Kamala's Media Blitz, Elon's Giant Leap, and Guest Chris Urmson

Kara Swisher: As marketing channels have multiplied, the demand for content has skyrocketed. But everyone can make content that's on brand and stands out with Adobe Express. You don't have to be a designer to generate images, rewrite text, and create effects. That's the beauty of generative AI that's commercially safe. Teams all across your business will be psyched to collaborate and create amazing presentations, videos, social posts, flyers, and more. Meet Adobe Express, the quick and easy app to create on-brand content. Learn more at adobe.com slash express slash business.

Scott Galloway: Rinse takes your laundry and hand delivers it to your door. Expertly cleaned and folded. So you could take the time once spent folding and sorting and waiting to finally pursue a whole new version of you. Like Tea Time You. Mmm. Or this Tea Time You. Or even this Tea Time You. Said you hear about Dave. Or even Tea Time Tea Time Tea Time You. Mmm. So update on Dave. It's up to you. We'll take the laundry. Rinse. It's time to be great.

Kara Swisher: Not all journalism is the same. Take The Guardian. Our coverage has something unique. Fierce independence. Nobody owns us or tells us what we can and can't say. So we're free to report the whole picture. We connect what's happening in Washington to the rest of the globe. Expose corruption wherever we find it. And give fresh perspective on everything. From wellness and soccer to culture, the climate, and more. Read, watch, and listen to The Guardian for free at theguardian.com.

Kara Swisher: Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swisher.

Scott Galloway: And I'm Scott Galloway.

Kara Swisher: So, Scott, you're in L.A.?

Scott Galloway: Los Angeles. Hello, ladies. Are you having a good time? Did you do your lonely bar dinner and everything already?

Kara Swisher: I did. I did. I go to the bar at the Polo Lounge and I do my favorite thing. I eat alone. Little shop salad. Well, you know how you can tell I like someone? I look at their shoes. I stare at their shoes instead of my own. Yeah, it's great here. And I was down by the pool yesterday.

Scott Galloway: Are you in Santa Monica?

Kara Swisher: No, the Beverly Hills Hotel. I'm going to give you one guess where it is.

Scott Galloway: Okay, it's in Beverly Hills.

Kara Swisher: Got it. There you go. Sorry. Go ahead.

Scott Galloway: And they called me. So I went out Saturday night. I haven't been out in a long time. I've been trying to drink a lot less. And my friend goes to these parties that a guy my age shouldn't be at, but I went anyway. And they had vodka and tequila. I don't drink either of those things. Tequila makes me anxious. Vodka has no impact on me. And I don't drink for taste. I drink to feel better about myself and everybody else. So they had these hard lemonades and I started sucking those things down. And it was one of those things where like two, three, nothing. And then four, on the fourth one, I decided I needed to dance. And whenever I decide I need to dance, that's God's way of saying, you need to go home now. No one needs to see me on the dance floor. And I literally know that. Whenever I start thinking, "Oh my God, it would be unfair not to share these groovy moves with the rest of the world"—

Kara Swisher: Oh, so you didn't dance.

Scott Galloway: Oh, no, I dance. But regardless of how messed up I am, I have a safety mechanism that goes, "Must go home now. You are dancing. Must go home now." And then I was so—I haven't been this hungover in a while. So I woke up, I got a call at 10 in the morning in my room. They're like, "Mr. Galloway?" And I'm like, "Yeah." And they were calling too early. And of course, I'm like, "Oh, no, no, what's up?" And they're like, "We really appreciate you being a friend of the Beverly Hills Hotel and that you mentioned us on the podcast. We've gotten a lot of calls. And would you like the cabana today?" And so of course I go, "Yes." And I wasn't entirely sure when I went down there that it had actually happened or I had dreamt it.

Kara Swisher: But you got a cabana?

Scott Galloway: They gave me a cabana so I could buy like $900 worth of iced teas and rosé, but I got the cabana for free.

Kara Swisher: Oh, nice.

Scott Galloway: Anyways, I absolutely love it here. I'll bring you here. We should come here for lunch sometime.

Kara Swisher: I know. I never get free stuff like that. This is exciting, all your cabana stories. But we've got a lot to get to today, including Elon Musk taking one giant leap into cringiness at Donald Trump's rally, why Google is losing ground in the search ad market. Plus, our friend of Pivot is Chris Urmson. I've known him for a long time, the founder and CEO of self-driving truck startup Aurora. He also was the first Google car person way back when. But when this episode airs, it'll be International Lesbian Day, just so you know. And so by law, you have to compliment me three times about my lesbianity.

Scott Galloway: Uh, but I also want to note some of our listeners had a bone to pick about those lesbian divorce numbers you mentioned last week because they were inaccurate. You said the divorce rate among lesbian couples is 70% according to data out of the UK. But our listeners pointed out that what the data actually said was of the total same-sex divorces in the 2019 study, 72% were female couples. They had a divorce rate of 72%.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, but the question then, we were talking with the producer, is like, what percentage of gay marriages are two females versus two males? Am I allowed to say female versus male still? Anyways, so it actually—because I would assume that there are vastly more gay male marriages than gay female marriages, meaning that still lesbians are much more likely to get divorced than gay men. Would you agree?

Scott Galloway: No, I wouldn't.

Kara Swisher: That's why. See, that's why I was questioning it last week. But the number we need to know, though, is what percentage of total gay marriages are male versus female. Do we?

Scott Galloway: We don't. We need to find that data.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, that would be really interesting. Well, we're going to find that data. But nonetheless, since it's International Lesbian Day, I'd like you to pay me a compliment.

Scott Galloway: Well, as atonement for my incorrect data, I'm going to a WNBA game.

Kara Swisher: You are? Did that work out? Are you going to do that?

Scott Galloway: We're trying to figure it out. I'm actually really excited about it.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, I know. You're going to sit right down on the court, by the way, FYI. Those are courtside tickets you're going to get.

Scott Galloway: Well, I think if a heterosexual white male goes, he should sit in the most expensive seats just to show that we still have advantage and privilege.

Kara Swisher: Yes. Well, you'll be sitting around all lesbians, just so you know, and the owners, essentially. I don't know if it has the same proportion or same draw of the gay community, but I've gotten into women's football, the Arsenal women's football team. Actually, Megan Rapinoe brought it up, and so I've been following the—

Scott Galloway: Rapinoe.

Kara Swisher: Actually, Megan Rapinoe brought it up. Yeah.

Scott Galloway: She's supporting Kamala. Anyways. Whatever. 90% of lesbians get divorced.

Kara Swisher: Listen, Scoot. Scoot Galloway. That's her new name. Here we go. Aren't you gay? I was lucky. Anyways, but I've been going. I'm totally following Arsenal Women's now. They're amazing. They have one of the best players in all of female football. Those ladies can kick a ball. You'll like WNBA. It's really fun. I'm excited to go. The arena's fun. There's a whole separate area they're going to take you back where you get free candy. And there's a beautiful dining room with food. They have it at most places. You'll like it a lot. You should go. That's a really cool facility where Liberty plays. People like it. It's fun. They have all these people that come out and dance and stuff. They have all the entertainment and everything else. Anyway, on Saturday night one of the reasons I'm here is my good friends Eddie Ball and David Freight had their 50th birthday party. It was an 80s theme. It was so much fun.

