主、工會、醫保計劃和政府專案選擇他們,正是因為他們交付了更低的藥價、更好的健康結果和更廣的藥房可及性,他們是變革、創新和透明度的領導者。庫班對這段話的評價是:一大堆什麼都沒有。他說,來 Cost Plus 網站,我們給你全部 2500 多種藥的價目表,進價和售價都給你。你打電話給那三家中的任何一家,要同樣的東西,他們會笑你。

更荒誕的是,如果現在跟這三家做生意,你想要自己的理賠資料,也就是有多少人用了修美樂、我們付了多少錢,他們不會給你,除非你大喊大叫,然後他們收你錢,還要六個月。庫班說,他們離開這些 PBM 的時候要自己的理賠資料,等了六個月,還被收了費,拿的是自己的資料。

他講了作為僱主的發現。他付給員工福利顧問每人每月 30 美元,一年幾百萬美元,而這些顧問只是把他們引向給佣金最高的公司。他砍掉了。然後對比處方藥:獨行俠隊從三大 PBM 之一採購花了 16.9 萬美元,如果從 Cost Plus 買,只要 1.9 萬美元。再看向保險側,自保公司每人每月 17.15 美分,只是為了使用他們搭好的醫療網路,而市場上有很多公司願意免費搭建網路。

他還有一個觀察:這些保險公司和 PBM 同時負責決定哪些理賠批准、哪些拒絕。一種昂貴的藥,在批准之前,你得先試三種其他藥,這叫“階梯治療”,而那些“其他藥”未必更便宜,只是返利更高。

沒有哪個 CEO 懂這些,因為這不是他們的核心能力。CFO 也不懂,HR 懂一點,因為他們天天在處理理賠,但他們大部分時間花在申請預授權上。你的孩子摔斷了胳膊,去看醫生,醫生在動手術之前必須找保險公司報備,然後保險公司說不行,你得回去再找人吵。這消耗的是員工時間,也是 HR 的時間。(馬克·庫班)

他的建議是:任何超過 500 人的公司,都應該設一個首席醫療官,專門盯這些事,能省一大筆錢。醫療是僅次於工資的第二大支出,有些公司是幾十億幾百億美元,你不懂,就等著被宰。而正因為大公司的 CEO 不懂、被宰,這個行業才維持著今天的不透明。

他提到自己介入這個行業的起點:收到一封冷郵件,來自 Dr. Alex Oshmyansky,一位放射科醫生兼物理學家。對方想建一個配藥藥房,生產短缺的仿製藥。庫班說你格局太小了,應該做更大的事。當時正好是“藥房哥”馬丁·施克萊裡(Martin Shkreli)入獄前後,他把一種叫 Daraprim 的藥漲價 7500%。庫班的想法是:如果他能這麼幹還能得逞,這個市場一定極度低效。為什麼能得逞?因為不透明。那我們就做一個完全透明的公司試試。

開放原始碼、AI,和為什麼不會有“唯一的大模型”

庫班在開源 AI 的爭論裡站在開放的一邊,但他強調這屬於商業判斷,不該被強制。Meta 選擇開源對它自己是好選擇,對別家不一定。這個行業很“近親繁殖”,大家讀同樣的論文、去同樣的會議,跟早期網際網路和流媒體一樣,技術是通用的,只是各自試不同的方向,某一兩家公司多幾個聰明人,模型效率就往前走一點。

他用 IBM 和 DEC 的歷史做類比:當年大型機需要專門為它

他用 IBM 和 DEC 的歷史做類比:當年大型機需要專門為它寫的軟體,市面上沒有現成可用的東西。PC 時代反過來了,MS-DOS 和 Windows 是現成的,每臺機器都能裝,這套變化直接改寫了人們對軟體的認知。隨著模型訓練成本下降、效率提升,開源的理由會越來越多。

他不同意 Vinod Khosla 把開源 AI 的危險類比成曼哈頓計劃。他不認為 AI 註定走向災難,整體上他對 AI 是樂觀的,但這不代表不會有可怕的事發生,軍事上尤其如此。

他真正相信的是,未來會有幾百萬、幾千萬個模型。醫療行業的品牌極其重要,梅奧診所、MD 安德森這些機構是巨大的品牌,它們不會把自己的專業知識全部貢獻給 ChatGPT 或者 Gemini,那等於商業自殺。它們會做自己的模型,持續更新,然後授權出去。所以不會出現“唯一的醫療資料庫”。

他提到自己在參與的一個專案:把 30 個不同的 AI 模型放在一個元搜尋引擎後面,你搜一個問題,比如“DEI 好不好”“新冠疫苗好不好”,能看到各種輸出,自己判斷哪個最好。這跟他講 Cost Plus 的邏輯一致:透明的作用是把選擇權還給使用者,讓每個人自己判斷。

他給 12 歲孩子的建議

訪談最後,Lex 問庫班對年輕人有什麼建議。他的回答是:好好生活,找到能讓你享受的事,保持好奇。你不需要現在就有一切答案。

他經常收到 13、15 歲孩子的郵件,說感覺被束縛住了。他說,你 15 歲,你感覺被束縛住了?保持好奇就行,你不需要知道長大要做什麼。他堅信每個人都在某件事上非常、非常、非常擅長,可能是世界級的,也可能不是,但每個人都有。難的是找到那件事,有些地方還需要資源才能實現。所以要好奇,才能找到它。

他自己在大學只上過一門技術課,Fortran 程式設計,還作弊了。直到去了 Mellon Bank,開始學一門叫 Ramus 的指令碼語言,才發現這東西有意思,他喜歡。那之後他找到了一份賣軟體的工作,一路走下去。你不知道那件事會是什麼,直到你走出去體驗不同的東西。

他講了一個去小學演講時常做的互動:讓孩子們環顧四周,看那盞燈,那盞燈曾經不存在,有人有了想法,有人做成了產品,然後你們學校買了它。看那把椅子,椅子以前長得不一樣,有人冒出了那個念頭。為什麼不是你?他讓孩子們走出門的時候問自己這句話。

當你走出去,問自己,為什麼不是我?為什麼我不能是那個改變世界的人?(馬克·庫班)

關於希望,他的答案很具體:看孩子們的眼睛。他收到全世界 13、14、15 歲孩子的郵件,因為《創智贏家》在很多國家播出,他們花時間寫郵件問商業問題,說明他們足夠好奇。他去學校、去不同的群體,看到孩子眼裡那種“外面有更大更好的東西”的光。這不代表沒有恐懼,氣候問題和其他一堆問題都在,但那正是孩子的美好之處,Z 世代身上尤其明顯。

他還講了一段很少被提到的往事。1992 年他去莫斯科國立大學教年輕人怎麼創業,那時他剛賣掉 MicroSolutions,想四處走走,高中又學過俄語。他說當地人當時不知道“利潤”這個詞是什麼意思。蘇聯剛解體那陣子,創業熱一下子就起來了,其中很多是黑幫驅動的,但那種火花確實冒出來了。他的判斷是,那種東西是人的本能,你永遠不知道什麼時候、什麼條件湊齊了,讓你能抓住機會。

Lex 接著這個話題說,俄羅斯和烏克蘭的體制會壓抑這種火花,長大後那種創業精神就很難看見了。庫班說他相信這一點,否則他當年也不會跑過去做那件事。他也提到,烏克蘭如果挺過這場戰爭,重建本身會創造機會,就像二戰後整個歐洲發生的事。前提是戰爭先結束。

這份訪談裡可以帶走的東西

庫班的很多觀點並不新鮮,新鮮的是他給每個觀點都配了一個具體到可以復現的動作。把三個小時的內容壓縮成可執行的部分,大概是這些:

  • 想驗證一個商業想法,別問朋友“你覺得怎麼樣”,去問潛在客戶“我能幫你省什麼”。朋友的讚美沒有資訊量,客戶的拒絕有。
  • 準備創業之前,先算清楚自己能承受多大的下行風險。有房貸、有家庭,就先存錢、先利用晚上和週末打電話找客戶,不要裸辭。什麼都沒有的時候,反倒是最好的時機。
  • 盤點自己的弱點,然後找一個在這些短板上比你強的人做搭檔。庫班不擅長招聘和開除,他就把這兩件事全交出去,從不逞強。
  • 判斷自己是不是站在泡沫裡,用一個樸素指標:計程車司機、理髮師、你 14 歲的孩子是不是都在聊這個。如果是,先想清楚怎麼保護自己,再想怎麼賺更多。
  • 如果你是僱主,去要一份自己的理賠資料,看看處方藥到底花了多少錢。庫班的對比是 16.9 萬對 1.9 萬,這個差距在很多公司裡都存在,只是沒人去查。
  • 如果你在醫療行業之外,記住透明本身就是一種產品。Cost Plus 賣的核心是讓你看得見價格結構的權利。同樣的邏輯可以搬到任何一個刻意讓人看不懂的行業。
  • 對自己的資訊源保持警惕。註冊一個小號,看看平臺預設推薦給你什麼,那才是演算法眼裡“像你”的世界。只用一個平臺獲取資訊,等於把判斷權交了出去。
  • 如果你還沒找到自己擅長的事,別急。庫班 25 歲才在銀行裡發現自己喜歡程式設計。保持閱讀、保持體驗,那件事會在某個時間點出現,可能是 15 歲,也可能是 55 歲。
  • 對已經做成的事,練習說一句“夠了”。庫班在 57 億美元落袋時選擇對沖而不是繼續加註,理由只有四個字:我不想貪。這個判斷在他之後二十多年的每一次下注裡都還在起作用。

整期訪談裡,庫班沒有給出任何一套成功公式。他反覆回到的東西都很樸素:把行業讀懂、把客戶的問題當成自己的問題、把看不懂的賬目翻出來看、把不屬於自己的能力交出去。這些動作單獨看都不新鮮,難的是他在每一個環節上都做到了具體。

他講自己坐在私人飛機上說“我覺得自己蠢透了”的時候,那種自嘲裡有一種很踏實的東西。一個人對自己判斷的侷限有清醒認識,才可能在泡沫最熱的時候收手,才可能在被人追問“誰在逼你搞 DEI”的時候,老老實實回答“沒人逼我,這是我的商業選擇”。

這套態度在討論 AI 的時候也很明顯。Lex 反覆提醒意識形態可能帶來的風險,庫班承認風險存在,但他更相信市場會自我糾正,相信會有幾百萬個模型、幾百萬個聲音同時存在,相信人會為自己最好利益做出反應。這種樂觀未必每次都對,但它至少給出了一條可操作的路徑:多建一個模型、多開一個資訊源、多把賬目攤開給人看。

Lex 在結尾引用了奧斯卡·王爾德:想象力是造物主給人類的補償,彌補我們所不是的;幽默感則是給我們的安慰,寬恕我們所是的。庫班在這一期裡展現的正是這兩樣東西的結合:一邊相信世界能變得更好,一邊對自己那些荒唐的判斷笑出聲來。

他把這套東西濃縮成一句送給小學生的話,其實也適用於任何一個正在猶豫要不要開始的人:看那盞燈,它曾經不存在,有人有了想法,然後有人把它做了出來。為什麼不是你?

