“Despite an A-plus in effort, I'm not reassured that this is going to work. If we are really worried, as they are, that this technology is the biggest threat we are facing as a society right now, I'm not reassured that corporate governance will take care of this risk.”

…were about shareholders complaining that the boards care too little about them and about profit making. So, weren't really cases about enforcing the social, the social purpose, which is not surprising. That's what shareholders are there for. They're trying to make some money with this investment.

But that's just such a great thing to point out, though, about this design of PBCs to begin with. The only people who can enforce it are most interested in one prong of the balancing.

So we know that there are certainly going to be shortcomings with a sort of corporate governance alone as the mechanism to avoid some of those worst case outcomes. And as you noted previously, boards traditionally have been thought of as having a hyper-focus on the financial interests. We mitigate…

So this is the most interesting and creative part of Anthropic's governance structure. But let me immediately say something that will, it's kind of surprising. And the long benefit trust is not 100% focused on safety. Even the trust has a triple mission, as it were. So it has to balance profit…

And just to pause there for one second for the folks who don't read S1s for a living, right? This is the dual class structure, or I guess in this case, multi-class structure, whereas normally we would have one class of shares, every share would get one vote, and this is sort of the traditional. And…