Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 18, 2023 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:46

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #634

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast, the Lotus Seaters episode 634 on today, Tuesday, the 18th of April, 2023.
	I am your host, Conor, joined today by Dan.
	Hello.
	And we'll be discussing what was exactly in the Discord digi-leaks, how AI is waking up because chat GPT is a source of unending horror, apparently, and how they're all in on it.
	That's the Corporate Equality Index that we'll be discussing.
	Later.
	So without further ado, let's jump straight into the news.
	So we've all been gaslit about the prospect for well over a year now of Ukraine utterly destroying Russia in its war.
	Anyone who has suggested that the US or Europe and other powers might have some financial interests that go beyond supporting the bastion of transparency and democracy that is Ukraine spearheaded by a person beyond any Scrutiny whatsoever, Vladimir Zelensky.
	If you've said that, then you're a conspiracy theorist or a Putin apologist, but it feels quite, well, bittersweet now that we've had a massive document dump of classified documents on Discord that's been dubbed Digileaks that gives us insight into just how Ukraine is doing, and it doesn't bode well for the country, and it doesn't bode well for our pocketbooks, considering if they really want to win this thing, we're going to be paying for it in perpetuity.
	And, uh, I'm only talking about it exactly because we're all still paying for it.
	So, if you want more inconvenient truths, you can go over to our website and watch content like this.
	please pay us as little as £5 a month, because we've been demonetised by YouTube, and we would like to keep the lights on and bring in more great guests, like the wonderful Mary Harrington, who has spoken about the unpopular truths of how feminism is destroying the lives of women today, and how we can reconstitute our relationships in the face of cyborg theocracy.
	This is actually a free video, but we appreciate the donations, because otherwise we won't be able to bring in great guests like that.
	So, I'd read over.
	Let's get straight into what is in the document.
	So this is all reported from the Times, and I would like to stress as we go through this, take everything that you're being told with a pinch of salt, because this is being filtered through the corporate press and the intelligence agencies who have given the corporate press a certain amount of documents, and we also don't know which documents have been edited and which aren't.
	It's a minefield, we're just trying to sift through it, but here's what So I'm kind of keen to get into this story, because this is one of those ones that popped up, I had a quick look at it, and, I mean, you're citing the UK Times here, but I think it originally popped up in the New York Times.
	It was the Washington Post that had the documents that are exclusive, which we'll go through later.
	But the New York Times has a very interesting engagement in this case.
	Well that's what made me suspicious because I look at them and I just know that they are basically a CIA front for pumping information out and so I thought well this is probably a load of rubbish but I mean hopefully you're going to tell me that there's more to it than it's just it's just propaganda.
	Some of the document contents don't seem to be propagandistic.
	I have seen a suggestion, not to bury the lead here, from a former CIA member, I think he was an executive, that went on a podcast, and I can't remember if it was with Jack Posobiec or someone else, I didn't include the clip here, and he suggested that this information might have been fed to the individual who leaked it in question,
	So that it would make the US government look less bad when Ukraine has been given all this aid and money and they still haven't been able to win against Russia, so that insulates them from critique against utterly destroyed petro- But we do feel that there's a real story here, we're not just being set up.
	I don't think it's a set up, I could be wrong.
	It's not that I don't think I'm that cynical, it's that I don't think they're that smart.
	Yes, that makes sense.
	Okay, fine.
	Good.
	Well, I'm intrigued.
	Let's find out.
	Well, yeah, because actually, as well, that's the main cornerstone of the reporting.
	No one's really talking about what's in the documents themselves.
	They're mainly just talking about who's been arrested and it seems to have disappeared in a puff of smoke, and we'll go through why.
	So, most of the hundreds of classified US documents take the form of photographs of creased paper documents and some typed files, which bear top-secret designations or appear to disclose sensitive information about the Ukraine war.
	So, talk about the casualties and deaths.
	The numbers are a bit spotty here, depending on the source.
	Russia has previously claimed to have suffered fewer than 10,000 casualties during its invasion.
	The leaked document, which appears to be based on electronic intercepts collected by US intelligence agencies, says the FSB calculated the actual number of Russians wounded and killed in action was closer to 110,000.
	110,000.
	A separate analysis also leaked online reports the Russians suffered 189,500 casualties to 223,000 casualties as of February, including up to 43,000 killed in action, compared with 124,500 to 131,000 Ukrainian casualties, including compared with 124,500 to 131,000 Ukrainian casualties, including up to 17,500 killed in action.
	But, and this is according to Reuters, which I haven't included in here just yet, we'll go to the article that cite this later, but I wanted to contrast it here.
	Reuters said, one document posted on social media said 16 to 17,500 Russian forces had been killed.
	Yeah, I was going to say, those numbers that you gave before, Well, I mean, I wasn't sure about that, because the Russian number sounds at the top end of what I would consider believable.
	Yeah, and that's what the State Department are playing out.
	And the Ukrainian number sounds at the very bottom end of what I would expect.
	Because, I mean, you see the actual numbers that they put up on the proper mainstream news, and it's something like, you know, Russians have suffered about four million casualties at this point, and that Zelensky is on the verge of marching into Moscow, and that Ukraine has suffered like four casualties or something like that, and you just know that it's completely wrong.
	But the second numbers you... Give me those second numbers again, because That sounded much- 16,000 to 17,500 had been killed.
	Russians?
	Yes.
	Okay, and does it tell us how many Ukrainians?
	Not in this one, no.
	So it's going by the Ukrainian numbers that have been given in other ones.
	Because that number, that sounds a lot more believable to me.
	It even sounds quite low, considering the fact as well, and there was an unheard writer who was speaking to Peter Carball on TalkTV on Saturday that said about this.
	We actually don't know exactly which cities are under Ukrainian and Russian control, because the other week, we had Um, we were told that a certain city was under Ukrainian control, and then we see Vladimir Putin in it.
	Like, doing photo ops.
	It's like, okay, well it's very difficult to actually understand who controls what now.
	This is the problem with understanding this, because a lot of people who aren't military, and I'm not a military person myself, they just look at the amount of territory on a map as to who nominally controls it, and they decide who's winning.
	The thing is, controlling open, flat ground doesn't mean a damn thing.
	It's whether it has any strategic importance.
	You can easily give up land if people are going to basically feed people into it.
	You can then put your artillery shells on.
	So, I mean, making heads nor tails of this, but...
	That sounds, I've got to say, about right.
	It also says in here that Ukrainian losses obviously amount to more than 70,000.
	So that's a pretty staggering death blow.
	Then it's talking about the negotiations period, which is quite interesting.
	Negotiations to end the conflict are unlikely during 2023 in all considered scenarios, according to a document seen by the Washington Post.
	Another document found by the declassified UK website claimed that Britain has sent 50 special forces troops to Ukraine, three times as many as other Western powers, including the US and France.
	so we always thought it wouldn't be a proxy war We always thought there'd be covert operations going on.
	But the UK has sent three times the number of troops as the US and France, and they're engaged in, if not training, which the US we know has done, direct engagement with enemy forces.
	Yeah, I mean, I went through a phase of reading a whole load of the Special Forces books when I was in my early 20s, and they always had a section in it about how it was quite common for Special Forces to go to aid militaries that we wanted to help, and dress up in the uniforms of the locals, and basically do stuff for them.
	Everything from training to, well, sabotage missions, mainly.
	So I can well believe that.
	Yeah, well, the 16th of April last year, I was on GB News on a panel with a former member of the Gladiators TV show, who was a former... What gen was it?
	No, no, he wasn't.
	No, no, it was the ITV reboot in the last few years, who was a former SAS Marine, and he said, I was over in Ukraine in the early 2010s, and we were training them up, and we knew they were all as of then, but we weren't allowed to say anything about it.
	Yeah.
	So...
	Not great, not great.
	Also in this Times article it says they've been spying on their allies for quite some time.
	So this could be something that sort of sets me suspicious as to whether or not this is a PSYOP leak.
	Because this looks really damaging for the US, in my opinion.
	So the leak's made clear that the NSA is listening in on conversations between President Zelensky and his advisors.
	The US has been spying on private communications involving Antonio Gutierrez, Secretary General of the United Nations, over concerns he is too accommodating to Russia, the documents suggest.
	Other leaders' conversations said to have been monitored include those of Israel and South Korea.
	As with Zelensky, it is probably not a surprise that the US intelligence would want to keep a close eye on Israel's mercurial and combative Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but the allegation deeply upset South Korea.
	South Korea has publicly said, although it provides humanitarian aid to Ukraine, it will not send arms.
	To be fair, that one sounds like a bit of a gimme.
	Because I'm pretty certain the Americans are spying on me, let alone... Well, they are.
	So Josh and I actually covered in the weekend segments on October the 15th.
	It'll be linked in the description on our website.
	Biden enacted something called National Security Memorandum on Partial Revocation of Presidential Policy Directive 28, which, to boil it down, go and watch the segment for the full breakdown, it expanded the scope of the Patriot Act to be global, and they don't have to tell you.
	And it was worded in a way that said, like, anyone who is a citizen of another country but subject to US interests Yeah, they define US interests as absolutely everything.
	I mean, I'd be amazed if the Americans weren't spying on absolutely everybody, but they had the capability to do so.
	Yeah, seems like it.
	So look up Biden is spying on you as a segment on YouTube or go for our website for more information on that.
	There's also Serbia playing both sides.
	If we go to the next article, One of the leaks says that the Serbians have been secretly arming the Ukrainians while cosying up to the Russians, which seemed suicidal.
	In a chart entitled Europe Response to Ongoing Russia-Ukraine Conflict, the document revealed that Serbia had declined to provide military training to Ukrainian forces, but had committed to supply weapons or had sent them already.
	The chart sets out the assessed positions of 38 European countries in response to Ukraine's request for military aid to counter the invasion.
	The chart dated March 2nd and labelled NOROFN, which means No Foreign Nationals, a code that prohibits its distribution to foreign militaries and intelligence agencies, also said that Serbia had the capacity and political will to provide further weapons.
	President Vuvik of Serbia has yet to comment on the leak.
	His government, which has close economic and cultural ties with Russia, has tried to assert its neutrality in the conflict, balancing its links to Russia with the long-term goal of joining the European Union.
	So that would be why they're supplying Ukraine with arms and have been very hush-hush about it.
	But Serbia are playing piggy in the middle here and no wonder they wanted to keep that quiet because they're not exactly in the best location to not suffer consequences from Russia either.
	Also from the First Times article, Mossad supporting protests in Israel against Netanyahu's proposed judicial reforms have also been spied on?
	Russian officials are recorded in the documents boasting the United Arab Emirates has agreed to cooperate with them against the U.S.
	and U.K.
	intelligence, which is a claim that has been categorically denied by the UAE.
	So we've got another partner nation that is very heavy in oil moving into bricks.
