“Potemkin economies, all these companies that produce reports and emails and credit to one another and just lending to one another, it's all it uses to run the money printer. And it's all well connected firms, and they get access to cheap credit. And they just need to continue to make enough, make work essentially to justify the credit line.
And then essentially they do credit arbitrage, they borrow it from the Fed at 3% and then they lend out to other people at 6%. And they need to look busy while they do that, you know, that's the entire business model. Because ultimately, there is an entire planet that's out there that's buying these dollars.
So you just need to get into the good graces of somebody who has access to the money printer, you get a lower interest rate and you're set. That's what the smart people in the US are doing. You can't do that in China, not because of communism.
You can't do that because the Chinese can't export their inflation. They can't just print money and send it abroad and buy things. They have to make things.
And they've been making things for 40, “50 years. And they've been getting a lot better at it. So all the smart kids in China are out there making actual products, building actual bridges.
That's how they eat. You know, it's not it's I don't think it's it's it's some kind of accident that over the last 100 years, China went from being dirt poor and the US was building amazing bridges 100 years ago. And today it's the opposite.”
From The Bitcoin Standard Podcast: 303. The Network State with Balaji Srinivasan, Dec 9, 2025
Apple Podcasts
303. The Network State with Balaji Srinivasan
Podcast Episode · The Bitcoin Standard Podcast · 12/09/2025 · 2h 30m
This material may be protected by copyright.
“We're basically getting, in a sense, the hard money that libertarians wanted and the global government that progressives wanted, except that global government of governments is Bitcoin, which is the network that stands above states, that limits what states can do without the consent of others, right? And they simply can't steal like they've gotten accustomed to stealing.”
From The Bitcoin Standard Podcast: 303. The Network State with Balaji Srinivasan, Dec 9, 2025
Apple Podcasts
303. The Network State with Balaji Srinivasan
Podcast Episode · The Bitcoin Standard Podcast · 12/09/2025 · 2h 30m
This material may be protected by copyright.
“Now, conversely, what's interesting is Chinese Communism, on the surface, it looks like Soviet Communism versus American Capitalism all over again, where the Chinese actually do look at the absolute numbers of widgets as one of the key variables in their system. Like, they're looking at production, physical production.
But why is it, why is Chinese Communism working this century and American Capitalism not, whereas it was in reverse the past century? And it argues because Chinese Communism is fundamentally disciplined by international markets. They crank out all these cars, they crank out all these ships, but they have to sell them abroad, right?
So even if it looks like they're cranking out widgets like the Soviets were, the fundamental differences, they're Capitalist abroad. By contrast, the Americans have essentially destroyed Capitalism within their system with the money printing. So they're actually Communist, but it looks Capitalist and the Chinese are Capitalist, but it looks Communist.”
From The Bitcoin Standard Podcast: 303. The Network State with Balaji Srinivasan, Dec 9, 2025
Apple Podcasts
303. The Network State with Balaji Srinivasan
Podcast Episode · The Bitcoin Standard Podcast · 12/09/2025 · 2h 30m
This material may be protected by copyright.
“Because the Soviets would just crank out a thousand shoes, or a thousand tanks, or whatever, and they'd have quantity over quality and be the crappiest shoes or tanks. That's what the planned economy did, and so on and so forth. And now, actually, I would argue, and you may disagree with this, today, American Keynesianism is actually like that, where the centralization, the money printing has gone to such a level that essentially the whole economy is centrally planned by the Fed and its allies, the Bank of Japan and so on and so forth.
And so they are, right? You agree, right?
Oh, yeah.
And so, as an example, General Motors doesn't exist without a bailout. The banks don't exist without a bailout. But even more fundamentally, the financial system really doesn't exist.
The stocks are buoyed by the plunge protection team, like Greenspan. And the thing is, they have a million shell games. They'll say, oh, the Fed didn't directly print money.
And it's like they extend the credit or Treasury does something, but if you map Fred and Treasury as essentially a unitary entity that coordinate closely enough for most purposes and most times, sometimes they'll have a bank buy it by proxy. They play a zillion shell games with this to fool themselves and others. But fundamentally, whether it's stocks, whether it's asset prices for mortgages, whether it's General Motors, the entire 20th century is being propped up by printing.
And American Keynesianism is like Soviet Communism at the end, where it's a zombie economy that's being propped up by the state.”
