Host: When AI becomes the interface for everything, every tool we have, every technology we use is going to be built on these models. And the models are not objective. They have opinions. They have strong opinions on things like history, on culture, on values. And those are very different depending where you are.

Speaker A: Deterrence is no longer just the size of a military. It's the pace of innovation in reacting to cheap software-built tech that adversaries may be using whether they're a country, criminal, or a terrorist group. And those technologies today are not being built by governments. They're being built by the private sector.

Speaker B: Products and technology travel faster than companies can. So what happens is for startup companies, usually in olden days, you didn't care about going international until you had a few hundred million in revenue. Now these companies have to go sooner and sooner internationally.

Host: The number one question we often get when we're visiting different countries is how do you recreate Silicon Valley locally?

Speaker C: I don't think that's true, by the way. I think that's a happy talk.

Host: We are here to talk international today. Lots of things going on at the firm for a firm that used to historically be all centered in Menlo Park and we didn't even want to open up a San Francisco office. This is a big change for us. So Ben, why don't you take us through this announcement around our global ambition and how all the pieces between global affairs, international go to market, LP relations on the global partnership level kind of fit in together.

Ben: Yeah. Well, it really kind of starts with America, interestingly. It's been our strong belief that if you drop a person into any country in the world and they don't have the culture and they don't have money and capital resources yet, and they just have an idea of how to make the world a better place, their best shot is in America. And that's just a very special thing. And so a big mission of our firm is kind of trying to preserve that special thing that is America. And that means America has to be a leader. It has to be a leader economically. It has to be a leader culturally. It has to be a leader militarily. And to do that we have to be a leader technologically. We have to be a tech leader. And that's really our role in the ecosystem and in the world is to help America be a leader.

And then what we realized as we've gotten further along with this mission is that we need to bring in our partners, our allies into that mission. And it kind of started with the work that you're doing Jen with people from around the world wanting to participate in the US technological opportunity and that meant we started getting investors from around the world. And as we went out to see those investors and we said how can we be a better partner, we found some interesting things. So one is every country wants to not only economically benefit from the technology but they'd like to actually directly benefit from the technology. Can you bring it to us? Can we get a chance to use it? And then at the government policy level people wanted to know how can we be a great country for adopting technology, for innovating like you guys are, and for helping push our country into the future.

And as we looked at how do we step up and step into that opportunity and be a good partner, we realized with our country partners we needed relationships at the government level, at the investor level, at the adoption level. And that's what these three components become. So we've got global affairs which builds our relationships with governments from Saudi Arabia to Japan to Mexico. Then we have people who invest - sometimes those are the government, sometimes they're various companies in the government, sometimes they're companies who handle government money in the form of pensions. And then finally both the government and the businesses want to adopt the technology and that's where Ragu's effort comes in with the go-to-market component.

Host: How much of your decision to join a16z was motivated by this mission and also the sense of duty and helping other countries think about the adoption of AI and not wanting to get left behind in AI like Ben was alluding to very much so.

Speaker A: You know what I saw happen in the years in the intelligence committee and then the White House is technology move from being a tool of diplomacy, of national power, to the arena of it where the supply chain for chips was not a technology issue as much as a foundational economic and national security issue. The supply chain for the components that go into drugs. When used by one country to constrain or have impact on another country, it becomes a tool of national power.

Speaker C: A software vulnerability is now not an IT issue.

Speaker A: Yep.

Speaker C: It can be a source of leverage, particularly if that vulnerability is in key parts of your power systems or your water systems.

Speaker A: Yeah. So I saw that shift happen from tech being either an IT issue or just a tool to the central arena of both economic growth and national power. And quite frankly from a deterrence perspective which is the language we talk about between countries in terms of deterring an invasion of a country, maintaining an international system of stability. You know deterrence is no longer just the size of a military. I think as we see in the Strait of Hormuz or we saw in the Red Sea, it's the pace of innovation in reacting to cheap software-built tech that adversaries may be using whether they're a country, criminal or a terrorist group.

And those technologies today are not being built by governments. They're being built by the private sector. Whether that's AI systems, whether that's autonomous systems, whether that's cyber defense systems, they are being built in the private sector. So certainly from a US perspective ensuring that we have the relationships between government and private sector to leverage that for our own economic growth and as a force for good on the world stage but also that our allies as well we build together we fight together and to ensure that together we can both have the advantages of that and to the extent that our tech also represents our values.

