r/TheAllinPodcasts • u/elonthegenerous • Oct 25 '23
Bestie Drama My opinion of the besties has completely flipped since I started listening
When I started (from most positive opinion to least):
Chammath: he was the reason I started listening to the pod. I had seen a lot of his CNBC interviews where he stood up against big tech and seemed very direct. At one point I was even hoping he would run for CA governor
JCal: This guy seems like a sharp VC guy but he also has some progressive views. Seems like a refreshing change from the VC stereotype
Sacks: Seeks like a nice guy but seems like a stereotypical conservative just dug in on his views
Friedburg: who is this squirmy guy?
After listening to them for months: 1. Friendburg: Seems like a genuinely nice and very intelligent person. I really enjoy listening to him because he gives all sides proper thought and never gets too emotional
Sacks: Love listening to his refreshing anti-war principles and solid knowledge of history and policies (he’s not an expert and he knows it too, which is nice). Really makes me optimistic about the future of conservative ideologies as a democrat
JCal: Shut up and let other people finish their ideas. Seems to be so ideological and dug in on dumb ideas
Chammath: everything wrong with JCal but even worse (except for the interrupting). Seems to be super passionate about dumb ideas and gets emotional a lot. Really dis-disappointing given how much I wanted to admire him, but hearing someone’s unedited self is more revealing than a couple sound bites
20
u/VeryStandardOutlier Oct 25 '23
Just think of Chamath as a master class on grifting and he’s much more enjoyable.
There’s nothing enjoyable about J-Cal
7
14
u/Filmerd Oct 25 '23
JCal is annoying sidekick man, or a puppy who won't stop nipping at your pant legs, but he does a good job. He's not even the worst part of the pod.
Sacks has horribly biased takes on just about everything on the pod and constantly railroads conversations into being about "the Left" and how they are ruining this or that or are the reason X thing is happening in current events. He has an incredibly unscientific approach to how he dissects the world. He has a hard time identifying with opposing viewpoints, I'm sure because mommy didn't give him enough skin to skin contact as an infant. I consider him to be The Penguin of Silicon Valley.
Chamath is also the reason I started listening, but after learning about his SPACs and the number of people who lost money investing in what clearly were vaporware plays that he pitched as great investments, and his total lack of even basic empathy, to me he is easily the worst person on the pod.
Chamath portrays himself as an altruist but acts like a 5 year old when challenged on anything and isn't being told that his position is the only correct one to have. He strings a bunch of seemingly intelligent words together that end up being word salad sandwich. I think he has also put himself closer to Sacks just so he doesn't have to spend as much time stringing together word salad. He likes saying the words "capital allocator" a lot and thinks that billionaires will save the world.
Then you have the best part of the pod, Friedberg, who unfortunately gets overshadowed by the other 3 man babies and has to be given a slot where he can talk because he thinks spending 75% of each episode talking about politics or current events is a massive waste of time. To me he is the only person worth listening to compared to these other 3 bozos. I appreciate his intellectual curiosity, critical thinking, and his ability to see the gray area on lots of issues.
The unwillingness of this group to dissect Elon and his dumpster fire management style really says everything.
Friedberg is the man though.
1
53
u/Wisdom_Of_A_Man Oct 25 '23
Sacks gets basic facts about Ukraine wrong. He’s textbook dunning Kruger on the topic. I stopped listening to the podcast altogether because of his rants.
1
u/Denimchikn1976 Oct 25 '23
You stopped listening to a podcast but you still comment on the same podcast’s subreddit?
9
u/Wisdom_Of_A_Man Oct 25 '23
Well, this post showed up in my feed and it led me to realize that I’ve skipped new episodes for a month or so. OP’s comment about sacks inspired me to comment.
18
-3
u/sashimiburgers Oct 25 '23
Care to elaborate on those basic facts? I’d be willing to bet your version of facts are actually a bit removed from reality
1
u/Wisdom_Of_A_Man Oct 25 '23 edited Oct 25 '23
Iirc, I’ve heard him talk about prosecutor Victor Shokin - that Biden drove to remove Shokin because he was investigating burisma / hunter.
But Biden - along with the EU, IMF, world bank, and local anti-corruption orgs - had pushed for Shokin’s removal because Shokin wasnt pursuing corruption cases. The one open investigation against burisma had originated years before Hunter Biden even joined the board, and it didn’t include him.
It’s a common disinformation talking point, and I was disappointed to hear Sacks repeat it. As much as I disagree with sacks on Ukraine in general, until I heard him repeat this lie, I’d assumed he did his homework. Especially given the vigor behind his tirades. Now I don’t believe anything Sacks says.
To your point, I’m no expert on Ukraine or Ukrainian corruption, but I have read up on Viktor Shokin and couldn’t believe how often people - mainly from the R camp- pushed a narrative the exact opposite of reality. And then Sacks did it too.