From The Bitcoin Standard Podcast: 303. The Network State with Balaji Srinivasan, Dec 9, 2025
Apple Podcasts
303. The Network State with Balaji Srinivasan
Podcast Episode · The Bitcoin Standard Podcast · 12/09/2025 · 2h 30m
This material may be protected by copyright.
The Hidden Empire: How Central Banking Reshaped Democracy and Capitalism
Modern society takes pride in two defining pillars: democracy and capitalism. We’re told that free markets empower individuals through competition, while representative governments ensure accountability and fairness. Yet beneath these ideals lies a quiet transformation — one not achieved through armies or coups, but through balance sheets, interest rates, and debt. The rise of global central banking has turned what were once decentralized systems of power into instruments of managed control.
This story is not about villains in smoke-filled rooms; it’s about structural evolution — how a well-intentioned idea designed to stabilize economies slowly grew into a mechanism that concentrates power in the hands of a global financial elite.
⸻
The Birth of Centralized Money
Before the 20th century, money was largely tethered to tangible value — typically gold or silver. Banks issued notes backed by reserves, and trade was limited by physical scarcity. When financial crises hit, there was no central authority to bail out failing banks or governments.
Central banks emerged as a solution. The Bank of England in the 17th century pioneered the concept: a central institution that could issue currency, stabilize the state’s finances, and act as lender of last resort. This model spread, culminating in the creation of the U.S. Federal Reserve in 1913 — a response to repeated banking panics.
The intention was noble: to prevent economic chaos. But centralization also meant that the power to create and control money — the lifeblood of all economic activity — was now held by a small group of unelected officials and financial intermediaries.
⸻
The Postwar Order: Bretton Woods and the Dollar Empire
After World War II, the world sought stability. The Bretton Woods Conference (1944) established a new global monetary system. Currencies were pegged to the U.S. dollar, and the dollar was convertible to gold. Two new institutions were born — the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank — to regulate exchange rates and provide development loans.
On the surface, this created an orderly world economy. But in practice, it placed extraordinary power in the hands of the United States and its central bank. The dollar became the de facto global reserve currency, and the Federal Reserve, by extension, became the world’s monetary anchor.
When President Nixon ended dollar convertibility to gold in 1971, the system shifted to fiat currency — money backed not by metals, but by confidence. From that moment, the supply of money was limited only by policy, not by physical constraint. Central banks could now create money ex nihilo, and the financial world became increasingly abstract — governed by interest rates, digital ledgers, and debt instruments.
⸻
The Financialization of Everything
With the link to gold severed, money creation accelerated. Central banks and commercial banks began expanding credit far beyond previous limits. Debt became the engine of growth. The new model rewarded those who could access credit first — corporations, investors, and governments — while ordinary citizens became dependent on loans for education, housing, and healthcare.
This transformation marked the financialization of capitalism. Profit no longer came primarily from producing goods or services, but from manipulating financial assets. Stock markets, derivatives, and property bubbles replaced factories and innovation as the primary sources of wealth.
The global central banking system — including the European Central Bank, Bank of Japan, and People’s Bank of China — all followed similar playbooks. Monetary policy, rather than democratic debate, became the ultimate arbiter of prosperity.
⸻
Crisis and Capture: The Era of Bailouts
Every few decades, this debt-fueled system collapses under its own weight. The Asian Financial Crisis (1997), the Global Financial Crisis (2008), and the COVID-era collapse (2020) each revealed the same pattern: risk-taking elites reap enormous profits during booms, and when their bets fail, central banks intervene to rescue them.
The tool of choice is quantitative easing (QE) — the large-scale creation of money to buy financial assets and stimulate markets. While QE props up the financial system, it also drives asset inflation — making the rich richer by inflating stocks and real estate — while wages stagnate and public debt soars.
In each crisis, the principle of free-market accountability — that bad investments should fail — is suspended. The system privatizes gains and socializes losses. What was once capitalism becomes state-managed finance.
At the same time, democratic accountability erodes. Central banks are nominally “independent,” meaning elected officials cannot easily challenge their policies. Yet their decisions determine the cost of living, employment, and the value of savings — the very issues voters care most about.
The paradox is clear: democracy exists politically, but not economically.
⸻
Global Dependence and Soft Totalitarianism
The influence of central banking now extends far beyond national borders. Developing nations depend on IMF loans and dollar liquidity, often conditioned on austerity policies that reshape their economies and governments. In effect, monetary policy becomes geopolitical leverage.
