All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 4, 2019 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
48:41
Episode 403 Scott Adams: The Border “Emergency” and the SOTU, Climate Bubbles, and Hoaxed
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody!
Come on in here.
Gather round. It's time for a Not My Regular Time Coffee with Scott Adams.
I'm Scott Adams.
By the way, people are still getting mad at me for speaking of myself in the third person.
People have not figured out that Scott Adams talks about himself in the first person because Scott Adams knows that talking about Scott Adams in the third person bothers some people.
And that's why Scott Adams does it.
And partly because, well, mostly it gets your attention.
So if it bothers you a little bit, that's why I do it.
Just enough to make you pay attention.
Alright, and since you're all here, and you're all so smart and good looking today, not to mention kind and generous, I would like to share with you the simultaneous sip.
It starts when you grab your mug, your cup, your steinier chalice, your thermos, your container, you fill it with your favorite liquid, I like coffee, and join me for the simultaneous sip.
Oh, yeah. So, in case you missed it yesterday, I did a video review of the documentary Hoaxed, which you can find on Vimeo.
I neglected to tell people where to get it.
So, in some ways, it was the most incompetent movie review of all time, because typically you should tell people how they can watch the movie if you're going to review it.
So if you go to Vimeo, you can buy it for 10 bucks and it is worth every penny.
As I was saying yesterday, I'll just give you the quick view of it today because I reviewed it in detail in my last Periscope.
But the last 10 or 15 minutes Are so mind-blowing that make sure that you're not disturbed when you watch the last part of the movie.
You want to be alone with the movie or be outside.
I was listening to the last part of it with my phone in my pocket and I was outside on the beach and the combination of looking out at the landscape and at the same time listening to the conclusion of the movie was sort of breathtaking.
It was incredible.
So if you can watch the last 15 minutes in some kind of, I don't know, stimulating environment where other people aren't bothering you, make sure you do that.
So it's a masterpiece.
I was blown away by it.
Now, totally worth $10.
Trust me on this. There are very few movies that give you a lasting feeling.
Where you walk into the movie and it doesn't leave you.
It just stays with you.
The old joke is it becomes a part of you.
This actually becomes a part of you.
Because you can't see it and then unsee it.
It actually can rewire your thinking.
That's what happened to me.
Let's talk about the Super Bowl for just one minute.
All right, I sort of kind of watched the Super Bowl, wasn't that interested.
The best part of the Super Bowl was President Trump being interviewed either the day before or the day of the Super Bowl and saying that he wouldn't be necessarily thrilled if his own son played football, obviously because of the dangers, the head injuries.
And I thought, that is exactly why people like this president.
On Super Bowl Sunday, or it might have been the day before, He's willing to go out and say, I'm not sure I would even let my kid play that game.
Now, he did say that if his son wanted to play, he might grudgingly let him, but he would not encourage him to do it.
And I thought that was insanely, I don't know, just honest.
Um... I'm not going to be answering questions about Mike Czernovich's personal life.
You can Google that on your own.
All right.
Let's talk about the border.
Now, as you know, we have this incredibly great timing where the border committee, which apparently is completely worthless, is meeting.
At the same time tomorrow, there'll be the State of the Union, highly anticipated.
And Trump, in his usual way, He's teasing that the State of the Union will be exciting.
Have you ever heard that before?
Has any president ever told you that he's not going to tell you what the State of the Union is going to be all about because it's going to be exciting?
You have to admit, That that's funny.
All right. It's absolutely hilarious that he's playing the media like an audience.
He's converted them from some kind of a, you know, what I guess we used to think was some kind of neutral third party watchdog kind of a thing.
He's turned them into movie critics or an audience.
And so all of us have become just part of the audience.
So of course he's going to be talking about border funding.
He's signaling with a wink and a nod that some kind of emergency declaration, some unilateral action, will be announced.
And if not announced, at least clearly signaled that it's coming.
So that will be exciting.
