Episode 2300 Scott Adams: CWSA 11/22/23 All The News Fit To Laugh At. Bring A Beverage

Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization. It's called Coffee with Scott Adams. And there's a reason for that. You'll find out soon if you'd like to take this experience, which is one of the best things that will ever happen to you in your entire life, up to levels that nobody can even explain with human words. All you need is a cup of mug or a glass, a tankard, chalice or stein, a. A canteen, jugger, flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like this coffee stuff. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine dinner, the day thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip, and it happens. Now go. Oh, my God. That was good. Well, thanks for joining on YouTube. Special thanks to people on YouTube because you did something that I didn't think was possible. If the people on locals, if you mind, a moment of privilege. So, YouTube, you did something that I didn't think was possible. My subscriber number has increased by about 50% in the last year. Pretty impressive. 50%. Now, that's the part that you, as the viewers, control, whether you subscribe or not, of 50%. Now, interestingly, my traffic is exactly the same the whole time. It will be 29 or 30,000 people will watch this today, like yesterday and the day before and all of the days before. So I've got questions. It's kind of nice that my subscribers went up 50%, but kind of odd that the traffic stayed exactly the same year after year after year after year. It's almost as if it's not natural. It's almost feels as if it's not organic, but I don't know. Anything's possible. Well, as Owen Gregorian noted in a retweet today, there's a new study. Research found that having at least two handfuls of nuts a day may improve male fertility. That's right. So I kid you not. Male fertility might depend on the quality of your nuts. I'm just reading the science. Stop doubting the science. That's what they said. If you've got good nuts. If you have good nuts, you're gonna have lots of good sperm. That's what they say. Well, in the most important news of the day, author Ben McCully has written a audiobook that's out now which has something to do with the Scott Adams talent stack idea. But most importantly, he's taking the opportunity to train AI by telling it in the book that I have an IQ of 185. I appreciate it. And now I'm wondering if Grok, which only knows what it sees on Twitter. Well, it knows more than that, but it also sees Twitter. I wonder if Grok knows that my IQ is 185 yet. Allegedly. All right, here's something I love. And by the way, if you're looking for that audio book, you can just look at my Twitter feed. Today I tweeted it. What's it called? Something like something for truck drivers. I'm not sure exactly what the title of it is, so look at my feed. You'll find the link. Apparently we've got Senator Mike Lee, who is calling for investigations into the January 6 Committee for Deceiving the public about the Capitol riots. Did I tell you yesterday that everything's going my way? I feel like everything's going my way. It's not there. Like everything needs to still go a lot further, but it does feel like everything's going my way. How much do you want to see an investigation into the J6 committee? Because in my opinion, that was treason. What I saw. What I saw was intentional organized government led treason to get rid of a president on a false pretense. Now, that's really different than just lying in public. Lying in public is barely legal and we're all used to it, so. So politicians lying, no big deal. But if you lie in an organized fashion, in a group effort, I'm sure that's called rico. Isn't that rico? An organized effort to do something that. I don't know how illegal it is, but it should be illegal to intentionally lie to the public in an official government entity. It's not. I'm sure it's not. Should be. So I don't know if any kind of investigation would find any crimes, but we should certainly know why they were such despicable weasels. In other news, I guess Australia's got some new powerful technology that makes lasers three to nine times more powerful without deteriorating the beam quality, which means you, you might be using these for shooting down missiles and shooting down drones. Now, in my book, the religion War, which is really hard to find because it's a banned book, one of the predictions I made is that there would be gigantic floating ocean based platforms that would have something like huge lasers on them and probably some kind of nuclear source so that you could put it near any theater of operation and it could basically shoot down 100% of whatever's in the air if you want to. So I think that's where we're going. We're going to end up with laser beams that can shoot down anything in the air. We might actually reach a point where nothing can fly. Maybe it might be actually too dangerous to have anything in the air at all because laser beams will just shoot them out of the air because eventually every side will have a laser beam. I guess once you can shoot anything out of the air, people are going to do it. So that's coming. Here's an idea that I think is so good it's irresistible. And I heard it on a reel on Instagram. But it's sort of a general idea. And that is that one of the biggest things the United States needs, not just for the citizens, but for the economy, is a construction boom. I can't think of anything that would be better for our economy than a construction boom where people get jobs and people are buying homes and doing all that stuff. But of course, the red tape and the approvals are so burdensome. I built my own home. It takes years to get approval to build a new home. Years. And that's just the normal process that's not with anything broken. But one of the things to change that is, at least in California, I think in other places you can do this ADU situation. These little tiny homes that you put a mother in law in, you can plop one in your backyard. But in California, I guess they come kind of pre approved and they cut a lot of the red tape out. So it's become a booming field because they got rid of red tape and they standardized on, okay, we'll approve this. As long as you meet these requirements, we'll approve it. Well, I saw an idea that I don't know who it's attributed to, but it's kind of a general good idea. So probably more than one person has had it that there should be something like a bunch of approved models of homes and maybe office buildings as well. So that if you wanted to build an office building or build a home, you would just pick one of the dozen or so models that are pre approved and that you would just go to the front of the line because you picked one of the pre approved houses. Now if you wanted to build a spec house, probably still have to do the work. But wouldn't it be nice if you could build a development or an entire new city? Because I keep hammering on that building new cities. Wouldn't it be nice if everybody could just say, all right, I'll have a, give me a number three or a number 12, and there's just no red tape. You just build them. To me this is irresistibly smart. I'm sure that something like this is going to happen. I'm sure that a president who is a Republican, Trump, Ramaswamy, somebody like that could move this forward. And I do think, I think we should have maybe state rules, but there should be some, there should be some kind of federal guaranteed approved building that every state has to accept. That would be just amazing. All right, so that's the future of housing. But