Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

David Sacks breaks down the true risk of AI David Sacks "It’s not that I think the AI is going to develop a mind of its own. I don’t think the technology is anywhere close to that. But I do think that it could be used by the government... show more

jay plemons

47,836 subscribers

102,370 views • 7 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

🚨 DAVID SACKS: “I very much agree with the Pope that the biggest risk of AI is the centralization of power and then its misuse against us, in some Orwellian way. I think it's government that's going to do that.”

🚨 DAVID SACKS: “I very much agree with the Pope that the biggest risk of AI is the centralization of power and then its misuse against us, in some Orwellian way. I think it's government that's going to do that.”

Chief Nerd

337,334 views • 1 month ago

David Sacks: “The biggest danger is that the government will ultimately use AI to surveil us, control us, censor us … By the way, that is the path that I think we were on before President Trump's election.”

David Sacks: “The biggest danger is that the government will ultimately use AI to surveil us, control us, censor us … By the way, that is the path that I think we were on before President Trump's election.”

Defiant L’s

21,551 views • 2 months ago

🚨 DAVID SACKS: “The biggest danger is that the government will ultimately use AI to surveil us, control us, censor us … By the way, that is the path that I think we were on before President Trump's election.”

🚨 DAVID SACKS: “The biggest danger is that the government will ultimately use AI to surveil us, control us, censor us … By the way, that is the path that I think we were on before President Trump's election.”

Chief Nerd

74,972 views • 2 months ago

David Sacks says the biggest risk of AI was described not by James Cameron in The Terminator but by George Orwell in 1984. “I almost feel like the term ‘woke AI’ is insufficient to explain what’s going on because it somehow trivializes it.” “What we’re really talking about is 'Orwellian AI.' We’re talking about AI that lies to you, that distorts an answer, that rewrites history in real time to serve a current political agenda of the people who are in power.” “To me, this is the biggest risk of AI... It’s not The Terminator, it’s 1984.” David Sacks

David Sacks says the biggest risk of AI was described not by James Cameron in The Terminator but by George Orwell in 1984. “I almost feel like the term ‘woke AI’ is insufficient to explain what’s going on because it somehow trivializes it.” “What we’re really talking about is 'Orwellian AI.' We’re talking about AI that lies to you, that distorts an answer, that rewrites history in real time to serve a current political agenda of the people who are in power.” “To me, this is the biggest risk of AI... It’s not The Terminator, it’s 1984.” David Sacks

a16z

16,352,440 views • 8 months ago

🚨 David Sacks Exposes the “AI Existential Risk” Industrial Complex “These are people who fundamentally believe in empowering government to the maximum … The single greatest dystopian risk associated with AI is the risk that government uses it to control all of us. You end up in some sort of Orwellian future where AI is controlled by the government.” Full Episode w/ David Sacks: The All-In Podcast

🚨 David Sacks Exposes the “AI Existential Risk” Industrial Complex “These are people who fundamentally believe in empowering government to the maximum … The single greatest dystopian risk associated with AI is the risk that government uses it to control all of us. You end up in some sort of Orwellian future where AI is controlled by the government.” Full Episode w/ David Sacks: The All-In Podcast

Chief Nerd

230,123 views • 1 year ago

🇸🇦🇺🇸 DAVID SACKS: MCP IS THE NEXT BIG WAVE IN AI "MCP {Model Context Protocol} is a new standard that allows agents to talk to existing SaaS applications or any kind of application, and it's really going to enable this agentic future that I think is the next big wave in AI." Source: David Sacks

🇸🇦🇺🇸 DAVID SACKS: MCP IS THE NEXT BIG WAVE IN AI "MCP {Model Context Protocol} is a new standard that allows agents to talk to existing SaaS applications or any kind of application, and it's really going to enable this agentic future that I think is the next big wave in AI." Source: David Sacks

Mario Nawfal

123,166 views • 1 year ago

🇺🇸 DAVID SACKS: AI IS STILL IN A BOOM "We're seeing a lot of interesting AI applications being developed, but it's still very early days, and I think that over the past week or so, there was a correction in sentiment towards AI, but I think it was a healthy correction. I don't think this was the beginning of a bust cycle or something like that. I still think that we're in a boom.” Source: The All-In Podcast David Sacks