Host: It's important that the world run on America and on western tech. Yeah, actually that's a great point on the values point because Ben you've said before no country wants to get colonized in cyberspace.

Speaker C: Particularly because AI is now just getting built in the six block radius in San Francisco.

Host: Say a little bit more about that.

Ben: Well you know when AI becomes the interface for everything, so every tool we have, every technology we use, every kind of system we have from your car to your refrigerator to your education system is going to be built on these models and the models are not objective. They have opinions and they have strong opinions on things like history, on culture, on ethics, on values. And by the way, those are very different depending where you are. The history of wars and the history of a country and laws and whether that country was a good actor or a bad actor are all very different depending on where you're getting the information from.

And so if you believe that as I do that for all our flaws, our fundamental values and ideas about everything from the way our economic system works to the rule of law have resulted in basically the best opportunities for humans in the world, then you want those values to be projected onto the world more so than to be the recipients of some other values. Which maybe were good at a time or maybe have some merits but overall don't give people a real opportunity.

Host: Giving people a chance. That's the premise of the original announcement we did for our fund announcement earlier this year and the importance of that and then particularly extending that chance to the allies of America as well. Ragu, I want to get you involved on this as well because portfolio companies are increasingly going international way sooner. They're multi-country, multi-channel, multi-product way sooner in the life cycle. How much of this is also accelerated by what's happening in AI and just the ability to push out software updates immediately?

Ragu: Yeah. I mean the reality is that products and technology travel faster than companies can. Right, because if you got a great product everybody learns about it very quickly, instantaneously you can access it through APIs wherever in the world you are, you can build on top of those things. So what happens is for startup companies, usually in the olden days you didn't care about going international until you had a few hundred million dollars in revenue etc. Now these companies have to go sooner and sooner internationally.

So while the products are being discovered internationally sooner, also to Ben's earlier point, it's easier to adapt these products for local markets much more easily thanks to AI. As AI becomes the interface to localize and internationalize these products, it's so much easier.

But in order to capitalize on the opportunity at scale, things don't change. I mean, you still have to be in region. You still have to understand the market structure of the region that you want to operate in. You have to understand partnerships, you have to build relationships. Lots of other countries have very relationship-based economies, not transaction-based economies. So it's this interesting blend where the technology moves really fast but the way you do business hasn't changed that fast.

Ben: Actually a really great example of what Ragu was talking about. When we were in Mexico recently we were meeting with the CEO of TelevisaUnivision, Alonso Angua, who is a great friend of the firm and one of our global partners. We were asking about what are his struggles. One of his challenges is he really faces heavy competition from some of the global streamers like Netflix or Disney or so forth, who have this US technology that's very powerful. But he has this unbelievable Spanish-speaking content. But it was hard for him to get to play on a global basis because it's in Spanish. It's a Mexican Spanish accent, which is different than an Argentinian Spanish or Colombian Spanish accent.

He was like, how should we solve this? And we're like, we've got this great company, 11 Labs. They can help you with it. We put them together in a couple of months. He was in France and Poland and all over the world with this incredible technology that had his actors basically acting exactly as they normally do with their right kind of intonations, their right laugh, everything but in different languages. And he recently based on that success got a big deal with Netflix.

So here we have something where we can bring our partners who have a great product that's culturally local but really really interesting and make it a global product by not competing with their allies but partnering with their allies. And I think that's a lot of what the program is about.

Host: I want to tie what Ben said back to the values point because people often ask us about Chinese open source models, how do you compare and contrast? So in that case, they didn't have to worry that when the content was dubbed into different languages that if the speaker said something sensitive about Tiananmen Square or sensitive regarding the Chinese government that using an American model that content would be translated and changed along the way. They knew it would be true to what was said. And that's what we mean when we talk about American values of not censoring, not injecting political will into how these models operate in the way that one would contrast.

Now, open source is something we deeply value because at the end of the day, there's all different kinds of models and all different kinds of price points clearly. But that's really a good example of what we mean when we say American and western values reflected in the models that we deploy around our infrastructure.

Speaker C: For sure the telenovelas are spicy enough. I don't know how much the introduction of Tiananmen Square needs to be introduced necessarily in the story line but you never know the border crossings etc.

Host: Good point. They keep their audience well enough.