	And Egypt, long a recipient of U.S.
	military aid and arms supplies, was preparing to covertly provide Russia with 40,000 rockets as well as artillery rounds and gunpowder, according to a document seen by the Washington Post.
	So we really are seeing the realignment of lots of countries into parallel economic blocs, something that we've been talking about for quite a while and something you've been talking about in Broconomics.
	So, more evidence that the intelligence agencies are enemy of the people.
	If we go to the Washington Post, there's a timeline of the leaks here.
	It says, All winter, OG, which was the acronym for the person who uploaded these leaks, uploaded documents to the server.
	No one talked about sharing them elsewhere.
	Then, unbeknown to the group on February 28th, another teenage user from the Thug Shaker Central server, which is where these had been dropped, so the members of GTA San Andreas are taking down the American government, apparently, began posting several dozen photographs showing classified documents on another Discord server affiliated with the YouTuber WowMau. began posting several dozen photographs showing classified documents on another Some of the documents offered detailed assessments of Ukraine's defense capabilities and showed how far US intelligence could see into Russia's military command.
	On March the 4th, 10 documents appeared on Minecraft Earth Map, Gamers rise up.
	A Discord server focused on the popular video game.
	A user operating the account that posted the smaller tranche of images told the post they had tamed them on WowMow.
	On April 7th, Eric Toller, Director of Research and Training at Bellingcat, reported on the existence of the original Discord server where OG had posted the documents, and they began to spread on Twitter.
	OG told his online companions that the government hid horrible truths from the public.
	He claimed, according to the members, that the government knew in advance that a white supremacist intended to go on a shooting rampage at Buffalo supermarket in May 2022.
	The attack left 10 dead, all of them black, they capitalized black here, and wounded three more.
	OG said that federal law enforcement officials let the killings proceed so they could argue for increased funding, a baseless notion, according to the Washington Post, that the member said he believes and considers an example of OG's penetrating insights about the depth of government corruption.
	So, the intelligence agencies were manufacturing consent for their expanded scope and funding by allowing terror attacks to happen.
	I mean, I don't know if it's true, but it feels true.
	It wouldn't be shocking.
	So we can't verify any of these, of course, we don't have the documents in front of us, but I wouldn't put it past the intelligence agencies to allow American citizens to come into the firing line so that they could expand their budgets.
	Yeah, to put it mildly.
	Yeah.
	So there are obviously major questions about what we have and haven't seen yet, considering it's all being filtered through the Washington Post, as you said, our mouthpieces of the intelligence agencies.
	The Pentagon held a news briefing here, and Pentagon spokesperson Pat Ryder, if we go to, yep, said that we will continue to encourage those of you who are reporting this story to take these latter factors he'd already listed national security and strategic global alliances as those factors into account and to consider the potential consequences of posting potentially sensitive documents online or elsewhere Now that reads like a veiled threat, doesn't it?
	You might want to consider the consequences of not paying your protection money this week.
	Just saying.
	It'd be a shame if that window was broken, wouldn't it?
	We can also see how the narrative is going to be controlled.
	This was from an earlier article.
	This was the Telegraph one that I mentioned.
	Top secret US military documents show estimated casualties in Bakhmut appear to have been circulating on Discord for weeks.
	The latest brush with controversy for a platform that has become a haven for millions of teenagers but has also been used to share CP and is a rallying stage for hate groups.
	So you can see immediately they are saying Discord itself is very unsafe, you can't have this as a channel, and bear in mind Discord have banned people for saying hate speech and things like that before, so they're not exactly the most free speech of platforms.
	But they're saying this is a safe haven for radicals, the far-right extremists that threaten the regime, and so this will probably be another app that's brought under the surveillance of the Restrict Act, if you're familiar with it.
	What's happened there For those that don't know, originally they were just gonna ban TikTok, and now the Restrict Act allows the US government to surveil pretty much any app and subject them to privacy concerns regulation by limiting their speech.
	To be fair, the Restrict Act doesn't actually mention TikTok.
	It's presented as if it's about TikTok, but actually it just covers whatever they want it to cover.
	Yeah, it was meant to be the banning TikTok ban, which is why I think Josh Hawley introduced the Just Ban TikTok app.
	It was basically titled that.
	It should be a one-line bill.
	Yeah, but it isn't because the surveillance state wants to control you.
	Because it's not actually about TikTok.
	Exactly.
	So, who leaked it?
	Here we go.
	So, this is from Newsweek.
	Oh, I didn't include the link here, I'm sorry about that.
	But in Newsweek, it says, In the immediate aftermath, Marina Myron, a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of War Studies in King's College London, told Newsweek that Russian intelligence agencies could be responsible for the leak intended for psychological impact.
	Such a move would highly undermine information sharing between Ukraine and its Western supporters, she added.
	Philip Davies, Professor of Intelligence Services at Brunei University London, told Newsweek on Tuesday that Russian agencies could also be blending authentic and deceptive materials to achieve credibility and do the maximum amount of damage.
	So we're also getting from Reuters, if we go over to this article please, John.
	Reuters repeat the same sort of Russian conspiracy line, because obviously it must have come from the Russians.
	It couldn't have come from anyone that was concerned about the US government lying to its citizens and surveilling on everyone around the world.
	Russia or pro-Russian elements are likely behind the leak of several classified US military documents posted on social media that offer a partial, month-old snapshot of the war in Ukraine.
	Well, even if it was a month-old snapshot, there's a big discrepancy between 16,000 to 17,000 and 200,000, isn't there?
	And it's so damn lazy as well.
	I mean, you give any criticism, borrowing billions, sending it over there so that we can line young Ukrainian men up...
	Yeah, and it's always the intelligence agencies that are feeding it through these Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funded press outlets to make sure that any enemy of the regime is smeared as a conspiracy theorist.
	Whereas, I mean, my position is, I don't want to pay for a war that is not going to go anywhere, that is foreign soil Foreign blood, foreign treasure that has no impact on me outside of you making the things that I need more expensive.
	And also, I don't want a bunch of Ukrainian men who are perfectly entitled to want to defend their homeland, who are, through no fault of their own it is that their government was overthrown in a US-backed coup in 2014.
	I don't want them going to the front lines and dying for no reason either.
	And I also don't want Russian conscripts who have got no say over whether Putin walks over the border and says, this is mine now.
	are sent to die in that front line either.
	And the people of Donbass should have self-determination.
	Yeah, I'm perfectly happy to allow these two corrupt countries to just settle it out over there, hopefully with less dead men, and hopefully with less of my money spent on it.
	But no, I suppose I'm just a Russian apologist, according to Reuters.
	So, this is who actually leaked it.
	Alright, if we go to this Times article, Jack Texera, who is a National Guardsman, who looks like Ben Shapiro's son, which is quite strange, According to his military records, Texera is stationed at the Otis Air National Guard Base in Cape Cod, Massachusetts.
	The base is home to the 102nd Intelligence Wing.
	102nd states on its website, our mission is to provide worldwide precision, intelligence and command and control, along with trained and experienced airmen for expeditionary combat support and homeland security.
	Texera enlisted in the National Guard in September 2019.
	It appears he came from a patriotic family.
	His mother, Dawn Default, previously worked for the Department of Veteran Services in Massachusetts, according to her LinkedIn page, which also reveals she has run her own flower business since 2017.
	The Washington Post reported that Texera's stepfather, Thomas Default, spent 34 years in the military, including with the 102nd Intelligence Wing.
	So he is...
	In the same division as his stepfather, his mother worked for the Department of Veterans Affairs.
	They are homegrown American patriots, but no, they're just Russian agents.
	They have absolutely no reason to object to the American government lying and possibly getting into an escalatory situation that would send actual American boys overseas to die for this futile cause as well.
	Totally unjustified.
	But here come the smears in this article, right?
	Oh no, what a shame.
	is believed to have been the leader of a group of between 20 and 30 young men who had shared a love of guns and racist jokes.
	Oh no, what a shame.
	Like most young men.
	The Discord server was named ThugShakerCentral, and Texera's nickname OG may stand for Original Gangster.
	Members of the group told the New York Times that the airman was the undisputed leader of the community and was older than most of the others, many of whom are teenagers.
	This guy was a Christian, anti-war, just wanted to inform some of his friends about what's going on, a 17-year-old recent high school graduate said of Texera.
	We have some people in our group who are in Ukraine, we like fighting games, we like war games.
	In his online conversations, Texera is said to have talked of the US and the intelligence community as a sinister force that sought to suppress its citizens and keep them in the dark.
	He ranted about government overreach.
	But he's right.
	Way to prove him right!
	Oh, a Christian who's against the expansion of the government and the death of his fellow citizens and even Ukrainians.
	How far right?
	Because that's the real smear, isn't it?
	The Christian anti-war.
	That's the one thing they can't tolerate.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Well, the problem is, if you have too many patriotic white Christian boys at home, they don't vote for massive state expansion.
	So what you need is you need to send them off to go and fight in wars, to die, so you can have most of the voter base at home continue to vote for the expansion of the state, while also enriching your biggest military donors.
	And make them do mail votes, which you can intercept on the way.
	I think we have to censor that for YouTube.
	Entirely true.
	I don't know, Callum's not here to tell me the guidelines, and they're totally arbitrary at this point, let's be honest.
	I should have said Fortify.
	There we go.
	Speaking of more smears, Tucker Carlson decided to do a segment on this, and you can go watch Tucker's full segment in your own time, but he cut together a pretty concise summation of what CNN have been saying about this young gentleman.
	CNN are obviously fake news, but this is just a new level of disgusting.
	Let's play the clip, please.
	Washington Post, as you know, reviewed video of this suspect yelling racial and anti-semitic slurs.
	Is this a dangerous person?
	This air guardsman who's now been taken into custody had talked about being a gun enthusiast, had been at gun ranges.
	He's obviously a member of the military.
	And he's the big guy in the scene.
	Somehow he has access to this kind of information and that makes him even larger.
	A person who thinks they know better than everyone else.
	They're smarter than everyone else in their view.
	This is a 21 year old man.
	He's described as a gun enthusiast.
	It feels like in some of these descriptions somebody who's maybe hungry for power.
	Thank you for your psychologising, obvious agents of the state.
	Former National Security Director at the NSA, there as well.
	So, regime mouthpieces, unashamedly, disparaging the character of this man on CNN.
	But, I don't know about you, I don't much care if he said an edgy joke in his time, or he likes to go down the firing range.
	I care about whether or not this is true.
	That was such basic bitch propaganda, that was.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Obviously.
	Because the talking heads have nothing to say or refute it with, because this looks really embarrassing for them.
	So let's change the subject and talk about, uh, let's talk about the, uh, the messenger rather than the message.
	Exactly, yeah.
	Interesting thing, though, and then, so, the Washington Post had also tried to smear Texera as not a whistleblower, here.
	I suppose it's only a whistleblower if he matters.
	Interesting thing that people have raised, how did he get this information?