🇺🇸 DAVID SACKS: AI IS STILL IN A BOOM "We're seeing a lot of interesting AI applications being developed, but it's still very early days, and I think that over the past week or so, there was a correction in sentiment towards AI, but I think it was a healthy correction. I don't think this was the beginning of a bust cycle or something like that. I still think that we're in a boom.” Source: The All-In Podcast David Sacks

Mario Nawfal

51,576 views • 11 months ago

.David Wolpe to Dave Rubin: "The idea of Rosh Hashanah, in part, is renewal. I think it is a deep Jewish belief that the way the world is need not be the way the world will be in a month or a year and that we really do have the potential to change ourselves and by changing ourselves, change the world around us."

.David Wolpe to Dave Rubin: "The idea of Rosh Hashanah, in part, is renewal. I think it is a deep Jewish belief that the way the world is need not be the way the world will be in a month or a year and that we really do have the potential to change ourselves and by changing ourselves, change the world around us."

The Rubin Report

23,226 views • 10 months ago

DAVID SACKS ON THE AI RACE: "The US is currently in an AI race, and our chief global competition is China, obviously. They're the only other country that has the talent, the resources, and the technology expertise to basically beat us in AI. And I think whoever wins this AI race, that's going to have tremendous ramifications for both our economy and our national security. Clearly, we want the US to be the winner, just like we were with the internet, and every other technology revolution before that […] We know that to win this AI race, we have to be the most innovative. You can't regulate your way just to beating your competitor. You have to out-innovate them. And we know that in the United States, the innovation comes from the private sector, not the government. So we have to do everything we can to help our companies win, to help them be innovative, and that means getting a lot of red tape out of the way… We have to have the most AI infrastructure in the US. It has to be the easiest place to build it. All of the new data centers that are going in, they require tremendous power, so getting ahead of the curve on energy, making sure we stand up all of this new infrastructure we're going to need to basically produce these AI factories… We want the US technology stack to dominate globally. We want to be the partner of choice for the whole world… I think everyone in Silicon Valley understands that the way that you win a technology race is to have the biggest ecosystem […] You just want everybody to be building on top of your technology stack, and that's what we want for the United States." David Sacks w/Marc Benioff Dreamforce

DAVID SACKS ON THE AI RACE: "The US is currently in an AI race, and our chief global competition is China, obviously. They're the only other country that has the talent, the resources, and the technology expertise to basically beat us in AI. And I think whoever wins this AI race, that's going to have tremendous ramifications for both our economy and our national security. Clearly, we want the US to be the winner, just like we were with the internet, and every other technology revolution before that […] We know that to win this AI race, we have to be the most innovative. You can't regulate your way just to beating your competitor. You have to out-innovate them. And we know that in the United States, the innovation comes from the private sector, not the government. So we have to do everything we can to help our companies win, to help them be innovative, and that means getting a lot of red tape out of the way… We have to have the most AI infrastructure in the US. It has to be the easiest place to build it. All of the new data centers that are going in, they require tremendous power, so getting ahead of the curve on energy, making sure we stand up all of this new infrastructure we're going to need to basically produce these AI factories… We want the US technology stack to dominate globally. We want to be the partner of choice for the whole world… I think everyone in Silicon Valley understands that the way that you win a technology race is to have the biggest ecosystem […] You just want everybody to be building on top of your technology stack, and that's what we want for the United States." David Sacks w/Marc Benioff Dreamforce

Ron Pragides 

231,781 views • 9 months ago

Elon Musk: Maybe the biggest danger associated with AI and robotics is that governments use them to suppress the population. “Maybe the biggest danger for AI and robotics going wrong is government. People who are opposed to corporations or worried about corporations should really worry the most about government, because government is just a corporation in the limit. Government is just the biggest corporation with a monopoly on violence. I always find it a strange dichotomy where people would think corporations are bad, but the government is good, when the government is simply the biggest and worst corporation. But people have that dichotomy. They somehow think at the same time the government can be good, but corporations bad. And this is not true. Corporations have better morality than the government. That is the thing to be worried about. The government could potentially use AI and robotics to suppress the population. That is a serious concern.” Interview with John Collison and Dwarkesh Patel, February 5, 2026