Scott Galloway: What'd you wear?

Kara Swisher: Oh, well, I'm glad you asked. Top siders, light 501 jeans, a polo shirt, Adidas Superstars, which were the bomb back then. And Varnays. Hello. Varnays. Oh, my God, I'm so good at this. Oh, my God. And then the cherry on the 80s top—I mean, we're talking like Safety Dance, Men Without Hats, Tom Petty. A members-only jacket.

Scott Galloway: I saw those members-only jackets. You all had them, it looked like. You all had them. Those are good jackets. I still like them. I don't know why they went out of style, because they're great.

Kara Swisher: They didn't really. I think they're ironic. So it's International Lesbian Day. What do you know? Anyways, yeah, members-only. It's making a comeback. You know, a lot of lesbians wear members-only jackets when they get married and don't get divorced as much as other people. Anyway, on to other news. Dock workers have returned to work after reaching a tentative deal with the U.S. Maritime Alliance. The deal was reportedly brokered with the help of senior Biden administration officials and will last until January 15th. The union has been pushing for a 77% raise increase over six years, reportedly tentatively accepted 62%. Obviously, automation is another big deal for them. Will Democrats get any credit for this win or just crisis aversion? We said this would happen. It would be settled tooth to sweet. What do you think about that?

Scott Galloway: It's either neutral to positive for Harris. First off, let's just encourage the writers strike folks at WGA to listen and learn. You don't go on strike when your industry is getting the crap kicked out of it and you have no leverage at that moment. The industry is in structural decline and having an especially rough year. And we have too many people who want to do our jobs and now we're going to strike. And what did they get? They got a 5% raise in the first year and eventually 12% over three years. The longshoremen basically represent commerce. The economy is booming and they pick a point of leverage very strategically before the holidays. I mean, this is a dirty secret of retail. And I learned this painfully.

Kara Swisher: China? That's right. No, it's an 11-year-old making my t-shirt somewhere in a region in China. That's just so jingoist and awful. Anyway, but you know, 72% of lesbians get divorced. So what you have is effectively, this is how you pull off a strike. To be clear, the WGA got a 5% raise in the first year for an eventual 12% over three years. The dock workers got a tentative 62% over six years. So I'm happy about that. The majority at the ports of New York and New Jersey, about two-thirds of longshoremen make at least $100K, which I think is great. And these guys had a lot of leverage. Every day they were out, they were going to take the economy down by $5 billion. So I'm happy for the longshoremen. I'm happy for the economy. I'm happy for Harris because it takes one of the three October surprises off the table. It was the strike. It was Iran slash Israel. And then the hurricane.

Kara Swisher: There's another hurricane coming.

Scott Galloway: But where I was headed with this is—when I was on the board of Red Envelope, we were coming into the holidays, and the dirty secret of retail is that you lose money 44 weeks a year, and then the eight weeks leading up to the holidays is where you just print money.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, exactly.

Scott Galloway: And at about the end of November, the longshoremen in Long Beach went on strike and our entire inventory for the holiday—and you might ask, "Well, what idiot decided to put all of your holiday inventory on one boat?"—was stuck seven miles off of the Long Beach coast. And that, in combination with a credit crisis and a software mishap that sent 15,000 gifts to the wrong address, which is not a good thing, Kara, took the company from eight bucks a share to chapter 11 in about three weeks.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, I think so. It was good that it was gone. I think you're right. It's a wash, but it's good that it's not there just hanging on. And by the way, there is another hurricane coming. There's going to be a lot of them. I mean, we'll get into that in a minute because of misinformation.

Scott Galloway: It's almost as if the climate is changing. Something's going on.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, I know. I don't know what to think. Of course, no climate change if you're a Republican. But speaking of things that are terrible for social media companies, three separate states have revealed lawsuits against social media last week. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is a really shady character I think we can say, has sued TikTok for violating the state parental consent law. New Mexico attorney general unveiled a lawsuit against Snap for ignoring reports of sextortion and failing to implement verifiable age verification. The Arkansas AG filed a lawsuit against Google, YouTube, and Alphabet for violating state deceptive trade practices. Meanwhile, the Kids Online Safety Act is stalled in the House. There's issues around how it's phrased, etc. But this is all around children's safety, again. A lot of it's around parental consent or abuse, sex abuse, or sort of those age-related things. Thoughts?

Scott Galloway: 59% of teens age 13 to 17 use Instagram. And according to a 2022 study, 24%—one in four adolescents—are social media addicts. Can you name any substance, any activity that has a one in four addict ratio? Nope. I mean, maybe nicotine, maybe cigarettes. And here's the thing. If you were to say, "How could you really mess up America?" Well, could we do something that gets people addicted, that polarizes them, that makes them more prone to conspiracy theory, makes them lack self-esteem, makes them more inclined to self-harm? And who would we do it against if we were really mendacious, if we were really evil? I know—13 to 17-year-olds, as their brains are getting wired, so we can set up a future of addiction and massive need for dopamine hits. And here's the problem. Just as Meta delayed and obfuscated, we need to do better. "We're proud of the progress we've made and have addicted a quarter of America's youth, or 25% of 60%. So one in seven teens are now addicted to this thing. Their stock has gone up 90%." And that's the problem. There is so much money in the business of addiction.

Kara Swisher: There is. It's more than that. It's also how they're fixing their brains. There's a really great series. Maybe we'll have the director on—Social Studies on FX.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, I heard it's great.

Kara Swisher: It's by the woman who did The Queen of Versailles, which was a great documentary. But let me just read this to you. Limited series Social Studies, a groundbreaking character documentary series that delves into the lives of the first digital natives. And it was filmed in Los Angeles over a school year. And I really want to see it. It's supposed to be really quite something. But you don't need the fact that we're sitting around arguing over this, waiting for more information to come in. It's really kind of like, we know what's going on. And by the way, we know it for ourselves, for adults, the same thing, the addiction issues around phones. It'll be interesting to see how we handle this, but it should be treated like cigarettes or anything else, especially around kids. We keep saying this over and over again. It's not censorship to do so. The kids know it. The kids are the adults in the room. One third of respondents of kids 18 to 27—or young adults—said they wish Instagram had never been invented. And nearly half of that said the same for TikTok. It's the kids. Even the young kids realize this is not—they can't resist it. It's irresistible. I got on TikTok this weekend for a minute and it was an hour later.

Scott Galloway: Oh, easy, easy.

Kara Swisher: It was crazy. I haven't—and then I like threw the phone that I use for TikTok in a drawer and locked it. I was like, "No, that must stay over there." Because I just was, it was very pleasing. It was a lot of cooking. I get a lot of cooking stuff and I like watching.

Scott Galloway: Do you get cooking clips? I was going to say, it says a lot of—the algorithm knows you better than you know yourself.