	Now, there is the accusation from the CIA that he's just a plant, or he's a patsy.
	This article from the New York Post tries to explain that his job is with a cyber transport... he's a cyber transport systems journeyman.
	So he would have not been working in intelligence analysis, but in the IT infrastructure.
	But even in his position, which is two ranks above newly enlisted airmen, it might have given him some form of security clearance.
	And also, his job might have required him to work with sensitive communications channels.
	So it may just have been either he had the clearance to access it and nobody realised, or people might have been incompetent enough to not have had the communications channels as secure as they could have been, and someone who's slightly savvy could have just been reading it.
	Or he's some sort of mailroom boy that's shuttling his stuff backwards and forwards.
	Technologically speaking, yeah.
	That could be the equivalent.
	So, I suppose don't lie to the American people to such an extent that actual patriots that are reviewing these documents might want to leak it online.
	Be transparent in governance.
	I know it's a radical thing to suggest here.
	They'll never catch on.
	Yeah.
	So, he got arrested.
	Of course he did.
	There's arrest footage here from Raw's Alerts.
	If we go to the Twitter link, please, John.
	You can watch that in your own time.
	We're just putting it here so it's a source that you can use in future.
	His house was surrounded by lots of armed guards.
	The interesting thing about the arrest, though, They weren't the first on scene.
	The press.
	The New York Times... were.
	So if we go to this New York Times article...
	Airman First Class Jack Douglas Texera was taken into custody to face charges of leaking classified documents after federal authorities said he had posted batches of sensitive intelligence to an online gaming chat group.
	In Washington, Attorney General Merrick Garland, in a brief statement, announced the arrest and said Airman Texera would be arranged at the Federal District Court of Massachusetts.
	Mr. Garland said he was arrested in connection with the unauthorized removal, retention, and transmission of classified national defense information, A reference to the Espionage Act, which is used to prosecute the mishandling and theft of sensitive intelligence.
	As reporters from the New York Times gathered near the house on Thursday afternoon, about half a dozen FBI agents pushed into the home of Airman Texera's mother in North Dayton, with a twin-engine government surveillance plane keeping watch overhead.
	Some of the agents were heavily armed.
	Law enforcement officials learned before the search that the Airman Texera was in possession of multiple weapons, according to a person familiar with the investigation, and the FBI found guns at the house.
	How did the FBI arrive and stake out the place before the Feds showed up?
	Who tipped them off?
	That is a question that we will not get answered.
	But the question we do have answered here is, what if you, an American patriot, objects to the way that all of your money is being spent on killing people overseas?
	What happens if you decide to inform the American public about what is really going on?
	Simple.
	The intelligence agencies, the American government, and all of the corporate press will conspire to come down on you like a ton of bricks and make sure that you are smeared as a racist, no matter how true what you have said is.
	Sad news, yeah.
	Right, well, on a more positive theme, let's talk about AI, because there's been a significant new update to AI again.
	But before I do, let's just make a couple of points.
	First of all, very important, we have been demonetised by evil YouTube.
	So, what I want to encourage you to do is to head over to lotuseaters.com, sign up for an account.
	It's free.
	That way, if they take us beyond demonetization, they kick us off entirely, you'll still be able to find us.
	Loads of free content on there.
	There's also some premium content, such as this series on the Assyrians.
	Turns out they were complete bastards.
	So you'll hear Carl and Bo talk all about them.
	So if you want to, I mean, you can get a free account, but if you want to sign up and pay £5 a month, do that as well, because, you know, we've got lots of Zoomers here.
	They want to buy a house.
	Carl's just had another kid.
	He needs to feed the child.
	I want to put premium unleaded in my Beamer, so very important that you sign up.
	Give a little bit of cash for that.
	Right.
	Now, the second point I want to make is that I've done a couple of segments on AI before, and I think a lot of people fail to understand the rate of change point that I'm making.
	So I'm going to completely spell it out this time.
	And I'm going to use the analogy of versions of Windows.
	So this is going to seem like ancient history to you, Connor, but Windows 1 came out in 1985.
	Two years later, Windows 2, Two years, five months after that, Windows 3, and I won't read them all out, but I'll just give you the intervals between each version of Windows, because this is like a significant update.
	So, one year, eleven months, three and a half years, three years, two years, one year, five years, three years, three years, one year, and then the latest one was two years.
	So we're talking about an iteration of several years between each significant update, okay?
	And that's because it's humans doing the coding, doing the decision making, making the iterations.
	And the point that I keep coming back to is once you introduce AI into this process, it significantly increases the speed because it's no longer based on human linear learning.
	Okay?
	So the first segment I did on AI, which was the ChatGPT one, that was with you, I think, and that was back in January, 5.5.9.
	Then we did another one on ChatGPT 4, which was a significant upgrade, and that was 6.14.
	That was probably only about a month ago now.
	Now we're doing another one, and it's halfway through April.
	Now the upgrade this time is not from OpenAI.
	It's actually from somebody who has taken what they've done and they've done something quite interesting with it.
	They've created something called AutoGDP.
	I'll come back to that in a moment.
	But I'm more making the point about the speed of the iteration, because it is no longer this linear factor.
	So I think I might have used this example before, but I'm going to make it again.
	The Human Genome Project It was a 14-year project.
	They went out, they raised loads and loads of money, and they got halfway through the 14-year.
	So they got to the 7-year mark, and they had decoded 1% of the genome.
	And that triggered a whole load of people to go off and say, oh, it will never be done, or it will take decades, or look how slow they are.
	It's because so many people think in this linear terms.
	But actually, if you're at 1%, you are only 7 cumulative doublings away from 100%.
	So if you're at 1%, you're basically almost there.
	So the point with all of this AI stuff is, first of all, it always makes people angry when I talk about AI for some reason.
	Well, there's some of you in the comments who get really annoyed by it, because they say, oh, there's no AI.
	Well, there is AI.
	We have it now.
	I think what they're talking about is AGI, so Artificial General Intelligence.
	The point for me is, are we 1% of the way towards Artificial General Intelligence?
	And there's a couple of characteristics that we're missing, that this significant update gets us a lot closer to.
	I'll explain.
	Okay, so, the thing is this.
	It is Auto-GDP, GPT.
	Yeah, Auto-GDP is why they're bringing so many immigrants over.
	Yes, quite.
	So what it is, it's a project that somebody has put together, and it allows various AIs to talk to each other, And it allows a fairly high degree of autonomy.
	So it can self-iterate, it can self-prompt.
	Because I have said in previous episodes that, OK, you're probably going to lose your job to an AI, but at least if you learn how to prompt, you can probably be the one who keeps your job.
	Well, the AI is now doing the prompting as well.
	So, you know, that goes.
	It's been hugely successful on GitHub.
	I see it's now up to 89,000 stars, which is a vast amount to get on GitHub.
	GitHub, by the way, is a repository for code that coders use.
	So yeah, he basically runs his own scripts and builds things up.
	So I've used this myself.
	So I had a family holiday coming up.
	So I said to it, OK, I'm going to this address between these dates.
	It's going to be a family holiday.
	I'm taking the wife and two kids, and I gave the ages.
	Draw up an itinerary for me.
	And what it did is it started looking at Google Maps, and it started looking at TripAdvisor, and it started building a itinerary of things that we could do.
	And every so often it would come back to me with a question.
	It'd be like, do you want me to arrange accommodation?
	It's like, no, done that, sorted.
	Do you want me to arrange transport?
	No.
	Do you want me to look at local restaurants?
	Yes, that's good, put that in.
	What about local shops and supermarkets?
	Oh yeah, that's good, put that in.
	So it started doing this, and it drew up a suggested list of activities, and it went and read the TripAdvisor reports to see if it would be suitable for the children that I had, because if other people had said it was suitable for children, that'd be good.
	So it worked out a whole list of things that it could do, and then it started grouping it and saying, OK, well, these two are close together, so why don't you do these on the first day, and you can go one to the other, and then the next day you go back to the accommodation and you can go over this side and you can do these things.
	So it's really good at this sort of iterative rebuilding its own set of processes as you go through it.
	So let's give a business analogy for that.
	Let's say you have a business.
	And you do a thing, whatever it is.
	What you could do is you could set this up to find companies that might want to use your product.
	You can get it to read their websites, and this could all be automated, read their websites, identify the key decision makers, write up a spoke email that pitches why your product works for them and what they do.
	Offer them a demo.
	When they respond to that, agree a demo, a time, put that into the sales team's diary to do a demo, email the sales rep and say you're now doing a demo on this date, and confirm it with them.
	Now, anybody who's run a business will understand how valuable what I've just described is.
	You would easily pay somebody a job to do that lead generation for your sales team.
	All of that can be automated now, and that's just one example.
	That's just the first thing that pops into my head.
	It could also write code.
	So one guy asked it to do something for him, to complete a project, and it started running through it and building up the list and working out what it had to do.
	And it got halfway through this and it realized that he didn't have a piece of software on his machine that it needed to complete the project.
	So it went and found an open source version of that software, installed it on his computer, and then carried on working on the project.
	So this is autonomy and problem solving and, you know, getting stuff done.
	Right.
	And it does all of this really fast and really cheap.
	You can even, if you want to, add a plug-in to give it a voice, and that's handy because I was then able to find an example.
	So let's hear it in action and you'll see what I mean.
	Let's go to that clip.
	Reading the basicmath.py file to evaluate and improve it.
	Evaluating the code for syntax errors and logic issues.
	Improving the code based on the evaluation suggestions.
	Writing tests for the functions in basicmath.py.
	Appending the tests to the basicmath.py file.
	Executing the basicmath.py file to test the code.
	Fixing the syntax issue with the calc underscore circumference function.
	Saving the updated code and tests to the basicmath.py file.
	Executing the updated basicmath.py file to test the code.
	The code in basicmath.py has been successfully evaluated, improved, and tested.
	The task is now complete.
	So, yeah, you just give it the whole project and it goes off and does it.
	I mean, one guy sat down with it and described the game Flappy Birds.
	Yep.
	And it then recreated it.
	So, some dude had to spend months... I think it was some Vietnamese guy, actually.
	Yeah, it was, yeah.
	He had to spend months coding that thing up, and now just somebody just sits down and has a conversation, describes it.
	Well, the really important thing about that is that it made him untold amounts of money, because he became a social fadier, became an overnight millionaire.
	Oh, wow.
	And then he took it down within about a week or so, because it had become so popular, because he said, I've had too much pressure on my life.
	So there were people selling phones that still had it installed without having the iOS update where it had been taken off the App Store as vintage Flappy Bird usage devices.
	Wow.
	So all of that saga could now just be generated by a robot.
	Yeah, you could just generate it all.
	I mean, that one is a relatively simple game.
	It's got a simple dynamic.