Elon Musk: Maybe the biggest danger associated with AI and robotics is that governments use them to suppress the population. “Maybe the biggest danger for AI and robotics going wrong is government. People who are opposed to corporations or worried about corporations should really worry the most about government, because government is just a corporation in the limit. Government is just the biggest corporation with a monopoly on violence. I always find it a strange dichotomy where people would think corporations are bad, but the government is good, when the government is simply the biggest and worst corporation. But people have that dichotomy. They somehow think at the same time the government can be good, but corporations bad. And this is not true. Corporations have better morality than the government. That is the thing to be worried about. The government could potentially use AI and robotics to suppress the population. That is a serious concern.” Interview with John Collison and Dwarkesh Patel, February 5, 2026

ELON CLIPS

24,452 views • 5 months ago

🔥🧠David Sacks Calls Out the AI Doomer Industrial Complex Sacks exposes web of AI Doomerism: Who are they? Three key nodes: -- Effective Altruists -- Former AI-focused Biden staffers -- Anthropic Patterns: -- AI threat inflation: bioweapons, job loss, etc. -- Carried out by a network of groups primarily funded by EA billionaires Goals: -- Global AI regulation -- " extreme restrictions on proliferation of computing power" -- Safety and security regulations -- Built-in "Woke AI" -- Picking 2-3 winners -- Similar to AI policy under Biden David Sacks: " These are people who fundamentally believe in empowering government to the maximum extent." "My problem with that is, I actually think that probably the single greatest dystopian risk associated with AI is the risk that government uses it to control all of us." "And out of all the risks we've talked about, that's the only one for which I've seen tangible evidence." " So in other words, if you go back to last year when we had the whole 'Woke AI', there was plenty of evidence that the people who were creating these products were infusing their left-wing or woke values into the product to the point where it was lying to all of us and it was rewriting history." " And there was plenty of evidence that the Biden EO was trying to enshrine that idea, basically trying to require DEI be infused into AI models." " So I'm quite convinced that prior to Donald Trump winning the election, we were on a path of global compute governance where two or three big AI companies were going to be anointed as the winners, and the quid pro quo is that they were going to infuse those AI models with woke values." "And there was plenty of evidence for that."

🔥🧠David Sacks Calls Out the AI Doomer Industrial Complex Sacks exposes web of AI Doomerism: Who are they? Three key nodes: -- Effective Altruists -- Former AI-focused Biden staffers -- Anthropic Patterns: -- AI threat inflation: bioweapons, job loss, etc. -- Carried out by a network of groups primarily funded by EA billionaires Goals: -- Global AI regulation -- " extreme restrictions on proliferation of computing power" -- Safety and security regulations -- Built-in "Woke AI" -- Picking 2-3 winners -- Similar to AI policy under Biden David Sacks: " These are people who fundamentally believe in empowering government to the maximum extent." "My problem with that is, I actually think that probably the single greatest dystopian risk associated with AI is the risk that government uses it to control all of us." "And out of all the risks we've talked about, that's the only one for which I've seen tangible evidence." " So in other words, if you go back to last year when we had the whole 'Woke AI', there was plenty of evidence that the people who were creating these products were infusing their left-wing or woke values into the product to the point where it was lying to all of us and it was rewriting history." " And there was plenty of evidence that the Biden EO was trying to enshrine that idea, basically trying to require DEI be infused into AI models." " So I'm quite convinced that prior to Donald Trump winning the election, we were on a path of global compute governance where two or three big AI companies were going to be anointed as the winners, and the quid pro quo is that they were going to infuse those AI models with woke values." "And there was plenty of evidence for that."