Senator Shelby said on CNN yesterday, Jake Tapper tweeted this around and I retweeted, that he says the experts on border security are coming in to testify at whatever is the next meeting of this working group.
To which I say, yes, Brian, I am in Hawaii.
To which I say, why are they just bringing the experts in to talk to them?
Are you telling me that the first major meeting of all the politicians to talk about how to handle border security didn't have the experts?
What the hell was the point of that meeting?
Was there any reason at all to have that meeting without any experts in it?
I don't think so.
So here's how the president can declare emergency and make it so easy to sell.
Because he's got to sell that idea to his base, who mostly will buy it.
But also to the rest of the country who doesn't want to see some kind of a dictatorship taking form.
Now, the news has done a good job of prepping people, because maybe it could be only one side of the news is doing a good job.
But how many of you know how many executive orders or, let's say, emergency declarations there have been?
Do any of you know how typical it is for these emergency declarations?
It turns out, yeah, I think 54 or 50 something.
So there have been over 50 of them.
And some of them, I think maybe even a majority of them are still technically happening, right?
So, yeah, 30 current emergencies, that's what I was looking for.
So there are at least 30 of them, or 35 or something, that are still in effect.
That's the word I was looking for, still in effect.
So the first thing that the public needed to know is that this whole emergency declaration thing is pretty routine stuff.
So it has the word emergency in it, so it makes you think it's unusual.
But we will all be educated by the time of the State of the Union to learn that these emergency things are quite typical.
Let's drink to that.
Are you ready? Sorry.
Oh yeah. So think of this in terms of setting the table.
If the president had declared an emergency declaration or whatever, if he'd done that three weeks ago or a month ago, the country wouldn't be ready Because they've not been educated on how typical it is, how many of them we already have in place, and how common the situations are.
In other words, you know, they're emergencies-ish, but they're not all end-of-the-world emergencies.
They're not all, you know, protect the homeland from immediate attack kind of emergencies.
They're pretty typical emergencies.
So now we've all been softened up, right?
So the public can no longer say, My God, that's an extraordinary thing you're doing, Mr.
President, because it's not.
Turns out it's fairly ordinary.
The second thing that we have, that we didn't have a month ago, is that we get to watch how defective Congress is.
So we get to watch this team of people working for three weeks and inevitably they're going to come up with no agreement.
We already know that in advance.
So we get to watch their incompetence right in front of us with the spotlight on it.
Usually their incompetence is more of a concept.
It's like, well, Congress didn't get something done.
But now because it's a A three-week working group where we know who's in the group, roughly speaking.
We know what they're talking about.
We know when they're meeting.
Suddenly, it's real.
This is a real group of people on both sides getting together and trying to do something.
And we're going to watch them fail, inevitably, right in front of us.
So at the end of this process, the president is going to be able to say clearly, hey, I funded the government, I gave the Democrats what they wanted, which is debates without the government being funded, and you can see right in front of you that nothing productive came out of it.
So now that I've tried every other way, I'm going to try the remaining way, which as it turns out is a fairly typical thing to do.
Because again, there have been 54 of these crises, 30 some of them are still in effect and you didn't even know about them, they're so ordinary.
So that the condition is perfectly set.
Now apparently there's some rumblings about DACA and path to citizenship and etc.
So he may sweeten the pot with some of that stuff to make it harder for the Democrats to say no.
But here's the kill shot.
Here's the kill shot.
Are you ready for it? If the president says something like, I'm going to say right now, he's going to get everything he wants.
Maybe not as much money as quickly, but he's going to get physical borders.
And it goes like this.
If he says in the State of the Union, I'm going to declare an emergency because Congress doesn't seem to be able to take the recommendation of experts.
I'll say it again. I'm going to declare a state of emergency because Congress doesn't seem to be able to do the simple step of taking the advice of security experts on a vital interest to the United States, our border security.
If he says, hey, I need a border wall, so I'm just going to do this emergency declaration, it's going to look like usurping power.
It's going to look like he's trying to game the system.
It's going to look a little dictatorish, to the other side anyway.