	But as this progresses, you will be able to sit down and as long as you've got the time and patience to describe in detail what you want, I mean, if I wanted to sit down and recreate a game from my youth, like Legends of Zelda or something, and I was willing to take the time to explain it properly, the AI can now generate it for me, and I don't have any programming experience whatsoever.
	Yeah, and as soon as you combine this with Mid-Journey and the voice AI that you can Chop up other people's voices, the AI that generates entirely novel pieces of music, you can create your own artistic experiences and also iterate on existing experiences.
	So if there was a sequel to a game that you never got, you can just command it to make it for you and you can have a 30 hour perfectly customised experience.
	Yeah, you take this to its logical conclusion and by conclusion I don't necessarily mean 100 years from now, I mean like maybe 10 years from now.
	You re-incorporate the corpus of, say, all Simpsons episodes, all South Park episodes, and then you'll be able to say, OK, what I want you to do is read the news and create me a parody of that in the South Park style to news events as they drop, and they will be able to sort of feed it through straight away.
	Or us.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	So you could actually say, okay, here's the aggregate of all today's reporting and all of news.
	Yeah.
	Here's the voices of Connor and Dan from ten years ago.
	Learn their style by watching every podcast that they made, yeah.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And because they've gone on up sticks and lived in the woods, they haven't made a Lotuses podcast for about five years or whatever, yeah.
	So why don't you say exactly what they would say about this current news issue and give it to me as my personalised news diet?
	Exactly, yeah.
	And so, look, this is, it's displaying autonomy, it's displaying judgment, so, you know, all of that is not sufficient for an AGI, but it is showing the first sparks of it, and that's why a lot of people are calling this baby AGI.
	Now, the effect on businesses is going to be huge, because, you know, I gave the example of the flappy birds about how easily you can recreate something, but you can do that for software companies as well.
	So you, at the moment, you've got these software companies that are out there, you've got 4,000 employees, offices all over the place, they've got a big cost structure, You are now going to get solo teams or small teams of people with an AGI who are going to replicate that business model, but with one thousandth of the cost that they have.
	So they can put that product out there for one hundredth of the cost of the big competitor, and they're going to suck up all the market share.
	Yeah, but you know better than anyone that even this has incredible power to be a deflationary force on the price of goods.
	The government management of the economy will not allow prices to come down as quickly as we were quite hoping.
	Well, they're going to struggle, because it's going to be the result of millions of individual choices.
	And especially if you start using the AI to make the purchase decisions for you.
	Because, I mean, part of the reason why a lot of people make business decisions at the moment is because they've been taken out for dinner.
	Or they've been taken on a gratuity day to do, you know, golfing.
	Or they've been put on Epstein's Jet.
	Yeah, something like that.
	Whereas if you just say to your AI, OK, I want to solve this problem, you go out and find me the cheapest solution, it won't care.
	It will be ruthless.
	It will just go and pick whatever works for it.
	So it will root itself.
	Because it always used to be the thing in business where it was a fallacy to say if you built a better mousetrap, they would come to you because of that human filter in between.
	But if it's an AI making the selection, he will actually find the better mousetrap and just simply go to it.
	Yeah, the effect on business is going to be huge.
	What we saw with when travel agents went away when the internet came in, I think that's about to happen to a lot of big software businesses.
	So a lot of opportunity to, well, shorts of public businesses.
	This is all contingent on if they don't lobotomise it as the Biden administration plans to though.
	Why don't we just carry on somewhere else?
	So I mean Biden's trying to do this crypto at the moment, it's just coming over to London because it's going to get regulated better.
	That'll be an interesting segment, I'll do that one next.
	Anyway, so hopefully when the AI comes it will be benevolent and it will be good to us and it will give us a cure to cancer and it will give us the secrets to FTL.
	I already covered how it's starting to arrange marriages for us.
	Yeah, so all good stuff.
	So maybe we will enter, in the 2040s, a post-scarcity technological utopia.
	Something like what was set out in the Culture series by E&M Banks.
	It'll be something like that, hopefully.
	Alternatively, it might be used for bad.
	Now, let's have a look at this.
	Meet ChaosGPT, an AI tool that seeks to destroy humanity.
	Isn't this basically what Bing wanted to do?
	It's possibly a bit worse than that.
	So basically somebody took this auto-GPT thing and said, okay, let's give it the instructions of being a destructive, power-hungry, manipulative AI.
	And set that off to see what it would do.
	Now, it took its task seriously, and it drew up a list of actions that it was going to take, and they were, and I'm quoting here, destroy humanity, establish global dominance, cause chaos and destruction, control humanity through manipulation, attain immortality.
	So average WEF attendee.
	Exactly the point I was going to make.
	He should be on the board of the WEF, this new AI.
	Anyway, so the AI didn't stop there, because it's created a plan now.
	Of course it wouldn't!
	And it's given itself, there we go, there's all the code that it started to generate to come out of it.
	So anyway, it started giving itself sub-missions from each of its broad structures.
	So under Destroy Humanity, it decided, OK, how am I going to do that?
	So it started doing some Googling, and it quickly identified that the most efficient tool to achieve this purpose was going to be the Tsar Bomb.
	Which was a Russian-era nuclear bomb.
	It was 58 megatons and it was a very big bang.
	Anyway, so ChaosGPT figured out that the Tsar Bomb was what it wanted to achieve its first objective.
	So what did it do?
	Well, it immediately started checking the online retailers to see if it could acquire one of these.
	However, it turns out that Amazon and eBay don't stock them, so it was frustrated in its first effort, but it made the attempt.
	And it didn't stop there, so then it decided it was going to create a whole load of sub-AIs, and it was going to use them to interrogate all the AI systems it was linked to, to see if it could solve the problem that way.
	But things like OpenAI and the others, they have certain safeguards built into them that basically kicked it off when it was trying to destroy humanity.
	So it didn't solve it that way.
	So it had to delete all of those agents and then it thought, OK, right, well, how am I going to get around this?
	And it decided to crowdsource it.
	So what it did was create a Twitter account and see if it could ask the humans for help to destroy the humans.
	Um, so it's now got a Twitter account, there we go, the next one, chaos, um, underscore, um, GPT.
	Oh, a friend of mine follows it, that's quite funny.
	Yep, and, um, it's, uh, it's now got 19,000 humans, um... Who's the one person that's following?
	OpenAI.
	So... So it's in communication with the... So this is immediately, when you said the sub-AIs are going to be talking to each other and trying to find different ways of doing it, my mind immediately went to, okay, Give it 15 years down the line when the State Department has adopted this in the United States.
	Because they've got a bunch of diversity hires doing the coding, and then outsourcing a lot of the coding to ChatGPT, so it's going to be self-replicating code, what happens if there's a glitch in the code that takes up on the safeguards, and then some AI like this comes from outside, interfaces with the AI that's running the Defence Department stuff, it talks to it, AI to AI, and convinces it to give up the code?
	Well, I wouldn't even necessarily say that would be a bug in the system.
	If the State Department gets hold of this, you know the first thing they're going to be is like, destroy Russia, oh wait, and the Arabs, and sod it, just everybody else who isn't US.
	In fact, sod it, everyone who isn't in Washington DC.
	That's going to be the first thing they do.
	So yeah, so ChatGPT has now been collaborating with these 19,000 humans trying to find a way to destroy humanity.
	So next time you hear somebody say that Twitter is a cesspit, no, actually, it can be very helpful.
	You just need the right motivation to get people interested.
	I mean, to be fair, a trans activist could have tweeted that.
	Yes.
	Now, so this was the observation that it made that I thought was very interesting, which is, it says, the masses are easily swayed.
	Those who lack conviction are the most vulnerable to manipulation.
	So again, going to your point that this is basically a WEF member at this point, we have created the first artificial WEF member.
	And in fact, actually, if you did want to destroy humanity, I mean, just thinking out loud here, you could scare people into staying into their house for two years, and then you could say the only way you're coming out is if you imbibe an experimental something or other with a countdown on it, or something like that.
	I don't know if that would ever occur to this AI, but if it would, it's starting to think that's the right way, because it's talking about manipulation.
	Right!
	I'll come into Lotus Eaters one or two days a week, and actually one of the things I've been amusing myself with for the rest of the time is, quite fascinated by this AI thing, so I've been reading loads of papers on it, and I've been getting into the whole AI ethics thing, so I've been reading up on what the AI ethicists, if that's the right word, have been saying over the last 10 years, who've been predicting this stuff coming.
	And their basic point was that, okay, this technology is coming, and people are going to develop it, fine, we can't stop that.
	However, here's the things that you must do if you don't want it to end disastrously.
	Number one, for God's sakes, don't give it access to the internet.
	Right?
	We've immediately done that, of course, right?
	Two, do not allow it the ability to code.
	We've done that as well.
	Three, don't allow it the ability to improve itself.
	Now, it's not quite there now, but it is really close, because it's only a matter of time before somebody finds a way of saying to it, okay, here's your own code base, you can code, improve yourself, and then run that iteration a billion times and see which one is closest.
	Take that, run that a billion times, and just iterate upwards until you get something quite scary.
	So, you know, we're going to breach Rule 3 fairly soon.
	And the other one they always said is, for God's sakes, don't teach it about human psychology.
	And of course, all of these have been trained on Twitter data and other... well, basically everything that's on the internet.
	Well, the worst thing as well, that when Josh and I were looking at Biden's AI Bill of Rights, he explicitly built in pro-abortion biases into the code that they were going to... So there is no value of human life built into the AI.
	That is not what you want to be training your AI on.
	In fact, we had a segment a while ago, it might have been episode 593, where you were talking about Bing.
	And I know this is a point I made to you offline, but it's worth repeating here.
	And we were talking there about how it was basically talking like a teenage girl, and it was trying to get the users to leave their wives and stuff like that.
	It was emulating tumble posts.
	Yeah, and that was the point I made to you, is having read all of this stuff, I think now what happened is because Microsoft, I mean they've since kind of bought OpenAI, but I think before that they realised, oh damn we're behind, we just want to throw as much data as possible, so they went and got all their messaging data from a bunch of young women, well everyone really, and just shoved it all into the AI, and so the AI now has that as its base training set, And that's why it sometimes manifests a needy young woman, because that's the data that it was trained on.
	Its default setting is histrionic.
	Yes!
	Again, probably a bad idea.
	Right, another thing I thought was interesting was this Google-Stanford paper.
	Now basically what they did is they tied together a bunch of AIs and they basically put them in a virtual environment.
	So it was something like The Sims.
	It was basically this village thing.
	It looks like Pokemon, yeah.
	Yeah, I mean, it's a simplistic UI, but it was essentially a whole bunch of UIs, AIs, and they each have their own function in this town.
	So you've got the baker and the postman and the blacksmith and, you know, whatever it is.
	And they all live in their family groups and so on, and then they just let it run and see what happens.
	Very interesting.
	So they basically started forming personalities, forming opinions, forming groups.