The All-In Podcast

148,698 views • 1 year ago

charles about AI possibly replacing drivers: "i don't think that's the point. i think that people really want to see the human do some extraordinary things, in a way. and i think that's what gives emotion to the people watching TV. in that sense, even if AI could potentially replace us, i think that's not really the point"

charles about AI possibly replacing drivers: "i don't think that's the point. i think that people really want to see the human do some extraordinary things, in a way. and i think that's what gives emotion to the people watching TV. in that sense, even if AI could potentially replace us, i think that's not really the point"

clara

91,527 views • 9 months ago

David Sacks: The Techno-Realist On E215, David Sacks explained a third category outside of techno-optimist and doomer: "Given the choice between the two categories of techno-optimist and techno-pessimist, I'm definitely in the optimist camp. And I think we should be." "But I think there's actually a third category that I would submit: techno-realist." "Which is, technology is going to happen. Trying to stop it is like ordering the tides to stop." "AI is going to happen. We might as well be the leader." "If we don't do it, somebody else will. China's going to do it or somebody else will do it." "If we don't, we could lose in a key category that has implications for national security, for our economy, for many things." "That's just not a world we want to live in." "So, I think a lot of this debate is sort of academic because the question is just, is it going to happen or not?" "And I think the answer is yes. So then we want to control it." "There's not a tremendous amount of choice in this, I think."

David Sacks: The Techno-Realist On E215, David Sacks explained a third category outside of techno-optimist and doomer: "Given the choice between the two categories of techno-optimist and techno-pessimist, I'm definitely in the optimist camp. And I think we should be." "But I think there's actually a third category that I would submit: techno-realist." "Which is, technology is going to happen. Trying to stop it is like ordering the tides to stop." "AI is going to happen. We might as well be the leader." "If we don't do it, somebody else will. China's going to do it or somebody else will do it." "If we don't, we could lose in a key category that has implications for national security, for our economy, for many things." "That's just not a world we want to live in." "So, I think a lot of this debate is sort of academic because the question is just, is it going to happen or not?" "And I think the answer is yes. So then we want to control it." "There's not a tremendous amount of choice in this, I think."

The All-In Podcast

154,319 views • 1 year ago

.Erik Voorhees: It’s actually good, from the Trojan horse perspective, that Bitcoin was traceable enough for traditional institutions to tolerate it. “When Bitcoin came out, everyone called it private, thought of it as private. It was referred to as anonymous in every news story. And in some ways, it is very private and very anonymous. But the truth is that it’s also extremely trackable and traceable. It is not private in reality. And the question is, should it have been from the start? And at first I thought, yes, it should have been more private. And that was a mistake in its design. However, I think if Bitcoin had been anonymous truly from the start, like a Zcash or a Monero, it would have had such antagonism from the state. I don’t know that the state could have snuffed it out, but they would have tried much harder. And I think it’s actually good, from the Trojan horse metaphor perspective, that it was traceable enough that the traditional institutions could tolerate it. They’ve never liked it, but they could at least tolerate it because there is some traceability. And that has allowed Bitcoin to grow. And I think in its shadow, that other crypto assets are actually anonymous is very healthy. The strength of cryptocurrency as a concept in society, I think, is served best when Bitcoin itself is not perfectly private, but other assets are. That is a very difficult thing, I think, for the state to combat. And that decentralization of attributes is really, really crucial. So, yeah, I’m very glad that there are other coins that are private. I want there to be more of them, and I want them to be more popular. And I think it’s okay that Bitcoin itself is not.”

.Erik Voorhees: It’s actually good, from the Trojan horse perspective, that Bitcoin was traceable enough for traditional institutions to tolerate it. “When Bitcoin came out, everyone called it private, thought of it as private. It was referred to as anonymous in every news story. And in some ways, it is very private and very anonymous. But the truth is that it’s also extremely trackable and traceable. It is not private in reality. And the question is, should it have been from the start? And at first I thought, yes, it should have been more private. And that was a mistake in its design. However, I think if Bitcoin had been anonymous truly from the start, like a Zcash or a Monero, it would have had such antagonism from the state. I don’t know that the state could have snuffed it out, but they would have tried much harder. And I think it’s actually good, from the Trojan horse metaphor perspective, that it was traceable enough that the traditional institutions could tolerate it. They’ve never liked it, but they could at least tolerate it because there is some traceability. And that has allowed Bitcoin to grow. And I think in its shadow, that other crypto assets are actually anonymous is very healthy. The strength of cryptocurrency as a concept in society, I think, is served best when Bitcoin itself is not perfectly private, but other assets are. That is a very difficult thing, I think, for the state to combat. And that decentralization of attributes is really, really crucial. So, yeah, I’m very glad that there are other coins that are private. I want there to be more of them, and I want them to be more popular. And I think it’s okay that Bitcoin itself is not.”