Kara Swisher: It does. I really like plantings. And then I also like—there isn't something else that always comes up. Just plants and hardware hacks. I got him such a lesbian. International Lesbian Day. Anyway, let's get to our first big story. With a month to go before the election, Vice President Kamala Harris is embarking on a media blitz this week. She kicked things off with an interview on the podcast Call Her Daddy and is set to appear on 60 Minutes, The View, Stephen Colbert, and Howard Stern over the next few days. Governor Tim Walz is also getting in on the action. He'll be on Jimmy Kimmel, is also recording an interview on SmartLess podcast. He was also on Fox News, which was interesting. Most of these will be light and friendly interviews. Some will be more hard-hitting. Is this a good idea or is it too little too late? Or what's the strategy here?

Scott Galloway: Well, the thing that struck me about it is just how much the world has changed in four years where the presidential candidates are the big news event or the big media events—not that they're going on 60 Minutes tonight. It's that they're going on this podcast. I mean, it really speaks to how podcasts have become such an important medium. And the fact that she went on Call Her Daddy, by the way, I don't know if you listened to it. It's really strong. And Alex Cooper is fantastic. She is good. Call Her Daddy is one of the five most popular podcasts in the U.S. And they filled a sweet spot. They said, "We're adults, we're women, we're going to talk about things that women aren't necessarily supposed to talk about in a very thoughtful, funny way, authentic, raw." And I thought it was a great move for her to go on. I thought she handled herself well. Trump's going on manosphere podcasts. What I take away from it is it speaks to the medium. They're not dying to go on CNN or Fox. I mean, they do that stuff. But the thing I've noticed more than anything about the impact we have is the people we help the most, that want to come on the most, are people with a book. If someone comes on our show and talks about their new book, you will tangibly see a market increase in book sales that day. And I would think that the same people who buy books disproportionately vote. So I think it's a great medium for those folks.

Kara Swisher: I do too. The thing I thought about is four years ago, I don't think these candidates were going on these pods.

Scott Galloway: Well, you know, Obama went on mine a long time ago. I think they were aware of that.

Kara Swisher: Oh, there it is. I'll let that go because of International Lesbian Day. I'm just saying. And Vice President Harris has been on my podcast. But I think it's a very different—I would agree. I think she should go on Joe Rogan. Like, I was like, don't go on Jeff Brimley.

Scott Galloway: A hundred percent.

Kara Swisher: I think she should go on Joe Rogan. And he would be good to her. Stern makes sense. That's a great one to do, too. Colbert is good. The View is excellent. But will it matter for her? Because no matter how many she does, it's not enough for the press. And the fact that she's not doing a big New York Times interview, I think, is really interesting. That, to me, is the most interesting—what they're not doing, offense.

Scott Galloway: She's getting her footing. And okay, it'll never be enough for the people who just don't like her, but she should be out there. And the thing that really, in my opinion, highlighted that Secretary Clinton didn't run a great campaign—her best media appearance, hands down, was on Howard Stern. She was likable. She was funny. The problem was she went on after the election. The bottom line is you can't play defense in a race this close. You've got to play offense and you've got to take some risks. And you just said what I think. If there's any one thing I would suggest to her right now, it's Rogan. Because if you actually listen to Rogan, which I don't—

Kara Swisher: He's a little positive towards her.

Scott Galloway: He's very impressed with her. And he gets the assignment. He's not going to try and call her out and embarrass her. He's going to be excited about her being there. And generally speaking, he doesn't push back on anyone, including if they're distributing or spreading conspiracy theory that mRNA vaccines alter your DNA. That would be a great move for her. And that manosphere right now, I believe, is still one of the few groups that is up for grabs. She should absolutely go on Rogan.

Kara Swisher: Rogan would be the place to go. Rogan or—trying to think what else. No, Rogan. She should go on Rogan. Yeah, I like Call Her Daddy, too. That's a good—that's the ladies, essentially. Great move. Yeah, great move. She should come on our podcast. But really, she should do—speaking of strange media appearances, former President Donald Trump returned to Butler, Pennsylvania, the site of his first assassination attempt, for a rally this weekend. Trump was joined on stage by Elon Musk, who literally jumped in the air a moment captured in a photo that launched many memes. I have to know what you thought of this. I saw some of your threads, and I wrote on Threads, "Elon's tummy just beat out Dukakis in a tank." He said he was—same thing with Howard Dean. It was so embarrassing. It was so awkward. He called himself Dark MAGA. A lot of people are calling him Dork MAGA. Another nickname for him was PayPal Poutine, because he had that weird look in another picture. It was full of weird Elon. I can't imagine Trump being happy about any of this, but what do you think of this? Also, Trump, by the way, gave a speech, and I noted this on Chris Wallace this weekend. His cognitive difficulties are so apparent, and the New York Times finally wrote a big story about it this week. I've been saying this for a while, the cognitive exchange. It's worse. I mean, he says crazy things all the time. This is a whole new level of cognitive failure on his part. Your thoughts on the Elon jump, whatever it was.

Scott Galloway: Well, let's go in reverse. There was a lot there. Let's go in reverse order. With respect to his cognitive function or dysfunction, both of us said this early and often to the bother of many of our listeners—and that is Biden was just too old. Biology says, "Hold my beer" around what you think or what you're hoping is going to happen. If Trump is reelected, he will be older than Biden was when he was too old to run for president, except Trump has supposedly a history of mental impairment or dementia. His father had dementia. He refuses to release the records of his cognitive tests, and he's obese. So, folks, Biden was too old, and this guy is way too old. Now, as it relates to Trump and Musk, or as I say, Sissy SpaceX, he's literally—look, the reality is for the campaign, for their core constituents, it was probably a good move. A lot of people really admire Musk, for a lot of understandable reasons. To me, it represents the two of them on stage and how much love and adulation they get represents something deeper and darker. And that is the aspirational vision of masculinity represented by these guys has turned so coarse, so vile. Between the two of them, they have 17 kids by six different women. With Musk, you have a guy who, when he gets to a position of power, accuses his workers of sex crimes falsely such that they have to leave their home, does not pay contracted, legally obligated severance, dead names, says his daughter is dead to him. And yet we have VCs, including those that come on our podcast, making all sorts of excuses for the guy. And what I have found is that generally speaking, it represents this dark peanut butter and chocolate zeitgeist in our society where we have conflated masculinity with coarseness, with cruelty, and some messed-up vision that as long as you're rich, you can treat women like crap. You can be a bad dad, a bad employer. And these guys, it was literally like the parade of poor role models for young men.

Kara Swisher: Yep, it really was.

Scott Galloway: It's just so upsetting. And it reflects something that over the last 40 years, people have gotten so sick of politicians grin-f***ing them. Never saying anything impolite. Never actually saying what might be going on. Trying to please everyone. Lying to everybody. Being PG at best. They were just so ready for someone to come in and, quite frankly, just be really coarse. And these two are literally the Fred and Ginger of, in my view, what it means to not be a real man.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, I would agree. It's interesting because I do think—I agree—there's a lot of people who really do revere Elon Musk. But boy, did he look dorky. Boy, did he. That was weird. And Trump's face, I thought was interesting several times. I don't think he liked it much at all, actually. I think he was like, "What is he doing taking up all my oxygen?" It's like two desperate people, desperate for attention sponges fighting with each other, with the jumping and the weirdness and who knows what he was on. So it just was—I thought it was embarrassing, actually.