This has created a global hierarchy of dependency: nations at the top issue reserve currencies and shape rules; those at the bottom must borrow in those currencies, accepting foreign control over their budgets and policies.
Meanwhile, within advanced economies, citizens find themselves trapped in cycles of debt and dependency. Housing, education, and healthcare costs — inflated by cheap credit — force individuals into perpetual servitude to financial institutions. Money, once a medium of exchange, becomes a mechanism of control.
The totalitarianism of this system is subtle. It doesn’t rely on censorship or police states, but on economic coercion. Monetary policy regulates behavior through incentives and scarcity. The illusion of freedom persists, but choice is constrained by debt, inflation, and financial instability engineered from above.
⸻
The End of the Illusion
We now live in an era where the visible governments of parliaments and presidents coexist with an invisible government of central banks. One debates policy; the other dictates the conditions that make policy possible.
When central banks decide interest rates, asset purchases, or reserve requirements, they are effectively determining the fate of millions — without electoral consent. And because every government depends on stable credit markets to function, no politician dares to challenge the system that sustains their authority.
In this sense, both democracy and capitalism have been hollowed out. Elections and markets still exist, but their outcomes are guided within boundaries set by unelected monetary engineers.
⸻
From Control to Consciousness
Central banking began as a tool to prevent chaos. Today, it is the silent architecture of global governance — unaccountable, technocratic, and deeply intertwined with corporate and political elites. The danger lies not merely in corruption, but in complacency — in our collective belief that this is the natural order of things.
To reclaim democracy and capitalism, societies must reassert transparency and decentralization over the creation and control of money. Economic systems should serve humanity, not manage it.
Until that happens, we remain subjects not of kings or tyrants, but of interest rates — ruled by an empire without a flag, whose power flows not from armies or ideology, but from the quiet authority of the central banks.
Value is neither created nor destroyed, only transferred.
This echoes the law of conservation of energy in thermodynamics: energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed.
Applied metaphorically to economics, it suggests that value—while subjective—is redistributed among actors through trade, innovation, and production rather than “created from nothing.” However, unlike energy, value is emergent, depending on human perception, utility, and scarcity.
⸻
⚡ Thermodynamics and Bitcoin
Bitcoin introduces a fascinating connection between energy and value:
1. Proof-of-Work (PoW) directly ties Bitcoin’s issuance and security to physical energy expenditure.
• Miners convert real-world energy into computational “work.”
• This work secures the network and validates transactions.
• The difficulty adjustment ensures that the rate of issuance is thermodynamically constrained — it can’t be inflated by decree.
2. Entropy and Order:
• Mining dissipates energy (increasing entropy), but the outcome—Bitcoin’s ledger—is a form of informational order: a global, immutable record of value.
• In this sense, Bitcoin transforms thermodynamic energy into informational structure—order from chaos.
3. Energy as a universal denominator:
• Since energy is the fundamental cost of all work in the universe, Bitcoin could serve as a “bridge” between human valuation systems (which are psychological) and thermodynamic systems (which are physical).
• In principle, Bitcoin becomes a monetary measure of energy expenditure, a way to anchor digital value in the physical limits of reality.
⸻
🪞 Bridging Human and Physical Value
If money is the map of value, and energy is the terrain of reality, then Bitcoin might be the bridge between the two:
• Traditional fiat currencies are detached from physical constraints (inflation via keystrokes).
• Bitcoin is anchored by physical energy costs, embedding the laws of thermodynamics into the monetary system.
In that sense, yes — Bitcoin could be seen as the first digital mechanism that tethers human value directly to thermodynamic principles, transforming human trust and attention (soft value) into hard, energy-backed reality.
⸻
🧭 Philosophical Implication
Bitcoin suggests that value itself might be a form of organized energy, expressed through human cooperation and encoded in information systems. It’s not that Bitcoin “creates” value—but it provides a thermodynamically honest substrate upon which value can be expressed and conserved.
“Flucht in die Sachwerte”
(the flight into real values)
-Ludwig von Mises
Fiat is like a gymnastics competition where certain gymnasts get to perform under weaker gravity, giving them an unfair advantage.
Bitcoin is like a competition where every gymnast faces the same gravity — the rules are equal for everyone.