文稿來自 Lex Fridman 官網公開發布的官方 Transcript(含說話人與時間戳)。
Mark Cuban (00:00:00): The person who controls the algorithm controls the world, right? And if you are committed to one specific platform as your singular source of information or affiliated platforms, then whoever controls the algorithm or the programming there controls you. Lex Fridman (00:00:20): The following is a conversation with Mark Cuban, a multi-billionaire businessman, an investor and star of the series Shark Tank, longtime principal owner of the Dallas Mavericks, and is someone who is unafraid to get into frequent battles on X, most recently over topics of DEI, wokeism, gender and identity politics with the likes of Elon Musk and Jordan Peterson. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Mark Cuban. Lex Fridman (00:00:55): You’ve started many businesses, invested in many businesses, heard a lot of pitches privately and on Shark Tank. So you’re the perfect person to ask what makes a great entrepreneur? Mark Cuban (00:01:07): Somebody who’s curious, they want to keep on learning because business is ever-changing. It’s never static. Somebody who’s agile, because as you learn new things and the environment around you changes, you have to be able to adapt and make the changes. And somebody who can sell, because no business has ever survived without sales. And as an entrepreneur who’s creating a company, whatever your product or service is, if that’s not the most important thing and you’re just dying and excited to tell people about it, then you’re not going to succeed. Lex Fridman (00:01:39): But it’s also a skill thing. How do you sell? What do you mean by selling? Mark Cuban (00:01:42): Selling is just helping. I’ve always looked at it about putting myself in the shoes of another person and asking a simple question, can I help this person? Can my product help them? From the time I was 12 years old, selling garbage bags door to door and just asking a simple question, do you use garbage bags? Do you need garbage bags? Well, let me save you some time. I’ll bring them to your house and drop them off to streaming. Why do we need streaming when we have TV and radio? Well, you can’t get access to your TV and radio everywhere you go. So we break down geographic and physical barriers, and Cost Plus Drugs. What’s the product that we actually sell? We sell trust. In a simplistic approach, we buy drugs to sell drugs, but we add transparency to it. And bringing transparency to an industry is a differentiation, and it helps people. Lex Fridman (00:02:30): Trust in an industry that’s highly lacking in trust. Mark Cuban (00:02:33): Exactly. Lex Fridman (00:02:35): Okay. So what’s the trick to selling garbage bags? Let’s go back there. At 12 years old, is it just your natural charisma? I guess a good question to ask, are you born with it or can you develop it? Mark Cuban (00:02:45): Oh, you can definitely develop it. Yeah. Because selling garbage bags door to door was easy, right? It was like… 12-year-old Mark going, “Hi, my name is Mark. Do you use garbage bags?” You know what the answer is going to be, right? “Can I just drop them off for you once a week? Whenever you need them, you just call and I’ll bring them down.” “Sure.” So that was easy. Lex Fridman (00:03:02): But I’m sure you’ve been rejected. Mark Cuban (00:03:04): Oh, yeah. Of course. Not everybody says yes. Lex Fridman (00:03:06): What was your percentage? Mark Cuban (00:03:08): I don’t remember, but it’s pretty close to a hundred percent. Lex Fridman (00:03:10): Oh, okay. So that’s why you don’t remember. Mark Cuban (00:03:12): Yeah. Right? Because who’s going to say no to a 12-year-old kid who’s going to save time and money? But typically, my career where I’ve started companies, it’s to do something that other people aren’t doing. Whether it was connecting PCs to local area networks and at MicroSolutions. And the salesmanship was walking into a company and just saying, look talk to me and I can help you improve your productivity and your profitability. Is that important to you? And the answer is obviously always yes. And then the question is, can I do the job and can I do it cost effectively? And so you didn’t have to be a born salesperson to be able to ask those questions, but you have to be able to be willing to put in the time to learn that business. And that’s the hardest part. Lex Fridman (00:03:55): I’m sure there’s a skill thing to it too, in how you solve the puzzle of communicating with a person and convincing them. Mark Cuban (00:04:03): Yeah, there’s skill from the perspective that I read like a maniac. Then now you can give me an example of any type of business and it’ll take me two seconds to figure out how they make money and how I can make them more productive. And I think that’s probably my biggest skill, being able to just drill down to what the actual need is, if any. And then from there, being able to say, well, if this is what this company does, and this is what their goal is, how can I introduce something new that they haven’t seen before? And is that a business that I can create and make money from? Lex Fridman (00:04:35): So figure out how this kind of business makes money in the present and then figure out, is there a way to make more money in the future by introducing a totally new kind of thing? Mark Cuban (00:04:43): Correct. Lex Fridman (00:04:45): And you can just do that with anything. Mark Cuban (00:04:46): Pretty much. Yeah. Lex Fridman (00:04:48): And you think you’re born with that? Mark Cuban (00:04:50): No, I worked at it. Because going back to what I said earlier about curiosity, you have to be insanely curious because the world is always changing. My dad used to say, we don’t live in the world we were born into, which is absolutely true. If you’re not a voracious consumer of information, then you’re not going to be able to keep up. And no matter what your sales skills or ability are, they’re going to be useless. Lex Fridman (00:05:12): You learn about life from your dad. You mentioned your dad. Mark Cuban (00:05:16): My dad did upholstery on cars, got up, went to work every morning at seven o’clock, came back five or six, seven o’clock, exhausted, and I learned to be nice. I learned to be caring. I learned to be accepting. Just qualities that I think he really tried to pass on to myself and my two younger brothers were just be a good human. And I think he didn’t have business experience. So as I got into business, he would just say, “Sorry, Mark, I can’t help you. I don’t understand what you’re doing.” Neither one of my parents had gone to college. You’ve got to figure it out for yourself. Mark Cuban (00:05:52): But he was also very insistent that… He worked at a company called Regency Products where they did upholstery on cars, and he would bring me there to sweep the floors, not because he wanted me to learn that business, because he wanted me to learn how backbreaking that work was. He lost an eye in an accident at work, a staple broke, and the only thing he wanted for my brothers and I was for us to never have to work like that, to go to college to figure it out. Lex Fridman (00:06:18): You said to be nice. That said, you also said that when you were first starting a business, you were a bit more of an asshole than you wish you would’ve been. Mark Cuban (00:06:25): Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah, because I was more of a yeller. I didn’t have- Lex Fridman (00:06:30): No, really? Mark Cuban? Mark Cuban (00:06:33): What you see on the sidelines would be at a Mavs’ game. Maybe a little bit. But I also didn’t have any patience for somebody I thought wasn’t using my common sense, because I was always on the go, go, go, go, go, particularly when I was younger, just trying to be successful, trying to get to the point where I had independence. And I would tell this to people. Either you’re speeding up and getting on the train, or we’ll stop and drop you off at the next station, but let’s go where you go. Lex Fridman (00:07:02): Did you have trouble with the hire fast, fire fast part of running a business? Mark Cuban (00:07:06): Yeah, always, because I hated firing people. ‘Cause it meant, one, it was an admission of a mistake in the hiring. And two, the salesperson in me always wanted to come out ahead, and I was always horrible at firing, but I always partnered with people who had no problem with it. So I always delegated that. Lex Fridman (00:07:23): Well, that’s the tricky thing. When you’re working with somebody and they’re not quite there, and you have to decide, are they going to step up and grow into the person that that’s the right or they’re not. And in that gray area is probably where you have to fire. Mark Cuban (00:07:37): Well, it’s hard, yeah, for sure because it’s obviously a failure somewhere in the process. What did we do wrong? And when I would interview people for jobs, 99% of the people I’ve ever interviewed I’ve wanted to hire, because in my mind, it was like, okay, I can figure out how to make this person work. And then they wouldn’t. And then people at the company would be like, “Mark, you suck at this.” And so I always delegated the hiring. Lex Fridman (00:08:06): Yeah, I’m the same. I see the potential in people. I see the beauty in people, which is a great way to live life. But when you’re running a company, it’s a different thing. Mark Cuban (00:08:15): It’s different. And you got to know what you’re good at and what you’re bad at, right? I was good at… I was a ready-fire-aim guy, and I always partnered with people who were very anal and perfectionist because where I could just go, go, go, go, go, go, they would keep me inside the baselines. Lex Fridman (00:08:29): They would do the due diligence, I suppose. Mark Cuban (00:08:32): Yeah, or just, yeah, the detail work, the dot the I’s and the cross the T’s. Lex Fridman (00:08:35): What does it take to take that first leap into starting a business? Mark Cuban (00:08:38): That’s the hardest part. It really depends on your personal circumstances. I got fired. I was sleeping on the floor of six guys in a three-bedroom apartment, so I couldn’t go any lower. So there was no downside. Lex Fridman (00:08:38): Starting at the bottom. Mark Cuban (00:08:50): Yeah, there was no downside for me starting a business. And it was just like… I was 25 when we started MicroSolutions, and I’d just gotten fired and it was like, look, I’m a lousy employee. I’m going to just start going to some of my prospects that I had at my job and asked them to front the money that I needed to install some software and found this company, Architectural Lighting, who put up $500 for me. That allowed me to buy software and have 50% margins and that’s how I started my company. Lex Fridman (00:09:22): But by way of advice, would you say? It’s a terrifying thing. Mark Cuban (00:09:25): Yeah, you’ve got to be in a position where you’re confident. I get emails and approached by people all the time, what kind of business should I start? That tells me you’re not ready to start a business. Either you’re prepared and you know it or you don’t. In the United States, with the American Dream, everybody always looks at themselves and say, okay, I have this idea. And then you go through this process of saying, okay. You talk to your friends or family, what do you think? And they almost always, oh, it’s a great idea. Then you go on Google and you say, oh my god, no one else is doing it. Without thinking, 10 companies have gone out of business trying the same thing. But okay, it’s on Google. And then people stop because that next step means, okay, I have to change what I’m doing in my life. Mark Cuban (00:10:11): And that’s not easy for 99% of the people. Some people look at that as an opportunity and get excited about it. Some people get terrified because it’s, okay, maybe I’m comfortable, maybe I have responsibilities. And so whatever your circumstances are, if you want to take that next step, you have to be able to deal with the consequences of changing your circumstances. And that’s the first thing. Do you save money? If you have a job, but d’you have a mortgage? Do you have a family? You’ve got to save money. You can’t just walk. They’ve got to eat and they’ve got to have shelter. But on the other side of the coin, if you’ve got nothing, it’s the perfect time to start a business. Lex Fridman (00:10:49): Desperation is a good catalyst for starting a business, but in many cases, the decision, as you’re talking about you’re going to have to make is to leave a job that’s providing some degree of comfort already. So I suppose when you’re sleeping on the floor and there’s six guys, it’s a little bit easier. Mark Cuban (00:11:05): It’s really easy, right? Particularly when you get fired and you don’t have a job and you’re looking at bartending at night to try to pay the bills. And so it wasn’t hard for me, but to your point, it really comes down to preparation. If it’s important enough to you, you’ll save the money. You’ll give up whatever it is you need to give up to put the money aside. If you have obligations, you’ll put in the work to learn as much as you can about that industry so that when you start your business, you’re prepared. And you can always, at night, on weekends, whenever you find time, lunch, start making the calls to find out if people will write you a check or transfer you the money to buy whatever it is you’re selling. And by doing those things, you can put yourself in a position to succeed. It’s where people just think, okay, Geronimo, I’m leafing off the edge of a cliff and I’m starting a business. That’s tough. Lex Fridman (00:11:57): But sometimes that’s the way you do it, though. Mark Cuban (00:11:59): There’s always examples of any situation or scenario, right? Lex Fridman (00:12:03): Anecdotal evidence for everything. Mark Cuban (00:12:05): But if you’re going into a new business, you’re going to have competition unless you’re really, really, really, really, really lucky. And that competition is not going to just say, okay, let Lex or Mark just kick our ass. And so, you’ve got to be prepared on how you’re going to deal with that competition. Lex Fridman (00:12:18): What do you think that is about America that has so many people who have that dream and act on that dream of starting a business? Mark Cuban (00:12:28): I think we’ve just got a culture of consumption and more. And to get more, you’ve got to… Creating a business gives you the greatest potential upside and the greatest leverage on your time, but it also creates the most risk. Lex Fridman (00:12:47): So that capitalist machine, there’s a lot of elements. By contrast, the respect for the law, like an entrepreneur can trust that if they pull it off, the law will protect them. There won’t be a government. Mark Cuban (00:12:59): Hopefully that’s still the case. Yeah. Lex Fridman (00:13:00): Well, yeah. There’s always… Mark Cuban (00:13:03): Versus other countries, right? So us versus other countries. Joe Biden of all people said to me, it was at an entrepreneurship conference that when he was vice president, he had put together, and we had gone up there, a bunch of us from Shark Tank to talk to young entrepreneurs from around the world. And he said to me, “Mark, I’ve been to every country around the world, and the one thing that separates us is entrepreneurship. We’re the most entrepreneurial country in the world, and there’s no one else who’s even close.” And when you look at the origin of the biggest companies in the world, for the most part, there’s an American origin story somewhere behind there. And I think that just gets perpetuated on itself. We see those Horatio Alger stories, we see examples of the Jeff Bezos of the world, the Steve Jobs of the world, and those are the types of people we want to copy. Lex Fridman (00:13:58): Yeah, we want to be really careful and try to really figure out what that is because we don’t want to lose that. Mark Cuban (00:14:04): For sure. Lex Fridman (00:14:05): We want to protect the… Whatever. And that’s a lot of the discussions about what’s the right way to do government, big government, small government, what’s the right policies, but also culture, who we celebrate. One of the things that troubles me is that we don’t enough celebrate the entrepreneurs that take risks and the entrepreneurs that succeed. It seems like success, especially when it comes with wealth, is immediately matched with distrust and criticism and all that kind of stuff. Mark Cuban (00:14:32): Yeah, well, it’s changing for sure, because you can go back just 12 years, right? Traditional media dominated, let’s just say through 2012, that was the peak of linear television. Newspapers weren’t as strong, but they still had some breadth and depth to them. And then social media comes along and everybody gets to play in their own sandbox and share opinions with people who think just like them. And it also gives them the opportunity to amplify those feelings. And I think that’s where celebrating entrepreneurs really started to subside some. There were always people who were progressive that were like, billionaires are bad or millionaires are bad, depending on the time period, but you didn’t really see it on an ongoing basis. It wasn’t going to be on the evening news. It wasn’t going to be in the front page of the newspaper. It was going to be if you read a book and someone talked about it, or you read a magazine and there was an article talking about this progressive movement or that progressive movement, whatever it may be, or political parties. But now all of that is front and center in social media. Lex Fridman (00:15:41): Yeah, we’re trying to figure it out, how we deal with the mobs of people and the virality of it all. And I think we’ll find our footing and start celebrating greatness again. Mark Cuban (00:15:51): Well, that’s the whole reason I do Shark Tank. Lex Fridman (00:15:52): That’s true. That show celebrates the entrepreneur. That’s true. Mark Cuban (00:15:56): t’s the only place where every single minute of every single episode, we celebrate the American Dream. And the reason I do it is we tell the entire country, and it’s shown around the world even, we’re amazing advertising for the American Dream, and I don’t even know how many countries, but every time somebody walks onto that carpet from Dubuque, Iowa or Ketchum, Idaho, that sends a message to every kid who’s watching, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12-year-old kid that if they can do it from Ketchum, Idaho, you can do it. If they can have this idea and get a deal or even present to the Sharks and have all of America see it, you can do it. And I’m proud of that. 15 years of that, it’s just been insane. Now kids walk up to me and go, yeah, I started watching you when I was five or 10, and I started a business because I learned about it from Shark Tank. And so I think it celebrates it, and we convey it, and I don’t think it’s going away, but there are different battles we have to fight to support it. Lex Fridman (00:16:57): Yeah, I love even when the business idea is obviously horrible. Just the guts to step up. Mark Cuban (00:17:04): To be there. Lex Fridman (00:17:05): To believe in yourself. To really reach. That’s what matters, because some of the best business ideas are probably, maybe even you and Shark Tank will laugh at. Mark Cuban (00:17:17): Oh, for sure. Without question. The good ones, we’re