there's something similar going on with space. So Senators Kyrsten Sinema and rich guy Eric Schmidt have sent the FAA a letter imploring them to act now and to eliminate red tape stuff. And so the idea is that there's too much red tape to get a rocket into space, which is no surprise. So we actually have some important people who are working on making it easier to get a rocket into space. Now isn't that just an unambiguously good idea? That is an unambiguously good idea. I mean, Elon has talked about if you piled all the, you know, the regulations up, it would be like a mile high or something. So when you worry about the future of America, what do you mostly worry about for me is competence and not being able to get out of our, let's say our legacy systems. The great thing about America is we, compared to, let's say, established places, we got to start from scratch and build something that worked. But now like everything, it starts getting ossified and red taped and regulations and rules and you just can't get anything done. We're going to have to do something that just sweeps the deck. And here's my optimism, my optimism goes like this. There's nobody better in the world than Americans at breaking what they built so they can build a better one. Would you agree with that? I don't think anybody is better than America at breaking the thing that existed so they can improve it. It's sort of built into our whole nature. In fact, I think that has something to do with being an immigrant nation. What did every early immigrant do to get to America? They broke their ship. They took their entire life and they broke it. And they got on a little boat and without knowing what's on the other end exactly, went across an ocean, a frickin ocean, on a little boat they couldn't even get. You couldn't even tell the difference between Virginia and Salem literally in one case the Mayflower. And they took that risk. They just broke everything they had because it wasn't working and went to where they could build Something new. Now, what happens if you create a country that's of people who are willing to break what they had to build something new no matter where they came from. Some came from Ireland. They broke what they had to build something new. Some came from Italy, Some came from, you know, China. So I really do think that's what's special about the DNA of America, which is the ability to savagely destroy. Savagely, like aggressively destroy what used to work but definitely doesn't work anymore. So. Kirsten Cinema Eric Schmidt. Yeah, that's the direction we need to go. Let's break it. We need to break more things so we can build more things. Let's talk about TikTok. Interestingly, you've heard me complain a number of times that Fox News was running advertisements for TikTok. It was actually sponsored on Fox News. Now, Fox News more than any other network, quite accurately. Quite accurately was, you know, having people on like Tom Cotton, I think Bob Lee, some other people who are criticizing TikTok, but they just. Fox News just ran an opinion piece. Now, opinion piece means it's not just one person's opinion that Fox News graciously decided to include. It means it's the actual Fox News opinion. Meaning as an organization, they have an opinion. Sort of like Wall Street Journal has an opinion board. So their opinion is that TikTok should be banned at the same time that they're an advertiser on their network. Thank you. Nicely done. Fox News just went from what the hell is going on with you guys? In my mind, why are you running TikTok ads to hero heroes. Here's why. And I'm going to quote the great Willie Brown, who was a politician in San Francisco and California for years, and he was at one point. I've said this before, but it's just such a great quote. Somebody asked him why he was taking lobbyists or taking money from the tobacco industry. Why when legislation was upcoming that was about the tobacco industry. And so Willie Brown, showing why he was so popular, said, if you can't take money from somebody and then turn around and stab them in the back, you're in the wrong business. Okay, you answered all of my questions, Willie Brown. I was actually a little bit worried that you might do what the people who gave you money said they wanted you to do. But he just went right in public and said, if you can't stab him in the back, you're in the wrong business. So here's Fox News, who took money from TikTok, ran their ads, and then ran a Opinion poll that says they should be banned and completely out of business. Nicely done. That is how you. Willy Brown. That is how you Willy Brown right there. You want to see it again? You want to see some more Willie Brown action? Because it's kind of cool when you see it. All right. All right. You might know that I endorse Vivek Ramaswamy. He's my choice for president. I think President Trump would be fun and wonderful, but he's very provocative and he's at a certain age. And I. So I have a bias for a younger president. I want to be consistent because I said the same thing about Biden. I said, hey, he's up there. That's a risk I don't want to take. So I'm going to be consistent in saying younger person is a better choice at the point now might not happen, but I'm going to stay consistent to that. So, having said that, I endorse Vivek. You know that Vivek decided he would use TikTok for his own campaign. And when asked about TikTok, he said that, you know, other places that, like Airbnb, he said, had a data privacy issue with China, which Airbnb denies, by the way. So there's some question about the details of that. But. So Vivek made it a private data privacy issue in at least in terms of how he answered the question. Now, like I said, I endorse him for president. Stop it. Who's calling me this time of day? But despite endorsing him, I'm going to stab him in the back by saying that he's not representing TikTok correctly. And I think you all know it. The real problem with TikTok is not the data privacy. That's a problem. It's a problem. You should do something about it. But it's not the big one. The big one is influence. And China has built a user interface for American minds. And there's a major candidate for president who at the moment is okay with that. I'm very much not okay with that. But in the spirit of Fox News, who can take TikTok's money and stab him in the back, I'm going to continue endorsing Vivek Ramaswamy while stabbing him in the back. So I'm going to stab him in the back right now. Vivek, you're completely wrong about this. Now, if the strategy, if the strategy is to simply use TikTok to get elected and then try to shut him down, oh, I'm going to be Giving him a standing ovation. And that might actually be the strategy. The strategy might be to use TikTok to get elected and then shut him down. Now, that would be the ultimate Willie Brown play. I don't know that he has that in mind. I've not heard any hints of that. But if he does. Standing ovation. Standing ovation. Because he's saying directly that he would use TikTok for the stated purpose of winning, because he's concerned, and it's a good concern, that Republicans aren't trying hard enough to win, that they're dying on principle instead of trying to win. So if you're going to be the guy who says, stop dying on principle and try to win, it is very consistent that you say, I'm going to use TikTok to try to win. So I'm not. I'm definitely not accusing Vivek of being inconsistent. He's very consistent. He's doing exactly what he says Republicans should do, Try to win first and then see if he can do some good stuff. I get that. I get that. But just keep in mind