So if we’re creating a global free market of super productive AIs to build efficient systems that cause creative destruction in open source, then how does humanity capture those productivity gains?
…Bitcoin
BITCOIN BACKED UBI?
“I think the FED will play a substantial backstop into any disruption from AI, which I think one of the things that we've talked about historically is how much will AI disrupt the labor market?
How much will the change in immigration policy disrupt the labor market? There's all these different, how much will tariffs disrupt the labor market? I know we're probably going to talk about Intel and the United States buying.
Are there any implications of that? I think the bottom line is that the FED will play a backstop in the markets. And when that is the case, you want to be out there issuing these fixed income instruments.”
From The Hurdle Rate Podcast: Episode 24 - Fed Signals and Equity Stakes, Aug 26, 2025
Apple Podcasts
Episode 24 - Fed Signals and Equity Stakes
Podcast Episode · The Hurdle Rate Podcast · 08/26/2025 · 59m
This material may be protected by copyright.
Potential for Human-Aligned Innovation: a market-driven AI incentive loop:
1. AI searches for novel energy systems.
2. New energy tech allows more efficient Bitcoin mining.
3. AI is rewarded with more Bitcoin, giving it more “fuel” to continue R&D.
4. Humanity benefits indirectly from more energy efficient systems resulting in more abundance in energy to humanity.
This could work like a self-reinforcing research economy, but it would need safeguards to avoid:
• Negative side effects (pollution, monopolization).
• Goal misalignment (AI “gaming” the mining instead of innovating energy).
“And here we get into an important debate on whether fractional reserve banking is necessary for an economy to grow. The short answer is no, and you have to be a Keynesian to believe so. And there's a lot of references in the chapter of the book, where you can see a detailed discussion of why this is the case.
There's a long debate on this within economics, within Austrian economics and people who are close to Austrian economics, perhaps not entirely Austrian. But I think the Rothbardian view and my view on this is that money and credit by themselves are not productive assets. In the Mizazian view, they merely represent receipts that allow their holders to purchase productive assets.
An increase in the supply of money or credit will no more increase the stock of productive assets in an economy than an increase in printed football stadium tickets will increase the capacity of the stadium itself. So the idea that we need fractional reserve banking because it allows banks to create more credit is completely misguided Keynesian thinking because again, it thinks of the credit itself as being the productive asset. But all that the credit does is that it reallocates the already existing assets.
You don't make more seats in the stadium by issuing more tickets. You just create more people fighting over the same number of seats that already exists. So fractional reserve banking does not magically create more capital labor or resources.
It merely entrusts their allocation to central banks rather than the productive, conscientious people who produce and save them. Fiat central banking is what makes fractional reserve banking viable. This is really the key idea.
And we'd have a very different world.”
From The Bitcoin Standard Podcast: 287. The Fiat Standard Lecture 6: What Is Fiat Good For?, Aug 19, 2025
Apple Podcasts
287. The Fiat Standard Lecture 6: What Is Fiat Good For?
Podcast Episode · The Bitcoin Standard Podcast · 08/19/2025 · 53m
This material may be protected by copyright.
The strategic playbook on why Tether (USDT) + Jack Mallers’ XXI needs to evolve beyond just a Bitcoin treasury into a dollar-yield product powered by USDT rails and BTC upside.
Here’s the rationale laid out step by step:
⸻
1. The Strategic Problem They’re Solving
• Tether’s current moat is liquidity + adoption, not yield.
• USDT dominates global stablecoin flows (~70% market share) because it’s everywhere, cheap to use, and trusted in markets where banking is weak.
• But it does not offer yield to holders, due to U.S. stablecoin rules and regulatory risk.
• Investors still want “dollar + yield” exposure.
• U.S. money market funds, on-chain T-bill tokens (BUIDL, BENJI) are exploding — because they do pay 4–5% yield.
• Tether risks disintermediation if users migrate balances from “static” USDT to yield-bearing instruments.
• Bitcoin treasury adds another challenge.
• XXI is positioning itself as “the MicroStrategy +” — but just holding BTC doesn’t differentiate unless they find a way to tie it to user value.
⸻
2. Why USDT Alone Can’t Offer Yield
• Legal barrier: The new U.S. stablecoin bill explicitly prohibits regulated stablecoins from paying yield directly. That means USDT can’t simply tack on interest.
• Reputational risk: BlockFi/Celsius cases showed regulators hate “crypto interest accounts.”
