E164: Zuck’s Senate apology, Elon's comp package voided, crony capitalism, Reddit IPO, drone attack

Apple Pro Goggles

• The hosts discuss the Apple Pro goggles and share their experiences using them.
• They talk about a basketball game viewing experience using the Apple Pro goggles.
• The hosts discuss the potential impact of the Apple Pro goggles on social interactions and relationships.

Travis Kalanick and Uber's IPO

• The hosts talk about the controversy surrounding Travis Kalanick not being allowed to ring the bell at Uber's IPO.

Career Success and Enjoying the Present

• The hosts reflect on the nature of career success and the importance of enjoying the present.

Facebook's Rayband Glasses

• The hosts mention Facebook's Rayband glasses and their potential applications.

Senate Testimony of Tech CEOs

• The US Senate held a hearing with tech executives, including Mark Zuckerberg, to discuss online child sexual exploitation and the safety of children online.
• Senator Richard Blumenthal confronted Zuckerberg, asking him to apologize to victims of harm caused by Facebook's products. Zuckerberg apologized during the hearing.
• Some commentators view the hearing as a "kangaroo court" and a "moral panic," arguing that it is unfair to single out tech companies for societal problems.
• Others argue that social media algorithms and addictive features contribute to online harms and that tech companies should be held accountable.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act

• There is a debate about whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which provides immunity to online platforms for user-generated content, should be repealed or amended to hold tech companies more liable.
• Some commentators suggest that the focus should be on mainstream entertainment and culture rather than solely blaming tech companies for societal issues.
• There is a discussion about the different standards of liability for publishers and common carriers and whether social media companies should be held liable for content they promote or editorialize through algorithms.
• Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is a visionary piece of legislation that enabled the creation of user-generated content platforms.
• Section 230 protects platforms from liability for content generated by users, but they can lose this protection if they take "Good Samaritan" actions to reduce harmful content.
• Republicans are considering removing Section 230 because they are angry about political censorship by social media companies.
• Removing Section 230 would lead to a flood of lawsuits against social media companies, which would likely result in even stricter content moderation.
• This would disproportionately impact Republican content, as the content moderators of these companies tend to be liberal.

Lawsuits Against Social Media Companies

• There is a growing movement to hold social media companies like Facebook accountable for the negative impacts they have on society, particularly concerning young people's mental health and safety.
• Trial lawyers see the potential for significant financial gain in lawsuits against social media companies, similar to the tobacco settlement, and are motivated to push for changes in the law.
• The economic incentive for trial lawyers could lead to a flood of lawsuits against social media companies, potentially resulting in hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue for the lawyers.
• The lawsuits will likely focus on highly emotional issues such as sexual exploitation, mental health, suicide, and bullying, which can be effectively presented in jury trials.
• Social media companies may be held liable for contributing to negative outcomes, even if other factors such as popular culture and entertainment also play a role.
• Hedge funds are involved in financing these lawsuits, seeing the potential for high returns due to the profitability of social media companies.
• The discussion should focus on finding a reasonable age limit for children's use of social media, with parental permission required, rather than changing Section 230 in a way that could lead to more censorship.

Elon Musk's Compensation Package

• A Delaware judge voided Elon Musk's $55.8 billion pay package from Tesla, siding with an investor who claimed it was unfair.
• The judge found that the pay package was excessive, the process by which it was approved was not fair, and the shareholder vote was invalid.
• Opponents of the verdict argue that the pay package was not excessive considering Tesla's subsequent success, the process was fair, and the shareholders were sufficiently informed.
• Some investors believe that the ruling sets a poor standard for companies governed in Delaware and could have a chilling effect on compensation practices.

CEO Compensation Practices

• The current CEO compensation structure incentivizes share buybacks and financial engineering rather than innovation and company growth.
• This practice leads to mediocre companies and diminishes American exceptionalism.
• Mary Barra's compensation at GM remained high despite the company's stagnant stock price, highlighting the flaws in traditional CEO pay packages.
• The Fortune 500 operates as a country club where CEOs are chosen based on political connections rather than their ability to create value for shareholders.
• A small group of consultants has significant influence in designing CEO compensation plans, which can lead