that he and I are going to have to disagree on TikTok as a persuasion tool and how much of a big deal that is and whether he should be trying to ban it right away versus using it to get elected. I would rather. I'd rather he was in favor of banning it, but still endorsing, because I think as a package, he's the best package. All right, so Mike Benz continues to be a national treasure by explaining to us some things that we kind of feel, but we haven't put a wrapper around it to understand it more comprehensively, which is the way American opinions are being manipulated by members of the government. Now, specifically, there are now two states that have rolled out some kind of media literacy program for their schools. So now New York and I believe California is following up. Two major states are going to train people in colleges and schools K through 12, something they call media literacy, which in their, in their view of it, would be teaching them how to understand the news and not be fooled by fake news. Now, I don't think you needed Mike Benz to tell you that this is coming from Democrats and is really. And it's a brainwashing operation that Democrats are too fucking stupid to know it's a brainwashing operation. Do you know why? Because they're already brainwashed. The. The Democrats actually believe that one side is right. Now, if you, if there's somebody on the right who says, yeah, damn it, one side is Right. It's our side. No, no, it doesn't really work that way. No, no. Both. Both sides have a little bit to explain. Both sides. This is one of those situations where both sizing it is absolutely appropriate. If you're both sizing the Gaza situation, you're gonna have to answer some questions about that. But you can absolutely. Both sides fake news. Right. If you're not both sizing it, you're not a serious player. I do think that there's a greater amount on one side, but so do they. So just know that that's what everybody thinks, that the other side has more of it. But that's probably a perceptual thing anyway. So basically, a Ministry of Truth like organization is being set up, and it's a major program. The Democrats are pushing to get it everywhere. And who do you think will develop the materials that the students will say? Do you think Republicans will be developing their materials that tells them what's true and what's not? No, no, no. This is literally just a way to brainwash kids into turning them into Democrats. And somehow everybody's like, all right, well, disinformation goal. So here's what I hate most about this story. There's lots of stuff in the news, a lot of topics, and usually the most involved I might want to get in a topic is writing a tweet or mentioning it on the live stream. You can't get involved in everything. But there is this weird category of things where I can't not get involved because I have some unique skill that is rare. And my country is calling me. I know it sounds dramatic, but it's just literally true. Who exactly would you call to deprogram California kids? This is my state. I just found out that the government is going to propagandize the children into becoming my enemies. Let me say that again. My state just rolled down a program to teach kids to make me their enemies indirectly. But that would be the obvious outcome of it if it turned them into good Democrats who believe CNN and MSNBC are telling the truth. What's the outcome of that? The outcome of that is I become their enemy, because that's what MSNBCNN will tell them. So the children in my state are being weaponized against me. And really, there's no propaganda or there's no hyperbole in that statement. The children of my state are being propagandized and brainwashed overtly, publicly. See for yourself. You can just look at it yourself. There's no doubt about what's happening to not like Me, among other things. I mean, it's not about me, of course, but that would be the outcome. Now, I believe I have unique skills to pull that off. So much so that I've largely decided this morning I'm going to start holding classes and maybe just for the neighbors at first, and see if I could build something like a, like a, like a two hour class to teach children how to spot fake news the real way, as in both sides. So it would be a both sides lesson. It wouldn't be a Democrats get everything wrong, Republicans are awesome, or Libertarians got the right answer. None of that, just how to spot the fake stuff. So if it worked and I got good at it and people wanted to send their kids there, and by the way, I would have lots of chaperones. It's 2023, almost 2024. So you can't say, you can never say something like, I plan to organize something for kids. You got to add right in there with lots of chaperones, like, yeah, their parents can attend. The parents should attend. You should audit the class. She would just say that automatically. My kids are homeschooled. We volunteer. Well, there you go. Yeah, I think I have enough that I could pull together a class with like an hour of preparation. It wouldn't take much. I've already got the notes for the lesson. So this is one of those situations where actually I actually have to work. Like, I should stop watching the news because I really want to stop working or working as hard. I like doing this. This isn't work. But I don't really want to go save my state. It's a lot of work, but I have to. I mean, seriously, you tell me, you tell me, can I let this go? Can I let that go in my state? I can't. I absolutely don't. I don't have the capability to just let that slide. I wish I did because I don't want to do it, but I'm gonna, because here we are. Anyway, I'll make that work somehow. Speaking of Vivek, he's reporting that the Iowa crowds for him are, quote, shockingly large, even in smaller counties. And it's a lot of people who have never been to a caucus before. He did six events yesterday, six events today, seven events tomorrow. And he says that the MSM narrative of what's happening in Iowa is completely wrong. He says, get ready for a surprise in Iowa on January 15th. You know what? There might be a surprise in Iowa. Might be a surprise in Iowa. Yeah, I think Vivek is rising and who is he? He's running against somebody right? Besides Trump. He's running. Who's the other guy who's running for the nomination? It's Ronnie something D. DeSantis. Ron. Ron DeSantis. Is that how you pronounce? I feel I like vaguely remember there was he's a governor or something. I remember he was once popular with Republicans, but now he's a guy with funny boots. That's all I remember about him. I don't have a specific memory of anything he said lately. Joking. Just joking. Let me ask you this. Speaking of desantis, wasn't at least half of the reason for desantis, and I need a fact check on this, see if this is accurate, wasn't something like half of the reason for DeSantis to run is that he could beat Biden and Trump could not. Do I have that right? Wasn't that like half of the reason the other half was people liked him. Right? The other half was he's a good governor. I'm sure he would be a good president. By the way, I think he would do a fine job as a president. If he's a president someday, I think I'd support him. But if half of the argument is he's the only one who could be Biden, and as of today, the last, the most recent six or seven polls have Trump solidly beating Biden, you know, within 2%, you could say, is margin of error. But that's a national number. If Trump is over Biden, 2% in a national number, and whenever they look at the battleground states, it looks like he has a more commanding lead, it looks like it's over. In terms