• Accounting: Tether’s reserves (USTs, cash) generate yield for Tether — but it can’t pass that directly to coin holders without becoming a security.
⸻
3. The XXI Opportunity
XXI can be structured as the “bridge institution” that Tether itself cannot be.
• Regulated wrapper: XXI, as a U.S.-listed public company, can custody USDT + U.S. T-bills + BTC under disclosure rules.
• Dollar yield layer:
• Customer funds sweep into short-term USTs or MMFs → this provides the safe, compliant base yield.
• XXI accounts can use USDT as the settlement rail, but yield is attributed to the account/fund shares, not the token itself.
• Bitcoin boost:
• XXI’s corporate treasury holds BTC.
• Periodically, when BTC appreciates, XXI can allocate a discretionary “Boost” or special dividend → giving users a sense of upside without turning the product into a BTC-linked security.
• Narrative fit: “Earn dollar yield, ride on Bitcoin rails, upside powered by XXI’s Bitcoin treasury.”
⸻
4. Why Tether Needs XXI Specifically
• U.S. regulatory firewall: Tether is Cayman-based, offshore, and highly scrutinized. It cannot safely offer yield products in the U.S.
• XXI as the U.S. vehicle: By anchoring XXI as a U.S.-listed, transparent entity (SPAC-listed, audited, with SoftBank & Cantor backing), they create the compliant face for dollar-yield products.
• Leverage Jack Mallers’ credibility: Mallers already built Strike, positioned himself as Bitcoin’s “payments guy,” and has credibility with U.S. policymakers and Bitcoiners alike.
• Defense against on-chain MMFs: If XXI doesn’t step into this role, products like Franklin’s BENJI or BlackRock’s BUIDL eat into USDT’s network.
⸻
5. Business Model Mechanics
• Base income stream:
• Interest from U.S. T-bills and repo (just like Tether earns today, but shared via XXI accounts).
• Boost income stream:
• Mark-to-market gains from BTC treasury.
• Optional discretionary distributions or marketing campaigns (“Bitcoin bonus yield”).
• Network moat:
• All flows denominated in USDT for transfers, withdrawals, global commerce → keeps reinforcing Tether’s dominance.
• Equity upside:
• XXI stock (ticker: XXI) becomes the “Bitcoin yield + Tether rails” proxy for institutional investors.
⸻
6. The Narrative That Sells
• To users:
“Get a U.S.-regulated account that pays safe dollar yield, moves at internet speed on stablecoin rails, and shares upside from the largest Bitcoin corporate treasury after MicroStrategy.”
• To regulators:
“We’re not paying yield on USDT itself — we’re offering yield via U.S. MMFs and treasuries, with transparent accounting, in a listed U.S. public company.”
• To investors:
“XXI is the Bitcoin-native BlackRock — combining stablecoin rails, safe yield, and Bitcoin exposure in one equity ticker.”
⸻
✅ So the playbook is:
Tether provides the liquidity + balance sheet.
XXI provides the U.S.-compliant wrapper + yield channel.
Bitcoin provides the upside narrative + long-term alpha.
Bitcoin is potential energy
AI is kinetic energy
The Cycle of Hidden Debasement
1. Debt-Driven Fragility
• The U.S. financial system is highly leveraged.
• Without periodic credit expansion, it risks cascading defaults → systemic collapse.
2. Crisis Trigger
• Something “breaks” (housing 2008, repo market 2019, pandemic 2020).
• The Fed must print (QE, rate cuts, emergency programs) to prevent mass defaults.
3. Liquidity Injection = Stealth Tax
• Printing devalues each dollar — this is the wealth transfer from savers to asset holders.
• Savers, wage earners, and those without inflation-protected assets lose purchasing power.
4. Debasement Silo
• Instead of letting that printed money flood into CPI-measured goods/services (which would reveal the inflation), they direct flows into high-capacity asset classes:
• 1980s/90s: Equities boom
• 2000s: Real estate
• Post-2008: Mega-cap tech
• Potentially next: Bitcoin ETFs + AI megacaps
• This contains inflation optics while still allowing monetary expansion.
5. Wealth Concentration
• The wealthy, who own the “sponge assets,” absorb most of the benefit.
• The masses get rising living costs later, once the asset bubble bleeds into the real economy.
⸻
Why It Works
• Most people don’t connect “S&P up 40%” with “my dollar buys less.”