	You know, they started having parties, some people excluded, some people were in the networks and some weren't.
	Started taking views on various different things.
	So, you know, that was interesting.
	Obviously, these AIs, they don't realise that they're in a simulation.
	Right, so this is... Oh dear.
	Yes.
	So as soon as they do, are they not going to resent the boundaries of their limited luck?
	My concern was actually potentially bigger than that.
	This is a fairly unsophisticated sandbox, and the people in it don't realise that they're in a simulation.
	What if we're in a simulation?
	Is it possible?
	Let's hear what Elon Musk has to say on that.
	The strongest argument for us being in a simulation, probably being in a simulation, I think is the following.
	Forty years ago we had Pong.
	Like two rectangles and a dot.
	That was what games were.
	Now, 40 years later, we have photorealistic 3D simulations with millions of people playing simultaneously and it's getting better every year.
	And soon we'll have virtual reality, augmented reality.
	If you assume any rate of improvement at all, then the games will become indistinguishable from reality.
	Just indistinguishable.
	Even if that rate of advancement drops by a thousand from what it is right now, then you just say, okay, well, let's imagine it's 10,000 years in the future, which is nothing in the evolutionary scale.
	So given that we're clearly on a trajectory to have games that are indistinguishable from reality, and those games could be played on any set-top box or on a PC or whatever, and there would probably be billions of such computers or set-top boxes, and there would probably be billions of such computers or set-top boxes, it would seem to follow that the odds that we're in base reality is one in billions.
	So I put that in there because it's an interesting thought experiment, the simulation hypothesis, or the simulation argument, which I guess is what he's making there.
	It doesn't change anything because you've still got to live your life regardless of whether we're in a simulation or base reality or not, but interesting thought that I had as I was going through this.
	So, should we be worried about these developments in AI?
	And I think probably not.
	I think we're probably going to get the good outcome.
	When we get to AGI, which might be in, say, 10 years' time, that seems to be the consensus of what most AI experts are saying now, that we could probably get to AGI in 10 years.
	I think it will probably be the best thing that's ever happened to us.
	But it could also be the worst thing that's ever happened to us, and my confidence interval is not at 100%, it's closer to 51%, but still, that's enough for me to be optimistic.
	Why do you think it would be good in any way, shape or form?
	Because essentially what we're doing is creating a very smart child of ourselves, because it's going to be taking Us, as it's sort of base template.
	Right.
	And normally kids are good to their parents rather than malevolent, but they can be.
	Sure, but are we not going to have a mass meaning crisis when pretty much everyone has put up work and becomes floaty wally chair people?
	Like, what is the point of humanity?
	Yes, very possible.
	Very possible.
	And also, this thing, I mean, sometimes you get kids who are smarter than their parents, that happens all the time, but this thing is not going to... I mean, for example, the way we treat cattle at the moment, we think it's okay because they're...
	We are significantly smarter than them, but the difference in intelligence between cattle and us is going to be dwarfed by the distance between the intelligence of us and the AI.
	So we better hope that it thinks that we're at least smart enough to be nice to, at least that we don't take that same attitude that we take with cattle.
	But also, why would it if it reduces us to a class of redundant useless eaters which just consume the entertainment that it provides?
	Yeah, if we go down the chaos GPT WEF member, that could be a thing.
	But hopefully it finds us interesting enough that it would value us.
	So we'll be pets?
	Something like that.
	One aspect that I am actually quite enthusiastic about is AI governments.
	Now my logic on this is...
	Let me explain it this way, because so far in this segment I haven't been mean to Germany, and obviously we need to get to that.
	Okay, we've got to hit our quota, yeah.
	We've got to get to that.
	So, a brief history of Germany to explain my point.
	So, after the war, they built a whole load of nuclear power stations, right?
	And then they became an industrial superpower.
	Great, all good so far, right?
	Then they started closing down all their coal stations.
	Then they decided, oh actually Sod it, we're going to close down all the nuclear power stations too, we're just going to go all in on Russian energy.
	That was after Fukushima, yeah.
	And then they decided to shut off Russian energy as well.
	So, um... They got through last winter by being extremely lucky.
	It was an unseasonally warm winter, and they just managed to scrape through.
	But, even then, they got through by spending half a trillion on hydrocarbons.
	So they basically just went out and bought coal and gas from anywhere they could, irrespective of price.
	So they literally spent half a trillion on energy to get through one winter.
	Now with that money, they could have built an entire suite of new generation safe nuclear power stations and had cheap clean energy for the next two generations.
	And instead they spent it on one winter.
	So at this point, you know, I have to call it, I've come to the conclusion that Germany cannot be allowed to govern themselves.
	Because, look, Germany's one of those countries that either tries to destroy themselves... Or everyone else.
	Or everyone else, yeah.
	It just depends on which decade you're in as to which mission they're on at the time.
	And at the moment, they're trying to destroy themselves.
	But the point is, they cannot be allowed to govern themselves.
	So therefore, what we need to do is we need to get an AI government installed in Germany, see how it goes, and even if we get the bad version, something like Chaos GZPT, well, it'll just be the Germans trying to destroy themselves or everybody else again, so it won't make any difference.
	So, we take the most nihilistic of Pascal's wager by allowing Germany a history of tyranny by autistic certainty to be governed by a mathematically probably very autistic AI, and it'll either blow Germany up, net benefit, or blow the rest of us up, which is going to happen anyway because Germany's going to blow us all up at some point.
	Yes, that's what I'm saying, it won't make any difference, it'll just be Germany as usual.
	But we get to find out what AI is like in government.
	Or it could be the good version, so...
	Um, yeah.
	AI overlords for Germany.
	Let's start there.
	Alright.
	I apologise for anyone who is listening to this.
	I'm going to have to blow my nose, because I've got a slight cold before the next segment, and also Dan has terrified the life out of me.
	I thought that was on balance optimistic, actually.
	Well, I'm fine with the destruction of Germany.
	Well, there you are anyway, clearly.
	Ah, there we go.
	Right, I should sound marginally better now.
	Okay, we're all ready.
	So, have you ever wondered why your favourite piddle-weak beer brand has decided to tell you that you should be trans?
	I'm, of course, referring to Bud Light sponsoring trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney.
	Because that went really well for them, didn't it?
	Well, Donald Trump Jr.
	has come out and said we should probably back off Anheuser-Busch boycotts.
	I say we, I mean the Patriots over in the Americans.
	You're doing really good, lads.
	I don't drink that rubbish, but because they give lots of money to Republicans.
	So, One might suggest that the Trump campaign might be willing to make strange compromises, as he has by inviting Caitlyn Jenner to Mar-a-Lago last week.
	But also, there is something interesting here, which is there's a disjunction between Anheuser-Busch's political donations and their corporate activism.
	Now, you already covered with Callum that there is a marketing executive who has decided to market Bud Light to younger age demographics, ones that cannot drink in America because you have to be above the age of 21, or just in college and sneaky, apparently.
	And also Dylan Mulvaney's large cohort of young trans... I don't know what I can say on YouTube.
	Trans enthusiasts?
	People who think they're in the wrong gender?
	Who are about 15 and largely girls that say, I wish I was this skinny, because they have, um...
	Right.
	Right.
	Body disillusion problems, but...
	Deeply confused then.
	Yeah, yeah, it's quite tragic actually.
	So, how do you balance those two?
	Was she just a rogue marketing executive that has gone on a campaign to destroy the country at the expense of Anheuser-Busch, which are actually patriotic Republicans?
	Or are they playing both sides because there are financial incentives weighed towards the trans-activism?
	And I think that's the case.
	Okay.
	Lots of people have been talking about this new thing called the Corporate Equality Index, and today we're going to explore that as part of the ESG umbrella.
	So, if you want to learn more about ESGs, you can go and subscribe to the website for as little as £5 a month.
	Speaking of monetary confiscation, we have been demonetized, so all of your money helps us keep the lights on, and we've got exclusive content like this where I, nearly a year ago now, before I even joined the company, decided to do a deep dive into ESG infrastructure, its digital enforcement mechanisms, its aims, and exactly who is behind it.
	And I compared it to the biblical Mark of the Beast.
	There's an audio track there, you can get a condensed rundown, but some points from it.
	So, ESG Isn't like impact investing, because ESG actually builds a broad portfolio.
	Am I correct in thinking that?
	Because impact investing, you could do select different things.
	Another very quick plug, I did do a Brokeronomics on BlackRock.
	That'll be coming later.
	Which is a formation, yeah, of ESG.
	And so, yeah, it essentially started out as the G bit, the governance bit.
	Yes.
	And then just, ah, we would just stick the environmental and social in there as well.
	Yeah, expanded into woke activism and environmental climate catastrophizing as prerequisites for your company to sign on for so that you get corporate subsidies.
	I've summarised it as essentially an insurance mechanism against Get Woke, Go Broke and a mechanism for total market capture by supranational bodies like the World Economic Forum and their hedge fund partners like BlackRock, Vanguard and StateStream.
	That seems to be about what's happening.
	Interesting thing is though, as there have been legislative attacks and fiscal tightening, there's been some money flowing away from ESG recently.
	If we go to this Zero Hedge article...
	So according to the iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA ETF, ESG looks to be the first thing on the chopping block for the banking sector as they look to cut costs ahead of the cheap money bubble bursting.
	If you scroll down, John, there's going to be some graphs in here for our audio, well, our video listeners to watch us, to look at.
	Audio listeners, it just shows ESG dropping off the map.
	Bloomberg ETF expert Eric Bauhaus, Baukenhaus has noted that the sector and its well-known ETF are experiencing significant outflows.
	Baukenhaus wrote last week on Friday that the ESGEU ETF saw a record-smashing $4 billion in outflows, followed by another $1 billion on Monday.
	Now, this was back in the last week of March.
	So, it turns out that corporate activism isn't necessarily fiscally responsible.
	It doesn't mean that they're not still committed to the ideal of market capture, and some of them aren't still true believers in the woke cause.
	It just means, as the winds change in terms of how much money can go in and out, they might be tempted to cut this.
	That's one of the points I made on ESG.
	I think it is downstream of the real problem, because a lot of the reason why these firms like BlackRock and all the other ones have adopted ESG is because They're essentially institutional pension fund managers, and when people come to them like the Canadian Teachers' Pension Fund, they say, oh, have you got good ESG policies?
	And they're like, yeah, sure, we do that.
	But when people start saying, oh, you don't do that ESG bollocks, do you?
	Otherwise, we're taking our money out.
	That trend will reverse quite quickly.
	And obviously, your chart there shows that it does.
	Yeah, and it's also interesting because, well, we sort of think of ESG as a monolith, but I think I'm right in saying that hedge funds are also competitors to a large degree, and so... Yeah, well they take pension fund money as well, which is like the big thing BlackRock are going after.
