Immoli: I like how with the last three questions on the second page Gabe acts like he is against DRM.
Even if not dropping Steam DRM, it makes it especially funny that Valve allows third-party DRM on top of the Steam DRM. They have no spine, yet they act in interviews as if they do. You can't say you are against DRM, and still say that you don't want to restrict too much if the publisher decides to use extra DRM (like Gabe says in the interview).
If GOG was like Steam, GOG would still advertise itself as a DRM-free service, yet allow the game publishers (EA, Ubisoft etc.) to include third-party DRM into "DRM-free" GOG games. "It is not us doing it, it is the game publishers!". But, GOG shows spine by simply refusing to selling anything with any kind of DRM, even if that severely restricts their business and potential income.
Another point in the interview when Gabe dismisses the "a Steam user was banned from all his Steam games" by simply saying that Valve would never do anything to hurt its customers, as that is bad business.
Sounds good on paper, but why do we see these reports then, with no forewarnings of breaking the TOS, and no feedback what exactly the banned user had done wrong? Of course we now hear only one side of the story, which would be that much more important for Steam to react to those reports and give explanations.
Also, I think Gabe meant that they don't want to hurt the feelings of their most productive, and potential (future), customers. Ie., people who will buy lots of games from them also in the future. Just because you already have hundreds of Steam games does not necessarily mean you are still an important customer to them, if you are e.g. in a Steam game buying hiatus, or have migrated to other services (like EA Origin, Windows Store etc.) but still liked to keep your old Steam games available for yourself.