of the argument for a DeSantis, if you've been running for a year or however long DeSantis has been running, and the end result of a year of running is if 50% of the reason you're running in the first place just dissolved, which is Trump can't win against Biden. It's kind of time, isn't it? So I'd like to suggest the following. I think DeSantis supporters surely want him to stay in for a couple of primaries because, you know, you paid the money, you're on the wagon, you might as well find out what happens, maybe get lucky. But if DeSantis shits the bed in Iowa and New Hampshire and Vivek beats him in one or both of those places, don't you think it's time? I feel like that would be the trigger for DeSantis to do the right Thing, and in part because I think the emergency backup spare is better served if it's Vivek. Now, to be realistic, the people who are not Trump who are running for the nomination, they're kind of running in case something happens to Trump or maybe something lucky happens, or maybe he says something that is literally disqualifying to the right, something like that. So it's sort of a just in case break glass in emergency. Some say that they're running for vice president. I don't think that they would tell you that. So I like to see it as the, you know, the emergency spare tire, but in this case, a full size spare. You know, sometimes spare tires, a little one, you're not supposed to drive too far. But in other cases, you get a full size spare. I think the Desantis is a full size spare. I think Vivek is a full size spare. Right. I don't think the others are, but they could do the job. That's a Trump like job. And you'd probably say, yeah, that looked. That's about what I wanted. They have the capability, they have the. They have the skill. So I feel like what you're going to see is a good reasons for DeSantis to make a respectable exit. And by the way, I'd appreciate him running. Don't you. You know, there's some of you who said, hey, don't run against Trump, but I'm glad he did. I feel like it made the system better that he was in the race because you had somebody to compare to Trump. Here's why it's important. DeSantis was sort of the safe Republican choice, am I right? He felt kind of safe and what you needed before you committed to Trump. If he's your choice. Think about the psychology of this. Before you committed to Trump fully, don't you love the fact that you had a good, solid governor choice? So that if you decide that Trump's still your person, that you made that decision with the best possible scenario, which is you had a legitimate choice. He's a serious legitimate choice for President DeSantis. So now if you pick. Now, if you pick Trump, what would be the. The psychological thing that happens? I think it binds you to Trump stronger because you have to make a choice of somebody who wouldn't have all the, let's say, I'm going to say, baggage of Trump? If you chose that directly after knowing you had a safer choice, you're going to be really committed to that choice. Do you understand how that works? Because cognitive dissonance is Going to lock you in to your choice thing. Controversial. All right, I think I'm back. So let me say it again. I think it's time, with the full respect of the Republican Party, for Desantis to, you know, maybe. Maybe back out after. After a primary if he doesn't do well, if he kills it in the primary, well, hey, I'll revise my opinion because, you know, the voters might want a choice. But if he. If he just. If Vivek laps him, if he gets lapped by Vivek in either of those primaries, I think he needs to do what he needs to do, and everybody would be happy with him, I think. All right, let's talk about Media Matters. It seems like it trends every day on. On X. So, you know, Musk is going thermonuclear law lawsuit against them for. For their allegedly fake analysis that said that X was pairing neo Nazi stuff with advertisers. And people have tried to reproduce it. Can't reproduce it. So it does not, in fact, appear that it was real. But we'll find out. Tim Pool has suggested that influencers on X, people like me and people like Tim Pool should join Musk in the lawsuit. Now, I'm no lawyer, so I don't know what that means. Is that something like an amicus brief or something? Again, I don't know what that means. But isn't an amicus brief like you're a friend of somebody on one side, so you write a little thing supporting them? You're a friend of the court. Right. But is that all, or would you somehow join in the lawsuit? Do you think class action would apply? Is there enough of it? I'm not a lawyer now, so I don't know. Would class action be. He means as a plaintiff. So as a plaintiff, that doesn't necessarily apply. Class action. You could just be an additional plaintiff. Right. I don't know what makes it a class. Class action does not apply. I'm hearing from the only lawyer that I know is watching. So we think that class action doesn't apply, but maybe you could be a plaintiff. Now, I don't know what that would mean. If the lawsuit is effective, what would that mean for the additional plaintiffs? That they would get some portion of the award, if there's any monetary award. Now, I can't imagine Media Matters has money, except for Soros money. Wouldn't it be amazing if Elon Musk sued Media Matters, which is funded by Soros, and then Soros money went to Elon Musk. How much would you Love that. Just the concept of it. That'd be fun. Well, if there is some way to join in on this matter and I can be useful without traveling, because I don't want to travel, but if I could be useful, I'd do that. One of the most fun stories here in California is we've got this guy, pencil neck Adam Schiff, to quote Trump, and he wants to be a senator instead of a mere House representative. And so. But Newsom was in the situation, I think, because he said he would appoint a black woman. So he did. But that doesn't mean that she has the job, you know, still up for election. And I don't even know if the woman who's in the job right now, whose name I can't remember, I don't know if she's even going to run. Has she announced she's going to run? But anyway, he's running. Schiff would be running against at least two highly qualified black women. Now, how in the world do Democrats in California elect a white guy when there are two highly qualified black women in the race? How does that fit with the whole I'm a Democrat thing? Feels like that. And apparently Schiff actually came out first in some early primary thing. Doesn't look like there's a strong preference for him. Now, would you say that Adam Schiff is the poor man's Keith Olbermann or not? That's the question I'm asking you today. Is Adam Schiff the poor man's Keith Olbermann sort of sort, which would make Swalwell the poor man's Schiff? So Swalwell would be like two levels below Keith Olbermann under that model? Under that model. All right, so Adam Schiff posted today on X that Elon Musk has been amplifying antisemitic content. Do you think that's true? Literally the opposite now. But. But I would say this isn't. Isn't the X platform and isn't all of social media a technology which amplifies all messages? So if so, if one person retweets you, they've amplified your message. So is X the only place that messages get amplified? Isn't that what all media does? It's amplification of messages? Aren't there messages on both sides of every issue on every platform that are getting amplified? This guy has ways of lying that you could write books about. All right, so here's lie pattern 17 from Adam Schiff. Here's the one where you make a claim about somebody that the reader