So it's going to be framed wrong if he says, well, you guys tried, now I'm just going to do my own thing.
That would be, you know, you could still probably get away with that, but it wouldn't be optimal.
Optimal would be, I'm going to declare a state of emergency because Congress on this topic doesn't work.
You watched it yourself.
You know, I gave them time, and you watched it with your own eyes.
You saw the reporting from both sides that they can't do this simple task.
And so the emergency is, Congress is broken.
On this topic. And the emergency is that Congress is not taking the advice of experts.
Here I'm assuming that the experts come up with some kind of a plan that includes some physical borders.
Now, who gets mad about that?
If he frames it as it's an emergency because they're not following the experts' recommendations, I think everybody just goes, ah, okay.
Because the other thing that's happening at the same time is this conversation about climate change.
So I don't know if you've seen how important it is that climate change and the way we talk about it, not the issue itself, but the way we talk about climate is going to change how we think about and talk about the border question.
Because the entire argument about climate from, let's say, the climate scientist's majority, the whole thing is, hey, we're the experts.
You would be the biggest idiot in the world if you don't follow advice from experts.
That's pretty much the argument.
Because nobody's asking the president to understand the science at some kind of deep scientific level.
Nobody's asking that. They're asking him to follow the expert recommendation.
At the same time, the Democrats are probably going to be trapped in a corner in which whatever they decide to do is going to at least look like going against the experts.
That's how I expect this will turn out.
If they do that, they will be refuting their own climate argument which is you have to listen to experts because we're not experts.
So I think they've trapped themselves.
And I think the president can skillfully paint this as nothing but obstructionism, and that the emergency is that the government doesn't work for this specific thing.
Now, if he says the government doesn't work in general, that would be a huge mistake, because that looks like a dictator ready to take over.
But if he says, we've got this great government, it does so many great things, but in this very specific area, I think you could all see, public, that the government didn't work.
And apparently it's the wrong tool for the job.
Congress, anyway, is the wrong tool for the job because it got too politicized and it became too much about me personally.
If President Trump says that the conversation about the border is totally messed up and can't be fixed because it became about his personality, everybody watching that is going to say, yeah, that's kind of true.
Both sides are going to say, it is sort of about you personally.
That would be the point.
He can say, and for this specific reason, we're just going to go with the experts.
And the only way we can do that is apparently if I order it as an emergency and we just follow the experts.
So I think at this point, the president has a clear path to building more wall.
And when I say more wall, I mean probably just in the populated areas and probably some kind of steel structure, because I think that's what the experts will recommend.
Now, here's an interesting thing.
I was reading yesterday that one of the technologies that has been at least considered is laying fiber optic cable and using them as sensors.
So apparently if you just take a fiber optic cable The same kind of cable that you would lay if you're going to create a communication link.
So nothing special to it.
It's literally just the fiber optic cable and whatever kind of sheath or coating it comes in.
They just lay it under the sand and they can detect Whether a person or an automobile or an animal has walked across it.
Because apparently the nature of fiber optics, I didn't know this before, the nature of the fiber optic cable is that it can detect pressure and somehow they can calculate exactly where along the length of it the pressure happened and how much there was.
So if a vehicle goes over it they can tell versus a rabbit goes over it versus a person.
So you could, as something like a tenth of the cost of other solutions, they can just run a bunch of cable, shovel some sand on top of it?
And they can tell who's crossing.
Now, let me counter the objections of all the people on Twitter who keep yelling at me like I'm an idiot.
And they say, ha, ha, ha, Scott.
I have to ask my co-host to come in.
My co-host, Dale, would like to explain to you why electronic fencing doesn't work.
Okay? Ho, ho, ho, Scott.
Don't you understand? If there's no fence, they will just walk right by.
Oh, you sensed it?
Your censors sensed it as they walked right by?
That helps a lot. How does that help us?
How does that help us that you sensed it?
Why don't you want to stop it?
It's not enough to sense it.
If you just sense that they entered the country, that's great, Scott.