not going to recognize every good one. And then sometimes we’ll just motivate people to work even harder to get it done because of what we say to them, and that’s fine too. There’s been great success stories that we said no to. Lex Fridman (00:17:30): What stands out as a memorable business on you’ve been pitched on Shark Tank. What’s the best one that stands out on- Mark Cuban (00:17:37): There’s no best one, right? They’re all different. They’re all best in their own way, I guess. There’re stupid ones, and we haven’t had any world-changing earth-shattering ones because those aren’t going to apply to Shark Tank. They don’t need us. So we typically get businesses that need some help at some level or another. But there’s ones I’ve passed that I wish Spikeball, do you know what Spikeball is? So it’s just rebounding net that you can put on the beach and you have these yellow balls, and you play a game of, it’s just a competitive game, but they’re killing it. So if you go to beaches in New York or LA, you’ll see kids playing it all the time. And it was a fun game that I wish I had done a deal with, and there’s been others. Lex Fridman (00:18:21): And you passed. Mark Cuban (00:18:21): And I passed. They were getting some traction and they wanted to create leagues, Spikeball leagues, and they wanted me to be the commissioner, and I don’t want to be a commissioner of a new Spikeball league. Lex Fridman (00:18:32): So you have to have this gut feeling of will this scale, will this click with people? Mark Cuban (00:18:39): Of course, yeah. Can it be protected? Is it differentiated? Is it something that makes me think, why didn’t I think of that? Or is it just a good solid business that’s going to pay a return to the founder and may not be enough of a business to return to an investor? Lex Fridman (00:18:56): Yeah, and I guess the question you’re trying to see, will this scale? There’s promise? Will the promise materialize into a big thing? Mark Cuban (00:19:06): Well, see, I don’t even care if it’s going to be a big thing, right? Because it’s all relative to the entrepreneur. We had a nineteen-year-old from Pittsburgh Laney, who came on with this simple sugar scrub, and there was nothing outrageously special about it. I didn’t see it becoming a hundred-million-dollar business. I thought it could become a two, three, five-million-dollar business that paid the bills for her. And that was good enough. And six months after the show aired, she called me up, she goes, “Mark, I’ve got a million dollars in the bank. What am I going to do?” I’m like, “Enjoy it. Put aside money for your taxes and go back to work.” And so it doesn’t have to be a huge business. It’s just got to be one that makes the entrepreneur happy. Lex Fridman (00:19:45): But then there’s the valuation piece. Do a lot of the entrepreneurs overvalue their business? Mark Cuban (00:19:52): Yeah, that’s the nature of it, right? And that’s really where the biggest conflicts in Shark Tank happened. That’s an evaluation. They think this is the best business ever. We had one lady couple that came on and they had this scraper for cat’s tongues, right? Lex Fridman (00:20:10): Nice. Mark Cuban (00:20:10): Bizarre. One of the most bizarre pitch ever. Lex Fridman (00:20:14): I love it. Mark Cuban (00:20:15): And they had this insane valuation and it was on because it was corny and fun TV, not because it was a good business. Lex Fridman (00:20:21): Oh, really? Okay. You didn’t see the potential. Mark Cuban (00:20:23): None. Yeah, none. Lex Fridman (00:20:25): There’s a lot of cats in the world, Mark. Come on. Mark Cuban (00:20:27): Yes, there are. And they’ll go very well without me. Lex Fridman (00:20:30): So how do you determine the value of a business, whether it’s on Shark Tank or just in general? Mark Cuban (00:20:35): It’s actually really easy. So if you take, just to use an example, a business that’s valued at $1 million, and I want to buy 10% of that company for $100,000, then in order for me to get my money back, they’ve got to be able to generate a hundred thousand dollars in after-tax cash flow that they’re able to distribute. Can they do it or can they not? Right? And if it’s a $2 million… Whatever the valuation is, that’s how much cash, after-tax cash they have to generate to return that money to investors. Or the other option is, do I see this as business potentially having an exit? Do they have some unique technology or do they have something specific about them that some other company would want to acquire? Then the cash flow isn’t as, I don’t want to say important, but isn’t going to guide the valuation. Lex Fridman (00:21:28): And how do you know if a company’s going to be acquired? So it’s the technology, like the patents, but also the team, is it- Mark Cuban (00:21:34): Yeah, it could be any of the above. It could be a super products’ company that I think is going to take off. Lex Fridman (00:21:41): And how do you know if they can generate the money? You made it sound easy. Mark Cuban (00:21:45): Yeah, can the person sell? And if not them, can I do it or someone on my team do it for them? Lex Fridman (00:21:52): So you’re looking at the person. Mark Cuban (00:21:54): Yeah, for sure. Yeah. That’s where Barbara Corker is the best. She can look at a person and hear them talk for 20 minutes and know, can that person do the job and do the work. Lex Fridman (00:22:02): Can you tell if they’re full of shit or not? So one of the things with entrepreneurs, they’re like we said, overvaluing, so they’re maybe overselling themselves, but also they might be full of in terms of their understanding of the market or also- Mark Cuban (00:22:17): Oh, yeah. Lex Fridman (00:22:17): … or exaggerating what they’re think or do, all that kind of stuff. Can you see through that? Mark Cuban (00:22:21): Yeah, for sure. Just by asking questions. So if they are delusional at some level or misleading at another level, I’m going to call them on it. So you get people trying to sell supplements that come on there and it’s a cure for cancer or whatever it may be, or there’s this latest fad that increases your core strength without doing any exercises. Shit Like that I’m just going to bounce, I’m going to pound on them. Right. Lex Fridman (00:22:48): I still love that. I still love the trying. Just trying. Mark Cuban (00:22:51): No, give them credit, right? Because they know all of America’s going to see it, and they’ve deluded themselves to believe this story so strongly. Lex Fridman (00:22:58): There’s a delusional aspect to entrepreneurship. You, Mark Cuban (00:23:04): That’s a great question. Do you have to be ambitious and set aside reality at some level to think that you can create a company that could be worth 10, a hundred, a billion dollars, yeah, at some level. Because you don’t know. It’s all uncertainty. But I think if you’re delusional, that works against you because everything’s grounded in reality. You’ve got to execute. You’ve got to produce, you can have a vision and you can say, this is where I want to get to and that’s my mission, or this is my driving principle. But you still got to execute on the business plan, and that’s where most people fail. Lex Fridman (00:23:40): Yeah, you have to be kind of two-brained, I guess. You have to be able to dip into reality when you’re thinking about the specifics of the product, how to design things, the first principles, the basics of how to build the thing, how much it’s going to cost, all of that. Mark Cuban (00:23:53): Yeah. Because if you can’t do the basics, you’re not going to be able to do the bigger things. And at the same time, you’ve got to be… One of the things that entrepreneurs do that I always try to remind any of that I work with on is we all tend to lie to ourselves. Our product is bigger, faster, cheaper, this or that, as if that is a finite situation, that’s never going to change. And there’s always somebody, I call them leapfrog businesses. Whoever’s competing against you, if you do a B or C, they’re going to try to do C, D and E, and you better be prepared for that to come, because otherwise they’re out of business too. So you’re never in a vacuum. You’re always competing against sometimes an unlimited number of entrepreneurs that you don’t even know exist who are trying to kick your ass. Lex Fridman (00:24:37): And the tricky part of all this too is you might need to frequently pivot, especially in the beginning. Mark Cuban (00:24:43): Hopefully not. Lex Fridman (00:24:45): So you think in the beginning, the product you have should be the thing that carries you a long time. Mark Cuban (00:24:51): Yeah, because that’s your riskiest point in time. And so if you’ve done your homework, which includes going out there and testing product market fit, you should have confidence that you’re going to be able to sell it. Now, if you didn’t do your homework and you go out there and you sell whatever it is and you’ve raised money or whatever, just to pivot, you’ve already shown that you haven’t been able to read the market. And so it’s not that pivots can’t work and always don’t work. They can, but more often than not, they don’t. You pivot for a reason. That’s because you made a huge mistake. Lex Fridman (00:25:28): Well, I also mean the micro- pivots, which is iterative development of a- Mark Cuban (00:25:33): Oh, yeah, just iterations. Yeah. Entrepreneurship, having any business is just continuous iteration, continuous. Your product, your sales pitch, your advertising, introducing new technology, how do you use AI or not use AI? Where do you use it? What person’s the right person? There’s just a million touch points that you’re always reevaluating in real , early ‘time that you have to be agile and adapt and change. Lex Fridman (00:26:00): But especially in software, it feels like business model can evolve really quickly, too, like how are you going to make money on this? Mark Cuban (00:26:07): Yeah, software for sure, because anything digital, because it can change in a millisecond. Lex Fridman (00:26:13): Speaking of which, how did you make your first billion? Mark Cuban (00:26:16): So my partner, Todd Wagner and I would get together for lunches, and we were at California Pizza Kitchen and Preston Hollow in Dallas, and he was talking about how we could use this new thing called the internet. This is the late ’94, early ’95, to be able to listen to Indiana University basketball games because that’s where we went to school. And he look, when we would listen to games, we would have somebody in Bloomington, Indiana have a speakerphone next to a radio, and then we would have a speakerphone in Dallas and a six-pack or 12 pack of beer, and we’d sit around listening to the game because there was no other way to listen to it. So I was like, okay, my first company, MicroSolutions, I’d written software, done network integration. And so I was comfortable digging into it, and so like, okay, let’s give it a try. Mark Cuban (00:27:08): So we started this company called AudioNet, and effectively became the first streaming content company on the internet. And we’re like, okay, we’re not sure how we’re going to make this work, but we were able to make it work when we started going to radio stations and TV stations and music labels and everything and evolved. Audionet.com, Which was only audio at the beginning, to broadcast.com in 1998, which was audio and video, and became the largest multimedia site on the internet. Took it public in July of 1998. It had the largest first day jump in the history of the stock market at the time. And then a year later we sold it to Yahoo for $5.7 billion in Yahoo stock, and I owned right around 30% of the company, give or take. And so after taxes, that’s what got me there. Lex Fridman (00:28:02): Well, there’s a lot of questions there. So the technical challenge of that, you’re making it sound easy, but you wrote code, but still, in the early days of the internet, how do you figure out how to create this kind of product of just audio at first and then video at first? Mark Cuban (00:28:18): A lot of iterations like you talked about. We started in the second bedroom of my house, set up a server. I got an ISDN line, which was a 128K line and set up, downloaded Netscape server, and then started using different file formats that were progressive loading and allowing people to connect to the server and do a progressive download so that the audio, you can listen to the audio while it was downloading onto your PC. Lex Fridman (00:28:47): Yeah, it was a super choppy. So you’re trying to figure out how to do it. Mark Cuban (00:28:49): Oh yeah, for sure. For sure. It would buffer it. It wasn’t good, but it was a start. Lex Fridman (00:28:53): But it was good enough the first Mark Cuban (00:28:55): Kind. Yeah, because there was no other competition, right? There was nobody else doing it. And so it was like, okay, I can get access to this or this. And then there were some third party software companies, Zing and Progressive Networks and others that took it a little bit further. So we partnered with them and I started going to local radio stations where literally we would set up a server. Right next to it, I had a $49 radio, the highest FM radio that I could find, and we’d take the output of the audio signal from the radio with these two analog cables, plug it into the server, encode it, and make it available from audionet.com. Then I would go on Uunet bulletin boards. I would go on CompuServe, I would go on Prodigy, I would go on AOL, I’d go wherever I could find bodies, and I’d say, okay, we’ve got this radio station KLIF in Dallas. Mark Cuban (00:29:48): It’s got Dallas sports and Dallas News and politics, and if you’re in an office or you’re outside of Dallas, connect to audionet.com and now you can listen to these things on demand. And that’s how we started. And it started with one radio station, and then it was five, then it was 10, then it was video content, then the laws were different then. So we could literally go out and buy CDs and host them and just let people listen to whatever music. And we went from 10 users a day to a hundred to a thousand, to hundreds of thousands to a million over those next four years. Lex Fridman (00:30:25): How did you find the users? Is it word of mouth? Mark Cuban (00:30:27): Word of mouth. Lex Fridman (00:30:27): Just word of mouth. Mark Cuban (00:30:28): Didn’t spend a penny on advertising. Lex Fridman (00:30:29): So the thing you were focusing on is getting the radio stations and all that. Mark Cuban (00:30:32): But radio and TV, anything, any content at all. Mark Cuban (00:30:34): You Lex Fridman (00:30:34): Pick up the phone, how’d you, Mark Cuban (00:30:37): Wherever I put everything that was public domain, I’d go out and buy a video or a cassette, whatever it was. And this was before the DMs, the digital minimum Copyright Act of 90, whenever it kicked in. So literally anything that was audio we would put online so people could listen to it. And if you think about somebody at work, they didn’t have a radio most likely. And if you did, you couldn’t get reception. Definitely didn’t have a TV, but you had a PC and you had bandwidth available to you and the companies weren’t up on firewalls or anything at that point in time. So our in-office listening during the day just exploded because whoever’s sitting next to you, what are you listening to? And that was the start of it. And then in early 98, we started adding video and just other things, and we had ended up with thousands of servers. Mark Cuban (00:31:26): There was no cloud back then. And just pulling together all those pieces to make it work. But where we really made our money was by taking that network that we had built and then going to corporations and saying, look, it’s 1996, ’97, ’98. And to communicate with your worldwide employees, what they would do is they would go to an auditorium that had a satellite uplink, and then they would have people go to theaters or ballrooms and hotels that had satellite down links and they would broadcast the product introductions, whatever. And so we said to them, look, you’re paying millions of dollars to reach all your employees when you can do it. Pay us a half a million dollars, and we’ll do it just on their PCs at work. So we did. When Intel announced the P 90 PC, we charged them $2 million or whatever to do that. Mark Cuban (00:32:20): When Motorola announced a new phone or a new product, we would charge them. And so we used a consumer side to do a proof of concept for the network, and then we would take that knowledge and go to corporations, and that’s how we made our revenue. Lex Fridman (00:32:34): And there’s some selling there with the corporations? Mark Cuban (00:32:36): Yeah, a lot of selling there, but we were saving them so much money, and they were technology companies. They wanted to be perceived as being leading edge. And so it was win-win. Lex Fridman (00:32:45): How much technical savvy was required? You said a bunch of servers. At which point do you get more engineers? How much did you understand could do yourself? And then also, once you can’t do it all yourself. How much technical savvy is required to understand enough to hire the right people to keep building this and innovation? Mark Cuban (00:33:03): I did all the technology, and then we hired engineer after engineer after engineer to implement it. And so, yeah, from putting together a multicast network to software to just all these different things, Lex Fridman (00:33:17): Was this a scary thing? Mark Cuban (00:33:19): It’s terrifying, right? Because as we were growing, trying to keep up with the scale, and literally, we’re buying off-the-shelf PCs, and then server cards as the technology advanced and hard drives and things would fail, and we would have to… We didn’t have machine learning back then to do an analysis of how to distribute server resources. There was a time when Bill Clinton and all the Monica Lewinsky stuff happened. They released the audio of their interviews of him or something like that. And literally, I knew at that point in time when that was released, everybody at work was going to want to listen to it, right? So we had to take down servers that were doomed. Mark Cuban (00:34:00): … Was going to want to listen to it. We had to take down servers that were doing Chicago Cubs baseball and just make all these on-the-fly decisions because we didn’t have the tools to analyze or be predictive. It was all technology-driven and marketing. Lex Fridman (00:34:17): The acquisition by Yahoo. Can you tell the story of that, but also in the broader context of this internet bubble? This is a fascinating part of human history. Mark Cuban (00:34:28): On the acquisition side, we were the largest media site on the internet, and it wasn’t close. There was nobody close. We were YouTube and relatively speaking, we would be 10X YouTube relative to the competition because there was nobody there. It became obvious to Yahoo, AOL, and others that they needed a multimedia component. We had the infrastructure, sales, all that stuff. Mark Cuban (00:34:52): Yahoo, when we went public in ’98 or right before, I think it was, they made an investment of $2 million, which gave us a connection to them. After we went public, they decided they needed to have multimedia, so in April of ’99, we made a deal, and then July of 2000 is when it closed. Lex Fridman (00:35:18): Can