would not quickly identify as equally true of every single person in the same business, because it's all legal and appropriate, because it's a business where you amplify everybody's opinion. And then he says he's profiting from misinformation. All right, what member of the media does not profit from misinformation? They all do. They all profit from it. Because that's what gets the clicks. They get more clicks for misinformation than information. So again, he's using pattern 17 of acting like there's only one person who does it now, everybody. This is just the universal way everything works and allowing pro Hamas propaganda to spread. Again, what does the regular media do? Does not the regular media also interview people who are on both sides? That's all they do. So that's lie, pattern 17 to pretend that he's the only one doing this stuff. And then Schiff says he's joined Representative Dan Goldman and Representative Raskin in demanding accountability from X. So these motherfuckers actually want to destroy the. The only remaining source of free speech in America. Could they be any worse people to Chandler Bing? Could they be any worse for America? And the amazing thing is that they do it right in front of you. Right in front of you. They tell you they don't want you to have information that is useful. At the same time, they're doing these. This media literacy thing, which is obviously the opposite of that. It's to teach people to be stupid and believe what they're told. All right, so the Pentagon, which has failed its sixth consecutive audit, as others have pointed out this week, they requested an extra $114 million for DEI. They've asked for $114 million of your taxpayer money not to defend the country, but to make it more defenseless. Because. Well, while I do not say that, you know, there's one group that's all good and other groups are all bad, I don't say that, obviously. Isn't the whole idea of DEI that you're going to give up capability to gain equity? Isn't that the whole concept? I thought the whole concept was, yeah, we're going to try a little less hard to look for the very best person. But as long as you're in the general ballpark, we value diversity. You could make an argument for that in a private company. As in, well, yes, it may be. In some cases, it's not that good for the shareholders. But you do live in a country that is a diverse country. And don't you want the businesses to reflect the diversity of the country to which I say yes, actually that's not a bad idea. But you do necessarily by simply trying harder for diversity. This has nothing to do with the quality of applicants in any group. It's just a restraint you put on your, on your employee hiring. Any kind of restraint is going to give you a worse outcome. Now we can accept that a little bit in corporate situations, but do you accept that when it comes to the military? Let me say it again as directly as I can. When it comes to self defense, whether it's the military or whether it's you personally defending yourself or you defending your family, you can discriminate as much as you want and it's completely moral and ethical. You agree with that right for self defense. And this is a unique category. It's not about business, it's not about personal relationships, it's not who you marry, it's not who you rent to. All those things have to be for society to function. Those have to be really done right, right. Can't discriminate in those categories. Everything just falls apart. But when you talk about defense, you can discriminate as much as you want. There's nothing wrong with that. The reason the military doesn't discriminate against black people, like I guess at some point it did, is because it turns out it didn't make a difference. So that discrimination wasn't helping, but it was hurting recruitment, so you get rid of it. That makes sense. But do we keep any discrimination when it comes to the military? Of course. Of course we do. If you're a certain age, you can't join the military. Am I wrong? The military is ageist directly, overtly, without an apology. And does anybody have a problem with that? No, because that's how you keep the country safe. So that's a very clean example, ageism, where the military says, yeah, we're just going to fucking discriminate like crazy about age. And what does the public say? Hey, discrimination. You say, okay, yeah, that makes sense. Do they do any other discrimination? Does the military discriminate against you for height? Absolutely. Height, weight, your ability, if you have a disability of some sort, Total discrimination. If this were a corporation, we'd say, hey, maybe put in some ramps. But in the military we say, hey, you're discriminating against the different liable. Oh yeah, okay, that makes sense. Wherever you see defense is the issue, either personal or national, discrimination is absolutely allowed. Now it might be illegal so that, you know, we make the laws ourselves. But in terms of what makes sense, what makes you a good person or a bad person, what is ethical, what is moral. In defense, you can discriminate as much as you want. And that is not unethical, is not immoral. It is simply smart. Right? And that works in every, in every possible way. Right? So, all right. Yeah. So the Pentagons are ridiculous. So Sam Altman is returning to OpenAI. So the drama about OpenAI, it went full circle. I guess the most of except for one person on the board is fired. Sam Altman is back, Microsoft is happy. And Ilya, the guy who's the genius of it all, seems to be happy. And he'll work at OpenAI. What's his last name? Ilya, could sever give me his last name so I can say, right? Because I have something to say about him. No, you're saying no, not man from uncle name. He's not Ilya Kuryakan, but that was a good guess. All right, well, you're not going to tell me his name or somebody tell me because not Karjakin. Come on, Suskever. Thank you, Yulia Sutskever. I think that's close, Sutskever. Now, if you've seen him on interviews and I've watched, there are some things we can say about him. Number one, he's a naturally good looking guy. He's pretty good looking guy. And secondly, he seems to be about like one of the smartest people in the world. That's kind of cool. He's all. He's probably already nearly a billionaire. If he has, if he has shares of Open AI, I think he's probably a billionaire, right? Depending how much he asks. So he's a good looking guy. He's got. He's probably a billionaire and one of the smartest people ever. And he can't build an AI that will tell him to get a haircut. Have you seen his hair? Now I'm going to do something that will seem cruel, but this, ladies and gentlemen, is tough love. So Ilya, I tell you this with love because I'm one of you. I'm one of you. Look at me, Ilya, I'm one of you. Let me tell you the best advice I once got at a barbershop. So I always get my hair cut at the same place. And the owner has a whole bunch of hair cutters and you just go in, whichever one's available, sit in the chair. And I never really talked to the owner, but a number of years ago I was in there and the haircutter said, you know, how do you like your hair? And I said, give Me, a number two. You know, that's a certain height of the hair that's remaining is number two. Give me a number two. And I remember that the owner of the place, oh, I think one day he was. He cut my hair. I think it was the first day that he cut my hair because he's just one of the cutters as well. And I said, number two all over. And he said to me, it's time for number one. And I said, what? He goes, yeah, trust me, it's time for number one. So I