Speaker A: Exactly. But this actually is a core part. When Py McCormack wrote the article about us earlier this year he called us a power broker and power being part of an offering that we enable our founders to tap into. For a lot of companies, starting a Mexico office for example is probably not top 10 on their list. But if they have a deal that we're able to walk in and effectively enable them a shot at winning way earlier in the life cycle, they might prioritize that.

Host: So maybe if you want to riff on that, Ragu, Ben, on particularly how that's changed for founders, they think about international when they have the benefit of being able to go right to the buyers in a much more adept way than figuring out a market from scratch.

Ragu: Yeah. I mean, a lot of markets are very top-heavy. So you take any mature business and you say how much of your revenue comes from - even countries like UK, a significant chunk is going to come from the very top companies in UK. So the reality is whichever country you look at it's five or 10 companies that matter and of course the government is a big influencer and buyer. So the example that you gave in Mexico is great. There are a few global companies in Mexico like the one that Ben talked about. It is not worthwhile setting up an office and serving all of the countries. But if you could get into the top five companies in Mexico that probably is worth a lot more than setting up a full operation in some other country. So it is the top-heavy nature and the relationship-heavy nature that helps our portfolio of companies.

Ben: There's a couple of other aspects that are important. One is you're right that Mexico probably isn't a top 10 thing that most companies go into first. And by the way, that's a terrible shame because Mexico is our neighbor. From a national security standpoint, how powerful would it be to have a western hemisphere supply chain ecosystem that was really well connected. So I think it's kind of bad for the country that it is number 10.

Secondly, to open a country as a company is a very large expense. You have to set up an entity, you have to hire a team, you have to localize the product. Depending on the country and how committed you are to it, it could be easily five or ten million just to get to your first deal. And so that is going to delay in your life cycle when you can go international.

But what if, before you ever put up an entity or ever got started in that country, you had an opportunity, a big opportunity, a $5 million opportunity, a $10 million opportunity that makes that investment much easier to do earlier. And so we can really enable both our companies and our allies by paving the way for that kind of thing.

A great example is nobody's going to Saudi Arabia first. However Saudi Arabia is booming and there are great opportunities there and they really need our help in developing the country. They're modernizing which is incredibly important to the security of the world that Saudi Arabia is going from this kind of tribal society to a modern, highly civilized player in the modern world and full ally of the United States. That transition is really important that it succeeds. So we're able to take a company like Flow, Adam Neumann's company, bring them to Saudi Arabia, introduce them to the right people in the government, introduce them to the right people in business, introduce them to the right investors. It's the optimal place to live if you're an expat moving to Riyadh, help develop the economy. And it's something that just isn't really possible without an effort like this.

Host: Maybe let's talk about geos we're prioritizing because there's a handful. Japan, Korea, the Middle East, Mexico, Canada. Are there themes as we think about different countries that make more sense versus others?

Ben: This is timely, Ragu and I have been debating this. So from our standpoint, it's very powerful when they're a strong ally of the US. We've got a relationship with the people in government. We've got a relationship with the people in business. We've got a relationship with the investors. Because those things are not separate. They all interact with each other. And if we have that, then we can really accelerate the opportunities for them and for us.

Speaker A: I think what I would just say to that point building on Ben's point is what's changed so much as we talked about a moment ago is that on the global stage whether it's in the context of countries pressuring other countries via supply chains, there are parts of the world which we have close allies who are now in increasingly tenuous positions.

So if we look at the Indopacific region. China has vastly increased its military, vastly increased the number of nuclear capabilities that it has. Their ship building capability are orders of magnitude more than the United States. And our allies in the region have started responding. Japan has changed its really sacrosanct policy from the post-World War II period to say it must have a capable military.

Speaker C: Yeah. It wants to build the military to fight today's wars, not yesterday's wars. It doesn't necessarily have the military-industrial base. Now, that cuts both ways. As we know from the own halting steps the United States military has been taken, the number of defense reform policies that have been written in the last 20 years, they all say the same thing. Fewer small numbers of exquisite platforms, more cheaper, larger numbers of platforms in addition to very exquisite platforms for certain specific use cases.

So as Japan thinks about building a capable military in order to deter aggression in the region, it is looking to partner with new firms building autonomous ships, building AI for an integrated battle space and they want to build with us. They don't want to just buy because they have their own capabilities they want in their own country, their own supply chains to protect.