Oh, that's great that you sensed it, didn't stop it.
Let me explain how this works.
The reason that you need physical structures in urban areas is that if somebody gets over it, they can disappear into the city.
So the biggest factor about whether you use a physical border or you use sensors is whether there's a population area nearby.
If there's a population area, as soon as somebody gets past the border, they disappear.
Can't be found. But if you're in a big empty area and somebody trips a sensor, they've got miles and miles and miles to go Before they can hide, before they can get to a population.
So, in those areas that are empty, of which is, you know, miles and miles, many miles of the border is just empty land, the sensor is good enough Because it's hard to cross in those areas.
It's physically hard to get there compared to, let's say, a road.
It's physically hard to get there, and if they do get there, they're going to be moving slowly because they're not necessarily in a vehicle.
They might be on foot, and they've got to go for miles, and they're going to be exposed.
So, border security just comes over and says, looks like five people just crossed the border, send the truck over.
So, sensors alone don't help.
It's sensors plus human border security within an easy driving distance.
So, when people say this part of the border will be sensors, What they don't say, but is assumed, is it's sensors plus enough humans to go and pick them up if somebody trips a sensor, because they'll be easy to find.
There's no population to fade into.
So, if you would like to be a smart participant in the border security conversation, don't say sensors don't work.
Because a good part of the Israeli border wall that we know works just great is low fence and sensors.
You could walk up to the Israeli border security and just sort of push down the fence and just step over it.
I mean, it's literally that small of a fence.
But they all have sensors on them.
And if you trip that sensor, you will very quickly meet some Israeli security forces you wish you hadn't met.
So it works in Israel, where there's big border areas with lots of room on both sides.
Yes, God is ignoring that huge problem.
What am I ignoring? But enough humans can be overwhelmed.
Yes. But if a caravan comes, then the caravan presumably would overwhelm the number of human border security.
But, here again, we could detect a caravan.
We know a caravan's coming days before it gets here.
So even then, you can move humans there.
Then you say, well, what if a bunch of them surprise you and they all run for the border at the same time?
Well, if that happens more than once, then you build a wall.
So all of this is iterative.
All of this is, oh, no wonder I keep blocking the wrong people.
All right, so I just did a little test where I very clearly tapped the right person to block them, and then before I confirmed, I read who it was I was blocking, and it was a different person.
So actually blocking, putting my finger right on the person I want to block actually blocks the wrong person.
I didn't realize that until just now, which would explain why I blocked so many of the wrong people.
So if I've accidentally blocked any of your friends, sorry.
We're talking about distractions and stuff.
Well, all of your little exceptions, it's like, oh, somebody will use a clever distraction and blah, blah, blah.
Those are all true. But remember, it's a process.
If we put up a solution and somebody finds a way around it in that area, well, you improve that area.
It's not like a one-and-done situation.
It's a continuous whack-a-mole situation forever.
All right. So, oh, I don't know if I told you, but apparently there's a new version of Periscope coming, or an upgrade, that will include split screen.
Have any of you heard that?
Apparently there's an...
eventually, or fairly soon, I think, I'll be able to do a split screen on Periscope, and that's going to be fun.
Oh, I told you that already?
all right never mind um did i hear back from tucker Somebody asked me. I don't remember why you're asking me that.
Oh, I hear, so Joe Rogan is getting, he's getting a lot of grief for his interview with Jack Dorsey, and people are saying that he didn't go hard enough at Jack on the question of banning or blocking conservatives.
And Joe has had to respond to that where he felt he needed to.
I'm not sure that there's anything he could have done that would have gotten different answers.
I watched enough of that to feel like he did ask the right questions and that the answers have something to do with the algorithm and looking at human behavior, not just the tweet itself, but a pattern of behavior, etc. But yeah, it would be fun to see the follow-up questions.
So I'll agree that more could have been asked on that topic.
They've used sensors on the border since the 80s, which means they work, right?
We wouldn't be talking about them now if they weren't using sensors already.