said yes to number one. Now it's grown out, you can tell I need a haircut. It's too long now. So now I'm a hypocrite. But I know it. So if you know it, that's not as bad. And so I say, ilya, you really have everything going for you. You have the hottest company, you're the smartest guy, good looking guy, shave your head. And let me do a joke that Jerry Seinfeld did. He used to have a routine where you talk about china and. And they had chopsticks, but they didn't have spoons. And he would laugh at China and say, you had chopsticks, you couldn't invent the spoon. And then the punchline is. He goes, you've seen shovels. And I laugh every time I hear that you've seen shovels and you couldn't invent the spoon. To which I say, ilya, you just spent the whole week dealing with the head of Microsoft. Satya. Come on. Satya figured it out. He's a shaved head guy. Jeff Bezos, anybody? Jeff Bezos. He got it figured out. Shave that shit. Yeah, shave that right off. What does Jeff Bezos look like now? Stud. Total stud. He's jacked. Shaved his head. Total makeover. Dana White. How about Dana White of the ufc? Imagine if he had the pointy haired boss hair instead of that cool shaved head. Shaved. His head. Looks great. Looks great. So I guess I don't care too much about the whole OpenAI saga, because all it did was sort of return it back to what it was. Well, Ilya, you really got a lot going on there. Shave that shit off. That's all I'm saying. How odd is it? And I didn't make this up. This observation came from Raul Davis. It was a great follow on the X platform. He said, what are the odds that the guy who's in charge of making a new entity, AI or AGI, will be like a news intelligence? What would be the odds that his last Name would be Altman. Literally an alternative to a man and he, and his job is building an alternative to people and he's apparently done it or it's close to it really. I mean, what are the odds of that? Come on, come on. Yeah, Sam Bankman fried. Same situation. Well, Israel allegedly is close to a hostage deal. They'll give, they'll give 50 of Hamas's prisoners and they'll give back 150 of Hamas type people that they have in jails. It'll be a four day lull in fighting. They don't call it a ceasefire, they call it a lull. And I guess the news, the news is saying that Biden was quite involved in this. Do we give Biden the win? Because it does look like Biden may have been quite instrumental in getting this done. No, no, you're not going to give Biden any credit at all for getting 50 people released. What's your argument for that? Is your argument that he probably didn't have any effect? That would be a pretty good argument. But the news is saying he was quite involved. That's why he went there to Israel. He's been on the phone and I don't know, maybe I don't, you know, I don't think it's fair to have a knee jerk reaction that everything Biden did was wrong. I mean, he's, he's struggling like it can't be true that everything he does is wrong. You know, it's entirely possible that this was about human lives and, and he wanted to save some Americans and he put some, put some elbow into it and maybe he did, maybe he saved some Americans. I'm going to tentatively give him the win on this. You know, maybe it could have been better. Maybe we didn't get any Americans. I don't know. I'm not sure who's in the 50. But if we got any Americans back, I know I'm not going to criticize them for it. And then I guess the deal says that there would be another day of lull for every 10 people that they give back beyond that. But nobody expects that to happen. So here's what I think. How in the world, what is Hamas thinking? Is Hamas thinking that somehow they're going to survive this? I don't know. I would be worried that there's another trick coming. So I'm kind of worried that this won't come off smoothly. But we'll see. Yes, my prediction would be wrong. Exactly. My prediction is that the deal wouldn't happen. But remember, the deal hasn't happened, but it does look like the prediction will be wrong if they pull it off. Now, the way that this would make sense, the only way I could say, is if both sides thought they had an advantage. And that's the part I didn't predict. I did not predict that both sides would think they had an advantage in making a deal. But I think the Israelis are going to get a public relations advantage, because if they had just gone in there and all the hostages died, they'd never be able to explain it. So if you can get a big chunk of them out, you'll always have that on your permanent record, that you did not just go in and destroy everything just because you could, that you used judgment, use some wisdom to manage the situation the best you could, etc. So I think that Israel will get a huge public relations benefit from it. I think Hamas thinks that they'll use that time to maybe consolidate or get some kind of advantage or something. But I think that Israel will get a bigger advantage from simply being able to watch activity once they think they can move freely, because they think they're going to tell which tunnels people came out of and where there's more activity than there should be. Even if you're Israel, wouldn't the first thing you'd like to know is where are those hostages coming out of? What holes are they coming out of, if you can find that out? Because wherever they're coming from is the first place you should go in and see if there are any more, or at least capture the people who are involved with releasing the first 50. Because whoever was involved in getting the first 50 probably knows where some others are, because that would be sort of part of the process of figuring out which 50. So it does give Israel an advantage, especially if they have any signal intelligence and they're listening in on any phone calls or anything, because the. Oh, I just fucking figured it out. Did you just figure out the play as I was talking? I figured it out, yeah. There's no way Hamas could coordinate getting all the people back without some signal intelligence. In other words, going to be on a cell phone, somebody somewhere, somebody's going to be talking to somebody else remotely, or even if they're doing it without signals, they could be sending couriers back and forth. Israel's going to watch where the activity is to figure out where the other hostages are. Israel is going to use this to figure out where the tunnels are and where the concentrations of Hamas are, and also where the other hostages are, and then they'll talk to the 50. And the 50 will probably give them intelligence about who else might be where. Oh, this is actually very smart. The more I think about it, the smarter this sounds for Israel because they're going to learn so much in this process. And then, and they, and they've said directly, this has nothing to do with whether we're going to kill everybody in Hamas. Oh, we're totally going to kill everybody in Hamas. Yeah. You know, I'm liking this deal a little bit more. So in my opinion, Hamas would be the ones who would be crazy to take it, even though they're getting 150 other people out. See, the problem with this whole battle is that that the two sides are really different kinds of armies because Israel's incentive is to kill the fewest number of non combatants as possible. And also Israel is trying to protect the maximum amount of life combatants and non combatants. So Israel is fighting a battle of protecting lives and avoiding killing the wrong people. Hamas is running a battle where they could win both ways. They could win by being slaughtered because they get the publicity win, which they think would