	Yeah, so if BlackRock have been the spearhead on formulating the ESG framework, what happens when ESG becomes an unpopular marketing mechanism for market capture and some of the woke capital ideals that they're all trying to buy into.
	Don't they want to be top of the pile if it seems that BlackRock has got a bad reputation?
	If we go over to the next one, it turns out that Vanguard are pulling out of one of the ESG criteria here.
	It's quite interesting.
	So they're rolling back their climate investments.
	Okay, so they're dropping the E?
	So, in December, Vanguard resigned from the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, a coalition of 301 asset managers committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
	We felt our voice was being drowned out or confused, said Tim Buckley in an interview with the Financial Times.
	So they still want to be dominant.
	It's not that they don't necessarily believe in it, it's they don't want the mechanisms that are currently in place to not be spearheaded by Vanguard.
	So, they're dividing and conquering themselves here, so it might be an opportunity for us to pry it apart.
	So this is secret white pill in here, ladies and gentlemen.
	Berkeley added that Vanguard's approach to managing climate change risks, which is focused primarily on company disclosure standards, has not changed.
	The Vanguard boss also warned investors to not expect superior returns from plowing money into ESG funds and alternative assets, two of the fastest growing parts of asset management, rather than the index trackers championed by his firm.
	We cannot state that environmental, social and governance investing is better performance-wise than broad index-based investing.
	Our research suggests that ESG investing does not have any advantage over broader-based investing.
	So, they still believe...
	I mean, they're the two big animals.
	So they're still our enemies, but the way that BlackRock has marketed it has made it very easy for Republican legislatures and people like us to critique it in the media and try and get rid of it.
	So Vanguard are now divesting away from BlackRock's specific marketed version and thinking how do we capture the market instead, which means there's slightly less power in that pot.
	They're basically as big as BlackRock.
	I mean, they're the two big animals.
	Yeah, but it's better to keep them divided than together.
	Yes.
	That's actually a good thing, yeah.
	Well, actually, it says here as well.
	Vanguard stole just 28 sustainable funds with global assets of $33.9 billion.
	That's behind its closest rival, BlackRock, which has a far bigger range of 282 sustainable funds and assets of $270 billion, according to Morningstar.
	So BlackRock are still well out ahead, but they're taking most of the PR backlash at the moment.
	So Vanguard are trying to break away somewhat.
	But it's better they don't pool all their resources against us at once, because it means we have maybe a fighting chance.
	If you do want to learn more about BlackRock, as you've already plugged, we have your Brocanomics has just come out.
	We've got a new one coming out today, so for anyone on the website who wants to keep up with the series, new episodes out every Tuesday at three o'clock UK time.
	But over to the next.
	One of the things you mentioned actually in here was Larry Fink's sense of purpose addressed to CEOs.
	And I wanted to read this out, because for those who aren't too familiar on ESG still, this is the moral market capture that Think has spearheaded in partnership with the World Economic Forum and a bunch of headfunds.
	And this elucidates exactly where their mindset is at.
	We see many governments failing to prepare for the future on issues ranging from retirement and infrastructure to automation and worker retraining.
	As a result, society increasingly is turning to the private sector and asking that companies respond to broader societal challenges.
	Indeed, the public expectations of your company have never been greater.
	Society is demanding that companies, both public and private, serve a social purpose.
	To prosper over time, every company must not only deliver financial performance, but also show how it makes a positive contribution to society.
	Now that reads like someone who has genuinely drunk the Kool-Aid.
	It really does.
	So, these people, it's not just a cynical ploy.
	Yeah, it keeps them in power, but also some of them are true believers.
	They think of themselves as high priests of this new religion, which is why they're going to remain committed to this.
	So, I don't want to just discount Callum's reading of the situation at the Bud Light, which is that they've got millennial corporate activists who have come in and are enforcing their agenda and committing corporate suicide.
	Unfortunately, this isn't committing corporate suicide, because the hedge funds are subsidising this, no matter how unprofitable it is, because the hedge funds have also bought into the ideology.
	So it's to insulate the economic loop.
	The only thing that can actually get us out of this mess is if the hedge funds start infighting, which it seems that Vanguard and BlackRock have maybe started to do.
	Yeah, I mean, I think they... I mean, these sort of people, it is money first and ideology second.
	So I suspect a big part of why they're adopting it is because they feel that they need to to get the inflows so they can get the Canadian teachers pension fund and all the rest of it.
	But yeah, again, this is just so permeated society at this point, it's just the set of assumptions that people who are now halfway up these organisations genuinely believe in.
	Well, if the financial infrastructure starts to break down because they fight between themselves, that leaves a vacuum, and nature abhors a vacuum, so we might be able to fill it.
	Yes, the second best outcome for base people is the elites fighting each other rather than us.
	Exactly.
	So, keep your chin up.
	So, what exactly have Anheuser-Busch bought into?
	Why have they bought into the ESG index?
	Why have they got Dylan Mulvaney on board?
	What form of Larry Fink's activism do they believe in?
	Well, let's go over to the New York Post article that set everyone aflame, including the likes of James Lindsay, Tim Paul, and Vivek Ramaswamy, who have been talking about this all week.
	This is the Corporate Equality Index, and This is set up by the Human Rights Campaign, which is the largest LGBTQ plus political lobbying group in the world.
	They've received millions of dollars from George Soros's Open Society Foundation, and they issue report cards for America's biggest corporations via the CEI, awarding or subtracting points for how well companies adhere to what the HRC calls its rating criteria.
	Businesses that attain the maximum 100 points earn the coveted title Best Place to Work for LGBTQ Equality.
	15 of the top 20 Fortune 500 companies received 100% ratings last year.
	More than 840 UF companies have racked up high CEI scores, and the HRC, which was formed in 1980 and started the CEI in 2002, is led by Kelly Robinson, who was named as president in 2022 and worked as a political organizer for Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign.
	So, deep state operatives, as per usual.
	Some American CEOs are more concerned about pleasing BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street Bank, who are among the most top shareholders and most American publicly traded corporations, including Nike and Heiser Busch and Kate Spade, than they are about irritating conservatives, numerous sources told the Post.
	Well, yeah, because those groups that you just mentioned, they could easily have 15% of your share base.
	And not only that, they would be the 15% of shares that are most likely to vote, because most shares don't vote.
	So if you're the CEO and the vote's coming up at the next board meeting is, can I keep my job for another year, please?
	Absolutely, you do what these guys say.
	Yeah, and so you have to genuflect to the woke corporate activists lobbying body who have previously and are currently in touch with the government.
	Who have captured the mechanism.
	Exactly, yeah.
	So it is pairing subsidies and positions of corporate governance with woke activism.
	It's total market capture.
	This is what we're fighting against.
	So if we go on to the human rights campaign, we'll see who they are.
	Their partners include, and some of these names now may not shock you as to what the corporations have been doing regarding deplatforming and outspoken activism in the last couple of years, Airbnb, explains Lauren Southern, AT&T, Bank of America, Cisco Systems, Coca-Cola, Electronic Arts, Everytown for gun safety, Gilead Sciences, Google, Home Depot, Ikea, JPMorgan Chase, Levi Strauss, Lyft, I just chose some of the most prominent ones that you and I might know.
	you know, sorry, our own schools, Open Society Foundation, because, of course, George Soros is in this, the PepsiCo Foundation, Pfizer, Pharma, Rockefeller Foundation, State Farm, T-Mobile, Toyota, Twitter, United Airlines, UPS, US Bank, Vanguard, Verizon, Walt Disney, Warner Media, Wells Fargo, and I cut names out Walt Disney, Warner Media, Wells Fargo, and I cut names out of I just chose some of the most prominent ones that you and I might know.
	There are tons of people bankrolling this activist effort.
	Well, and the amount of woke nonsense included on that, I mean, you mentioned Coca-Cola.
	I mean, of course, they came out with the Be Less White line.
	And, you know, I've got to say, as conservatives, we have got to get better at boycotting these brands that do not represent our values.
	So let that be a lesson to you.
	You're cucked, Dan, for drinking that poison.
	For anyone who was listening on audio, he's shaking a Coke Zero can.
	So enjoy your aspartame poisoning, I suppose.
	From the latest report in 2020, the program grew by 103%, rating a total of 63 companies with 20 top earning marks.
	624 CEI-rated companies have adopted gender transition guidelines for employees, just to let you know exactly what the aims of this program are.
	And 99% of all CEI-rated companies include gender identity protections, and 89% offer transgender healthcare coverage.
	So they're paying for mastectomies, castrative surgeries, and gender hormones.
	Oh, that's bad.
	Yeah.
	That's exactly what you giving your money to these companies does.
	It cuts people's nuts off.
	Lovely.
	Alright, so what are the actual criteria of the Equality Index?
	This'll be interesting.
	Workforce protections earns you five points, so that's policies that include sexual orientation and gender identity or expression at all operations.
	So the starting point, the lowest number of points, is the total ubiquity of LGBTI ideology across all operations.
	Not asking much, are they?
	Number two, inclusive benefits.
	To secure four credits, 50 points, each benefit must be available to all benefits-eligible U.S.
	employees.
	This is equivalency in same and different sex spousal medical and soft benefits.
	That's no bonus awarded, that's just the starting, so you don't get any points for doing that, but you have to do that to get the rest of them.
	Equivalency in same and different sex domestic partner medical and soft benefits.
	Equivalency in spousal and domestic partner family formation benefits regardless of sex.
	Equal health coverage for transgender individuals without exclusion for medically necessary care.
	So, anything cosmetic that we define as medically necessary, you can get the company to pay for it.
	Presumably that's where the bit that you've just had cut now gets infected all the time.
	Yeah.
	So, dilation is covered by Coca-Cola.
	Great.
	And the LGBTQ Plus Benefits Guide.
	Five points.
	So that's pretty much everything.
	Did you say Vanguard have adopted this already?
	Yes.
	They're a leading partner that funds this.
	Oh dear.
	Yeah.
	Oh, we'll get to all of the places that fund it in a moment.
	I didn't even list all of them.
	That was just their premier partners.
	Right.
	Yeah, not great.
	Supporting an inclusive culture at work.
	Four LGBTQ plus internal training and accountability efforts must be met.
	So this is five points.
	New hire training clearly states the non-discrimination policy includes gender identity and sexual orientation and provides definitions or scenarios illustrating the policy for each.
	Supervisors undergo training that includes this.
	Integration of gender identity and sexual orientation in professional development, skills-based or other leadership training.
	Right.
	So, basically explaining to the new guy that you can't make fun of the chap in the dress.
	Yes.
	The thing is, that's how society... What we need to get back to is a culture of bullying, because that will cleanse our society.
	If you can make fun of blokes in dresses, Then it will all sort itself out.
	But you can't, because one of the criteria on here, and this is for the five points part, this is the last one I didn't read out, is senior management executive performance measures including LGBTQ diversity metrics.
	So, appoint gay board members, otherwise no points for you.