you explain to me the trickiness of what you did after that? Mark Cuban (00:35:24): The collar? Lex Fridman (00:35:25): Yeah. Mark Cuban (00:35:25): Okay. When we sold to Yahoo, we sold for $5.7 billion in stock, not cash. After Micro Solutions, when I sold that, I took that money and initially I told my broker I wanted to invest like a 60-year-old man because I wanted to protect it, but then he started asking me all kinds of questions about all these technologies that I understood, like networks I had installed. We had become one of the top 20, let’s say, systems integrators in the country. At one point in time, we were the largest IBM token ring installer in the country. It was crazy. Banyan, Blast from the Past. Mark Cuban (00:36:08): Anyway, these Wall Street bankers or analysts rather, that were the big analysts of the time would call me up because they would ask my broker, “What does he know about this product, this product?” I knew them all, what was working and not working. The ones that worked, I say that it’s working and they say something, the stock would go up $20. My broker was like, “You know this better than they do. You need to invest.” Mark Cuban (00:36:32): I started buying and selling stocks, and this was in 1990 and was just killing it. I was making 80, 90, 100% a year over those next four years to the point where guy came in and asked to use my trading history to start a hedge fund, which we did. I sold within nine months, it was great. The point being as it goes forward, so when we sold to Yahoo, I already had a lot of experience trading stocks, and I had seen different bubbles come and go. The bubble for PC manufacturers, a bubble for networking manufacturers, they went up, up, up, up, up, and then they came straight down after the hype where somebody just leapfrogged. Mark Cuban (00:37:14): When we sold to Yahoo, I was like I’ve got a B next to my name. That’s all I need, or all I want. I don’t want to be greedy. I’d seen this story before where stocks get really frothy and go straight down. I knew that because all of what I had was in stock, I needed to find a way to collar it and protect it. Understanding stocks and trading and options and all that, my broker and I, we went and shorted an index that had Yahoo in it. Mark Cuban (00:37:42): The law at the time was you couldn’t short any indexes that had more than 5% of that stock in it, of the Yahoo stock. I took pretty much $20 million dollars, everything I had at the time, and I shorted the index. Lex Fridman (00:37:58): This is fascinating, by the way, because based on your estimation that this is a bubble. Mark Cuban (00:38:02): Or just mine not wanting to be greedy. Lex Fridman (00:38:04): Sure. The foundation of this kind of thinking is you don’t want to be greedy. Mark Cuban (00:38:09): Yeah. How much money do I need? Where other people were saying, oh, I think you can go up higher, higher, higher. I went on CNBC and I told them what I had done, and Yahoo stock had gone up significantly from the time I had collared. One of the guys, Joe Kernan was on there, “Don’t you feel stupid now that Yahoo stock has gone up X% more?” I’m like, “Yeah, I feel real stupid sitting on my jet.” Lex Fridman (00:38:37): There is some fundamental way in which bubbles are based on this greed. Mark Cuban (00:38:42): For sure, and I’d seen it before, like I just said. What I did was we put together a collar where I sold calls and bought puts, and as it turned out, when the market just cratered, I was protected. Over the next two, three years, whatever it was, it converted to cash, paid my taxes, etc, but it protected me. As it turns out, it was called one of the top 10 trades of all time. Mark Cuban (00:39:08): What was even more interesting out of that period, my broker at that time was at Goldman Sachs, and I had asked him to see if there was a way to trade the VIX, the volatility index, and there wasn’t. One of the people that Goldman that we were working with to try to create this actually left Goldman and created indexes that allowed you to trade the VIX. Lex Fridman (00:39:32): It’s not trivial to understand that it’s a bubble. You’re lessening your insight into all this by saying you just didn’t want to be greedy, but you still have to see that it’s a bubble. Mark Cuban (00:39:43): Yeah, obviously if I thought it was going to keep on going up and there was intrinsic value there, I would’ve stayed in it. It wasn’t so much Yahoo, it was just the entire industry. We’re looking at the magic seven or whatever it is stocks now and people were asking is it in a bubble? I would get into cabs and people would just start talking about internet stocks. Mark Cuban (00:40:06): There were people creating companies with just a website and going public. That’s a bubble where there’s no intrinsic value at all. People aren’t even trying to make operating cap profits, they’re just trying to leverage the frothiness of the stock market, that’s a bubble. You don’t see that right now. You don’t see any IPOs right now for that matter, so I don’t think we’re in a bubble now, but back then, yes, I thought we were in a bubble, but that wasn’t really the motivating factor. Lex Fridman (00:40:32): Do you think it’s possible we’re in a bit of an AI bubble right now? Mark Cuban (00:40:35): No, because we’re not seeing funky AI companies just go public. If all of a sudden we see a rush of companies who are skins on other people’s models or just creating models to create models that are going public, then yeah, that’s probably the start of a bubble. That said, my fourteen-year-old was bragging about buying NVIDIA with me in his Robinhood account. He tells me the order, I place it, and he was like, “Oh, yeah, it’s going up, up, up.” I’m like yeah, we’re not quite there yet, but that’s one thing to pay attention to. Lex Fridman (00:41:09): Yeah, we’re flirting with it. You said that becoming a billionaire requires luck. Can you explain? Mark Cuban (00:41:15): Yeah. There’s no business plan where you can just start it and say yeah, I’m definitely going to be a billionaire. If I had to start all over, could I start a company that made me a millionaire? Yeah, because I know how to sell and I know technology, and I’ve learned enough over the years to do that. Could I make $10 million? Probably. $100 million? I hope so. But $1 billion, just something good has got to happen. Lex Fridman (00:41:39): Timing. Mark Cuban (00:41:40): Timing. Internet stock market was going nuts when we started, and that certainly I couldn’t predict or control. It’s like AI right now, AI’s been around a long, long, long, long time. The NVIDIA GPUs, you couldn’t predict that now’s the time that they were going to get to that cost-effectiveness where you could create models and train them and although it’s expensive, it’s still doable. We had ASICs for custom applications and we had CPUs that were leading the way, but GPUs were more for gaming and then crypto mining, and then all of a sudden they were the foundation for AI models. Lex Fridman (00:42:27): I think luck being essential to becoming a billionaire is a beautiful way to see life in general. First of all, I personally think that everything good that’s ever happened to me is because of luck. I think that’s just a good way of being. It’s like you’re grateful. Lex Fridman (00:42:43): That said, there’s some examples of people that you’re like, they seem to have gotten lucky a lot. We’ll mention Jeff Bezos. It seems like he did a lot of really interesting, powerful decisions for many years with Amazon to make it successful. Mark Cuban (00:43:01): But he was really able to raise money, a lot of money, and people were really dismissive of him because they weren’t profitable and we were in an environment where it was possible to raise [inaudible 00:43:16]- Lex Fridman (00:43:15): It was possible to raise that money. What about somebody you get sometimes feisty with on the internet, Elon. Could even look at Zuck, and Bill Gates, and Warren Buffett. Mark Cuban (00:43:25): Look, Zuck was just trying to get laid and it took off and he wrote some good stuff. Lex Fridman (00:43:29): Aren’t we all? Isn’t that the foundation of human civilization? Mark Cuban (00:43:32): At some level, right? More power to them, you can’t take anything away from them. Snapchat, same thing, took off. Apps didn’t take off in 2007 when the iPhone came out, apps took off in 2011, 2012, and if you were there with the right app at the right time. Mark Cuban (00:43:48): Even Facebook in 2004, the bubble had burst and the price for computers had fallen enough. And kids in school all needed computers or laptops. If he had tried to do something like that five years earlier… He was too young, but five years earlier or five years later, or Friendster might’ve been the ultimate or MySpace, Lex Fridman (00:44:12): Friendster, I remember Friendster. Mark Cuban (00:44:14): Or MySpace. I had a MySpace account, and that was before Facebook. Lex Fridman (00:44:17): Yeah, the timing’s important, but there’s the details of how the product is built, the fundamentals of the product. Mark Cuban (00:44:25): But that’s what gets you. When the opportunity is there, that’s what allows you to take advantage of that opportunity and the kismet of it all because it wasn’t like any of the people I mentioned, there weren’t others trying the same thing. You had to be able to see it. You had to be able to visualize it and put together a plan of some sort, or at least have a path, and then you had to execute on it and do all those things at the same time and have the money available to you because it wasn’t like whether it was Google or Facebook, they raised a shitload of money. It wasn’t bootstrapping it that got them there. Lex Fridman (00:44:59): Raising money is not just about sales, it’s about the general feeling of the people with money at that time. Mark Cuban (00:45:07): And proximity. Lex Fridman (00:45:09): Oh, yeah. Sure. Mark Cuban (00:45:10): If Zuck wasn’t at Harvard and he was at Miami of Ohio University or he was at Richland Community College, same idea, same person, same execution, and nothing. Lex Fridman (00:45:20): I believe in the power of individuals to realize their potential no matter where they come from. Mark Cuban (00:45:29): I agree 100% with that. Lex Fridman (00:45:31): But luck is required. Mark Cuban (00:45:33): The only delta is scale. We’re not all blessed with the access to the tools you need to hit that grand slam. Lex Fridman (00:45:42): But then also, billion is not the only measure of success, right? Mark Cuban (00:45:45): Absolutely not. Right. Everybody defines the success in their own way. Lex Fridman (00:45:49): How do you define success, Mark Cuban? Mark Cuban (00:45:51): Waking up every day with a smile, excited about the day. People always say when you get that kind of money, does it make you happy? My answer always is if you are happy when you are broke, you’re going to be really, really, really happy when you’re rich. Lex Fridman (00:46:08): But you got to work on being happy when you’re broke, I guess. Mark Cuban (00:46:11): You’re just being happy. If you were miserable in your job before, there’s a good chance you’re still going to be miserable if that’s just who you are. Lex Fridman (00:46:19): That’s a pretty good definition of success, by the way. Mark Cuban (00:46:21): Thank you. Lex Fridman (00:46:21): How do you reach that success by way of advice to people? Mark Cuban (00:46:27): We talked about my dad, my parents. I never looked at my dad and said okay, you’re not successful. He busted his ass and when he came home, we enjoyed our time together. There was nothing at any point in time where I felt like this is miserable, we’re awful, we don’t have this, we don’t have that. We celebrated the things we did have and never knew about the things we didn’t have. I think you have to be able to find your way to whatever it is that puts a smile on your face every day. Some people can do it, and some people can’t. Lex Fridman (00:47:07): It’s not always about the smile on the outside, it could be a smile on the inside. Mark Cuban (00:47:11): Whatever it is, whatever makes you feel good. Lex Fridman (00:47:14): Even the struggle, like with your dad, the really, really hard work can be a fulfilling experience because the struggle leading up to then seeing your kids and seeing your family. Mark Cuban (00:47:29): Exactly right. That was my dad’s grand slam, seeing three kids go to college, be successful, be able to spend time with them. That was the other thing he really made me realize is the most valuable asset isn’t the money, it’s your time. That’s why from a young age, I wanted to retire because I wanted to experience everything that I possibly could in this life. He got joy from us, I get joy from my kids, and that’s the most special thing that you ever can have. Lex Fridman (00:48:00): Beautifully said. You have made some mistakes in your life? Mark Cuban (00:48:05): Yeah, a lot of them. Lex Fridman (00:48:06): One of the bigger ones on the financial side we could say is Uber. Mark Cuban (00:48:12): Yeah, we call that not doing something. Yeah, it wasn’t a mistake, it was just… It was a mistake. Lex Fridman (00:48:16): I like how you tried to… Mark Cuban (00:48:20): I always try to look at mistakes at things you did that didn’t turn out as opposed to things you didn’t do, the negative. Lex Fridman (00:48:27): Can you tell the story of that? And maybe it’s just interesting because it is illustrative how to know when a thing is going to be big and not, what are the fundamentals of it, and how to take the risk and all this kind of stuff. Mark Cuban (00:48:40): The backstory of that is Bill Gurley came to me and said, “Mark, there’s this guy, Travis, that has this company, Red Swoosh, which is a peer-to-peer networking company that I think you can help.” I invested and would spend a lot of time with Travis. Mark Cuban (00:48:57): It’s funny because back then, that was 2006, I was an investor at Box.net with Aaron Levy and… Oh, there was one other company, but there were three of them where there’d be emails where I’d introduce them and we’d all talk in these emails and they’d all gone to have astronomical success. Mark Cuban (00:49:20): Red Swoosh had its issues. I always look at peer-to-peer as stealing bandwidth from the internet providers when bandwidth was a scarce commodity. What Travis did with that though, was great. He convinced gaming companies who wanted to do downloads of the clients for those games to use his peer-to-peer on Red Swoosh. He busted his ass, and I think he sold it for $18 million, so he did well. Mark Cuban (00:49:47): So it was natural for him to come to me, and I still have the emails and ask me about Uber Cab. I thought okay, this is a great idea. I really, really like it. He showed me his budgets, and I think they were raising money at $10 million or $15 million or whatever. I’m like, “Your biggest challenge is going to be you’re going to have to fight all the incumbent taxi commissions. They’re going to want to put you out of business. That’s going to be a challenge and I think you don’t have enough money designated for marketing to get all that done.” I said, “I’d invest, but not quite at that valuation.” Never came back to me. Lex Fridman (00:50:26): Yeah, there’s some lessons there connected to what you’re doing now we’ll talk about [inaudible 00:50:32], it’s looking at an industry that seems like there’s a lot of complexity involved, but it’s hungry for revolution and the cabs are that. Mark Cuban (00:50:43): Yeah, for sure. They were dominated by an insulated few, they were not very transparent, you didn’t know the intricacies, they were very politically driven, an old boy insensuous network. I told him, “Travis, the best thing about you is you’ll run through walls and break down barriers. The bad thing about you is you’ll run through walls even if you don’t have to.” Lex Fridman (00:51:07): There you have to see, is it possible to raise enough money? Is it possible to do all this? Is it possible to break through? It’s a fascinating success story with Uber. Mark Cuban (00:51:18): I think he tried to go too big. He had too big an ambition, which cost him in the end, not financially and personally, but just in terms of being able to stick it out with them, but that’s what makes him a great entrepreneur. Lex Fridman (00:51:32): It’s a fascinating success story. You have certain companies like Airbnb just go into this thing that we take completely for granted. Mark Cuban (00:51:41): And change it all. Lex Fridman (00:51:42): Just change it all. Mark Cuban (00:51:43): Linda Johnson, who worked as our general counsel at broadcast.com, was Brian’s GC and chief operating officer. They had a smart, smart team. Lex Fridman (00:51:55): They believed in it. It’s a beautiful story because you’re like all right, all the things that annoy you about this world, they’re an inefficient, and it just seemed like a pain in the ass- Mark Cuban (00:52:05): See, I probably would’ve said no like a lot of people did to Airbnb because I’m like I don’t want people sleeping in my bed. Lex Fridman (00:52:12): I would’ve too. I was like this is not going to work. I’ve done couchsurfing and stuff and it was always… It didn’t seem right. It didn’t seem like you could do this at a large scale. Mark Cuban (00:52:20): To monetize it. Yeah, but he did more power to him. Lex Fridman (00:52:24): In 2000, I think January, you purchased a majority stake in the NBA team, Dallas Mavericks for $285 million. At this point, maybe you can correct me, but it was one of the worst performing teams in franchise history. Mark Cuban (00:52:42): It’s true. Lex Fridman (00:52:44): How did you help turn it around? Mark Cuban (00:52:46): I had this big, tall guy named Dirk Nowitzki, and I let him be Dirk Nowitzki, and I got out of the way. I think more than anything else, there was the turnaround on the business side, and then there was the turnaround on the basketball side. On the basketball side, I just went in there, immediately said whatever it takes to win, that’s what we’re going to do. Back then, they had three or four coaches that were responsible for everything and I was like okay, we spend more money training people on PC software than we do developing the most important assets of the business. Mark Cuban (00:53:19): I made the decision to go out there and hire 15 different development coaches, one for each player. Everybody thought I was just insane, but it sent the message that we were going to do whatever it took to win. Once the guys believed that winning was the goal as opposed to just making money, attitudes change, efforts went up, and the rest is history. Lex Fridman (00:53:47): The assets of the business here are the players. Mark Cuban (00:53:48): The players. Lex Fridman (00:53:48): The players. Mark Cuban (00:53:48): Yeah, for sure. On the business side, the first question I asked myself is what business are we in? I really didn’t know the answer immediately, but within the first few months, it was obvious that the entire NBA thought we were in the business of basketball. We were not, we were in the experience business. Mark Cuban (00:54:08): When you think about sporting events that you’ve been to, you don’t remember the score, you don’t remember the home runs or the dunks, you remember who you were with, and you remember why