translate into even more pressure on Israel in the long run. So that would be a win. They could also win by killing lots of Israelis and making it a less hospitable place to live. So Hamas can win by dying and they can win by killing you. They have a weird business model. So under those conditions, what responsibility does Israel have to not kill people in Hamas? It seems to me if Hamas's strategy is maximum death of their own people and that happens, it means Hamas got the strategy they wanted. So I think Israel is getting way too much pressure for not doing enough to protect the citizens when it's the actual strategy of Hamas for their own citizens to die in large numbers. So if the other side wants to die even more than you want to keep them alive, the people who want their own side to die is always going to win. Like Israel can't control how much the other team wants to die. Like they don't have any control over that. If they really, really want to die really badly, not much you can do about that. So there's no doubt about what's going to happen. There will be what looks to us like unacceptable non combatant deaths, but there wasn't any choice. So you can say it's unacceptable. But compared to what? Compared to what? And I guess now some member of the government there. See, who was it? Israel's intelligence minister has said out loud that, well, you know, maybe another option. Another option just putting that out There. Oh, while we're just spitballing another option for Gaza, just one other thing to think about, put this on the list of things we should consider would be to promote the voluntary resettlement of Gaza Palestinians for humanitarian reasons outside the Strip, to depopulate it. Now, this has always been the cats on the roof situation. There was no other option. Israel from the beginning had to depopulate Gaza because they said very clearly we're going to change the reality there for 50 years. Two generations. Two generations is exactly what you need to brainwash a population back to some kind of compliance. Because here's why you need two generations. The first generation you try to brainwash is going to be unbrainwashed by their parents. So even though the school might say this is true, this is true. As soon as they go home, their parents say, forget that, that's that western Jewish school you're going to. They're just lying to you. So that's not as strong. But by the time you get to the second generation, you've got a good chance that the parents and the schools, because the parents would have been brainwashed in the first generation, you got a good chance they get the same message that, oh yeah, this is what's true both sides. So 50 years is sort of a minimum. I think Eisenhower said the same thing about Germany. Eisenhower said it would take 50 years. So, yeah, I don't see any possibility that anything else will happen. They're going to have to depopulate Gaza and it will be trouble forever. But what else are you going to do? Biden apparently delayed the shipment of 4,500 M16 rifles to Israel. The problem was there was some right wing politician who was doing photo ops, handing them out. That wasn't a good look. But there is some thought that the settlements that are near Gaza or in any dangerous areas might be arming themselves and Israel, the government might not be too happy about that because they're sort of anti gun, but I can. So you know the Trump polling, he's up in seemingly almost all of the new polls. Trump is leading Biden, but we talked about how weird it is that he, that Trump seems to be leading with young people. And I suggested that there might be something wrong with the polling and now I've got some pushback on that, which is more credible than me. So Nate Silver, who, you know, famous, famous for polling and knows what he's talking about, he points out that there are actually really good reasons why we might see the youth have changed dramatically. Number one, it's happened before. So actually there is precedence of a subgroup like youth completely flipping. And I think Reagan was the example. So the youth group kind of went for Reagan. They liked him. So it has happened before and it happened with Reagan. And who's the closest president to Reagan that we've had? Trump. He's the closest to Reagan. I mean, intentionally, he actually intentionally models himself after Reagan. So would it be surprising if young people who, by the way, were hugely against Reagan for being this right wing Nazi guy, that's what they thought, that they flipped by probably the second. I think the second election more likely than the first. So yes, it's possible because Trump is a candidate. The other possibility, as Nate Silver points out, is that Biden is not just old. Biden was old in the first election, he is now ancient. And young people have a real, just a natural biological revulsion to age sort of built in so that they can, you know, I guess that keeps them fucking each other instead of people who can't reproduce. Right. So biologically they're just built to be repulsed by anything they can't reproduce, basically. So it could be that. It could be, as nae Silver says that the young people had never seen inflation until till now. That's actually a really good point. The inflation we're experiencing now I hate. Like, I really, really hate it. But I've also spent a lot of years of my life in an inflation economy, so it's not the first time to see my buying power drop like a rock. If it were the first time, I would definitely be more alarmed about it. Even though I should be, you know, a 10 and a 10 alarmed. You know, you get used to anything, but the young people are not used to this. Like, are you telling me I can't afford any, I can't afford to buy a house and you just made it 20% worse. Like just in this brief residency, you made it 20% harder to get a house that I already couldn't afford. That could move some votes. Sure. And then the obvious, which is the Gaza situation, young people seem to me more pro Palestinian than pro Israel. That might be the TikTok effect, but I don't think. That's not nay Silver's opinion. That's my opinion, the TikTok part, but the overall thing that naysilver warns, and I love this, not only because it comes from someone credible, but I hadn't really thought of it this way. And he says that when the polls are telling you something, if your first reaction is the polling is wrong, you're betting Wrong. He says in the long run, the polls do hold far more likely than there being some weird anomaly. So the odds of it being a weird anomaly that wouldn't present itself at the election itself, probably low. And that somebody very credible says, yeah, this shift in sentiment is almost certainly real. Isn't that interesting? Because even yesterday, I wasn't sure it was real, but I'm actually convinced Nate Silver knows what he's talking about. He's in exactly his domain, and he seems at the moment not to have a boss that he needs to please. So these are really credible opinions. He's a follower. You should follow him for sure. All right, North Korea. Well, South Korea is going to suspend their military pact that they had since 2018 during the Trump years because North Korea defied warnings from the US and its allies and successfully launched what he calls its first spy satellite. You know what? I think we're handling that wrong. I'm just going to put it out there that if Trump had been president and this had happened, now, Trump might have also told him, hey, don't do it. And maybe he wouldn't have, but suppose he did, because I don't think a spy satellite is the most dangerous thing in the world. You