Scott Galloway: It was embarrassing. It's like my first marriage. Our first home, we had one vanity in the bathroom. It got ugly.

Kara Swisher: It just got ugly.

Scott Galloway: Wait, I need to look at me. No, I need to look at me.

Kara Swisher: He seemed uncomfortable in several of the pictures. It was like Elon needs the attention more. And it's desperate—like he makes Trump look humble by comparison. I have to say it was weird. Although Trump was meandering all over the place. But just to circle back, I think it's good for Trump. I just think there's this—they both, Trump and Musk, have this zealot-like, cultish, religious-like following. And it's kind of the same. It's a little bit of the same person.

Scott Galloway: I think there can be—this is Highlander to me. There can be only one. I think they're going to have such a falling out. It's going to be delicious to watch when it comes.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, it'll be after the election. Maybe. We'll see. Well, we'll see who wins. But by the way, speaking of who wins, while Elon is all in on Trump, some people in big tech are hedging their bets. This was interesting. Ben Horowitz and his wife, Felicia, plan on making a significant donation to Kamala Harris's campaign. Horowitz announced his decision in an email to Andreessen Horowitz employees last week, saying he's encouraged by conversations with Harris around the "little tech agenda." I have no idea what that means. Horowitz and Mark Andreessen had endorsed Trump back in July. As someone on Threads put it, "The seed investment didn't work out, so the growth fund invested in a competitor." So thoughts? This was interesting. Breaking news. Breaking news. Breaking news. VC covers his ass.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, let me get this. I mean, these guys were so stupid to come out in favor of either candidate as aggressively as they did. That was just so—it shocks me when Sequoia Capital or Andreessen Horowitz say, "Okay, at the end of the day, we're just about money." Fine. I get it, but just admit it. And we're under the impression that Trump, if we support him, will basically say, "Oh, these guys give me a lot of money. So if they want me to put $10 billion into a stablecoin or into crypto, I'll do it." So they saw their chance to make a lot of money more likely with Trump than Harris. But you do it quietly. You don't come out. Because when Sequoia Capital, Andreessen Horowitz endorsed Trump, which they did—Ben, be clear, we were all listening when you did that. And if you're the state pension—their largest investors are institutional investors and pension funds. And when Michigan State Teachers Fund says, "Okay, let me get this. We send you money and pay you money"—

Kara Swisher: Shut the f*** up.

Scott Galloway: —are not taking political stands.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, it was weird. I thought it was weird at the time. And so these guys, you know what happened here, Kara?

Kara Swisher: They got so much shit, and they thought, oh my God, if she wins, we are fucked. I know. Let's pretend that somehow we like her as well, just in case. This is a very expensive insurance policy. It's like trying to get health insurance when the MRI comes back and says there's a growth on your lung. I just find this... I don't think it helps him. Ben, we remember Andreessen Horowitz coming out very hard for Trump. Now that it's a toss-up—

Scott Galloway: Yeah, let me just give you the quote. "I wish we didn't have to pick a side," said Horowitz, who acknowledged his political choice would upset many friends and even his mother. "We literally believe the future of our business, the future of technology, and the future of America is at stake."

Kara Swisher: I mean, this is when Biden was still in, FYI, but still, that was pretty firm. "We wish we didn't have to pick a side"? Then you shouldn't have picked a side, boy. And now, of course, picking another side is the same difference.

Scott Galloway: For-profit companies, including a venture capital firm, which is for-profit all in caps, they're so outstanding at making money. The U.S. corporation makes more money than any entity ever invested in history. It's an amazing thing. It pays for our Navy. It pays for unemployment insurance. It pays for child services. It's a wonderful part of what is wonderful in America. They're so good at it, though. You shouldn't be trusted to do anything else, nor should you do anything else other than be really good citizens, good to your employees, good to the environment, good to the community. But for God's sakes, stay the fuck out of politics.

Kara Swisher: I want them all to stay out. I'm so tired of them. Go away.

Scott Galloway: Stay out on the left, too.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, get out. Go. I don't want to hear what you think of Ukraine. I don't want to think. Go. Pull the curtain. Vote for whoever you want. Give money. Fine. That's right. But don't put anything on corporate letterhead. That's not why the U.S. corporation exists.

Scott Galloway: I seldom say stay in your lane, but stay in your fucking lane. Just quietly, if you want to do it, that's the whole thing.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, good luck, Ben. We'll see. I think she'll take your money, but still, it's kind of gross. All right, Scott, let's go on a quick break. And we come back. Google's ad search dominance slips. Not a surprise to us. And we'll speak with a friend of Pivot, Chris Urmson, about getting driverless trucks on the road. I've talked to him before. Really interesting guy.

[Ad break]

Kara Swisher: Scott, we're back. Google is finally facing some actual competition when it comes to its nearly $300 billion search ad business. Companies like TikTok, the AI search startup Perplexity, have begun to challenge Google's dominance with targeted ad initiatives for brands. Amazon is also gaining ground, and has been for a while, with consumers going directly to the e-commerce platform for product searches. That's where I do all of them now. Google's share of the U.S. search ad market is expected to drop below 50% next year, the first time in over a decade, according to the research firm eMarketer. Google is trying to use AI to its advantage, rolling out ads alongside those AI-generated summaries they now have there. They've been under pressure, obviously still in courts, to prove it's not unfair to competitors in recent antitrust trials. But having rivals is a good thing for them in this regard. Talk a little bit about things, because Perplexity is reportedly in talks with Nike and Marriott, tied to its new ad models that allows companies to bid for a sponsored question. What do you think about this?

Scott Galloway: I think search is kind of over. We talked about this idea of where search is going. The anecdotal evidence is that my default search engines are now ChatGPT and Claude. I just type in questions and I get a more thoughtful, interesting response. And then with Google, I can't follow up and go, "Why did you say that?" or "Please support, please provide more data on your answer," or "This component of your answer seems off to me. What is the source here?" I can't do that with Google.

The analogy, and I think it's a good one, is retail. The early big winners that really drove a ton of shareholder value—the best performing stock in the 1980s was a company that took every electronic device and put it all in one big box called Circuit City. Then it was Best Buy. Before that, Walmart was the stock to own. And before that, it was department stores, Sears and JCPenney. And then over the last 20 to 30 years, the majority of the shareholder gains in retail have been in specialty retail. Consumers don't want more choice. They want to be more confident in the choices presented. That is the point of specialty retail. Williams Sonoma says, "We're not going to give you 50 toasters to choose from. We're going to pick the best two because we have better taste in kitchen appliances than you do." By the way, Dualit, Electrolux, hands down, best toasters. And then Sephora said, "We're not going to be Macy's with all these different counters and people. We're going to pick these emerging brands." They're edited. When you're looking for lip balm, we have the two or three best lip balms. And then Lululemon became worth more than retailers 10 times the size.