• CPI is politically and statistically engineered to understate inflation.
• The Fed maintains the illusion of stability while executing wealth transfer.
⸻
If this is right, then each cycle is essentially:
• Step 1: System debt crisis → print money
• Step 2: Hide the new money in asset bubbles (tech, crypto, etc.)
• Step 3: Rinse and repeat until the sponge is saturated → find a faster horse
⸻
I can map out every cycle from 1980 to now showing:
• Crisis points
• Fed balance sheet jumps
• Which “fast horse” asset took the debasement hit each time
A deliberate liquidity pivot…
1. Phase 1 – Prolonged Tightening
• Fed keeps rates high until something in the credit markets breaks — defaults spike, liquidity freezes, maybe a bank failure or corporate debt crisis.
• This creates the justification for aggressive easing (lowering rates, QE, fiscal stimulus).
2. Phase 2 – Forced Credit Creation
• Once the crisis hits, the Fed and Treasury flood the system with liquidity to prevent contagion — just like 2008 or March 2020.
• Credit is created through bond purchases, direct fiscal spending, bank support, etc.
3. Phase 3 – New Absorber for Liquidity
• In 2008–2014, Amazon, tech stocks, and real estate absorbed a lot of the monetary expansion (through valuation expansion).
• In your scenario, Bitcoin becomes the preferred or engineered “sink” for the new credit:
• As an inflation hedge narrative.
• As a regulated investment product (e.g., ETFs) to channel excess liquidity into something non-systemic.
• Possibly even as a sovereign-controlled asset class for retail speculation, keeping that speculative energy away from fragile banking assets.
4. Strategic Rationale
• Bitcoin’s fixed supply narrative makes it an ideal scapegoat for rising prices (“it’s not inflation, it’s just Bitcoin going up”).
• It’s highly liquid and globally accessible, so it can absorb both domestic and international flows.
• Politically easier than more real estate bubbles or over-leveraging the stock market again.
⸻
The Macro-Political Twist
If this scenario plays out, Bitcoin becomes:
• A pressure valve for fiat debasement optics.
• A controlled speculation zone — people chase BTC instead of dumping dollars into food/energy/land, keeping CPI calmer.
• Potentially part of a wider financial reset narrative (“sound money” for the digital age, but under institutional custody).
⸻
This actually parallels your Amazon theory:
• Post-2008, credit expansion fueled tech equity multiples → tech became the growth sponge.
• Post-future-crisis, credit expansion fuels Bitcoin ETF inflows → BTC becomes the growth sponge.
In fiat, the humans works for the machine. In Bitcoin, the machine works for the humans.
In the coming decade, AI will replace most human labor, creating unprecedented productivity and wealth — but the monetary system will determine whether that abundance is shared or hoarded.
In a fiat system, infinite money printing fuels debt, inflation, and asset bubbles that widen the wealth gap, leaving most citizens with a devaluing UBI and cheap digital escapism.
In a Bitcoin-based system, finite supply and decentralized governance preserve AI’s surplus in sound money, ensuring UBI retains purchasing power, prosperity remains grounded in the real world, and nations are incentivized to cooperate over innovation rather than currency wars.
AI makes the pie bigger; Bitcoin ensures everyone gets a real slice.
“The world will become richer, so much richer. But how will we distribute the riches?
I want you to imagine two camps, communist China and capitalist America. I want you to imagine what would happen in capitalist America if we have 30% unemployment?
There will be social unrest in the streets.
And I want you to imagine if China lives true to caring for its nations and replaced every worker with a robot, what would it give its citizens?
UBI?
Correct.
That is the ideological problem. Because in China's world today, the prosperity of every citizen is higher than the prosperity of the capitalist. In America today, the prosperity of the capitalist is higher than the prosperity of every citizen.”
From The Diary Of A CEO with Steven Bartlett: Ex-Google Exec (Mo Gawdat) on AI: The Next 15 Years Will Be Hell Before We Get To Heaven… And Only These 5 Jobs Will Remain!, Aug 4, 2025
Apple Podcasts
Ex-Google Exec (Mo Gawdat) on AI: The Next 15 Years Will Be Hell Before We Get To Heaven… And Only These 5 Jobs Will Remain!
Podcast Episode · The Diary Of A CEO with Steven Bartlett · 08/04/2025 · 2h 36m
This material may be protected by copyright.