One of the dumbest, I hate to say this, but there's some things where people maybe don't, they're not informed, and there are some situations where smart people can disagree, but there are some things that are just flat out dumb, and so I don't know how to talk about them without properly labeling them, and I'll give you an example.
One of the examples is people say they prefer a wall because if the administration changes sometime in the future, it's much harder to take down a wall than it is to take down some sensors.
So people say, no, a wall will be more permanent just because it's harder to change your mind later if you don't want the wall.
To which I say, that's not smart.
That's not smart at all.
Because if the administration of the future decides to...
Yeah, it's ridiculous. If an administration of the future decides that they don't want to enforce the wall, the wall becomes irrelevant that same day.
You don't have to take it down.
You just have to stop enforcing the border.
There's a million ways to get around a wall, over a wall, go through the open border.
You're talking about a scenario In which the government of the United States decides to not enforce its border.
If that ever happens, there are a million ways to get over and around a wall because there won't be any humans picking up the people who are going around it.
Here's the other bad argument.
The other bad argument is that all you need is a ladder to get over a wall.
All you need is a ladder to get over a wall.
Well, on a technical level, that's true.
A big enough ladder could get over a wall.
But have you seen the immigrants?
They literally come with nothing but a backpack.
Who's got a backpack that'll carry a 30-foot ladder?
And don't you need two of them?
You need one on each side, right?
So you need two 30-foot ladders that you have to somehow carry with you without detection.
And even if it worked, As soon as you put it up, somebody's going to find the ladder and take it, and then you need another 30-foot ladder.
So it seems to me that the ladder concept is technically possible, but it would be so impractical.
The only way it could work If the coyotes have a permanent ladder there that they just put up, they put up just when people come and then they quickly take it down and cover it with dirt or something.
But the thing is that the places where there are walls, wait for it, wait for it, the places where there are walls, and those would be the places that a ladder could get over a wall, because you don't need a ladder if there's no wall, are the populated areas.
If you put up a ladder in a populated area, and by the way, they could probably put video security on those areas as well, somebody's going to see the ladder pretty quickly.
The ladder isn't going to stay there very long.
So it's impractical to transport a new pair of 30-foot ladders to a border.
I mean, it's just hard to do. And if he did, it wouldn't stay there long.
And then the question of tunnels.
Apparently even the smugglers, I'm sorry, the drug cartels, Apparently the cartels are also not using tunnels as much anymore because it's not economical.
By the time you build this big tunnel, it's expensive, it takes a long time.
It's just easier to use a fishing boat, according to the El Chapo trial.
That's their thinking. You go to the store and buy two ladders.
You have to carry two 30-foot ladders to a border area where there's a wall and there's no population on the other side and no video watching it.
You can do it, but that amount of friction would substantially reduce the number of people who could do it.
Put a rope on the other side.
Well, you know, one of the weird aspects of making it hard to get over the wall is that you only get the people who are in good physical health.
The top is a razor's edge.
It wouldn't be hard to thwart the top.
All you have to do is take a carpet.
So just throw a carpet over the top.
Go from ladder to carpet to rope or ladder.
So all of it can be done, and I would guarantee that somewhere somebody is doing just that stuff.
Not many people can do it.
Did I see Gavin McGinnis' lawsuit against the SPLC? So I've heard of such a thing.
So apparently Gavin McGinnis is suing the Southern Poverty Law Center, which will be interesting.
So we'll be watching that.
And I assume, I don't know the details of that, but I assume it's because they have labeled him in a way which he would say is...
Inappropriate. Alright. The wall won't stop people from catapulting into America.
That's a funny comment.
Alright. We don't have much else going on right now, right?
Oh, here's what's going on.
We've been watching for, what, three straight years where every single day there's an article on the homepage of CNN saying that President Trump is a racist.
Is that not true?
Is it not true that basically every single day CNN has a top page news suggesting that the president is a racist for one reason or another?
Have you noticed that stop this week?
Have you noticed they're not talking about that so much?
So it turns out that Governor Northam has so badly damaged the Democrat brand that it looks like it's changed the coverage.