That's the analogy here. Google is Walmart. It's everything. You type in "best podcast in America" and it'll give you articles on trends and media. It'll give you deep dives into Joe Rogan. And you have to sort through all the different toasters and try and figure out which one to buy. Whereas when you go into the Sephora of that, or the Williams Sonoma of that, which is ChatGPT, it says, "You know what? We're better at giving you the right answer. And we're going to try and just give you one answer that would be better on average than any one of the five returns given to you in 0.5 seconds." It's specialty retail, and it's going to create a ton of shareholder value. Does that mean Google is going to go away? No. But the majority of incremental shareholder value from search is going to go to the specialty retailers that edit the answer, which is the AI guys.

Kara Swisher: When I started doing commerce search on Amazon, I hadn't gone back to Google to do commerce because it was like all the library books on the floor. It's like, where do I look? I mean, I try it, but then I always seem to find what I want on Amazon or somewhere else. I think we will use artificial intelligence for search. That's the end of it. And especially with Apple getting ready to roll out Apple Intelligence at the end of this month. We'll see how they deploy it, how they announced it back in June. When they're officially in the game, I suspect they'll do a good job at bringing it out. It's not just, "Would you like to rewrite this email?" I don't think that's just it, because that's so irritating on Google right now. "Would you like to rewrite this email?" But there are other things that you will use it for. And you're right, you get a better answer. And it's as if search came to you versus you finding search. I do think that Google has to think hard because they have not been. One of the problems of them being the dominant search engine, they haven't been innovative because they haven't had to be. They haven't been pressured by competitors who are putting out better. We talked about the various attempts to compete with Google, but they really haven't had competition in decades. And that just makes you—they've owned it and it's made you—they've never innovated. They have not innovated search. Haven't needed to.

Scott Galloway: They haven't needed to. They didn't need to roll out cell or fiber optic or data analytics, which was stuck in Bell Labs because AT&T was like—I remember when my mom and dad got divorced, my dad moved to Columbus, Ohio to work for O.M. Scott's, and then he moved to Chicago to work for the other fertilizer company, Vigoro. Anyways, we lived in Glen Ellyn, Chicago. When I would go there during the summers on a Saturday, he and I would take a train for 40 minutes to downtown Chicago. I remember he was into speed walking and I'd have to run behind him. And then he'd stop and he'd say—

Kara Swisher: Every story is a new piece of insight, but go ahead.

Scott Galloway: He's moving too fast. He doesn't wait for you. Around understanding why I'm so fucked up in the head.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, that was a big one right there.

Scott Galloway: But I remember at the same corner, he'd stop and he'd point up. He wouldn't even say anything. And he'd point to the Sears Tower and he'd look at me and go, "Tallest building in the world." Isn't that funny? Tallest building in the world was called the Sears Tower back in the 70s. Anyways, the reason we traipsed downtown on a train for 40 minutes to his office on a Saturday was so I could use the Watts line to call my mom. Because calling my mom in California cost like a buck a minute. I could run up a $30 phone tab and my dad, being Scottish and having literally been broken around money and so deeply cheap, we would spend our Saturday morning going to the office to use a Watts line. They had such a lock on the market and they didn't innovate. And Google has not innovated. I will give them this: they are innovating. When you do those Google searches now, the top query is kind of this AI-generated attempt to give you—

Kara Swisher: But it's not a good one.

Scott Galloway: It's not as good, but at least they're trying.

Kara Swisher: Trying isn't good enough. If you're dominant and you make all the money, they can't just try. They have to lead. And I feel like they don't lead. They just respond. Have you tried their AI offering? The new notebook where you can make podcasts out of them?

Scott Galloway: Yeah, it is pretty specialized and pretty interesting.

Kara Swisher: But they're competing in AI because there's competition, right? That's why they're competing in AI. I'm talking about search. And it might be a day late and a dollar short.

Scott Galloway: This will be exhibit A. When any professor across strategy talks about the innovator's dilemma, they're going to talk about how Google basically invented, drove AI, but had such a big business they didn't want to threaten that they sat on their hands. And someone came in very small, started nipping at their heels. And basically they woke up and they had a great white shark that had taken them up to their midsize and their torso in its jaws. This will be exhibit one for the innovator's dilemma.

Kara Swisher: I do not do Google search as much. I mean, it's like me going to the movies. It's in decline. What do you use?

Scott Galloway: Amazon for commerce. That's where I do most of my searching, on stuff I'm looking for. And occasionally I use Google, but it's so frustrating now. It's so cluttered. It doesn't give me the answers I want anymore.

Kara Swisher: It takes you somewhere that can make more money.

Scott Galloway: Yes, exactly. And I can feel it. It's so cluttered.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, we'll see. I think they're in much bigger trouble. And it'd be interesting to see what happens to their lawsuit, the unfair advantage, whether it continues. That's the problem with these things. There are now rivals. I don't know if it'll change the fact of what they did, but it certainly informs what they're going to do going forward. I love rivalry. I think it's the best thing for consumers. But we see—anyway, let's bring in a friend of Pivot, Chris Urmson. He is the founder and CEO of Aurora, a company focusing on autonomous trucking technology. We've talked many times before about it, and I met Chris back when he was doing the autonomous cars at Google. Welcome, Chris.

Chris Urmson: Oh, thanks for having me.

Kara Swisher: So you founded Aurora back in 2017. As I said before that, you were running Google's self-driving car project. You were the first person who put me in a self-driving car. Can you talk a little bit about where Aurora is now? We've talked in the interim about where it's going, and I've seen some of your trucks. I've come to where you were making them. You talked a lot about shortages in our country, where I think we're down 60,000 to 78,000 trucks and stuff like that. So talk a little bit about why you went into it and where we are today.

Chris Urmson: Yeah. So we're focused on building this technology to drive trucks safely down the road. Over the next decade, we expect we're going to need another million people willing to drive trucks. And it's a really important job, but it's a really difficult job that we just can't get enough people who want to do that. And as you know, the ability to move goods in the logistics chain is just fundamental to the U.S. economy operating. And we see a huge opportunity to make that whole on-road driving safer. So for us, we've been working with a number of great partners, including Volvo and Paccar, who make about half the trucks sold in the U.S., and we're working to safely get the first driverless trucks on the road.

Kara Swisher: So you have them on the road, correct? At this point?

Chris Urmson: Yeah. If you drive between Dallas and Houston or between Fort Worth and El Paso, you can see our trucks on the road. Today, we have people on board who are monitoring those trucks, but almost all of the time, they're driving themselves. And what we're pushing to is get to the point where we can safely take those operators out of the vehicles and really have the trucks go do the work.

Kara Swisher: Now, some of the factors of trying to get people out of them is an aging workforce, under-representation of women, and obviously challenging work conditions of sleeping and everything else.

Chris Urmson: Yeah. If you look around the room you're in, everything in that room moved on a truck at some point. And so I'm incredibly thankful for the people who want to do this job, but it's hard. It's days or weeks away from home. It leads to lots of long-term health problems. In fact, if you are a truck driver, you're 10 times as likely to die on the job as the average American. And so that means that over time, people don't want to do it. Back when I was at the university, we used to talk about "dull, dirty, and dangerous" as the places where you could see automation or robotics really helping society. And that's kind of what we have with trucking, and that's why we're so excited about moving it forward.