So I think a part of that is thinking about those regions of the world. I talked about one in the Indopac region that covers Australia as well. Obviously, certainly the Middle East has been an area of American interest for a long time. Israel is an incredible capable ally with capable military and intelligence community. The UAE is as well. Saudi Arabia is modernizing and thinking about AI infra, how it builds an innovation, entrepreneurial innovation base in order to compete globally.

And then certainly when we think about Latin America, when we think about fentanyl coming into the United States, it comes in via Mexico. So public safety, national security, how autonomous ships can help a vast Mexican coastline are not only important to our ally and to the stability of Latin America, it's important to us as well. So I think that's at least the national security lens we bring to some of our partnerships in American dynamism or in the AI infra space.

Ragu: Yeah. I mean it's the reason Ben and I have been debating - there are so many sides to this that you got to bring it all together.

Firstly, to Ann's point, it has to make a lot of sense from America's interest point of view. And that is abundantly existing in all these countries. These governments are very AI forward and they're putting in policies that are very modernization-centric whether it's in defense or across the economy.

Thirdly, they are all top-heavy economies. I mean you go hit the top companies you are actually having global influence. For example all those North Asian countries that you talked about, I think 15-20% of the global 2000 are across Japan, Korea, Taiwan.

And then lastly for our startups, the way business is done in these countries is very different than let's say UK or some English-speaking country. So the value add that we can provide to our startups and the value add we can provide to these countries is so remarkably higher than in other places.

So when you put it all up and score it out, that's why we go into these countries.

Host: Yeah. And some of these countries are also leapfrogging too where they didn't have to deal with the prior technology.

Speaker C: Exactly. Like technology like Saudi, you go through the visa entry and it takes 30 seconds, which is unbelievable. And you know here you get stuck behind unfortunately a very long line increasingly for a number of different other reasons. But it's a different kind of approach to how you think about incorporating technology in everyday life but it's not evenly distributed. So what are ways we can accelerate that in different avenues is also the opportunity that a lot of these countries are seeing as a huge leapfrog.

Host: It's very different though when we think about international prioritization compared to maybe other VC firms because the typical VC firm's way of doing international has always been investment driven versus actually thinking about the portfolio companies and what they would like to do internationally. So maybe speak a little bit more about that contrast and quite frankly why for the first 10 years of the firm it was very rare we even did an international deal outside of not just the US but even outside of Silicon Valley.

Ben: Well I think we've always looked at investing through the lens of what do we bring to the table. So as a result, if you think about what we try to do for a company, we really try to help them network to the right talent, to the right customers, to the right expertise. And that is very hard to do in multi-geographies. Even like San Francisco and Menlo Park in the early days we were like let's just have a really good product for this and then we'll expand from there.

Whereas I think other VCs think of the product much more as the money. And so if the product is the money then the international strategy is okay we'll find a team of investors in say the UK and we'll help them raise money and then we'll take a percentage of their winnings for helping get them their product. And that makes sense in that model. I think it doesn't make sense for us because our whole thing is how do we help you build a better company? How do we accelerate your opportunity or growth?

So we needed to get to a certain level of size and stature for that to make sense in more regions. But now that we are, it starts to make a lot of sense. In our role in investing, we don't look at it as how do we snatch up the opportunities in Sweden or Japan or Saudi or UAE. We look at it as what is your ecosystem missing in terms of capital and expertise to go global and is there an opportunity for us to plug in.

So we don't want to displace their A-round and seed investors necessarily. We want to say okay if you've got companies that are emerging as real global companies then that's where we can really step in and help. And if we're already in the country and we're already doing a lot of business and we're already understanding them and their entrepreneurs, then we're in great position to do that. But we would do that directly. We're not raising money for somebody who's not part of our firm, our culture, our mission and having them go run a play. That's just not us.

And also so much of the time when you think about these entrepreneurial ecosystems, what they're oftentimes missing is growth capital. They actually have a great talent base on the early stage side, but they're missing that component to actually go global and they become a localized success versus actually thinking about global ambitions.

Host: Maybe drawing from your experience at VMware, Ragu, about the evolution of company building. How's that particularly changed in the ambition for local companies to become global over time?

Ragu: That's dramatically increased. Previously, like I said earlier, you would not even dream of going global until you're really well advanced. And now because your product can be - there is such a universal appeal for you. If you've got a great product, it's such a universal appeal whether it's B2B or a B2C product, it behooves you to go earlier.