Arjun Khemani

23,056 views • 1 month ago

ELON MUSK: "Probably the biggest danger for AI and robotics, going wrong is government. The way people who are opposed to corporations or worried about corporations, should really worry most about government, because government is just a corporation in the limit. Government is just the biggest corporation with a monopoly on violence. I always find it strange where people would think corporations are bad, but the government is good, when government is simply the biggest and worst corporation. I actually think that is the thing to be worried about. It's like the government could potentially use AI and robotics to suppress the population. I think that, like, if you have a limited government, you limit the powers of government, which is what the US Constitution is intended to do, then you're probably gonna have a better outcome than if you have more government."

ELON MUSK: "Probably the biggest danger for AI and robotics, going wrong is government. The way people who are opposed to corporations or worried about corporations, should really worry most about government, because government is just a corporation in the limit. Government is just the biggest corporation with a monopoly on violence. I always find it strange where people would think corporations are bad, but the government is good, when government is simply the biggest and worst corporation. I actually think that is the thing to be worried about. It's like the government could potentially use AI and robotics to suppress the population. I think that, like, if you have a limited government, you limit the powers of government, which is what the US Constitution is intended to do, then you're probably gonna have a better outcome than if you have more government."

DogeDesigner

28,540 views • 5 months ago

🚨 DAVID SACKS: “I don't think there's going to be this huge job loss associated with this [AI] productivity boom that we're going to get. In fact, I think what's actually happening now is that AI is becoming synonymous with the American economy … It's generating 75% of GDP.”

🚨 DAVID SACKS: “I don't think there's going to be this huge job loss associated with this [AI] productivity boom that we're going to get. In fact, I think what's actually happening now is that AI is becoming synonymous with the American economy … It's generating 75% of GDP.”

Chief Nerd

79,986 views • 2 months ago

Asked by Ben Smith about how he views the politics of AI and the data center build out, Governor Josh Shapiro says: "AI is being developed. The real question is, is it going to be developed here in the US or in communist China? My view is that all of us should want it developed in the US. The US should lead on this. This is a national security issue. I think this is an issue that threatens our freedom if we allow China to overtake us when it comes to AI development."

Asked by Ben Smith about how he views the politics of AI and the data center build out, Governor Josh Shapiro says: "AI is being developed. The real question is, is it going to be developed here in the US or in communist China? My view is that all of us should want it developed in the US. The US should lead on this. This is a national security issue. I think this is an issue that threatens our freedom if we allow China to overtake us when it comes to AI development."

Semafor

99,123 views • 7 months ago

Marc Andreessen says AI is hyper democratizing. “Is the future of the world going to be one or a small number of companies, or for that matter, governments or super AIs that kind of own and control everything?” “Or is this a technology that's going to diffuse out and be in everybody's hands?” “This is the time in which AI is actually hyper democratizing. It has spread to more individuals, both in the country and around the world in the shortest period of time of any new technology I think in history.” “The best AIs in the world are in the consumer products.” “This technology is going to be in everybody's hands. And everybody is going to be able to use it to optimize the things that they do, have it be a thought partner, assistant for building companies.” Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸

Marc Andreessen says AI is hyper democratizing. “Is the future of the world going to be one or a small number of companies, or for that matter, governments or super AIs that kind of own and control everything?” “Or is this a technology that's going to diffuse out and be in everybody's hands?” “This is the time in which AI is actually hyper democratizing. It has spread to more individuals, both in the country and around the world in the shortest period of time of any new technology I think in history.” “The best AIs in the world are in the consumer products.” “This technology is going to be in everybody's hands. And everybody is going to be able to use it to optimize the things that they do, have it be a thought partner, assistant for building companies.” Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸

a16z

79,935 views • 8 months ago