you went. It was my first date with a girl who’s now my wife or I went with my buddies and he threw up on the person in front of us. My dad took me, my aunt, my uncle took me. Those are the experiences you remember. Mark Cuban (00:54:28): Once I conveyed to our people that this is what we were selling, that what happened in the arena off the court was just as important as what happened on the court, if not more so because if mom or dad are bringing the 10-year-old, you have to keep them occupied because they have short attention spans. Mark Cuban (00:54:45): I would get into fights with NBA, put aside the refs, but getting in fights in the NBA, I would say NBA, nothing but attorneys, because they had no marketing skills whatsoever. To their credit, they realized that was a problem and started bringing in better and better marketing people. Lex Fridman (00:55:01): Part of the selling is you’re selling the team, selling the sport, selling the people, the idea, all of it. Mark Cuban (00:55:09): Yeah, the experience. Have you ever been to an NBA game? Lex Fridman (00:55:12): Miami Heat. Mark Cuban (00:55:13): Do you remember walking into the arena and you feel the energy? That’s what makes it special. Lex Fridman (00:55:18): Yeah, the energy is everything. Especially playoff games. Mark Cuban (00:55:20): Right, for sure. Even a regular season game, even against the worst team, that’s where we get… Because the tickets tend to be a little bit cheaper on the resale market, that’s where parents will bring their kids. You hear kids screaming the entire game, and the parents are thrilled to death, they got to do something with their kids. The kids are thrilled to death because they got to see basketball, an NBA game, and scream at the top of their lungs. Mark Cuban (00:55:44): If it turns out to be a close game, and that ball’s in the air, and if it goes in, everybody’s hugging and high-fiving people you’ve never seen before in your life, and if it misses, you’re commiserating with people you’ve never seen. That’s such a unique experience that’s unique to sports. We never sold that and that’s exactly what we started. Lex Fridman (00:56:01): I have to say, just going to that game turned me around on basketball because I’m more of a football guy. Basketball wasn’t like the main sport. I was like oh, wow, okay. Mark Cuban (00:56:09): It’s fun. It’s different. The energy in a stadium is completely different than the energy and arena. In the stadium, particularly if it doesn’t have a roof, it’s hard to bottle that energy. You feel it and you see… I’m from Pittsburgh, so there’s the terrible towels and people screaming defense and everything at Steelers games, but in an arena, the energy level is just indescribable. Lex Fridman (00:56:33): How much of it is the selling that tickets in person, but also versus what you see on TV? When you’re owning a team, do you get any of the cut for the what’s shown on TV? Mark Cuban (00:56:44): Yeah. There’s a TV deal that’s done with either a local TV broadcaster and we get all of that, or a network broadcaster like ABC, ESPN, T&T, whatever, we get one 30th of that. Lex Fridman (00:56:58): What role does the TV play in turning a team around? Mark Cuban (00:57:01): It keeps fans connected. Look, when the team is doing really well, it’s easy. There’s more viewers, everybody’s more excited. When you’re not, there’s still going to be hardcore fans and general fans and kids that like to watch the game. Lex Fridman (00:57:15): What about the personality of the people in the stands? Clearly, you’re part of the legend of the team because you’re literally there going wild. Mark Cuban (00:57:26): Yeah, screaming the whole game. It’s funny, the way I am here is how I am 24 hours a day, unless there’s a Mavs game. For whatever reason, that’s where I let out all that stress and frustration. The fan’s the sixth man. We need fans to bring that energy and amplifying that as much as we can is important. Lex Fridman (00:57:49): You’ve had a beef recently on Twitter on X with Elon over DEI programs. What to you is the essence of the disagreement there? Mark Cuban (00:57:59): I wouldn’t call it a beef. Lex Fridman (00:58:01): It’s a bit of fun? Mark Cuban (00:58:03): Yeah, it’s fun for me. It’s his platform, he gets to run it any way he please. He pays for that right, and so I have total respect for whatever choices he makes even if I don’t agree with them, but because it’s his platform, people are less likely to disagree with him, particularly somebody who’s got a platform themselves. Mark Cuban (00:58:33): When we start talking about DEI and it’s just de facto racist and this stuff, stuff that I just think is nonsense. I have no problem sharing my opinion. If he disagrees, okay, he can disagree, I don’t care. It’s fun to engage, but he doesn’t really engage, he just comes back with snark comments, which is his choice. Lex Fridman (00:58:58): In your comments, you do a bit of snark too. Mark Cuban (00:59:01): Yeah, a little bit. Lex Fridman (00:59:04): You’re pretty, let’s say, rigorous in your response. There is some exchange of ideas, there’s some snark, there’s some fun, all that kind of stuff. You do voice the opinion that represents a large number of people and that’s great. That’s really beautiful. But just lingering on the topic, what to you is the good and the bad of DEI programs? Mark Cuban (00:59:28): Really simple, D is diversity. That means you just expand your pool of potential applicants to people who you might not otherwise have access to. To look where you didn’t look before, to look where other people aren’t looking for quality employees. That’s simple. Mark Cuban (00:59:47): The E in equity means when you hire somebody, you put them in a position to succeed. The I, inclusion, is when you’ve hired somebody and they may not be typical, if you will, you show them some love and give them the support they need so they can do their job as best they can and feel comfortable and confident going to work. It’s that simple. Lex Fridman (01:00:08): That’s a beautiful ideal. When it’s implemented, implemented poorly perhaps, or in a way that doesn’t reach that ideal, do you see, maybe when it’s quota based, do you see that it can result in essentially racism towards Asian people and white people, for example? Mark Cuban (01:00:27): There’s a lot to unpack there. First, you can’t do quotas. There are illegal unless you’re… And I’m not the lawyer on this subject, but unless you’re trying to repair something that’s happened in the past, some discrimination that’s happened in the past. It’s not quota-based, and I think that’s really just a straw man that people put out there. Mark Cuban (01:00:50): Now, does that mean that there aren’t DEI programs that are implemented poorly? Of course not. Everything that’s implemented poorly in one company to another. Sales, marketing, human resources, you can pick any element of business and find companies that implement it poorly, but that’s the beauty of capitalism in a free market or mostly free market where if you make these choices and they are the wrong choices, you’re going to lose your best people. You’re not going to be able to hire the best people. You’re not going to execute on your business plans in the way that we discussed, regardless of the size of the company. Mark Cuban (01:01:28): It also, I think, depends on where you’re having the discussion. When I’m in a different group of people off of X, the feedback’s completely different. To your question of reverse racism, yes, it happens because people are people. There’s no human being that is 100% objective. It’s also, there’s very, very, very few jobs that can be determined on a purely quantitative basis. Mark Cuban (01:02:07): How do you tell one janitor from the other, who’s the best? How do you tell one salesperson that you’re hiring versus another you’re hiring because they haven’t sold your product yet, so you don’t know? We talked earlier about firing people because you made mistakes. Mark Cuban (01:02:21): Yes, there’s discrimination against any group, white, Asian, black, green, orange, whatever it may be, but I truly believe that there’s far more discrimination against people of color than there are people who are white. I think it’s become a straw man, that reverse discrimination because of DEI is prevalent or near ubiquitous. Lex Fridman (01:02:48): Much of American history was defined by intense radical racism and sexism. But in the recent years, there was a correction and I think the nature of the criticism is that there’s an overcorrection where DEI programs at universities and companies, when they’re not doing their job well, are often hard to criticize because when you criticize them within the company or so on, they have a very strong immune system. If you criticize a DEI program, it seems like it’s very easy to be called racist, and if you’re called racist or sexist, that’s a sticky label. Mark Cuban (01:03:33): You’re getting into the culture of organizations and leadership within organizations, and accepting any type of criticism, put aside DEI. When I criticized the referees in the MVA, I got fined. That was their option. I knew what I was getting into, not that they’re completely analogous, but it’s cause and effect. Mark Cuban (01:03:56): If I’m in a major company and I’m publicly criticizing or even internally criticizing a sales plan or a product, our product sucks. There was a Google engineer that got fired for saying Google had AGI, and nobody believed they did and they knew that created problems. It wasn’t DEI related, but it was saying something publicly that was, in the CEO’s eyes, to the detriment of the company. Mark Cuban (01:04:23): I think those are all analogous. If you’re trying to accomplish something within an organization because you think there’s a problem and there’s people speaking out saying look, we’re getting it wrong, I think I’m a victim of all this, and the company… Then leadership has got to make a decision. Do they agree or not agree? Are they right or are they wrong? Is it positive or negative to the company? And you decide. Mark Cuban (01:04:50): This conversation that conservatives are being silenced in organizations now, I haven’t seen it. The other side of your question, I think unpacking it, is what’s driving all this? Put aside universities for one. In corporate America, when I talk to people in corporate America about DEI, they always start talking about ideology. Mark Cuban (01:05:25): I’ve talked to Bill Ackman, who you’ve had on, and when I asked him, “Bill, you run your own companies. Who’s telling you what to do?” “They are.” “Who’s they? “It’s the universities, the people who have this ideology of DEI.” I’m like, “Did they force you? Did they coerce you? Did you lose control of your company?” “No, it’s not me. It happens to other people.” Then I talk to other people, same thing. Mark Cuban (01:05:52): I try not to go one-on-one in Twitter conversations on this topic. In the DMs, I’ll talk to people who are really conservative and I’ll ask the same question and be like, “Who’s forcing you to do this?” “It’s the ideology that’s everywhere. Didn’t see the Harvard thing in University of North Carolina.” I’m like I’ve never had anybody try to push me in this direction to do this. This was my business choice. I’m not trying to tell other people you have to do this. You make your own business choices. Where companies have made their business choices, and if somebody doesn’t feel confident or comfortable with it, they may feel they’re being discriminated against. Mark Cuban (01:06:30): There was something I just read in the Wall Street Journal, where the Wall Street Journal had a company interview 2 million people, and the difficulty in firing and how people, when they were fired, 40% of the people who were fired felt like it was wrong, that they were doing a great job. Then it talked about the HR person going through the hassle of trying to explain to this person through performance reviews that they weren’t doing a good job, yet the people still thought they were doing a great job, despite being told they’re not doing a good job. Mark Cuban (01:07:04): I see that as being an analogous to all this huffing and puffing about reverse discrimination and conservatives not being able to speak up because if 40% of people who have been fired don’t believe they should have been fired, there’s a disconnect somewhere in how you think you’re doing your job. If you just feel like, I can’t speak up because of it, because of you’re white, and that doesn’t comport well with DEI programs, a lot of things are going to happen. Mark Cuban (01:07:39): Either that’s going to come up in your performance review, HR or your boss is going to have to address it in some way, it’s going to get to HR at some level, and then decisions are going to have to be made. You can’t just fire somebody because they spoke up. Somebody’s going to have to communicate with you. I think a lot of… I just don’t trust the supposed volume- Mark Cuban (01:08:00): I just don’t trust the supposed volume that people say it’s happening at, versus everything I’ve read and seen. And when I talk to people in positions of authority within organizations and ask them who’s forcing them to implement these ideologies, nobody says… Nobody says yes, that there is somebody. But on Twitter, it sounds great. Lex Fridman (01:08:22): It is true for Conservatives, but in general, you can sell books, you can get likes when you talk about this ideology, and there’s a degree to which, “Is this woke ideology in the room with us right now?” Meaning it’s this boogie monster that we’re all… Mark Cuban (01:08:38): Or is it a positive? Lex Fridman (01:08:40): I guess another way to say that is they don’t highlight a lot of the positive progress that’s been made in the positive version of the word “woke” in terms of correcting some of the wrongs done in the past. Lex Fridman (01:08:51): But that said, if you ask people in Russia, a lot of them will say, “There’s no propaganda here. There’s no censorship.” And all that kind of stuff. It’s sometimes hard to see when you’re in it that this stuff is happening. It does seem difficult to criticize DEI programs, not horribly difficult, terrible, they are this monster that infiltrates everything, but it is difficult and it requires great leadership. Mark Cuban (01:09:20): So where have you criticized it and been condemned? Academic or… Lex Fridman (01:09:24): Academic. Mark Cuban (01:09:25): Okay. Academic, let’s… Two different worlds. Lex Fridman (01:09:28): Companies and academic, yeah. Mark Cuban (01:09:29): Two different worlds. Lex Fridman (01:09:30): But I also think it’s not… I really want to point my finger at the failure of leadership of basically firing mediocre people. People that are not good at their job. The problem to me is DEI’s defense mechanism, like immune system, is so strong that the shitty people don’t get fired. So the vision, the ideal of DEI is a beautiful ideal. It’s just like… Mark Cuban (01:10:01): Well, maybe it’s because I’m an entrepreneur, when I see an ideal that you try to implement it, and support it, and get to that point. But universities and companies are night and day different. Mark Cuban (01:10:12): I can see an argument for the ideology in a university. I can see, you look at the amount of money spent on it. And so while the goal is right, the way they implement it in universities, the way they implement most things in universities, is wrong. There’s a reason why tuition has gone up a multitude, or a multiple, of inflation. They’re not well run organizations across the board. So I’m not going to argue with that at all. So when you’ve seen me argue with DEI, I haven’t waded into DEI in universities at all. Lex Fridman (01:10:46): That’s mostly focused on companies. Mark Cuban (01:10:48): A hundred percent because that’s where I exist. But at the same time, I read Christopher Rufo’s book where he talks about the genealogy of wokeism and ideology, but then he gets to the point, and I hope I’m remembering this right, where he says that the response to it is decentralized activism, if you will, that’s not the word he used, to try to counter that DEI. Mark Cuban (01:11:12): And that seems, to me, to be counter to the whole Conservative movement right now, other than school boards where it’s centralized, and the Republican candidate is all about centralized power in him. And to me, that’s just a conflict in a lot of the underpinning of the whole DEI conversation, that a lot of which goes through Christopher Rufo right now. Lex Fridman (01:11:41): Let’s continue on a theme of fun exchanges on the internet. Lex Fridman (01:11:45): So Elon tweeted, “The fundamental axiomatic flaw of the woke mind virus is that the weaker party’s always right (in even if they want you to die).” Lex Fridman (01:11:57): And you responded, at length, but the beginning is, “The fundamental axiomatic flaw of the anti-woke mind is that it allows groups with historical power to play the victim by taking anecdotal examples and packaging them into conjured conspiratorial ideology that threatens to upend the power structures they have been depending on.” Mark Cuban (01:12:22): Says it all, right? Lex Fridman (01:12:24): Well, there’s a tension there. So, yes, but both can be abused. Both positions of power can be abused. There’s power in DEI, and there’s shitty people that can crave power, and hold onto power, and sacrifice their ideals. Mark Cuban (01:12:45): Okay. Put aside universities. Lex Fridman (01:12:47): Dammit. Mark Cuban (01:12:48): Because I’m not going to argue that universities implement DEI well, and I’m not going to tell you that they need to be spending twenty-some million dollars a year on DEI positions. To me, that’s insane. Do I look at the Harvard and North Carolina decision and say it was a great decision? No, because I think having a diverse student body helps make for kids who are better prepared for the real world. But I’m not running a university, so it’s not my choice. Maybe at some point in the future I will, but not now. And in terms of terms the corporate side of it, who’s telling anybody what to do? Lex Fridman (01:13:37): Well, maybe you can give me some help. Mark Cuban (01:13:41): Sure. I’m here to help you, Lex. Lex Fridman (01:13:44): There’s an example in the AI world of a system called Gemini 15, Google… Mark Cuban (01:13:52): Everybody was black or whatever, people of color. Lex Fridman (01:13:54): George Washington was Black, Nazis were Black. Mark Cuban (01:13:57): So why is it when that came out, it was a big uproar, but when somebody… So, who was it? One of the people who were trying to fuck with me, I forget which one. Lex Fridman (01:14:09): There’s so many people. Mark Cuban (01:14:10): But he pointed out to Elon that Grok, Elon’s AI, was woke when it answered certain questions, and other people have pointed out other things to Elon about Grok, however it’s pronounced, that was leaning left or woke. And Elon’s response was, “Oh, it’ll change. It’s a mistake. We’re fixing it.” When it happens to Gemini and Google, it’s the end of the world. “Look how woke they are. And it’s a reflection of all their culture.” Now Google comes out and says it’s a mistake. And then they doxxed the guy who’s the Product Manager or whatever of AI, of that product who… And then they go back and look at his old