What is missing is the supporting ecosystem, and finding a way to plug into a new country. And that's where our new offering really focuses on. So it's really help them get the fast start in these regions. And for that you need to be in the region, to have the relationships, to build the trust, to build the credibility. All of those things don't happen overnight and that's where we can provide that.

Ben: Yeah. And then by spending time locally as well, we get to know the local ecosystem and then see the great entrepreneurs from those regions and then to the extent to which it makes sense actually fund those and then help them go international leveraging our network as well.

Speaker C: So businesses in these countries are so much a collective ecosystem rather than an individual company going in and dominating something there.

Host: Maybe speak a little bit more about the prior tech cycles of adoption and particularly with AI. Ann, this is a great question for you. There's so many nuances around security and even the debate between open versus closed that there are considerations of whether that's even viable to build without upsetting the apple cart on what is allowed with open source given the security nuances. Maybe speak a little bit more about how you've been thinking about that and advising companies on that delicate balance.

Speaker A: So, it's a hot topic right now. As you know, it's a hot topic around the world because fundamentally as many technologies are, AI is dual use. So the first step - let's use cyber as an example - the first step whether you are an attacker or a defender is finding vulnerabilities in systems. And then if you're a defender you patch them, if you're an attacker you exploit them. So models make the step of finding vulnerabilities in code far easier. And quite frankly, it makes the next steps, exploit or defend, easier as well.

The economics of cyber defense were broken well before the latest AI models came out. I saw that in the White House where my nightmare was the ransomware attacks against rural hospitals in America. There wasn't another hospital two blocks down. So actual Americans' opportunity to access health care was disrupted by in some cases state harbored criminal groups halfway around the world. So infrastructure is very fragile and the reality is that the models help both.

I personally believe - I'm focused on cyber security for a moment - that they help far more in defense because defense is far harder. You have to be defending a broad expanse and an attacker has to find one way in. So as a result I actually think we are in a difficult space at this moment because there's such a broad attack surface, there's so many systems that are vulnerable. But I think we will see the opportunity for much more secure space.

When I talk with governments around the world or companies around the world, all are grappling with that question. Most countries have two missions: defending the country as well as maintaining its interest overseas. Given both, how do we ensure that these powerful capabilities don't fall into our adversaries' hands, don't fall into criminals' hands to be used for that purpose?

In the traditional cyber tools arena, we always grappled with this. When a capability is on a thumb drive, export controls are a joke. You can't actually control it in that way. And there is real power, as we talked about earlier, in the models that the world runs on being run on trusted models. When people are using an American model, they don't have to worry there's an intentional backdoor. As we talked about earlier, they don't have to worry that a chatbot's answers will be framed by censoring to fit a particular political story of an authoritarian government.

So the question for now is to say how do we build in the degree of safety in model so that they can be used in environments that need that safety. And that is somewhere where because the main models are American we're in a particular position to think through and build that out. I think this is not done by government, it's not done by the private sector. What it really needs is people who really understand the models best from the private sector at the table with folks on the government side who are thinking about how do we both promote innovation and control for these risks, and building out the right set of government policies to enable both the use as well as the understanding of how do you protect against the risks that come with it with the models as well.

Host: Yeah. As our partner Mark often says, technology is the dog that caught the bus. And we've never seen before that countries are feverishly demanding the latest versions of the model because they recognize how competitive it is to their economy, to their people, to their interests. And this now is unlocking all sorts of new paradigms as we think about globalization in a way that feels categorically different than just selling product internationally. And this is hopefully then an opportunity for many of our founders as well.

Speaker C: No doubt. Although it is complicated. Like for example from a government standpoint you'd like to say okay don't release your model with cyber hacking capabilities. But if you do, as a company, and you want to find the vulnerabilities in your own code and patch them, you can't do that without also enabling cyber attacks because as soon as it can find the vulnerabilities, guess what? And so you're kind of in this situation where if you lock that capability to understand vulnerabilities, then the only people who will be able to understand vulnerabilities are the bad actors who jailbreak the system. So we're in a very interesting world on that.

Host: Yeah. And I think to that point, we'll focus on the cyber aspect because that's gotten so much attention with Anthropic's model, etc. I think what AI models essentially do to Ben's point is you want to be the first to hack your systems because we often use the expression of digital doorknobs. It now allows attackers to jiggle every doorknob continuously and at scale. So your hope for your network is using those models first to find where you're vulnerable and frankly then be able to fix it. And that wasn't a tractable problem before.