Because today if you made a comment about the Trump administration being racist, it would be impossible to make that comment without somebody saying, yeah, but Northrum, yeah, Northrum, Northrum, Northrum.
So as long as Northrum stays in the news, and he's the current piñata, the president gets sort of a pass.
Because they don't want to drag him in and have those relatively weaker claims try to stand up to this Northam thing.
So that will be interesting.
At the same time that the Russia collusion thing seems to be sort of falling apart.
Now one of the things I don't believe is that Mueller is getting ready to wrap things up.
Do any of you believe that?
That doesn't feel true to me.
It does not feel true to me that Mueller is ready to wrap things up.
Unless wrap things up means in the next six months.
If you told me he was going to be done in six months, then I might say, oh yeah, he's wrapping things up.
He'll be done in six months.
But I don't see any way that's going to happen next week.
It's not going to happen in the next 30 days, is it?
I just don't see that happening.
I feel like we would have far more signaling that that was going to happen.
I heard a woman say Trump is a racist.
Yeah. I mean, you can't stop the pundits.
So the pundits are still going to say what the pundits say.
But when CNN decides what of all the news there is, what articles and what things to put on their front page, that's an editorial decision.
But the pundits are going to say what the pundits say.
Yeah, so A.G. Whittaker, acting A.G., he says it's going to wrap up soon, but haven't we heard that before?
to me that doesn't mean anything.
Yeah, so there's a list of celebrities and news people who apparently are being sued so there's a list of celebrities and news people who apparently are being sued for And I have mixed feelings about that, I gotta say.
I gotta say I have mixed feelings.
I'll show you my view in a minute.
Now the first thing that happened when I saw the list of the 50 or so people who were being targeted for lawsuits, the first thing I did was look for my name.
I wanted to see if my name was on the list.
Now, maybe the reason my name isn't on the list is because I immediately, as soon as the news was corrected, I clarified and apologized.
And I wonder if that would be enough.
You know, if Alyssa Milano or Kathy Griffin said, okay, we were fooled by the news coverage, it looked like something different than what it was, so we clarify and we apologize.
Would that be enough to get them off of the lawsuit?
Somebody says there's a website called defendgavin.com.
That must be for...
I'm guessing that's for donations for people who want to defend Gavin McGinnis or help him in his lawsuit against the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Oh, the lawyer did say that a retraction or an apology would do.
Well, that seems fair.
Blah, blah, blah, blah.
You only wanted a retraction.
Do they accept WEN tokens?
Let's talk about my app.
I'm going to do a special periscope on this, but the interface by WinHub app, we've added some doctors now, and some of the doctors are international, but other doctors practice in the United States, and they're licensed for particular states.
And they can even write prescriptions.
If they're licensed in your state, they can write a prescription.
Not for opioids, but for other stuff.
Spell it, please. I think you're asking me to spell the name of the app.
It's called Interface, I-N-T-E-R-F-A-C-E, Interface by WenHub.
If you search for that on the app stores, it'll come up.
Yes, so we are part of the telemedicine.
Thank you for putting it in text there.
So I'll tell you a little bit more about that maybe later today.
Alright.
Alright, let me show you the video.
So that's what I'm looking at today.
It's pretty nice to look at, I've got to say.
It has been, actually it's been raining the whole time we've been here, so I think today is the first non-rainy day.
medication therapy I don't know what that is so I'm at the the montage Should you donate to Roger Stone's defense?
Well, I think that's up to you.
Alright, I'm just looking at your comments here.
Yeah, I'm in Hawaii, in Maui.
Moore and AOC, I talked about that, yeah.
Roger Moore says AOC is the future of the Democrats.
What telemedicine app?
So my startup's app is called Interface by WenHub, and we have a number of experts on there, but we just started signing up doctors.
So we have a number of doctors on there, and we're trying to add more.
If you support the app, you'll be part of supporting bringing down healthcare costs and increasing the options.
So if you'd like to be part of that, that's one way to do it.