tweets, and show that he’s very left leaning and very DEI supportive, and that’s the end of the world. Lex Fridman (01:15:01): It’s not the end of the world, but Google’s so much dependent on trust, that trust a Google search has as objective as possible, channel into the world of information. And so that brand is really important for us. Mark Cuban (01:15:19): So you’re giving them too much power. And maybe I’m not recognizing the power. So I’ll tell you a personal experience. Mark Cuban (01:15:29): Up until a month ago, maybe if you put in keto gummies, Shark Tank keto gummies, into Google, it would show up with scammy ads, scam ad, after scam. And I would get emails, up until a month ago, from elderly people asking me why the gummies weren’t working, and why the companies were charging all this money on a month-by-month basis when they tried to cancel. And they said it was the number one deal on Shark Tank of all time and all Shark… It was a mistake. Lex Fridman (01:16:07): Well, there’s fraud, there’s mistakes, but the mistakes… Mark Cuban (01:16:12): No, but why didn’t Google fix it? This just didn’t happen once over one week, over two weeks. And because it was hard to fix. As it turns out, I was working with them to try to find a fix, and we would both look at the same page. And, if you were inside of Google within the Google. com domain, it would show one page. If you were outside of Google, it would show another. And it took us looking at it at the same time for anybody to realize it. Meaning that there’s a lot of technology problems that are hard to fix. Lex Fridman (01:16:41): They’re super complex, and we could talk about it forever with social media. The criticism towards Google, towards other companies when they’re based in Silicon Valley, there could be an ideological drift into an ideological bubble out of which the technology is created, and they could be blind to the obvious bias that comes inherent to… Mark Cuban (01:17:00): But they’ve got billions of customers who are not going to… So what you’re saying is, the free market stops with artificial intelligence, that people don’t pay attention and respond, that Google doesn’t listen to the responses, that people inside of Google will ignore their own best financial interest, and even their own best personal interest, because they know they’re going to get doxxed now by Elon and others, and so I just don’t see that. Mark Cuban (01:17:27): And Elon’s not allowed to make those same mistakes, but… Elon’s allowed to make those mistakes, but Google isn’t? Lex Fridman (01:17:33): Oh, no. Elon is 100% should be criticized for the ridiculousness of overstatements that he makes about various products. He’s having a bit of fun, like you are also, and I also believe in the free market, but it’s not always efficient. There’s a delay. Mark Cuban (01:17:50): Just takes time. It’s fine. Lex Fridman (01:17:52): So which is why Elon is important when calling out, I think overstating the criticism of Gemini, but Elon and others are just… Mark Cuban (01:17:58): Gemini wasn’t even a fully available public product yet. Lex Fridman (01:18:03): It’s still a bias that resonates with people. Mark Cuban (01:18:06): That’s the way neural networks work though. That’s why there’ll be millions of models, because weights and biases, putting together a neural network. Lex Fridman (01:18:16): No. So the Black George Washington is a correction on top of the foundation model to keep it “safe.” One of the big criticisms of all of the models, frankly, probably even Grok, a little bit less so, is they’re trying to be really conservative in the sense of trying to be careful not to say crazy shit, because we don’t know how the thing… Mark Cuban (01:18:44): It’s brand new and we know what happens, and they do it on the front end with prompts, and they try to do it on the back end with the neural networks that are underneath them, and it doesn’t always work. And that’s why there’s going to be millions of models rather than just four foundational models, or five, that everybody uses. Lex Fridman (01:19:02): Well, I guess the main criticism is you want to have some transparency of all the teams that are involved and that this kind of… To the degree there’s a left-leaning ideology within the companies, it doesn’t affect the product. Mark Cuban (01:19:16): But that’s the beauty of… Lex Fridman (01:19:17): The free market. Mark Cuban (01:19:19): That’s where the market corrects it. And not only from the outside, because everybody is going to test it. When YouTube first came out, or not first came out, after Google bought them, there used to be different commands you could give it. There were prompt commands that you could give it, and you could find all the nasty porn that got loaded before they kicked it off. And it was just the nastiest shit ever. And even now to this day, if there’s some horrific tragic event, somebody’s loading it up. Mark Cuban (01:19:53): Now, I know that’s not direct to your point of internal influence to the output, but people on the outside are going to check for that now. It’s almost like the new bug contest to try to find bugs in software. And then on the inside, if it’s all left-leaning, and all you have is left-leaning employees, because most Conservatives won’t want to work there, then again that’s self-correcting as well. Lex Fridman (01:20:16): That’s the hope, but it can self-correct in different kinds of ways. You can have a different company that competes and becomes more conservative. My worry is that it becomes two different worlds where there’s like… Mark Cuban (01:20:27): Already is. Lex Fridman (01:20:29): No, come on, don’t give up. Mark Cuban (01:20:31): Oh, I’m not giving up. So where does this go? Is the question. What happens next? And going back, I’ve been in so many PC revolutions, or evolutions, where porn was the big issue. Now we don’t even talk about porn being an issue, even though every post on Twitter now has “link in bio” for a porn post, we don’t even think that’s a negative anymore. That’s just an accepted thing. And now it is become very… Where your politics on Twitter. But again, as you extend that and things grow, as AI models become more efficient, and trainable for a lot less money, or even locally on a PC or a phone, we’re all going to have our own models, and there’s going to be millions, and millions, and millions of models and not just foundational models. Mark Cuban (01:21:29): Now maybe they’re built some on open source, maybe it’ll be copy-pasta where you can just cut and paste and create your own model and train it yourself. Maybe it’ll be mixture of experts where maybe it’ll be a Meta front end. Like we’re working on a project where we take 30 different AI models and there’s just a Meta search engine where it searches all of them, and you can compare all the outputs and see what you think is the best, like a search engine. Because you might get, “Is DEI good?” “Is the Covid vaccine good?” You’re going to get a variety of outputs and you have to make that decision yourself. Mark Cuban (01:22:09): That’s what I think is going to happen with AI as well, because I think brands… There’s no way the Mayo Clinic and the Harvard Medical School are just going to contribute all their IP to ChatGPT, or Gemini, or whatever. It’s going to have to be licensed or they’re going to do their own. Lex Fridman (01:22:27): That’s a very hopeful message. But that said, human history doesn’t always autocorrect really quickly, self-correct, really quickly. Sometimes you get into these very painful things. You have Stalin, you have Hitler, you can get to places very quickly where the ideological thing just builds on itself. Mark Cuban (01:22:50): Twitter is not real world. There’s 20… Lex Fridman (01:22:54): Twitter is not real world. That’s true, yes, but you could still have a nation captured by an ideology. Lex Fridman (01:23:00): I think America has been really good at having these two blue and red, always at tension with each other, dividing the populace, and in the process of doing that, figuring stuff out. Almost like playing devil’s advocate, but in real life. Mark Cuban (01:23:18): And that’s fair. And that’s right. As opposed to Pravda telling you everything you want to know and everybody believing it, because there’s control of everything. Mark Cuban (01:23:26): And so going back to what you said earlier, people in Russia don’t think invading Ukraine… A lot of them see it as a positive. I’m sure you have relatives and friends who think it’s the best thing that ever happened, because they believe in Putin. Lex Fridman (01:23:42): They’re denazifying Ukraine, they’re removing the Nazis from Ukraine. Mark Cuban (01:23:46): Because exactly what Putin said. And we don’t have one uniform media outlet. That’s the difference. Even though people like to talk about mainstream media as being the source of a lot of the friction, there is no such thing as mainstream media anymore. Fox is the biggest cable news channel with the biggest audience, and they call everybody else mainstream media. It’s insane the things that we accept from our sources of information. To me, that’s the bigger problem. The bigger problem is trying to figure out what is free speech and what is the line of tolerance for free speech? And at what point does hateful free speech crowd out other people? Putin’s the master of that. You’re going to jail or you’re going to be dead if you disagree. Now, God help us if we ever get to that point here, but the person who controls the algorithm controls the world. And if you are committed to one specific platform as your singular source of information or affiliated platforms, then whoever controls the algorithm or the programming there controls you, in a lot of respects. And I think that’s where our biggest problem has been. We get people attached to specific platforms, and apps, and media outlets, and they become part of that team, and they identify as such, and either you’re part of the team or you’re not. And that to me is the fundamental problem. Mark Cuban (01:25:18): It’s not woke ideology, because I never felt any pressure to make the choices that I’ve chosen, including diversity, equity, and inclusion, and I’ve never forced anybody or told anybody to do it. I just said, “Here’s my experiences.” Whenever I’ve talked to people who talk about the woke ideology, no one ever got forced. If you look at Dylan McDermott, if there was a way to gauge the number of impressions that she had, and where they sourced from, I’d be willing bet any amount of money that 90% plus of the impressions and discussions of Dylan McDermott were on, right-leaning media. Lex Fridman (01:25:57): Several things, actually, let’s even go there. You gotten a bit of a beef with, again, fun, with Jordan Peterson about this. Mark Cuban (01:26:03): That’s the guy whose name I couldn’t think of. Lex Fridman (01:26:05): So the topic there was the gender transition and Dylan Mulvaney. Can you explain the nature of the beef? It’s an interesting claim you’re making and most of the people who are concerned about this are Conservatives. Mark Cuban (01:26:21): The point is that if you looked at impressions when you run an ad, you’re curious about impressions and who sees them, but if you look at the impressions related to Dylan McDermott, like I just said, I bet 90% or more were in conservative media, and I don’t know how many followers she had, 250,000 followers or whatever when the Bud Light ad came out. And if it weren’t for Kid Rock shooting at Dylan McDermott Bud Light cans, she’d be long forgotten. Lex Fridman (01:26:53): But most of the people that care about censorship are going to be free speech advocates. So most people that care about Putin suppressing speech, or anybody else suppressing speech, are going to be libertarian. So there’s probably an explanation of that. Lex Fridman (01:27:08): The criticism that Jordan Peterson could provide, I guess he said that Dylan Mulvaney popularized the kind of mutilation in his view, that can affect… There’s a very serious life-changing process that a person goes through, and when that’s applied to a child, it can do a lot of harm to a person if… Mark Cuban (01:27:32): But my point still holds, I don’t know how many kids were following, and you could look at the followers list, it’s not like it’s hidden. Back then, if they had 250,000 followers and now we’re on TikTok where he might get 50 some thousand views or likes, I don’t know how many views, but likes, I’ve never seen any evidence that Dylan McDermott influenced people to transition their gender. As he transitioned to her, it was documented on TikTok over the course of a year. And again, when you go back and look at the views on those TikToks, it wasn’t enormous. Lex Fridman (01:28:14): But the trends start. It could be… What worries people is for young kids there to be a trend of, especially when you feel like an outsider, you feel not yourself, less than yourself, all this kind of stuff that kids feel like, that if it’s because popular enough, if it’s a trend, you would gender transition without meaning to do that. It is just part of a trend. That’s the worry they have. Mark Cuban (01:28:44): That is a big stretch, to think that all the things that have to happen before you transition gender, and I’m not saying kids might find it cool, or in the moment expedient, if you will, to dress up as the other gender. Great, who cares? But to go through the actual physical transition, I don’t remember what the numbers were that I read, but I do remember that the latest numbers that came out in terms of transitioning were from JAMA, which is a medical association, that said from 2021 to 2022, the numbers went down. Mark Cuban (01:29:27): But the bigger point is there are no numbers for 2023 when, post-Dylan McDermott. So there’s no way to know if the assertion is true, even marginally true. Now, you can easily suggest it, but you can say that about any social media influencer. Kids are dying because… It’s just like when people accused Trump of potentially influencing people to inject bleach into their veins. That’s a big old leap to say that because Trump says it, that people are going to start injecting, and then they find somebody who actually did. And it’s like, “Oh, it must be true. This is a trend now.” I’m just not buying it that there aren’t enough roadblocks in the way. Mark Cuban (01:30:18): Now, I’m not saying it never happens, and for me, to me, you should have to wait until you’re 18 to actually have any surgery to transition. And if your parents approve it earlier, then you can have a conversation with your doctor. But you’re suggesting that everybody in that process to transition, a minor is corrupt. That the doctor, the sociologist, the psychologist, all the people involved, the hospital where the surgery is happening, the insurance company that’s paying for it, they all have been corrupted by this trend. I just don’t see that. Lex Fridman (01:30:55): Well, not corrupted, but people, it’s back to the DEI thing, there could be pressure, and we are… Mark Cuban (01:31:02): Pressure to operate? So think about all the people who have to be complicit to do an operation. Lex Fridman (01:31:07): It’s not complicit like evil complicit. It’s more… Mark Cuban (01:31:10): No, it is evil complicit. Because somebody…. In hospitals right now, they won’t perform abortions because of state law. In Alabama, they stopped IVF treatment immediately after that ruling by that judge, the Q Anon judge, to think that they’re not going to pay attention to the possible consequences of being the hospital that does transgender, that gives doctors operating rights there and not be aware of the risks associated with it and double check, to me, that’s just insane. They’re risking their entire business, and livelihood, and personal relationships for not checking that this fourteen-year-old boy who wants to be a girl or vice versa, is there waiting for surgery. I just don’t see that. Lex Fridman (01:31:58): In America, yes. But if we look at humans in general, and Jordan Peterson, I think unjustly, incorrectly brought up Auschwitz. Mark Cuban (01:32:09): That was ridiculous. Lex Fridman (01:32:10): But if we look… To me, World War II is a very interesting time. It does reveal a lot about human nature, and that humans are able to commit atrocities without really speaking up. The point I want to make is that when you’re in this situation where everybody is around you is committing an atrocity, you can be the good German… Mark Cuban (01:32:37): But… Lex Fridman (01:32:38): Human nature is such that you can do [inaudible 01:32:41] things. Mark Cuban (01:32:40): But that is in a time of war. Lex Fridman (01:32:45): But it’s still human nature. It’s interesting to remember that. Mark Cuban (01:32:48): It’s a time of war when you feel like there’s nationalism, patriotism, everything that comes up. Russia, the moms of the kids sent to Ukraine who didn’t come back, in Russia, feels certainly different than the everyday Russian who’s just taking whatever information that’s available from a unified controlled media. Lex Fridman (01:33:09): But we should remember human nature. It’s interesting. Mark Cuban (01:33:12): I’m not dismissing human nature at all, but there’s a difference. I think that human nature, self-preservation influences those decisions. There’s nothing about self-preservation involved in DEI, wokeness, transgenderism to compare it to Auschwitz. That’s insane. Lex Fridman (01:33:29): Well, that comparison is almost always, probably always, is insane comparison between anything and the Holocaust. Mark Cuban (01:33:37): I agree. Lex Fridman (01:33:37): I think there’s a name for that rule, but once you bring up Hitler, the conversation ends. Mark Cuban (01:33:42): Goes away. Lex Fridman (01:33:43): I do appreciate you bringing up Trump and bleach as an example. So continuing on fun exchanges between you and Elon, you said, “If they were having Biden’s last wake and it was him versus Trump, and he was being given last rights, I would still vote for Biden.” To which Elon replied, caricaturing you, “If Biden were a flesh-eating zombie with five seconds to live, where, upon being reelected, Earth would plunge into a 1000 years of darkness, I would still vote for him.” Lex Fridman (01:34:16): That’s basically quoting you, but in a caricature. And you responded, “While, I have your attention. Wanted to say thank you! Your consultants at Tesla followed up about using Cost Plus drugs…” About which we’ll talk about. “… To save the company money. Truly appreciated.” And in parentheses, “(My limit is 300 years of darkness.)” Very well done, Mark. Lex Fridman (01:34:41): What’s your intuition, if we just stick on Biden and Trump for a sec, what’s your intuition why Biden would make a better president than Trump? Mark Cuban (01:34:48): Look at the basics. If you look at the people he’s hired, there hasn’t been any turnover in his cabinet at all. If you look at the people he’s hired over the course of his career, or while he was Vice President in particular, there’s nobody who’s turned on him, and came out, and written books, and made public statements about how he’s bad for the country. Mark Cuban (01:35:12): Now, compare that to Trump, the people closest to him, almost all of them turned, unless there’s a financial relationship involved, and to me that says everything. Lex