Kara Swisher: So when you think about that, the idea of automation and everything else, obviously the longshoremen just settled because they're getting more money, et cetera, their strike. But one of their issues was automation coming to docks, for example. There is a perception that you're going to kill people's jobs. Explain, but there's a shortage of drivers at the same time or people willing to do this job.

Chris Urmson: That's right. And I would say my expectation is that if you are driving a truck today and you want to retire driving a truck, you're going to be able to do that. But in the interim, what we're going to see is more automation come in to support the logistic industry. And that over time, there'll be less and less people that actually do this job, in the same way we have fewer and fewer saddle makers than we had way back in the day. If you look at a study by the Department of Transportation, they see that this technology is actually going to grow the U.S. economy.

I think a relevant metaphor is what happened with the automated teller in banks. Originally there was this concern that it was going to kill the bank industry. There wouldn't be people to work there. And the automated teller actually came in, and what it did was it reduced the cost of operating a bank to the point where they could open more branches. And it moved the people that were the tellers from basically a cost center to a profit center. Instead of standing there to count out your dollar bills, they were now helping customers with new financial services. And so we expect there's a whole bunch of new jobs that will come around this. And as we make moving goods more efficient to support the increasing demands for what you need now, there'll be all kinds of exciting jobs in the logistics space.

Scott Galloway: Nice to meet you. So a couple of things. One, this just makes so much sense. If someone had said, based on trends around which part of automation makes the most sense, I think almost anyone would have looked at the data and said, "Okay, they can drive late at night, backbone of our economy, not a great job." It just seems like automated driving for long haul trucking in the middle of the night when there's no traffic makes all sorts of sense. And yet it really hasn't gotten the same traction as EVs, or at least it doesn't get the attention that I can tell. The obsession is with automated consumer vehicles. What has gotten in the way of the type of adoption I would imagine you and your investors are expecting? Is it unions? Is it the technology? Is it regulation? What is the friction here?

Chris Urmson: I think the first part is that the imagination is caught more viscerally by the robo-taxi space. It's where I worked for a long time, and people can connect with that in a way that they don't really connect with long-haul trucking, since we don't make "Smokey and the Bandit" anymore or any of those kinds of movies. And then the second part is that at some point we realized that making the self-driving cars was hard. And so there were a bunch of companies that jumped into the space and said, "Oh, we'll just go do trucking. That's so much easier because freeways are straight and not much happens there." And it turns out they were ill-informed. When you're driving a car around the city, there's more stuff you have to interact with, but when you're moving at 15 miles an hour, you can stop within 15 feet. Whereas if you're driving down the freeway, you can't just stop for one thing. It takes you 150 meters, 200 meters to stop. The kinetic energy involved with a 70,000 pound truck at 70 miles an hour is just completely different. So people underestimated how hard the technological problem would be. And so we saw a flourishing of companies in the space, and they all kind of died out because they didn't really understand the strategic investment you'd have to make. Things like we have this special kind of LIDAR, which is laser radar, that allows us to see much further than you can see or any of the robo-taxi folks can see. And that gives us the confidence that we can respond safely to things that are on the road.

Kara Swisher: So when you're thinking about where it's going, one of the things is this idea of what regulation is coming for these. There's been some statewide regulation for autonomous vehicles, nothing on a federal level. Would you support national regulation? There have been several self-driving companies currently facing federal investigations about multiple crashes. These are largely the Waymos or the GMs, et cetera, in the robo-taxi area. How do you look at whether this should be state-by-state? Because you're operating in Texas, which presumably is more amenable than other states to this, correct? That's why you're there.

Chris Urmson: Yeah. And so there's a little bit of a misnomer. In most of the states today, I think 44 of the 50 U.S. states, either by explicit law or implicitly, we're able to operate self-driving trucks on the road if we are confident in the safety of it. The federal government generally is responsible for the regulation of the safety of the vehicle. And I think that they've been really thoughtful. Over time, they've put out guidelines that say, "Here are best practices that you should be following," and we generally adhere to them. I think that's the right kind of mindset for them to have been in. This is an evolving technology. We want to be careful that we don't create regulation that prevents its adoption and sees the U.S. benefit from the safety, the sustainability benefits, the economic benefits of this. As this becomes real and we start to understand what the challenges are and what the right kind of regulation is, absolutely, we'd love to see a federal standard.

Kara Swisher: On safety or on what are driving on highways themselves, which are federally controlled?

Chris Urmson: Well, we look at this as an interstate commerce kind of challenge. We're driving trucks today within Texas, but soon to Phoenix and then ultimately across the United States. And so having consistent regulation across the United States would be valuable and simplify some of what we do. But there's already significant oversight. I think this is something that's missed. At the state level, we work closely with Texas DOT and Department of Public Safety. We've been working hand in hand with them, helping them understand the technology, helping them make sure that they are in a position to regulate as they see fit. And similarly with the federal government. And in both cases, they can intercede even without further jurisdiction.

Kara Swisher: Right, but presumably Texas is nicer than New York, for example, in terms of these things.

Chris Urmson: Well, Texas is a better market for us, and the good people of Texas have been very welcoming of the technology.

Kara Swisher: Well, they're welcoming of everybody, they seem. But one of the things that you noted is the robo-taxis suck up all the oxygen. Elon Musk has his big robo event in LA this week. What's your take on the robo-taxi industry as a whole? And I will point out that Musk doesn't have any robo-taxis on the road, and there are many efforts by Google with Waymo and GM with Cruise, although they've had a rockier road, but Waymo seems to be proceeding pretty smartly, despite issues. They've been testing these cars for a long, long time. Talk about the industry as a whole and what you expect from this Musk event.

Chris Urmson: Yeah, so the industry, I think it's exciting that we've kind of ridden the Gartner hype curve. In 2016, everybody and the dog was going to have a self-driving car tomorrow, and that didn't happen. And then we kind of crashed through the valley of disillusionment, where is this ever going to work? And now you stand on a street corner in San Francisco and you'll likely see two Waymo cars drive by with nobody in the driver's seat. So it's happening. And from what I hear, people really love the experience.

Kara Swisher: I do. I use it a lot. It seems like a great product.

Chris Urmson: I think the business is challenging. The economics of just building and deploying that and scaling that, I think it's going to be hard. But I think it has the possibility and the opportunity to really re-democratize transportation. If you think about, I know you're a Bolt owner, 95% of that time, that car is parked somewhere. And so there's a lot of resource that's tied up in that, that if it could drive itself, could be more efficiently serving the community and help people get around. Now, whether the technological approach that the Tesla folks are taking is going to get there, I have significant doubts. But the overarching arc of this is that this technology is going to be huge for improving safety and making it easier for people to get around.