know what would have been a better way to go to congratulate him? Am I wrong? I think Trump might have congratulated him for a very difficult accomplishment given. Given the resources that. And the reason I would do that is because it's actually a pretty good accomplishment. And what Trump understood about North Korea is that it's just one person. It's just Kim Jong Un. If you can make Kim Jong Un respect you by showing that you respect some accomplishment of his, which is a real accomplishment, that's a genuine accomplishment, why not just treat it that way? I would think that your next negotiation with North Korea would go down a lot better if you had just said, you know, that was pretty impressive, especially given the sanctions, which we're not going to take off, you know, kind of. Kind of move them in the direction of. You realize we don't have any reason to be at war with you. Right? You get that? We have no reason to be at war with you. That was what Trump got. Right. All right. Newsom is going to be debating DeSantis, apparently on Fox News. And the account. I tell you, you should follow. Amuse posted this. Shock. Oh, and they decided they wouldn't have a live audience. So it says shock Fox to host debate between two people who won't be president in 2024 in front of no one who will vote in 2024. Well, it's not exactly true because it's going to be live televised, but that's a funny post. You know, I don't mind this at all. I think Fox News is playing it right. Here's why I think they're playing it right. I agree with no audience because it's on Fox News. Do you think it would be fair to DeSantis to have a Fox News debate where, you know, inevitably it's going to be filled with Fox News people? Yeah, it actually wouldn't have been fair to Newsom. So if Newsom complained about that and Fox News accommodated him, good for both of you. He should have complained about it and they should have made an adjustment. I don't mind that at all. So good news. And. And the fact that, you know, you think neither of them would be president? Well, I don't know. I would say that's not at all certain. Not at all certain. Certainly in the case of Newsom, it's not at all certain. So to me, this is a good service. It's probably. I don't know if it'll be a good ratings winner, but I'll probably watch it. I'm actually interested in what both of them say, and I do think it might be a, you know, preview of 2028, et cetera. Yeah, this is a good service. Apparently, even Morning Joe has finally capitulated on Ukraine and thinks it's unwinnable. And at least one of their guests does, as they seem to agree. And so they've moved all the way from what they said would be appeasement to Putin to we better wrap this thing up. Anybody see that coming? All of us. I think all of us saw it coming. Yeah. I don't see any possibility that there's going to be some big war breakthrough. But I think all the smart people and the best analysis I saw was this. I forget who said it. I wish I could credit them. But at this phase of the war where they're both kind of hiding in trenches and making small advances and then getting their asses kicked, that artillery is the primary weapon of this phase of the war and that artillery is the defining weapon and that Russia has something like 5 to 10 times more artillery now, I think the Ukrainians might have some more accurate artillery, but numbers are probably going to win. Secondly, Russia has a bigger population, several times bigger than Ukraine, especially since so many people left Ukraine and just flew fled. So Ukraine is literally just running on the people, and the experts are saying this is one of those wars of attrition where one side is just going to hope they die less than the other and just keep on going until somebody has a win. So this would be an interesting time to negotiate, but Ukraine probably has a weak negotiating position. Yeah. I think David Sacks has been right on this from the start. He's been as right as you can be on Ukraine, I think. I don't think he got anything wrong. Yeah. Yeah. So. And my prediction as well was that of course it's a stalemate. Of course there's going to be. Oh, is it John Mearsheimer? Is that who we're crediting with that opinion? I feel like you're right. Thank you, David. John Mearsheimer, I think, is the opinion I was stealing there. There's a terrorist alert in New York State. There's more terrorist chatter. I guess we'll wait to see. I still wonder why the terrorism in the United States went effectively to zero, not counting a mass shooter here and there. But. Yeah, so we'll watch all that stuff. All right. Dealing with foreign matters, New York City. We've talked about Eric Adams defunding valuable services in New York City in order to afford all of the immigrants. Saw some stories today of black citizens of New York, I think, or someplace. They were complaining that all the free food was being given to the immigrants and there wasn't enough free food left. And they're right. They're completely right. You know, there are plenty of people, black Americans as well as others, who need a little help, and there's not enough help to go around. So if I were an American and I were in that situation, I would be pretty mad at whoever let in all the other people to eat my food. I wouldn't like it at all. Yeah, I saw on Fox Report there's some, I saw some weird story about air marshals are assigned to follow January 6th. People, and not just people who were at the protest, but anybody who had an airline ticket to D.C. on the day of January 6th. They are forever on basically a terror watch list. Imagine being on the terror watch list because you went to DC on business, but also there was a protest happening and that's it. And then you get followed by air marshals for the rest of your life. Yeah. Yep. It's a real thing. I mean, it's a real report. I don't know if it's real. It didn't sound real to me. There's something about that that just didn't, didn't sit like a real thing. Maybe it's real. There's something. Something missing in it, though. I don't know. I felt like something about that. I have not yet watched the documentary the Fall of Minneapolis, but I do plan to. So I hear it's interesting. It's about the George Floyd hoax. We could call it that now, right? Can we call the George Floyd thing just the George Floyd hoax? I think we're at that point where it's fair to say that and that's not hyperbole. But of course, Derek Chauvin will stay in jail because he's a white guy and we don't have a justice system. That's fair. All right. Oh, yeah. So Trump's nickname for Desantis, Desanctimonious. I saw a comment that said that it's getting stronger. I don't know that it's getting stronger or we're just getting used to it, because sanctimonious never, never quite connected for me. But, you know, he's the nickname giver. Trump is. So if it's sticky, it's sticky. Hey, stuck is stuck. All right, all of you youtubers, thanks for joining. I would like to use my powers of psychic abilities. That was almost a sentence. I'm going to use my psychic abilities to predict how many total viewers there will be. Not the live viewers, but how many total viewers on YouTube. There will be 29,000 for this episode. 29,000 live is different, but the eventual 29,000, just like every other one, no matter how many of you hit the subscribe button. But by the way, if you like any part of these live streams, you should hit the subscribe button and the alert because then you'll get to watch it. All right, that's all for now, and I will go do some other stuff and I'll talk to you tomorrow. YouTubers, thanks for joining.