Fridman (01:35:26): The dynamics of the team is important to you when you [inaudible 01:35:28]. Mark Cuban (01:35:27): If you’re going to be the most powerful person in the world, you better know how to manage and lead. And that’s not to say Biden hasn’t made a lot of mistakes. Immigration, the border, is a horrific mistake, and hopefully he recognizes that. And I don’t like the fact that he doesn’t admit his mistakes and just say, “Okay, I got to fix it.” Or, “I made a mistake in Afghanistan.” Whatever it may be. The position of Commander in Chief and President, you’re going to make mistakes. Mark Cuban (01:35:59): Then I look at the other guy, never admits a mistake, and the list is long. Lex Fridman (01:36:04): What do you think about the immigration situation? A lot of Conservatives are using that… The theory is that the reason it’s happening is because they would be able to illegally vote. Mark Cuban (01:36:19): That’s insane. Lex Fridman (01:36:20): For Biden. Mark Cuban (01:36:21): You can’t be an illegal immigrant and vote. Mark Cuban (01:36:24): And now, in a lot of states, because of the Conservatives, they’ve passed laws saying you have to show identification. When I voted in Texas, you had to show state identification. They can’t vote. You can’t register as an illegal alien, that I’m aware of, to vote. Lex Fridman (01:36:39): But of course, that story, and it really worries me, enables, or serves as a catalyst for questioning the legitimacy of an election. Mark Cuban (01:36:49): I remember going to the debate with Trump in 2016, and he was debating Clinton, and one of the things he said was, “We don’t even know if this election will be legitimate if I lose.” This was in 2016 before he was even elected, and that was where he was going. That’s just what he does. He’s never admitted a mistake. The guy’s failed a zillion times. Most people say, “Okay, I learned from them.” I read a book about Roy Cohn, and Roy Cohn was the ultimate deny, deny, deny, and that was one of Trump’s mentors. And you can see almost everything that Roy Cohn ever did in the same way that Donald Trump approaches things. Lex Fridman (01:37:27): But, given how drastic the immigration situation is, that story becomes more believable. Mark Cuban (01:37:33): Of course it does, but the facts are still the facts. And in red states, they’re going to be checking every ID, they’re going to be making sure that’s not the case, and you can also make the argument, “Well, in the blue state, it doesn’t matter.” In the swing states, they’re still going to be checking because they know Trump is going to sue the out of them when he loses. And so again, that’s where people will take those self-preservation steps to keep their job and do the right thing. Mark Cuban (01:38:01): There’s still enough people who believe in this country and how amazing it is to do the right thing. And a lot of the premise of what some Conservatives are saying and doing, the underpinning of it is that their fellow citizens will not do anything, not some things, anything, that serves the best interest of this country. And to me, that’s just wrong. That is just misleading and wrong. Lex Fridman (01:38:27): I just worry about… I don’t care about Trump or Biden, I care about democracy. I just worry. I worry about the viral nature of the idea of this illegal immigrants. Mark Cuban (01:38:39): It’s very functional. Either they get across… There’s a thousand different ways, an unlimited number of ways to enter the United States of America undetected, and the south border where it’s the easiest and the worst, and Biden needs to take steps to reduce that. Mark Cuban (01:38:55): Remember, when Biden was vice president and Obama was president, they called Obama, the Deporter in Chief. He had no problem deporting people. And I think if I had to guess, and this is just a guess, that when they looked at the initial statistics for immigration when Biden took over, they thought there was room for more immigrants, not because they would vote, but you can make a fiscal argument that, in a world where the birth rate is flat to declining, we need immigrants. And immigrants typically don’t have a higher crime rate or anything than indigenous American citizens. Indigenous isn’t the right word, but American citizens. And so they made a calculated mistake. They made a decision that was wrong, and now they have to fix it or it’s going to hurt them severely. Mark Cuban (01:39:48): But I don’t buy what Elon’s pushing that the whole reason is they are voters and will become voters. Lex Fridman (01:39:57): And we should say the obvious, you’re a descendant of immigrants. Mark Cuban (01:40:02): For sure. Lex Fridman (01:40:02): And the immigrants is what makes this country great, in many parts, the diversity of this nation. And we should probably keep the people that are already been in this country for a while and are killing it, like PhD students and all this. It’s like [inaudible 01:40:17]. Mark Cuban (01:40:16): That’s not what Donald Trump wants, though. He wants to ship them all out. There’s just a whole lot of hyperbole when it comes to talking to all, about talking about all of these things we’re talking about. When it’s right versus left, my team versus your team, my tribe versus your tribe, the only way to stand out is hyperbole. Mark Cuban (01:40:34): The hard part, and why I like this conversation, is how do you distinguish hyperbole versus reality? And I get where you’re going, Lex, where it’s like what… The smallest spark sometimes can cause people to change, and then that spark becomes bigger, and then it becomes more widespread, and then all of a sudden your country has changed. It’s not what you thought it was. I get that completely. And yes, you always have to be on top of that to make sure, but a lot of that comes from lack of leadership, and lack of trust, because there’s nobody who’s saying, “All right, Republicans, that’s all hyperbole and you’re wrong for that. Democrats, you fucked up on immigration. You up in Afghanistan. Here’s where you made these mistakes. Own it.” Mark Cuban (01:41:23): There’s nobody who says, “We’re not going to just bring in Republicans if the Republicans win.” And there’s nobody who says, “We’re not going to just bring in Democrats. We’re going to bring in a mix. We’re going to try to get balance on the Supreme Court.” There’s no leadership that’s doing it. That’s the fundamental problem. It’s not about the ideology of woke. No leadership. Lex Fridman (01:41:45): Leadership, whatever systems we’ve created, it’s really frustrating that if you don’t like Trump, it’s really is Trump derangement syndrome. He’s definitely Hitler, and if you don’t like Biden, he’s senile, lizard person… Lex Fridman (01:42:00): Senile lizard person that- Mark Cuban (01:42:04): Right, everybody gets labeled right because that works on social media. Look, if Elon changed the algorithm just by taking himself out of it, seriously, I’m not saying don’t post, right? Post all you want, but if you look at his followers, they’re almost all right-leaning. If you look at the people he engages with positively, they’re almost all right-leaning. And if you look at the people he engages with negatively, like me, I consider myself an independent, but I lean left on the DEI topic. That influences the algorithm. And so you see what you see because of what he says. Lex Fridman (01:42:44): Yeah, well, I mean for sure. But there could be a lot of influential people on Twitter that influence the algorithm and all that kind of stuff. But I do feel it’s not even about ideology where you lean, it’s about the algorithm, not prioritizing drama. The attention grabbing thing or the lower lizard version of that where people just want the drama. They want to tear you down. Mark Cuban (01:43:13): Right. When I last read through all the stuff on their algorithm, right, maybe it’s changed, whoever has the biggest account and gets engagement on that account influences what people see the most. Lex Fridman (01:43:26): Yeah, I mean, that’s interesting. I don’t know if that’s, to the degree that’s true, they’ve pretty- Mark Cuban (01:43:31): I’m sure it’s still the case. Lex Fridman (01:43:32): …Pretty rigorous description of the way the algorithm works. It’s actually kind of fascinating. There’s a clustering of people based on interests- Mark Cuban (01:43:41): But I think they called the nearest neighbor approach, and I think that’s what they do. And so whoever has the biggest account, has the most neighbors who in turn have their neighbors who in turn have their neighbors, and that’s how they discern what comes next. Lex Fridman (01:43:53): But there’s a clustering still. So if you don’t give a shit about Elon, you’re not- Mark Cuban (01:43:57): And you’re not following him, yeah, you’re not following- Lex Fridman (01:43:59): You’re not going to have an influence. It’s not going to have an influence. Mark Cuban (01:44:02): When you get a break, just create a burner account on Twitter and see who they recommend to you. Lex Fridman (01:44:07): Elon. Mark Cuban (01:44:08): And not just Elon, I mean the people that Elon likes. And I’m saying that’s not Elon saying add this person, add this person and suggest this person, this person, and this person. I’m saying that’s what the algorithm is. Lex Fridman (01:44:19): Yeah. There should be transparency around that. For sure. That’s the- Mark Cuban (01:44:22): And there is. There is. And that’s the whole point, right? He knows there’s transparency and he knows the impact. That’s why when I say take yourself out of the algorithm, don’t include his account, that changes I think the output of the algorithm. Lex Fridman (01:44:34): Well, when he wasn’t owning Twitter, he was one of the biggest accounts, if not the biggest account already. Mark Cuban (01:44:39): He wasn’t. But still. even the Kim Kardashian accounts, whatever, it wasn’t open source to Elon’s credit. It is now. So I couldn’t see it to know. Right? So I didn’t get the sense one way or the other of one element being dominant over the other. But obviously conservatives felt that left leaning was more dominant back then. Lex Fridman (01:45:00): Yeah, I would love to see numbers on all of this. Mark Cuban (01:45:02): Yeah, you and me both. Lex Fridman (01:45:04): DEI, everything like this. Sometimes anecdotal data really frustrates me. It frustrates me primarily because of how sexy it is. People just love- Mark Cuban (01:45:05): That’s a great way to describe it. Lex Fridman (01:45:15): Love a story, and I’m like, Goddamn it, this is not science. This is- Mark Cuban (01:45:20): It’s not even common sense. Lex Fridman (01:45:22): Well, no, I think anecdotal stories often have a wisdom in them. Mark Cuban (01:45:27): No doubt, right? There’s something to be gained from seeing them. Lex Fridman (01:45:30): There’s a signal there, but how representative is that signal of the broader thing? Mark Cuban (01:45:35): There’s a whole lot more noise than signal more often than not. Lex Fridman (01:45:37): All right, so as I mentioned, Cost Plus Drugs, there’s so many questions I can ask here, but what’s the big question? What’s broken about our healthcare system? Mark Cuban (01:45:47): There’s no transparency. And when the lack of transparency leads to lack of trust and when you can’t trust the healthcare system other than maybe your doctor, that’s a broken system. Lex Fridman (01:45:58): So what aspect of this system does Cost Plus Drugs is trying to solve? Mark Cuban (01:46:04): So the thing we’re trying to solve for is trust. And the way we feel we get there is through complete transparency. So when you go to costplusdrugs.com and you put in the name of the medication, if it’s one of the 2,500 and growing that we carry, we will first show you our costs, what we actually pay for it, then we’ll show you our 15% markup. Then we’ll show the pharmacy fill fee and shipping, and that’s your total price. And that alone, that transparency alone, is completely revolutionizing how drugs are priced in America today. And it’s led to research being done comparing our pricing to CMS and ours being cheaper than even the government is negotiating, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And so just that transparency alone has had an impact and saved millions of people hundreds of millions of dollars or more. Lex Fridman (01:46:59): And maybe it results in more transparency in other parts of the system too, seeing the business of it. What do the so-called middlemen companies. So the PBMs- Mark Cuban (01:47:09): Correct. The pharmacy benefit managers. Lex Fridman (01:47:10): Thank you. CVS Caremark, Cigna’s Express Scripts, and United Health’s Optum Rx, they control majority of the market. What do they do wrong? Mark Cuban (01:47:22): They put profits over everything. And they know in an industry that’s completely opaque, they can pretty much do what they want and nobody gets to see what they’re doing in detail. And so the first thing when you sign a contract with one of those big PBMs, it says you can’t disclose any of this. And the fact that you can’t be disclosed means they could tell Lex’s company that they’re getting a great price and they’re only being charged X. And they can tell Mark’s company, oh, you’re getting a great price and we’re charging Mark X plus, right? But Mark doesn’t know any better because there’s no way to know. Lex Fridman (01:48:03): The markup is not transparent. Mark Cuban (01:48:05): The cost isn’t transparent, the markup isn’t transparent. And there’s different things, like I was just talking to a company in a presentation a couple days ago, and they took the step to leave the big three PBMs to go to a rebate free PBM that was smaller. And what they said led to the decision, they had a contract with the PBM for these things called rebates, where depending on the volume of medications you buy, they’ll kick back to you a percentage of them. And as it turns out, when they compared what was contracted for to what they actually got, they were getting underpaid every single year. They just don’t care. They’ll take products. There’s a drug called Humira, and it is the number one revenue drug in the country. And there’s also a biosimilar, multiple biosimilars, but one we carry called Yusimry. And, Humira, the pre-rebate price is about $8,000 per month. After rebates, depending on the size of the company, it’ll be anywhere from three to $6,000 a month. You can go to get your doctor to prescribe that biosimilar Yusimry and you pay $594. But those big three PBMs won’t allow their clients to get Yusimry because they don’t get a rebate on Yusimry. So they’d rather keep a drug on their formulary, even though their patients, their customers would save a lot of money, they’d rather keep a drug and exclude another because they’ll make a lot more money. Lex Fridman (01:49:39): So the CVS Caremark spokesperson, I think responded to you, Phil Blando, with the usual language that so deeply exhausts me, but I was wondering if there’s any truth to it. Employers, unions, health plans and government programs work with CVS Caremark precisely because we deliver for them. Lower drug costs, better health outcomes, and broad pharmacy access through our true cost, cost vantage and choice formulary initiatives, we are the leading agent of change, innovation, and transparency in the market. Mark Cuban (01:50:18): That’s a whole lot of nothing. Lex Fridman (01:50:20): So they are not transparent? Mark Cuban (01:50:23): No. Call them up. You go to Cost Plus Drugs, we’ll give you our price list of all 2,500 plus drugs. Lex Fridman (01:50:29): The actual cost? Mark Cuban (01:50:30): The actual cost, and what we sell it for because it’s just a plus 15%. Call up any of the big three companies and ask them for the same thing. They’re going to laugh at you. It’s so bad, in fact, if you do business with them right now and you just ask for your claims data, meaning how many people use Humira that we’re paying, what are we paying for it? They won’t even give it to you unless you really, really scream and yell at them and then they’ll charge you and take six months to get it. So when we moved away from them, we wanted to get what our claims data was to understand what we were going to be facing. They wouldn’t give it to us until six months later, I forget the exact month. And then they charge us for it as well, our own data. Lex Fridman (01:51:08): On the CEO front, you’ve said that CEOs don’t understand healthcare coverage and it’s costing them big. What’s the connection between Cost Plus Drugs and companies? Mark Cuban (01:51:20): I can speak for my own companies, and this applies to all companies, bigger companies that’s self-insured, because we self-insure. When we started Cost Plus, I finally said, okay, it’s time for me to understand how I’m paying for my healthcare for my employees and their families. And the first thing I looked at was a lot of these companies use employee benefits consultants, and turns out I was paying $30 per employee per month, which was millions of dollars a year, and they were just sending us to the companies that paid them the biggest commissions. I’m like, how fucking dumb am I? So I’m like, okay, we’re cutting that. And then I looked at our medication, our prescription deal that goes through the PBMs that we were using and that the consultant connected us with. And I took a list of, this was early on in Cost Plus Drugs, list of the generic drugs that we sold that cost more than $30 that the Mavericks also had purchased. Mark Cuban (01:52:20): We were able to get that claims data, and it turns out we spent $169,000 with that PBM, one of the big three PBMs, and it would’ve cost us buying from Cost Plus Drugs $19,000. And that’s just a simple example. Then I looked at the insurance side of things. We self-insure, so there weren’t premiums per se, but we were getting charged $17.15 cents per employee per month just to use the network that they put together for us, providers, hospitals or whatever. And I’m like, all right, are there companies that won’t charge us to put together these networks? Turns out there’s a lot of them. And those insurance companies and those PBMs are also responsible for determining what claims, what to authorize and what to deny. So for a drug, it may be, all right, this is an expensive drug, but before they’ll say they’ll pay for the drug that your doctor wants to prescribe for you, you have to try these three other drugs in what’s called step up therapy to see if these other cheaper drugs work or they’re not even necessarily cheaper, they may be being pushed because they’re getting a higher rebate. Mark Cuban (01:53:31): And so I’m like, that’s insane. I want my employees to get the medication that the doctors say is best. And so I didn’t realize those were the intricacies of where my healthcare dollars went. There’s not a single CEO who does because that’s not a core competency that they need. And the CFOs, that’s not their core competency and the HR people, they contribute and they understand it some because they’re dealing with the claims, but they spend most of their prescription drug related time or healthcare related times trying to get pre-authorizations approved. So your kid breaks their arm or you get sick and you go to the doctor and before the doctor will do a surgery or do whatever, they have to go to the insurance company