Scott Galloway: What's the challenge that you were just referring to from your perspective? An economic challenge? Just lots of money or people use it so that—

Chris Urmson: One of the reasons that we think trucking is a great first market is that we value driving a truck about three times as much as we value driving a car. And so when you think about introducing a new technology, the place you want to enter is somewhere where the unit economics are large enough that they can support introduction of new technology. It's going to be more expensive initially. And the market size is gigantic. If you think about trucking in the United States, it's about a trillion-dollar market today. And ride-hailing is about an $80 billion market. And the way that you expand the ride-hailing market is you drive costs down. And so that becomes challenging for a business. Whereas where we're introducing in the trucking market, the idea will be that you'll buy a truck, you'll pay us to drive the truck for you. And so it fits exactly into the market structure today. So the combination of a much bigger market that you don't have to change customer behavior for and much better unit economics mean that we can be building a business and profitable and have the privilege to continue to pursue our business while you're going to have to continue to be cost-cutting on the other side and investing heavily to make it happen.

Scott Galloway: So, do you think that the constant over-promising and under-delivering around robo-taxis, mostly at the feet of one person, do you think it's made people cynical and ultimately has hurt the industry? As we're all sort of rolling our eyes when anyone begins to talk about or ventures to guess when this is actually going to be rolled out and have widespread adoption? Hasn't this industry kind of become known for over-promising and under-delivering?

Chris Urmson: I think that's fair. But I think that's true of almost any new technology that comes to market, that there's a period of time where people are like, "This is exciting." And this is why Gartner has the hype curve model.

Kara Swisher: The hype, yeah.

Chris Urmson: But I think what's happened with this is we spent a decade where the thing we got was 144-character tweets and some things that didn't feel like big new technology steps. And as this kind of got onto the stage, one, we had to develop in public because we're on the public roads and there was a responsibility to help be transparent about that. But the other is it captured the imagination. And so I think it had all the normal hype curve, but with it accelerated even more so or amplified because of how visceral and exciting it is for folks.

Scott Galloway: And just real quick, you're married with children?

Chris Urmson: I am, yeah.

Scott Galloway: Live with your kids?

Chris Urmson: My kids are both at college, actually. So one's at UC Davis, one's at University of Rochester.

Scott Galloway: And how long have you been married?

Chris Urmson: 25 years.

Scott Galloway: So let me get this: an innovator trying to change the world, married for 25 years, two kids, on good terms with your kids?

Chris Urmson: Yep. Really enjoy it.

Scott Galloway: Listen up, young men. Listen up. These are the innovators who also happen to be men. You also didn't jump up and down at a Trump rally this weekend, did you, on the stage?

Scott Galloway: No, I didn't jump up and down at a Trump rally.

Kara Swisher: Okay. All right. Just asking.

Scott Galloway: No, asking for a friend. Sorry, I didn't mean to use you as a prop there, but I did. A little bit.

Chris Urmson: Couldn't be more different, Scott. I've known them both. I could not be more different as people in general.

Kara Swisher: You know, you have this big push to get these driverless trucks on the road in Texas, and you have to have them between states because Texas isn't the only place you want to deliver stuff, right?

Chris Urmson: Absolutely. Within Texas.

Kara Swisher: But you shared back in August that Aurora raised $483 million by selling additional shares of the company. That's on top of $1 billion in liquidity reported back in June. You talked about how expensive it is to get there. You feel this is the one area that will, in autonomy, become profitable before the others.

Chris Urmson: You're right. The other is a race to the bottom in some way, for a while at least. We see the path to build the business, to go and deliver a valuable product to customers in the trucking space, build that up, use that to drive up scale. That'll help us drive down costs. And then, fundamentally, the technology to drive a truck is very similar to the technology to drive a car. We see ourselves ultimately going and working in that space as well.

Kara Swisher: Oh, so you move there.

Chris Urmson: Absolutely. If you think about the intelligence we're building to understand the built world, the driving world, that's going to be really interesting and there's going to be lots of places over time that we can apply that. But right now, the job is, let's get this product out in the market. Let's go make sure our customers find it valuable, that we deliver on our promises there, and then we can go build a business in other places as well.

Kara Swisher: Would that be a bus or things like that?

Chris Urmson: I think people will want different solutions. If you look at the automotive market, they're masters at segmenting that space. So I do actually believe in the long-term robo-taxi vision. I also think there's an opportunity to augment public transportation. Today we kind of packetize the people moving into these 50-person buses. And we've all been there where we've seen this bus go by with two people on it or nobody on it. Imagine that. And those buses, by the way, are restricted to certain lanes because that's where we can afford to have them. And they're kind of gerrymandered. Imagine you can, because you don't have to have a driver in each vehicle, you can have a six-person vehicle. And then that can be called through the public transit authority and it can route dynamically over time. You can really provide a valuable public service through that over the long term as you drive the cost down. So I think there's going to be, we are going through this phase that never happens as quickly in the near term as you expect, of transforming for the first time in 100 years what it means to move around in cities.

Kara Swisher: It's incredibly exciting.

Chris Urmson: It is indeed.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, thank you, Chris Urmson of Aurora. Good luck. You're also Canadian, just so you know.

Scott Galloway: God, he's Canadian. It explains everything.

Kara Swisher: Totally explains everything. Hold on. University of Manitoba, PhD from Carnegie Mellon. Dude, you're the innovator we need right now. I'm looking at all this. This is hence why I brought him, Scott, so you could have a better vision of these robo-taxi fellas.

Chris Urmson: That's very kind of you to say. Thank you.

Kara Swisher: Thank you so much, Chris.

Chris Urmson: Thanks so much. Thanks for your good work.

Kara Swisher: Scott, I like to bring you nice men. I know all the nice ones in tech. I try to bring them. Chris is one of them.

Scott Galloway: You cheated though. You brought on a Canadian. That's redundant.

Kara Swisher: No, no, no. He's really great. I met him when he was at Google and I tried out his first cars. He was always so enthusiastic and really a good guy. And I appreciate, you know, he's worked. It's a tough business that he's in, right? Because he was at the pioneering part of this. And he's just worked really hard and he's not a hand waver. He doesn't make things up. Like this robo-taxi event that Elon's doing is such nonsense. They haven't had a mile on the road. I mean, maybe they've tried it out. But Waymo's been at it, but they haven't. And he's just going to wave his hands and look at me. Same thing. It's a total difference in people. And Chris is the one I would focus in on. Anyway, one more quick break. We'll be back for wins and fails.

[Ad Break]

Kara Swisher: Okay, Scott, let's hear some wins and fails. You go first.

Scott Galloway: Well, I'll just start with my fail. I would be remiss if I didn't highlight we're recording on the one-year anniversary where approximately 1,200 people were killed, attacked by Hamas. Approximately 210, I believe, were taken hostage. 97 hostages are still being held in Gaza following their abduction by Hamas during the attacks. This includes 33 confirmed deceased whose bodies remain in Gaza. The number of hostages still alive is believed to be fewer than 70. And estimates suggest many have not survived the ongoing conflict. Some of the people taken hostage included a 10-month-old who has reportedly been killed, a five-year-old, a 10-year-old. Anyways, I think it's important that we don't forget that there are still a lot of people being held in terrible conditions underground that absolutely could be released, that are not combatants. These are civilians, elderly, young people. So anyways, today marks that one anniversary. That my fail. They should not be there.