And I think now the models help you particularly for code bases that were public, particularly if you're relying on third party code or open source code. And that's some of the biggest areas of risk or where there is dependencies on code that nobody was really maintaining. So I think we're now seeing companies coming together taking responsibility for that because now the cost of not addressing insecure code has gone up and the cost of addressing it has gone down. Which is a good shift from where we were before.

Speaker C: We may finally build secure systems.

Host: Exactly. Please God. And more importantly, the process for building new code can incorporate these as well.

Speaker A: And it's kind of very tricky from an industry standpoint because originally cyber hacking was vandalism. Like, okay, I'm going to mess up your PC. Then, with the internet, it became theft and now it's war. That evolution, I think, snuck up on people. And we've seen, the great thing when it went from vandalism to theft, the vandalism company, Microsoft, is one who created all the theft opportunities by putting Windows on the internet when it wasn't ready to be on the internet because it wasn't built for that kind of idea. And with ActiveX and all these kinds of technologies that let people come into the internet and get right to your machine.

And I think that we're kind of in a period like that where we've got all this technology that was built in the pre-AI era that's not nearly secure enough for the AI world. And we're going to have to make that transition.

Host: Yeah. There's a 20 year legacy of code that has to be tackled.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: That AI is creating many opportunities. Yes. Many opportunities.

Host: Awesome. Well, maybe in closing, Ben, I know the number one question we often get when we're visiting different countries is how do you recreate Silicon Valley locally? They want the ingredients to it. And there's a few components to success that have enabled Silicon Valley, but there's also the proposition, what if the internet is actually Silicon Valley or the actual Silicon Valley just distributed.

Ben: I don't think that's true, by the way. I think that's a happy talk. One thing you learn when you go to different countries is they're very different. The laws are different, the policies are different, the governance are different. And that's why America has continued to be special. We've had the internet now for quite a long time and that's absolutely not the case.

So what is going on? And by the way, I wish we could bring some of our own policy makers on those trips so they could hear people say we want Silicon Valley before they keep trying to wreck us. Not all of our policy makers, many are outstanding, but some really don't like the fact that we have a technology industry.

So I think as we've traveled around there's a combination of ingredients that make Silicon Valley special and America itself special. The first is you do need the talent. Talent is most easily seen in is there a great technical university that graduates people who know how to build things. That's an essential thing. And by the way many countries have that that don't have a Silicon Valley. What are they missing? They're missing the other two components.

The second is do you have a set of laws and policies that facilitate entrepreneurship, are essentially good for business? Can you create a company easily? Can you hire people easily? Can you fire people easily? Is there a tax incentive structure that's not onerous? Can you own - and this is a big one lately which California is moving against - can you own an illiquid asset that has value or will it get seized? Norway introduced an unrealized capital gains tax and that effectively ended the tech ecosystem there. So those kinds of policies are super important. If they're not right, nobody is going to take the extreme risk both personal and financial of starting a company if it's not an environment that's conducive to that.

And then the third one which is a combination of everything in a way is the culture. Do the most capable young people willing to make the biggest contribution get social status reward? Is it cool to either start or join a new company? Almost no countries have that. It's really good in the US. It's clearly good in China by the way, although they've done a few things to mess it up. But in most countries, in a lot of ways, success is frowned upon.

You hear a lot of this in the political rhetoric. "Oh the only way you could make a billion dollars is if you're a thief." Which is completely absurd. You look at the people, almost none of them are thieves. You can't steal a billion dollars, that's a real truth. But it's a rhetoric that works because it's a great sour grapes idea. "How did he get all that money? Oh, he's a thief. Okay, I'm not a thief. So I feel much better about myself now."

But that's a lot of the thing and that's the thing that's so hard to replicate and it's so hard to build and it's so easy to destroy. So it's something that I think we have to just be aware of how special that is and unique in the world. And then we can try and help other people do it but we also have to try equally hard not to wreck it ourselves.

Host: Yeah, for sure. It's World Cup season and there was a great tweet where someone was like, "I think America thinks they could potentially win the World Cup." And maybe they can, maybe they can't, but the fact that America thinks they can is a feature, not a bug.

Speaker C: Yes.

Speaker A: There's a reason.

Host: Ambition is fantastic.

Speaker C: There's a reason we all read our kids "The Little Engine That Could." "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can." That's in America. You can believe you can.

Host: That's right. That's right. Amazing. That's a good note to end on. Thank you all.