and get preauthorized. And then they always say no. And then you have to go back and somebody has to argue for you. And that just eats up employee time because I’m sick or my kid’s sick and you’re wasting my time. Eats up HR time. Mark Cuban (01:54:29): The CEOs don’t know any of this, right? So what I’m saying is one, the smartest thing to do is to get a healthcare CEO at every company with over let’s say 500 employees that focuses on all these things. You’d save a shitload of money. And two, healthcare is your second largest line item expense after payroll. And in some companies it’s hundreds, billions of dollars and you don’t understand it and you’re letting these guys rip you off? And it’s because these big CEOs don’t understand it and are getting ripped off that the industry is the way it is because that allows the opacity to continue. Lex Fridman (01:55:07): That’s fascinating. So that most companies outsource, offload the expertise on the healthcare side when they really should be internally, there should be an expert that [inaudible 01:55:20]- Mark Cuban (01:55:19): Yes, because it’s the wellness of your employees and their families and- Lex Fridman (01:55:22): It costs a lot of money. Mark Cuban (01:55:24): Yeah, but if your employees aren’t healthy or if they’re worried about their kids and what is more worrisome and detrimental to the performance of a company? A DEI program or having to go to HR and scream and yell and explain, and your doctor wasting their time doing the same thing to get authorization for a surgery or a medication? It’s insane. Lex Fridman (01:55:49): What made you decide to step into this cartel-like situation where so much is opaque? Mark Cuban (01:55:56): So I got a cold email from a Dr. Alex Oshmyancy, who’s my co-founder. He’s a radiologist by trade in a physicist and a smart mother fucker. And he had a pharmacy that he wanted to create a compounding pharmacy that would manufacture generic drugs that were in short supply because it happens all the time that things aren’t available. I’m like, you’re thinking too small. We should do something on a much bigger scale. And then it was right around the time they were sending the pharmacy bro, Martin Shkreli, to jail. And so I was reading up on that and he increased the price of this drug, Daraprim, I think it was like 7500% or increased a low cost drug to $7,500, one of those. Mark Cuban (01:56:34): And I’m like, well, if he can just jack up the price to this drug and charge more and get away with it, this has to be an incredibly inefficient market. And so the question is why is he able to do it? And it was immediately apparent that it was a lack of transparency. And so can we start a company that is fully transparent with our costs, our markup and our selling price, and see if it works? And so we went for it and it took off immediately. I mean, you read a press release from a company saying they were creating a cost advantage program basically pretending to replicate us? We haven’t been in business two years. How insane is that? Lex Fridman (01:57:13): Did you get a lot of pressure? I mean, I’m sure they’re very good at playing games, so cartel-type situations they protect. It feels like healthcare is very difficult to get in there. Mark Cuban (01:57:23): Yeah, it does. And the whole industry is an arbitrage, but we don’t work inside the system. We work outside the system. And so we don’t work with those biggest companies, the biggest companies with the most dominant control. It’s very insulated and very controlled, like you said, we work outside them, we won’t work with them. And so because of that, we don’t have access to every medication because they’ve told a lot of the big brand manufacturers that if they work with us, they’ll take them off their formularies or change the rebate structure so that they won’t be prescribed as much. Lex Fridman (01:57:52): That’s dark. Mark Cuban (01:57:53): Yeah, it is dark. But we’ll get past that, right? Because there’s a downstream impact of all this in the rebates and the greediness of those big three PBMs. When you go to a local pharmacy here in Austin, and let’s just say you have a friend here that is on Medicare or Medicare Advantage, and they go to a local pharmacy and they get a drug that costs $600. Well, in the insurance company, that $600, the pharmacy first buys that drug for probably that price, minus 5%. So $570. Then there’s probably a copay by the patient, and that’s probably $20. So now the net investment that the pharmacy, the local pharmacy has for that brand medication is $550. Where it gets really fucked up is those big three PBMs, they’re not reimbursing them $550 or more. They’re reimbursing them $500 or less. And literally those community pharmacies are eating that loss, and as a result, they’re going out of business left and right. Mark Cuban (01:59:01): And the most insane part of it is yes, with corporate employer insurance, that happens, but it happens more with Medicare Part D and Medicare Advantage. It happens all the time with those, almost with every script. So the government is complicit in these community pharmacies going out of business. So how does that connect to Cost Plus Drugs and what we’re doing and the big brands? The big brands know that if all these community pharmacies are going, tens of thousands of them are going to go out of business because of the way this pricing is, they’re going to lose a connection between their brand medications and grandma and grandpa and Aunt Sally and all that business is going to get transferred to the big companies and they’re going to have even less leverage. So they’re working with us to come up with programs that are very supportive of independent pharmacies, and that’s going to allow us to break the cartel because it’s in their best interest not to allow them to be so vertically integrated that they destroy the entire community and independent pharmacy industry. Lex Fridman (02:00:03): Is there other aspects of the healthcare industry that could use this kind of transparency and revolutionizing? Mark Cuban (02:00:10): Yes. Yeah. So what we’re going to do with our own healthcare, we’re not going to be in the business of selling healthcare or anything like that or operate, but the things we do for my companies, we’re only going to do deals with providers, healthcare providers, that allow us to be completely transparent. So that whatever contracts we do, we’re going to post them all. Whatever pricing we get, we’re going to post them all so that every company who’s our size or even bigger will have a template that they can work on, which will take it away from the big three insurance companies and the big three PBMs. Because now without that transparency, they have to use consultants who are getting paid by those big three, those big companies and aren’t giving them the best response. And so now that transparency will overcome that. Lex Fridman (02:00:56): And you’re using your, how should I say it, celebrity? Your name to push this forward? Mark Cuban (02:01:02): Yeah, that’s why it’s the only company I’ve ever put my name on. Lex Fridman (02:01:04): It’s weird that people aren’t getting into this space. Public people, there’s not a big, you look at tech, there’s these CEOs are open and public and public and they’re pushing the company and they’re selling everything, and it’s all transparent. But you don’t see that in healthcare. Mark Cuban (02:01:25): No, because it’s a big business. And most people, if I was 25 trying to start a company, I’d work in the system. If I can build it up big enough, they would just buy me and I’d make money and buy a sports team, but I don’t need that money now. Lex Fridman (02:01:38): Let me ask you about AI. You got a little bit of an argument about open source. I think you stepped in between Vinod Khosla and Mark Andreessen. You think AI should be open sourced? Mark Cuban (02:01:50): Yeah, for sure. Lex Fridman (02:01:51): So all that discussion we’ve been having about Google and so on, one of the- Mark Cuban (02:01:55): Well, they’re two different things, meaning that Meta is doing open source. That’s a good choice for them. I think that’s a smart choice, but it’s just a business decision for everybody else. I don’t think it should be forced. Lex Fridman (02:02:07): Forced, yes. And even Google’s open sourcing some of the models and- Mark Cuban (02:02:12): Because they’re all… That’s a very incestuous industry where the people all work together at some level. They read the same papers, they go to the same conferences. It’s like the early days of streaming and the internet where people used the same technology everywhere, and now they just try different things. And you get one smarter or a couple of smart people in one company like Anthropic, and they do things a little bit better and efficient, model efficiency gets better. So it’s just a business choice, but I don’t think it should be forced, but I think it’s a smart business decision. Lex Fridman (02:02:42): Open sourcing is a smart business decision. Mark Cuban (02:02:44): Yeah. Lex Fridman (02:02:44): It’s a tricky one. I mean, Google is a pioneer in that with TensorFlow in the AI space. That’s a tricky decision to give- Mark Cuban (02:02:51): It really, really is, right? Lex Fridman (02:02:52): To give away the code. Mark Cuban (02:02:53): Go back to historically there was digital computing, which was a dominant player, and they thought, and IBM to a certain extent thought that they wouldn’t be subject to a problem with the PC industry. And then all of a sudden, with their mainframes and everything, they had captive software they wouldn’t use off the shelf software. So for a digital equipment mainframe or an IBM mainframe, you needed software that was written for it. There was nothing off the shelf. And when the PC industry came along, it was the exact opposite. There was MS-DOS and then Windows, things that were off the shelf that every PC could use. And that changed how people thought about software. And I think the same thing will happen here where it’s going to be as models become more efficient and easier and less expensive to train, I think there’ll be more reasons to open source. Lex Fridman (02:03:49): Yeah, that’s the hope. It creates more competition and a lot of different diversity of approaches in how they’re implemented deployed, what kind of products they create, all of that. Vinod compared to the danger of that to the Manhattan Project. Mark Cuban (02:04:04): Yeah, I’m not buying that at all. Lex Fridman (02:04:06): You don’t see the parallels between nuclear weapons and AI? Mark Cuban (02:04:08): No, no. I think, I’m not an AI fatalist at all, right? I’m an AI optimist, but it’s not to say that there isn’t a lot of scary shit that can happen with it. Lex Fridman (02:04:21): Yeah. Mark Cuban (02:04:21): Militarily. Like I said earlier, I’m a big believer that there’s going to be millions and tens of millions of models and people will take their expertise and either get hired for it and contribute or create their own models and license. So that you see now with this thing called mixture of experts where you connect things and people can take their expertise and we’ll be able to take that expertise and retain it in a way that they want to retain it. So I don’t think there’s going to be one medical database. I told this to people at a couple of big companies that were doing healthcare initiatives. Branding is so important in the healthcare space for hospitals, the Mayo Clinics, the MD Andersons, they’re huge brands. And I don’t think they’re just going to give up their expertise to some main singular model and say, okay, whatever expertise we have is available to you in Gemini or Chat GPT or so-and-so’s version of Meta’s open source. There’s just, that would be business suicide. And so I think you’re going to see each of them have their own models and update them as they go and license them. Lex Fridman (02:05:40): Yeah, and make money from the expertise. Mark Cuban (02:05:43): You have to. You have to. Lex Fridman (02:05:45): You don’t give away messages. You have, yeah, any expertise evolves and growth and all that kind of stuff, and you want to own that growth. What advice would you give to young people? You have an exceptionally successful career. You came from little, made a lot. What advice would you give them? Mark Cuban (02:05:59): Love your life. Find the things that you can enjoy. Be curious. You don’t have to have all the answers. When you’re 12, 15, I get emails from 13, 15-year-old kids, right? Lex Fridman (02:06:11): What do I do? Mark Cuban (02:06:12): What do I do? I feel like I’m being held back. I’m like a 15, you feel like you’re being held back? But just be curious because you don’t have to have the answers. You don’t have to know what you’re going to be when you grow up. I’m a hardcore believer that everybody has something that they’re really, really, really good at. That could be world-class, great. Every single human being on this planet. And the hard part is just finding what that is. And in some places having resources to enable it. But be curious so you can find out what it is. I took one technology class in college, Fortran programming, and I cheated on it, right? Mark Cuban (02:06:52): I mean, it wasn’t until I got a job at Mellon Bank and I started learning how to program in this thing called Ramus, this scripting computing language that I realized, oh, this is interesting to me and I like it. And that’s what got me a job selling software and going on from there. You just don’t know what that’s going to be until you go out and experience different things. So for anybody young out there listening, enjoy your life. Find things to smile about, be curious, read, watch, expose yourself to as many different ideas as you can because something’s going to click at some point. You may be 15, you may be 25, you may be 55, but it can happen. Lex Fridman (02:07:33): One thing to mention is sometimes it’s difficult or your parents, people around you might not be conducive or might not be of help in finding the thing you’re good at. In fact, in my own life, the society was such that, I don’t know if they’ve helped much at the thing I was good at. I’m still not sure what that is, but I think- Mark Cuban (02:07:56): The interviewing done pretty well for you. Lex Fridman (02:07:58): Well, it’s not even, there was a thing where I saw the beauty in people. Like I, very intensely. So you can call that empathy, all that kind of stuff. Mark Cuban (02:08:10): Someone called it wokeness. Lex Fridman (02:08:13): Super woke, I guess you could say, just super woke, that’s me. But in the education system I came up in, it was a very hard mathematics, science and so on, and it didn’t notice that whatever that was in me, but you have to keep the flame going. You have to try to find your way and see what that’s useful. And others around you might not always notice it. So it might take time. So it could be lonely. You can really have to find the strength to believe in yourself. Mark Cuban (02:08:44): Oh, for sure. And I’ll tell you one quick story. 1992, I went to Moscow State University to teach kids how to start businesses. I had sold Micro Solutions and I wanted to travel, and I took Russian in high school. My Ruski is like [inaudible 02:09:04]- Lex Fridman (02:09:07): Good enough to remember that. Mark Cuban (02:09:09): Yeah, right? Yeah. But it was interesting to me, and I bring it up because they didn’t know what the word profit meant. But at the same time, I would go around and meet people, and it was as entrepreneurial right after the Soviet Union fell, entrepreneurship went through the roof. A lot of it was mafia driven, but it was, people found that spark because I think that is natural. And so you just never know when and how and when the circumstances will come together for you to be able to take advantage. Lex Fridman (02:09:48): That spark is really important to comment on is in Russia and Ukraine, I think the system kind of suppresses that spark somehow. As you said you saw the natural entrepreneurship, but there’s not the entrepreneurial spirit once you grow up in both of the nations I mentioned. There is [inaudible 02:10:08]- Mark Cuban (02:10:08): No, I believe it, right? Lex Fridman (02:10:09): But there’s something about the system that- Mark Cuban (02:10:10): Without question. Lex Fridman (02:10:12): Be reasonable, be [inaudible 02:10:14]- Mark Cuban (02:10:14): There would have been no reason for me to go over to do what I was doing if it was otherwise. Lex Fridman (02:10:18): But, that’s the thing that really can help a country flourish. Mark Cuban (02:10:22): It’s going to be interesting with Ukraine if they’re able to survive this, because as horrific as it is, as you saw across Europe after World War II, the rebuilding creates opportunities. Lex Fridman (02:10:35): Rebuilding creates opportunities, but first, the war has to end. How that ends- Mark Cuban (02:10:39): I don’t know either, Lex Fridman (02:10:40): Is a really complex path. What gives you hope about the future of humanity? Mark Cuban (02:10:46): Just looking in my kids’ eyes, just talking to them and seeing their spirit, their friends’ spirit. And obviously we’re blessed as can be, right? And it’s not the same for every kid, but I get emails that I don’t respond to all of them, but from 13, 14, 15-year-old kids around the world, because Shark Tank’s shown everywhere asking me business questions. And it’s just like they took the time. They were that curious and that interested. And I see it when I talk to schools, when I go to different groups, that spark in kids’ eyes that there’s something bigger and better and exciting out there. And that’s not to say there’s not fear. Yeah, climate and any other number of things, but that’s the beauty of kids. And I think Gen Z really embodies that. And to me, that’s just really exciting. Lex Fridman (02:11:43): They dream. They dream big, they see the opportunity for making the world better. It’s cool. It’s cool to see young people in their eyes, that dream. And I could be the one to do it too, which is super powerful- Mark Cuban (02:11:56): It’s funny because when I go talk to elementary school kids, one of the things I do, I said, okay, let’s look around. You see that light there one day, that light didn’t exist. Then somebody had the idea, then somebody created a product out of it, and now your school bought that. You see that chair? Chairs didn’t always look like that. Somebody had that idea. Why not you? So when you walk out and, what I make them do, ask yourself, why not me? Why can’t I be the one to change the world? Lex Fridman (02:12:24): Thank you for that beautiful, hopeful message and thank you for talking today, Mark. You’re fun to follow. I’m a big fan of yours, but you’re also an important person in this world. I really appreciate everything you do. Mark Cuban (02:12:36): Well, I appreciate it. Thanks for saying that, Lex, and keep on doing what you’re doing. This was great. I really enjoyed this. Lex Fridman (02:12:41): Thanks for listening to this conversation with Mark Cuban. To support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Oscar Wilde. Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he’s not, and a sense of humor was provided to console him for what he is. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.

本集資源與出處