My win is something much more hopeful. I had a wonderful weekend. I think I told you I saw about 11 guys from my fraternity at UCLA. When I showed up to UCLA, I was 17. It was back in the space race where any, especially a boy who showed any academic promise, was told to skip a grade. And my friend, Mike Baruch, who I've been hanging out with this weekend, when I met him at freshman orientation at UCLA, he was 16. Can you imagine a 16 year old going to UCLA? I mean, my boy is 17 and he's a wonderful young man, but the thought that he would be my age and at UCLA right now is just insane.

Anyways, my win and my advice after hanging out with all these wonderful men and their kids and just how much joy and reward we have registered from each other over the last 40 plus years. My advice to any young person, but especially young men who aren't as good at weaving a social fabric, is you need to find your fraternity. You need to find your people. When you get out of high school or maybe in high school, the moment you turn 18, one of the things you need to do to set up success in your life and mental well-being is to find your fraternity. I mean, find your tribe. I don't care if it's through a church group, if it's through a nonprofit, if it's through a group on campus, if it's a fraternity or sorority. You really do need to be thoughtful and say, my life is largely going to be driven by a series of things that are outside of my control. When and where you are born determines the majority of your success or lack thereof, unfortunately. But there are some things you can control. And you want to find a good group of people that are smart, that are kind, that are ambitious. And right away, find your fraternity. Find a group and start investing in those guys or women. And the reason I focus on young men is young men just aren't as good at it. There are, I think one of the biggest threats in our society right now is there's just increasingly a huge cohort of young men that, quote unquote, aren't finding their fraternity. And when you find it when you're 18, there's just a group of guys, quite frankly, we don't have a ton in common other than we liked each other and we came together at a young age. And what that means is you run into them 10, 20, 40 years later and you have real affection for each other. And that is so wonderful.

Kara Swisher: Oh, sweet. God, I always love when you talk like this. Do you know that? It's very touching. It's very touching, the friendships you've made. That was one of the great things about going to your birthday party, was seeing all your different friendships over the many years, and especially the ones from fourth grade and stuff like that. But when you just think about how many young people, especially young men, aren't finding that. I agree. You know, not going into work, not going to college, not joining the Army. Where do they find their tribe?

Scott Galloway: That's right.

Kara Swisher: Well, you've definitely got a tribe.

Scott Galloway: You got a tribe. There you go. Scott Galloway has a tribe. It's very touching when you talk about it. I'm excited for your book about this topic. I think it's really important when people are showing such bad signs of masculinity to have a counter narrative. It's critically important.

Kara Swisher: I think my fail, it's not a fail. This Hurricane Milton is reaching category five strength as it approaches Florida. We just had this terrible storm that really did a devastating dance of devastation in North Carolina and Georgia. And this is heading towards Tampa. This is the west coast of Florida. This is a flood prone area as it is. We have to really think about how to structurally deal with these things because everywhere is Florida now, someone was saying. We are all living in Florida at this point. Obviously it's more dangerous to be in Florida when it comes to hurricane season. We have to all think about the devastation of climate change again and again. And the fact that there's a party that pretends it doesn't exist is, I feel like we're in that movie, and we're about to see some really devastating things. So you really need to wake up. It's not just a climate disaster of the moment, but we have to think about it from a systemic way and how to deal with it. Either not live in these places or find a way to live in them that keeps people safer. But these tropical alerts from the Weather Service, which by the way, the Trump administration wants to cut in their Project 2025, are disturbing, to say the least. And so our heart goes out to the people there. And at the same time, we have to be able to plan for these things in a much better way going forward. It's like we forget every single year that these are going to happen and they're getting worse. So that's my fail.

My positive, I think the family thing, Scott. I think that's true. We had a really wonderful weekend. It's Clara's birthday.

Scott Galloway: How old now?

Kara Swisher: She's five. I know, right? I know, we've known each other a long time. We just had such a lovely weekend, not on the phones, not doing things separately. But as a group, Amanda's brother and sister-in-law came in and their son. And it's just really, you guys have to get out. You have to get out with family and groups of people and in communities more. It's something we should all try. I thought about it a lot over the past couple of weeks, the idea of doing more stuff with family or friends or whatever. But it was a beautiful party. It was fantastic. She dressed as Princess Tiana in this case, usually she's Elsa or Anna. But it was really nice to see all these kids playing with each other. It's just kids really play. I was really watching my son Saul play with his cousin Oscar and they just play. They don't need a lot of stuff to do that. They just need to run around. So I agree with you. I think it's really important to find your groups of people and get out of your head. And it's a difficult time over the next 30 days with this election. So everybody needs to calm down.

Scott Galloway: Kids keep you young, don't you think?

Kara Swisher: I agree. Well, I mean, let me ask you, when you're around your kids, don't you feel 61?

Scott Galloway: That's good.

Kara Swisher: That's good. You're funny, Scott. Anyway, also, by the way, everybody, get your vaccines. This is our anti-RFK announcement. I got both my COVID and flu vaccine this weekend. Free whale head if you get a vaccine. Get them. I didn't feel terrific all weekend, but I didn't feel bad. And so I urge you, this is going to be a tough season.

Scott Galloway: Well, that's an ad for vaccines.

Kara Swisher: I didn't feel terrible. It's the facts. You don't feel good when you get vaccines. By the way, back to me, I'm doing this NAD treatment. I'm going to be so young and youthful.

Scott Galloway: What is that? Have you heard of this?

Kara Swisher: No, what? It's something that repairs your mitochondria. It's basically what rich people do thinking they're going to live forever. You're not going to live forever. No matter what you do, Carmine, you're going to die. Anyway, that's from Moonstruck.

Scott Galloway: Moonstruck. My favorite moment in the movie. The phone rings at 2 in the morning and Olympia Dukakis just wakes up and goes, "Who's dead?"

Kara Swisher: She's so great.

Scott Galloway: She is good.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, we want to hear from you. Send us your questions about business, tech, or whatever's on your mind. Go to nymag.com/pivot to submit a question for the show, or call 855-51-PIVOT. Okay Scott, that is the show. We'll be back on Friday with more. You going to be in LA until I see you next week? But you're there all week?

Scott Galloway: Yeah, I think I'm there all week. I go back to New York.

Kara Swisher: Did you do the thing in the writer's room yet?

Scott Galloway: No, not you. I had AI show up with me just to piss everybody off. I sent a bot.

Kara Swisher: Did you? Okay. All right. Well, we're very excited to hear that story.

Scott Galloway: I'm meeting with a couple of Hollywood executives from Netflix at the cabana here at the Beverly Hills Hotel. I just might explode. I'm so Hollywood right now.

Kara Swisher: Cabana. Wear your Varnays. Wear your Varnays. Anyway, read us out.

Scott Galloway: Today's show was produced by Lara Naiman, Zoe Marcus, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie Rattat engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Brose and Mia Silverio. Nishat Kharoua is Vox Media's executive producer of audio. Make sure you subscribe to the show wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. You can subscribe to the magazine at nymag.com/pod. We'll be back later this week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. Kara, have a great start to the week. Happy birthday, Clara. That's very exciting.