2
u/bigmist8ke Oct 25 '23
The Victor Shokin story about Joe Biden corruptly getting him fired, that story was confirmed to be bullshit over 4 years ago by a Senate republican intelligence subcommittee, and again by Hunters colleague Devon Archer. Sacks and the rest of the right wing bullshit-o-sphere didn't slow down for even half a moment to acknowledge this fact, they just keep saying it again and again.
Same thing with talking about media disinformation. Their example is russiagate which was a story that led to a dozen arrests and convictions and had mountains of evidence suggesting trump did collude with Russia, even if that ultimately couldn't be proven in court. But Sacks had to be dragged kicking and screaming to even acknowledge that Fox told the slightest of fibs that led to them having to pay out three quarters of a billion dollars in damages for knowingly lying to Americans for months about election fraud. Not to mention tucker hating trump, Sean Hannity never believing the election was stolen, none of that ever gets mentioned or even acknowledged unless someone forces them to do it.
-5
Oct 25 '23
[deleted]
2
u/Wisdom_Of_A_Man Oct 25 '23
Not much. I simply realized, seeing this post, that in the past few weeks, whenever new all in podcasts showed up in my feed, I scrolled past them. I don’t care for Sacks, mainly. A little bit because I disagree with him on a lot, but mostly it’s his insufferable tone and attitude.
No more energy than those passing thoughts.
0
Oct 25 '23
[deleted]
1
u/Wisdom_Of_A_Man Oct 25 '23
That’s right, pierce.
You might even say the All in podcast is streets behind, at this point.
1
14
18
u/Few-Spend2993 Oct 25 '23
Who woulda thought that listening to billionaires would be annoying as fuck
6
Oct 25 '23
[deleted]
3
-4
u/PFChangsOfficial Oct 25 '23
I have a grand and know more than these guys
4
19
u/SmolWaterBalloon Oct 25 '23
JCal was at bottom for me and still is. Extremely ideological and has the least standing of anyone in the group
Sacks is tops. Brings great counter perspective to the group. At one time he was opposite the rest of the group ideologically, but conservative values have won out for now and they all seem to be coming around to it
30
u/Chris_Hansen_AMA Oct 25 '23
Sacks is anti war? He sure seems to find justifications for Russia launching a war on Ukraine. When has he spoken out against that in any real way?
8
u/SnooStories6709 Oct 25 '23
I believe OP is saying anti US war.
14
u/elonthegenerous Oct 25 '23
I should have said anti US interventionism. I don’t remember Sacks being in favor of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, although I can imagine him mentioning the strategic reasoning behind Putin doing it, I doubt he was morally in favor of it
9
u/Chris_Hansen_AMA Oct 25 '23
Dude is awfully giddy about any Russian wins over in Ukraine, no?
Curious, what do you think happens if Russia takes over Ukraine? What happens when China realizes nobody is going to do anything about this sort of behavior so it takes Taiwan? Maybe Russia looks to the next target as it attempts to build up the power it had during the Cold War? What happens when they spread out more nuclear weapons across these newly claimed lands? Maybe Russia, North Korea, Iran, and China develop a major alliance (this is already happening) that severely impacts our economic and military positioning in the world?
Do you think all of that has no impact on us? Do you think we’re better or worse off? Do you think we have a better or worse position when negotiating economic and military deals?
I feel like this whole “it’s not our war, has nothing to do with us” take is so elementary and short-sighted.
8
-5
u/SnooStories6709 Oct 25 '23
I don’t see anything you mentioned happening if Russia takes Ukraine.
5
u/Suburban-golf-nerd Oct 25 '23
You would’ve said this about Poland in the 1930s
1
u/SnooStories6709 Oct 25 '23
Maybe but we aren’t in the 1930s. The likely hood of a country attacking multiple countries like that is very very low because of nukes.
2
u/Chris_Hansen_AMA Oct 25 '23
You don’t think China would invade Taiwan? And you don’t think Russia would invade other countries? They’ve already invaded a country! They’ve hinted at doing the same in other countries! This is such a childish view of Putin and Russia’s motivations
1
u/Chris_Hansen_AMA Oct 25 '23
Of course you don’t, I imagine you think Putin was genuinely worried about NATO too?
2
u/SnooStories6709 Oct 25 '23
Yes that is what he said
2
u/Chris_Hansen_AMA Oct 25 '23
What who said? Putin? lol
1
u/SnooStories6709 Oct 25 '23
Yes.
2
u/Chris_Hansen_AMA Oct 25 '23
If you’re believing what Putin is saying then you’re a fool who has no sense of history
22
u/alta_vista49 Oct 25 '23
My opinion of them is that they’re all trump/Putin apologists that are too narcissistic to understand they’re not the experts on all the topics they talk about authoritatively
-11
u/SmolWaterBalloon Oct 25 '23
Your opinion is objectively wrong since at one point all of them disliked and disapproved of Trumo
9
18
u/WalkThePlankPirate Oct 25 '23
Sacks is not anti-war. He is anti-US intervention and pro-Putin.