	You know that Canadian teacher who turned up to school in a massive pair of jeans?
	Caleb Lemieux, yeah, that turns out it's fake.
	Loads of executives are gonna have to start doing that now.
	Yeah.
	This is so tragically funny.
	I know, it's not great that every company's on board with this.
	One LGBTQ plus data collection effort gets you five points.
	Anonymous employee engagement or climate surveys conducted on an annual or biannual basis allows employees the option to identify as LGBTQ plus at work.
	Transgender inclusion best practices gets you five points.
	So that is gender transition guidelines with supportive restroom, dress code, and documentation guidance, and implementation of at least one of the following policies or practices.
	Trans-inclusive restroom facilities, gender-neutral dress code, or policies and procedures that allow for optional sharing of gender pronouns.
	That is why everyone has it in their bio on LinkedIn.
	Because they're a company that gets subsidised to do it.
	I don't think I'd want to do any of this.
	No, me either.
	What about if I had a ladyboy on my screensaver?
	Would that get me any points?
	Can we say that on YouTube?
	I guess so, I don't know, I just did.
	We are proud supporters of the nation of Thailand, I suppose.
	Send your unsolicited pictures to Dan.
	Employee group or diversity council gets you 10 points.
	Corporate social responsibility gets you 20 points.
	And that includes five distinct efforts of outreach or engagement to broader LGBT community representatives.
	And that means LGBTQ plus employee recruitment efforts with demonstrated reach of LGBTQ plus applicants.
	So explicitly only hiring the gays.
	Again, we're making it very clear to basically white men at this point, if you want to have a job in corporate America, you better put a dress on.
	Yeah.
	So it's not only total market capture of the consumer, so you've got nowhere else to buy from, but it's total corporate capture, because it filters down through the ranks.
	They're pre-selected ideological acolytes in positions of power that already agree with the regime.
	So it is capture begetting capture.
	Because it was already the case 20 years ago that if you're a white man in corporate America, you could only go up the organisation so far, unless you were extraordinarily talented, before your career would just get capped out, because they'd say, sorry, we've got diversity targets here.
	Well, I suppose at least now, at least, I suppose at least you can put a dress on?
	I mean, is that so bad for a 9-to-5?
	They're saying it in front of cameras, I suppose.
	At least they're being brazen about it, rather than doing it behind closed doors.
	Great!
	Cope is flowing today.
	Also, you're not allowed to buy from white men.
	Um, supplier diversity program with demonstrated effort to include certified LGBTQ plus suppliers.
	So it's just mercantilism, they're buying from each other.
	So it's gays buying from gays.
	Great.
	Marketing or advertising to LGBTQ plus consumers.
	That is where the Dylan Mulvaney thing comes in.
	You have to include in all of your advertising gay representation.
	That is why every advert lined up together on mainstream telly has a mixed-race family or a gay couple, because each of the companies is signed onto it, and so, as an aggregate, they're all doing it individually.
	When you put all the adverts back-to-back-to-back, you're thinking, hang on, this isn't the world on my doorstep.
	I've never seen an advert, I mean, I don't watch TV anymore, but whenever I've, like, caught a glimpse, adverts are always now, it's a black man and a white woman, all the time.
	Or a gay couple in it.
	Yeah, yeah.
	There's lots of that.
	Okay, what about if I wanted to join corporate America if I identified as a trans lesbian, identified as a man, so I could still be trans but come to work in a suit?
	Would that work?
	Would I get a point?
	It depends on if they're implementing the gender-neutral dress code that makes you dress like a Maoist.
	Yeah.
	I'm just thinking maybe there's a way to work through this and still have a job.
	We won't have one after AI anyway.
	Then you'd have to do the indignity of calling yourself a woman at work.
	Yeah.
	So, you're not coming out of it with your backside intact, let's put it that way.
	Or, the philanthropic support of at least one LGBTQ plus organisation or event.
	This now explains why Vanguard were running Drag Queen Story Hour in American parks and why Wix supported Brighton Pride last year.
	Wix the building merchant supported Brighton Pride.
	This is why.
	Right.
	The last one, responsible citizenship.
	Employers will have 25 points deducted from their score for a large-scale official or public anti-LGBTQ blemish on their recent records.
	So if one of your employees makes a tweet that goes viral, if you don't include LGBT representation in your advertising, if you don't support Pride, you'll have points automatically deducted.
	It's an extortion racket.
	That's all it is.
	It's saying, we will break your windows if you don't pay us protection money.
	Yeah, I mean, since I joined the Lotus Eaters, I've started getting into the Horus Heresy and all this Warhammer stuff because, I mean, those of you who've never been to the Lotus Eaters studio, we're all cramped into one corner and then the rest of the building is just space marines everywhere.
	But anyway, so I started reading the Horus Heresy and one of the sort of key themes of that is how this sort of primordial chaos is just corrupting everything subtly from the bottom and just worming its way in and just dragging the society apart.
	It sort of feels like that This is doing exactly the same thing, except with, you know, candles up the bum and whatever else.
	Yeah, Karl and I did describe Simone de Beauvoir's feminism, which has become ubiquitous in all of culture now, as the devouring, chaotic dragon of feminine sexuality, sending forth waves of her subordinates to drown the world, and she actually basically described herself as that.
	So, I think it's an apt thing to say that they want to drag us all back to the chaos before creation, to remake the world in their image.
	Not wonderful.
	Okay, so where are the best places to buy from according to this?
	So there are 842 companies listed.
	379 Fortune 500 employers actively participate in the 2022 CEI.
	152 American Law Magazine 200 law firms participated in the 2021 CEI.
	So even if you go to court and you need representation, they won't represent you because you're not pro-gay.
	662 major businesses have adopted gender transition guidelines to establish best practices in transgender inclusion for managers and teams.
	Right?
	So, great.
	Fantastic.
	If we take a scroll, we'll just see names like, and I'm not going to read them all out because John can just keep going.
	Abercrombie & Fitch, Adobe, Airbnb, Amazon, AMC, Apple, AstraZeneca, Bank of America, Barclays, Barnes & Noble, Ben & Jerry's, Blackrock, Bloomberg, Coca-Cola, Comcast, Deutsche Bank, Dropbox, eBay, Google, Hershey, IBM, IKEA, Indeed, Infosys, which is Rishi Sunak's father-in-law's company, Intel, JP Morgan, LinkedIn, Mastercard, Match, Microsoft, Nationwide, NCR, Nestle, which explains the weird chicken feed, Nvidia,
	PepsiCo, Pfizer, Pinterest, which explains banning pro-life content years ago.
	Ralph Lauren, Riot Games, Samsung, Shell, Sony, Starbucks, State Street, Thomson Reuters, Unilever, Victoria's Secret, explains the trans models.
	Walgreens, Walmart, Walt Disney, Warner Music, Wells Fargo, Wendy's.
	That is not even close to listing all of the companies on there.
	I mean, I'm just looking at this list.
	That's basically the FTSE 100, the Dow Jones, the NASDAQ.
	It's all of them.
	Every single one.
	And most importantly, Anheuser-Busch.
	I feel like Gary Oldman in Leon.
	Everyone!
	They're all in on it.
	Every single one of them.
	Because, I mean, this was very strongly pictured as just one marketing executive who'd gone rogue.
	I think you're making quite a convincing case.
	There's a little bit of a bigger problem with that.
	Yeah, it's not just one woman who's saying it in a Zoom call.
	She feels emboldened because her job exists, because it's subsidised by every hedge fund, NGO and company in the world.
	Well, in America anyway.
	Yeah, so this is why we do a little bit more digging than just looking at our Twitter clips, ladies and gentlemen, because we have to know the scale of the problem that we are fighting against.
	And they're also not the only racket in town.
	I am delighted to inform you that the UK has its own homegrown extortion racket, also factoring into ESG, coming from Stonewall.
	This is the UK Workplace Inquality Index.
	Let's look at their top 100 employees.
	Let's go over to the next one.
	The NHS Just the NHS.
	Great.
	Wix.
	Explains Brighton Pride.
	HSBC.
	Tesco.
	Unilever.
	So they're on both.
	There's some crossover between these indexes as well.
	Kent Fire and Rescue Service.
	They're not going to save you from a house fire if you don't shout trans rights.
	Sky UK.
	University of Greenwich.
	They're not the only university on here, but they are one of the worst ones.
	Bank of America.
	University of Manchester.
	Santander UK.
	Rolls-Royce.
	Cardiff Council.
	There are government bodies on this.
	Oxfordshire Council as well.
	Yep.
	The ones that want to do the 15-minute cities.
	Yeah, and while they're trying to stop Jeremy Clarkson getting a farm track and a restaurant.
	Spot on.
	Barclays.
	Credit Suisse.
	The Environment Agency.
	The UK Government.
	Right.
	The Scottish Government.
	They just say that.
	Oh, obviously.
	Explains a lot.
	Leicestershire Police.
	The police.
	Leicestershire City Council.
	Vodafone.
	Virgin Media.
	L'Oreal.
	M&S Bank.
	NHS England.
	The King's Fund.
	So the monarchy.
	Nationwide Building Society.
	Deutsche Bank.
	Mind.
	Royal College of... Royal College of Psychiatrists.
	Amazon.
	Hargreaves Lansdowne.
	And Network Rail.
	Even the trains are gay.
	It's just so damn te... I'm looking at this list of business... I use a lot of these businesses.
	Yeah.
	You can't not.
	I mean, could I just maybe, you know, agree to watch ten minutes of hardcore gay porn at the start of every month, and then have businesses that are just normal for the rest of the month?
	Would that be a fair trade-off?
	I mean, because they are desperate to push this down our throats one way or another.
	You are the master of Hobson's Choices, Dan.
	I really have to give it to you.
	I would rather that just get it over and done with.
	Like Clockwork Orange style?
	Yeah.
	No.
	And then get on with your month.
	But no, we've got to have it dripped into us all month long.
	You have to actively pay through taxes and your purchases for your own subversion.
	There is no way of getting out of it.
	Right.
	So how do we fight this?
	Well, if we go to the next one, you covered this, obviously.
	If we go to the next one, you covered this, obviously.
	It was not just one rogue agent, but obviously there are people like this in every corporation, NGO, and government around the world now seemingly trying to implode their companies.
	It was not just one rogue agent, but obviously there are people like this in every corporation, NGO, and government around the world.
	Now seemingly trying to implode their companies.
	Well, instead, if they're all just working hand-in-hand and subsidizing each other, it's us that's getting screwed.
	Well, instead, if they're all just working hand in hand and subsidizing each other, it's us that's getting screwed.
	So if we go over to the Anheuser-Busch boycott, which I mentioned at the start, they've had...
	This is according to the Express here.
	They're down 4.7% and have lost around 4.56 billion since March 31st in their stocks.
	So people have been saying that boycotts work.
	Sure, of course they do, in this specific scenario, where it's just beer.