I talked about Hoaxed already.
All right. I'm definitely not going to take the road to Hana.
That's a long day. Can people ping an expert who's offline?
Oh yes. So one of the upgrades that we did not have in the initial release is that you can schedule experts.
So they have to make their schedule available, but when the expert wants to be available at a certain time, they can now schedule that time and you can schedule it through the app and then you both just show up and have your call.
Am I going to hang out with any celebrities?
No. I mean, not intentionally.
So one of the things that's happened since I started doing Periscope is I now get recognized in airports and in public where I never used to.
So almost everywhere I go now, people pick me out of the crowd and say, hey, Simultaneous ep?
Yeah, Christina's a celebrity, so I'll see her.
Tried to use interface for an AI expert, but no luck.
There usually are AI experts.
I've seen a number of them on there.
How do you become an expert on the app?
You just have to call yourself an expert at something and just sign up.
All you have to do is put in your profile and you can be an expert at literally anything that you think people will pay for.
And you don't even have to charge.
You can be an expert for free if you want.
Oh, there is a web interface.
Yeah. We do now have a laptop web interface for Interface by WenHub.
So you don't have to use the app.
You can just Google it, Interface by WenHub.
You Google it and you'll find the web page.
That's brand new. So thank you for reminding me.
And then I've told you that an upcoming version, we don't have it in this version, but probably a week or so, we'll have a donate button so that if there are any conservatives who don't want to be on Patreon or they don't want to be on one of the other donation sites, if they've been kicked off especially, They could use the interface app and get donations that way.
Did I already talk about Jack Dorsey?
Yes, we did.
Do I like people saying hi to me in public?
It depends on the situation.
If I'm at dinner, enjoying my dinner, that would not be optimal.
But if they just say hi on the way by, that's fine too.
If somebody just recognizes me as they're walking by and they say hi, then I do like that.
And if somebody sees me in the airport, as is often the case these days, then of course.
I never bothered by it in person.
The only issue was whether I was doing something else.
if I'm not doing something else that matters then I enjoy it what kind of dreams do I have when I sleep at night I almost never dream.
But weirdly, I had a dream yesterday.
I had a dream that I was falling asleep and having a dream.
I literally had a dream about falling asleep and dreaming.
It was the most useless dream I've ever had.
Because you smoke pot, somebody says.
Could be. Will you draw Dilbert as long as you can?
Well, I was thinking about this the other day.
If I could sell the entire Dilbert brand forever, just all the rights to Dilbert, past and present, for a billion dollars, I would quit tomorrow.
But I don't think anybody's going to pay a billion dollars for it.
But if they did, it's for sale.
So let me announce this officially.
Anybody who pays a billion dollars for the rights to Dilbert, it's for sale.
But I wouldn't expect that to happen.
And somebody says, "I'll think about it." Do you ever get to meet me in person?
Well, that's hard to say.
Alright, WEN tokens, you can still buy them if you go to interface.wenhub.com and owning WEN tokens is not an investment.
It doesn't qualify as an investment, but nonetheless, if the app is successful, the value of the tokens should go up.
That's the way they're designed.
They're designed to go up if the demand for them goes up.
So, if you were going to guess when is the very best time to buy them, it's probably right now.
Probably right now. And you can also buy them on exchanges.
Latoken.com.
You can buy them. Did you see there was an article that apparently it's possible to embed a virus in your DNA that would take over the CRISPR machines?
So in other words, you can put software in your DNA and it can affect a machine that's measuring your DNA, like a software virus?
Yeah, who knew that was possible?
Somebody says, B.S.? I have to say I'm with you on the BS on that.
Because the story by itself does not look like that could be.
People are calling BS on that.
I think I'm going to agree with the BS people.
If you know even a little bit about software, it feels like there's an air gap there.
It just doesn't seem like that's possible.
All right. Fleetwoods is great.
Yeah, I've eaten at Fleetwoods a few times.
Alright, that's enough for now. I will talk to you later.
▲
Export Selection