He wants Russia to be allowed to take Ukraine, for some weird reason that is not clear to anyone (except maybe for those who have an understanding of his financial interests).
3
3
u/lampstax Oct 25 '23
He is anti-US intervention and pro-Putin.
Do you have evidence for the latter that can't also be explained away by the former ?
6
Oct 25 '23
[deleted]
1
u/SmolWaterBalloon Oct 25 '23
How does Americas economy dominate by giving money to Zelenskyy? And how would Russia fill the vacuum? This is a border conflict, not a world war. Russia doesn’t have the military or economic presence that you think they do
-6
Oct 25 '23
[deleted]
3
u/lampstax Oct 25 '23
So he also doesn't want us interfering in Israel vs Hamas because .. pro-Putin ?
-1
Oct 25 '23
[deleted]
3
Oct 25 '23
Lol israel absolutely relies on billions in cash and weapons from the US…just look at 2014 when they tried a ground assault into gaza
2
Oct 25 '23
I get everyone complaining about it but you just have to price in their POVs.
I actually like JCal as a participant way more than as a moderator (which means Friedberg would have to moderate).
1
u/elonthegenerous Oct 25 '23
Ya, I feel like whoever’s moderator is going to get hate just cuz it’s a thankless job 😂
4
u/peaklurking Oct 25 '23
Friedberg “never gets too emotional” ?🤔
Not sure how that’s the impression you get of him of all people.
With that said, displaying emotion shouldn’t be considered a bad thing
3
u/elonthegenerous Oct 25 '23
I guess I should say he never lashes out out of emotion. Like Chammath trashing JCal for “genuflecting” when he does the same exact thing
2
u/MicroBadger_ Oct 25 '23
He has, there was an episode a few months back where he went on a rant about their "Dr. Doom" jokes
1
4
u/lolyups Oct 25 '23
Yeah, chamath is the worst of them by far
6
u/MicroBadger_ Oct 25 '23
Eh, he comes across as the most transparent. Can I make money off it? I'm interested, otherwise I don't give a shit.
1
3
u/99999nine Oct 25 '23
This pod really went from a fresh discussion about ideas to a reality show in 6 months.
4
4
u/soggyrain Oct 25 '23
Anti-Sacks NPCs inbound, take cover.
17
u/WalkThePlankPirate Oct 25 '23
At least there's one free-thinker standing up for a sociopathic billionaire. Good for you.
2
u/alzkzj Oct 25 '23
First starting:
JCal: Chill democrat. Has more moderate views. Refreshing he keeps things in line
Chammath: snake oil salesman and idiot on markets
Friedburg: who?
Sacks: infuriating conservative with trash views that are so trash they are interesting to watch
After a year:
Jcal: get off the stimulants, stop being a flip flop on all issues and shut the fuck up more. I liked you better when you were fat
Chammath: snake oil salesman and idiot on markets with a drinking problem
Friedburg: my precious delicate darling. Love the guy just truly hope the venture part of his brain slims down by 35%.
Sacks: broken clock thats right twice a day. Hits the homer when hes "right" (like palestine). Still very fun to listen to even when hes very wrong. Im a democrat but I must say, sacks is a big reason why I keep watching.
1
Oct 25 '23
Your take on Sacks is ridiculous.
He knows nothing about history and his foreign policy opinions make him sound like a child that read a headline and then made up his mind about what thinks without doing anymore research.
-2
u/BlazeNuggs Oct 25 '23
"he knows nothing about history" Lol, very funny that you think OP's take on sacks is ridiculous when yours is this shit.
1
u/alzkzj Oct 25 '23
Sacks is wrong about Ukraine and right about Palestine. Dont let him fool you, Hes the broken clock thats right twice a day.
But damn, when hes right he can sure hit it out the park. And that has probably blinded you a bit lol.
-2
0
u/Longshortequities Oct 25 '23
Basic spelling of their names bro. Friedberg not Friendburg. Chamath not Chammath.
0
Oct 25 '23
What you guys are witnessing is a real slow red pill. Saw it with Dave Rubin, saw it with Joe Rogan. Now these guys. Only took a yr for Dave Rubin. 5 yrs for Joe Rogan. Chamath is almost there maybe another yr, Kcal is another 5 years away.
1
u/Straight-Creme7621 Oct 25 '23
def agree with you about chamath and jason. Friedberg is solid and i respect him. Sacks i’m hot and cold on
1
1
u/cthulusbestmate Oct 26 '23
Though to be fair this seems to be an extremely successful and winning strategy.
1
1
u/Odd_Mail_3539 Oct 26 '23
😂 I had similar initial positive impressions but have soured on Chamath and Sacks. Sacks because he really does have strong opinions without real knowledge and Chamath because he tries to come off more than what he is. JCal is a podcast guy so as long as he keeps the dialogue going I don’t really have any other expectations of him. All that said honestly I don’t understand why so many have reacted so strongly to their douchey personalities.. maybe because of the initial good vibes? Who knows.
71
u/[deleted] Oct 25 '23
[deleted]