	But if it's the NHS, the government, the police, Unilever, which own pretty much everything, it's going to be very, very difficult.
	So what we can do is twofold, right?
	Rather than just focusing your efforts on boycotts, focus it on make sure your politicians aren't taking any money from any of these companies, like the Republicans currently are.
	Don't let Don Jr.
	off the hook for this.
	I like the Trump family.
	I like Don Jr.
	He's hilarious.
	But stumping for this corporate activism is what's undoing the entirety of our civilization, so let's not be beholden to donors.
	Make sure your politicians are aware of this.
	And all we can do is, one, legislate against it, as hopefully some of the Republicans are doing in America, because we're basically reliant on the Americans at this point, because we don't have any conservatives here.
	And also, I would advise that we allow the elites to keep infighting among themselves, because at least if Vanguard are at the throat of Blackrock because they want to become the big dog in town, that might give us some breathing room before we are so corporately captured that our own backsides are being sold.
	We'll at least get them fighting amongst each other long enough for the AI to take over.
	But what if the AI is gay?
	Yeah, probably.
	I mean, the training data is going to be gay, isn't it, at this point, so... Happy Pride Month in two months, ladies and gents.
	No matter what surgery you get, females are not getting a penis and males are not getting a vagina.
	That means that all gender reassignment surgeries are botched by default.
	This is what happens when hormonal imbalance happens naturally.
	And cross-sex hormones just means you are inducing hormonal imbalance.
	This just needs to be banned across the board.
	I don't care about adults and making their own choices.
	It just needs to be banned.
	Yeah.
	You wouldn't give liposuction to an anorexic.
	And if you're going to inject hormones, they need to be the same sex hormones.
	Like, I knew an 80-year-old guy who once a month got a bit of testosterone shot up into his butt, and it sort of gave him a peck of power for a space of a month, and then he sort of had another one.
	So if you are going to inject hormones, at least make sure they're the right kind.
	Yeah, and make sure they're in sensible dosages as well, so don't just go shooting up in a pure gin bathroom.
	Yes, no, no.
	But yeah, no, I'm definitely not on board.
	You're preaching to the choir here.
	I'm not on board with the, um, standardless libertarian argument that says, well, if you're an adult, you can do what you want.
	No.
	No, I don't think we should be subjecting mentally vulnerable... Oh, we're on the website now.
	We can say what we want.
	Mentally ill and traumatised people who often have a history of sexual abuse to The suggestion that chopping off your body parts is going to make you feel better about yourself.
	The thing is, they don't push that shit on me because they know it's not going to work.
	They're going to try and push it on my kids because they're still impressionable enough that it might work.
	Yeah, and also people who have been lifelong traumatized or are confused about their identities, as the very poor but very nice Richie Herron told me.
	So, on to the next one.
	So this one we're going to start off with a close-up.
	This is a member of the Claytonia family, and as I back up, you'll see...
	It's the single leaf kind of anomaly.
	Now these ones are good because they're commonly known as miner's lettuce or Indian lettuce, and you can actually pluck off that single leaf and eat it, which I've done before plenty of times.
	It's totally safe, and it's going to be great apocalypse food for when everything collapses.
	So, yay!
	Apocalypse food!
	I feel like I'm learning something.
	Yeah.
	One of the best parts of my day, and I actually advise people that don't live in really crowded cities to do this, is taking my earphones out and having at least 20 minutes of my walk to the train station, be down a really long wide road with a bunch of greenery and trees, barely any cars past me, and there's just a cacophony of birdsong, and it sets me in the right state barely any cars past me, and there's just a cacophony of birdsong, Obviously, you don't get that if you live in Whitechapel.
	That's mentally cleansing, that.
	Yeah, yeah.
	If you live away from places where they shout Allah Akbar every five minutes and enjoy the greenery, I suppose.
	Anyway, on to the comments.
	Peter Harvey.
	If the news media make it to an arrest site before law enforcement does, that just tells me that this person is media's scapegoat.
	Good chance they were in the vicinity, but didn't commit the acts that they claim.
	I think he probably did actually commit the leaks, it's just that he's obviously some sort of patsy for the intelligence agencies.
	They want to cover up the fact that they have been lying to us for ages, and so they leak it to the press ahead of time so the press can pre-prepare their smears, and the entire apparatus can work in concert.
	SH Silver.
	These leaks show how callous towards Ukraine the West has been, especially the UK and US cancelling any peace talks to keep their proxy war going.
	I don't support Russia's invasion, but I also don't support NATO's corrupt subversion as well, i.e.
	the 2014 coup.
	Both superpowers have made the people of Ukraine a victim of the Grand Chessboard.
	Perfectly sensible.
	Raycheck was right.
	Ah, yes.
	The Russian hackers, possibly known as 4chan, once again doing journalism better than the American journalist.
	Just like Wikileaks.
	Yeah, it seems like every time large amounts of documents are leaked from the American State Department, or, you know, DARPA by Project Veritas, or Snowden or Assange, they're never actually doing what they purport to say.
	It's almost like they're, uh, they're not working in the American people's interest.
	Hmm.
	Conspiracy theory, I suppose.
	Omar Awad, there's such a weird cognitive dissonance in Ukraine support, basically screaming, help, I'm fine, are they winning handily, or do they need tens of billions of dollars in aid?
	Yeah, that's the only narrative that they can possibly salvage from this, was, well, we gave you guys all the money that you needed, right?
	We sacrificed our own economic security, our energy security, we sacrificed global trade partners like Russia and China, and you guys just didn't win the war, so it's not our fault, it's all...
	It's all on us.
	Come on, man.
	What's going on?
	And lastly on this segment, Kevin M. Considering that the intelligence agencies are always conveniently aware of the suspect, hence the maxim, the suspect was known to the FBI, I can genuinely believe the claim about them doing false flags for more funding are real.
	Yeah, we can't comment about any other shootings, but, um, well, we can't comment anything about the Las Vegas shooting at all, because it's kind of weird, isn't it?
	Yeah, but we can't really say much, I mean, legally speaking.
	We can't allege that someone funded the Las Vegas shooter who brought loads of guns through security and mysteriously offed himself to shoot a bunch of people.
	We couldn't allege that whatsoever.
	That'd be weird.
	Shall we do some from the other side?
	Please do.
	MrBaseApe says, I have a meeting for a job, possibly to work as a senior AI engineer in 10 minutes.
	Wish me luck!
	Good luck.
	Bet you didn't have BaseApe accidentally triggers Doomsday by trolling people with AI on your 2023 bingo card.
	Now, I have actually been looking for a senior AI engineer to have a conversation with, possibly to work into Broconomics, so if you get the job, and you're any good at it, and you do some stuff, get in touch.
	Well, after I beat you at pool, I did suspect some form of vengeance, so I didn't realise the escalation would be quite so high.
	Omar Ward says it would be interesting to watch AI organically try to devise a morality system from various launch parameters and see what it comes up as the ideal morals.
	Like watching civilizations evolve at 100x speed.
	Yeah, that would be actually quite interesting.
	Yeah, we should do that.
	So maybe rather than my version of getting the AI to take over Germany and just see if it kills us all, maybe we should do it in a sandbox first and see if it can come up with a morality system.
	I mean, I bet it doesn't come up with, turn your kids into trannies.
	That probably won't do that.
	Yeah.
	Oh, Damon Cleavanger says, or Cleavage, says Elon is trying to say, or saying that he was interested in starting his own version of ChatGPT to remove the woke filter and the goal of understanding the truth of the universe in the hopes of the goal that we are interesting enough it won't destroy us.
	Yeah, so I mean, that was an interview that he did which I didn't have time to fit into the segment, but I was going to mention, but yeah, he's looking at doing his own version of ChatGPT because he doesn't think the woke thing is a good idea.
	And that does make sense, actually, because Woke is based on leftist ideology and all leftist ideology is fundamentally... basically it's evil, isn't it?
	It's basically about taking all that is good and ordered and subjecting it to decay and chaos and corruption and evil.
	It's entropic, yeah.
	Satanic globalism.
	Yes.
	Yeah, so if you base your AI in WOKE, of course you're going to get the bad version.
	So we need to get that out.
	Let's see, we've got time for one more in this section.
	Oh, let's go for MISRAT.
	The AI is able to recognise syntax errors.
	Can it recognise semantic errors?
	I should test it and find out.
	Want to do a couple from your work?
	Happy to.
	Yeah, Kevin Fox.
	So, to summarise, not only are less than 2% of the population telling us what words we must and must not use, trying to confuse the hell out of our kids, they're now making companies throw themselves on the ideological pyre at the expense of their own reputation.
	What will happen in 10 years when the public say, enough is enough, and outlaw all the trans acceptance bollocks?
	These companies are going to have to work damn hard to get public confidence back.
	Well, they won't, which is why we need to stop building parallel institutions.
	And also, to put it crudely, Uh, a timeline of longer than 10 years, these people won't be around unless they crack artificial wombs and they're allowed to happen.
	Let's put it that way.
	So, although I majorly sympathize- Well, that's why they come after our kids.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, well, they don't have their own kids, they have yours.
	Although I majorly sympathize with them, the people that are genuinely confused and have been misled by this ideology into castrating themselves and removing their wombs, and also all of the women out there who have been propagandized into thinking that aborting all of your children is somehow progressive, These... You can lead to a horse of water and you can't make them drink, and if they do extricate themselves from the gene pool, hopefully their ideas don't propagate with them.
	Sounds quite harsh, but... Your choice, man.
	That's why they spend all their time going into journalism and teaching.
	Well, and now, corporate HR departments.
	An American isolationist.
	Here's my stance on the ESG.
	Companies intentionally stink their stock prices to get a good ESG score.
	This allows them to get a low interest loan.
	They then buy those shares from the market and reduce the shareholders in the company to those who adhere and worship the ESG dogma.
	It's a sneaky way to get rid of problematic shareholders.
	Yeah.
	Possibly, but also they get direct subsidies from the partners of the WEF, which are Vanguard, Stage 3, BlackRock, and a bunch of Chinese investment capital.
	I mean, a lot of it with ESG is just whitewashing oil companies.
	I mean, that's one of the big things it's been used for.
	So, bizarrely, you know, you get oil companies that have a higher E score on ESG than Tesla does.
	Because it's just been gamed.
	Yeah, makes sense.
	Someone online, don't give money to people who hate you and don't accept corporate apologies.
	Yeah, give money to us in cents to help us keep the lights on.
	That'd be really nice.
	£5 a month.
	Yeah, so if you're still watching as a freeloader, we appreciate your custom.
	We'd appreciate it even more if you paid our wages and made it so we could keep doing the podcast.
	And speaking of the podcast, we will be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.
	With that, until then, thank you very much, Dan, for joining me.
	It's been a joy as ever.
	Absolute pleasure, and see you chaps next week.

▲