Episode 1432 Scott Adams: Lots of Persuasion Lessons on the Best Coffee With Scott Adams EVER!
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Viral thread by @MartyrMade, Darryl Cooper
California rejects CDC on masks in schools
How to defeat Governor Newsome
Mighty Small Homes: kit homes
Google erased Mike Cernovich report on SPLC
Children should be taught, the "news" isn't real
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
It's time for Coffee with Scott Adams, the best time of every single day.
No doubt about it, the argument is over.
It's just the best time.
Today, I have for you, look at these notes.
Yeah, content.
Good content for the first time.
It's going to be the best content you've ever heard, and all you need to enjoy it to its maximum potential is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chels or a stein, a canteen, a jug or a flask.
A vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day.
The thing that makes everything better.
It's called the Simultaneous Sip and it's going to rock the entire world like a 5.8 earthquake in California.
Go! Oh yeah.
Oh yeah. Well, as some of you have been following my saga of...
Trying to be a dumb guy who learns how to do smart stuff, meaning that I was trying to learn how to do the proper sound engineering for this livestream.
Now, if you've been with me from the beginning, you knew it started with me just holding up my phone and talking to it.
And over time, I try to chip away at it to make all the elements a little bit better.
You know, I'm always A-B testing.
And let me tell you what happened recently.
So I asked on social media...
How do I get two sound signals to go through my Rodecaster Pro mixer so that my iPad and my laptop or two iPads can have the same sound with one microphone?
And many, many people gave me suggestions.
Do you know what happens when you get lots of good suggestions and they're all different?
Worthless. It turns out that if you get lots and lots of help, you can't tell what is the good help because it's all different.
If I got lots of advice and it was largely the same or there was one, let's say, one approach that people seemed to favor, then I'd say, whoa, there we go.
Got something to try.
But if 100 people give you technical advice and all 100 are different...
You have nothing. Because you've got to try all hundred things, and it's basically the same as guessing.
So most recently, somebody gave me a full diagram with details of what cables to buy to make this connection, which I don't think the equipment is exactly made to do this.
But you start with these.
All right so you got this going into the speaker holes and then it goes into one connection but then the one connection goes back into a splitter so you've got your your coming out analog right into the splitter and then the splitter It goes into these cables,
and then these cables go into these little devices, into the microphone part, which I think is trying to change it from analog back to digital, and then it goes back into this, and then it goes into your devices.
Now, how impressive was this?
Somebody had to figure out all of these cable types and all of the different transfers and redirections.
To make all this work.
And I plugged it in, and I'll be damned.
It actually worked.
The sound actually went from my microphone all the way into the device.
But, how many engineers are already laughing?
Come on, tell me. Those of you who actually know what you're doing, how many of you are laughing now?
Some of you are.
I know it. You got punked, somebody says.
Yeah, it worked, but the noise was so extreme it wasn't usable.
So you could tell somebody was talking, but there was so much interference it wasn't a useful thing.
So that was another week of work and ordering things and putting things together.
And there's one more thing that did not work.
Will I be discouraged by this?
Nope. Nope.
Because every time I do something that doesn't work, I learn a new thing about engineering, which is if you've got too many connections and changes, it's probably not going to work.
I know what you're saying. I hear you.
You're all saying hire an engineer, hire a producer, and even if you don't want them sitting there with you, at least have them show you how to set it up once.
That's good advice from people who have never worked with an engineer.
Have you ever worked with an engineer?
Let me show you how it goes.
All right? We're going to make this work, and I'll show you how to do this.
Here's the device you're going to use.
You want to come in, and you want to do this.
That's it. That's it.
Just this. Hit these three buttons in that order.
You're done. It's going to work every time.
All right. Give me my paycheck.
I'm out of here. First day you turn it on.
Nothing. Nothing.
And then you call the engineer and he says, oh, did I forget to tell you that you also have this setting that has to be set.
Okay, now I got it.
Change the setting. It works.
Yay! Next day, put on the setting.
Doesn't work. So you call up the engineer.
He goes, oh, did I tell you that sometimes, in this situation, you have to have the setting on and then do this, but do it in a different order.
You go, okay, got it now.
I have all the situations.
So you do that. What happens the next day?
Yeah, the next day it doesn't work.
So one of the things you can count on an engineer to do is to find a perfect solution that never works twice.
Because it's the nature of audio engineering that you can set it up once and it just doesn't work the next time.
It's very common across all the products.
And I know you're going to say, get OBS and get all these things that combine things.
They all have that problem.
They don't work twice. So I've tried them all.
All right, moving on.
At the billionaire summer camp in Sun Valley, where Bill Gates gave a speech to the other billionaires who were assembled there for fun, he gave a speech on climate change.
So he's talking about climate change to all the billionaires so they can do something about it.
In a related news, this is the Daily Mail reported this, so many of the attendees flew in on private jets to hear the climate change talk that the airspace as far afield as Michigan and Canada had to be temporarily closed.
Let me put it in my own words.
There were so many private jets flying to the speech about climate change that it blocked out the sun.
And for a moment, the sun couldn't get through to the Earth, and it actually cooled the Earth.
There were so many private jets in the air, mostly it was shady from Michigan to Sun Valley.
So that's the good news.
That's the good news. All right, here's something I often recommend that you do things.
Wouldn't you say? Sometimes I give you advice.
Sometimes I say, you know, you should read this article, or you should look at this tweet, or you should maybe follow this person on Twitter.
You hear me say that a lot, right?
Here's what I don't often say, but I'm going to say it today.
Stop everything you're doing, except this.
As soon as you're done with this, or actually, I will give you permission to stop this.
That's how good this thing is that I'm going to recommend.
You could actually stop the live stream right now and just go listen to this content.
It's pinned at the top of my Twitter page.
And it's Tucker Carlson reading an article, or I don't know if it's a tweet thread or article, from Daryl Cooper, who I don't know, but he's a tremendous writer.
So whoever Daryl Cooper is, oh my God, can he write?
Let me say that again.
Oh my God, can he write?
And the reason that Tucker is reading his piece on TV is that you've almost never seen anything like this.
It is so well written that your brain just does something.
I mean, it's weird. And here's what he pulled off that is very hard to do.
In some ways, it's the holy grail of all writers.
So he does what all writers are trying to do But not many have ever pulled it off in the history of writing.
Which is to take this big, complicated thing that we all experience.
In this case, he's writing about the 2020 election and the fact that Republicans are doubters about the outcome.
And the story is pretty big because there are a lot of moving parts.
And what Daryl does, which Tucker Carlson recognized and saw its value, as do I, is that somehow he managed to put all that...
into a logical framework.
It was crazy.
It was so good.
So here's my recommendation.
I don't want to ruin the content by, you know, summarizing it too much.
But let me tell you, if you're wondering why it is that Republicans are more doubtful about the outcome of the election, you're probably saying, well, that's kind of obvious.
I can think of ten reasons.
You have to see his description.
It's just crazy.
It's so good. And honestly, honestly, stop what you're doing to absorb it.
It's at the top of my Twitter feed.
You'll know where to find it.
There's a TikTok star who's in trouble because he had some exotic snakes, and one of them was a zebra cobra.
And he let it escape, but he didn't tell anybody for months, and I guess authorities found it and captured it.
But here are some fun snake facts that I just found.
All right, are you ready for fun snake facts?
Number one, a zebra cobra can spit venom nine feet, and the venom actually burns you like acid.
Oh my God, that's the scariest snake I've ever heard of.
First of all, I don't like to get within nine feet of anything called a cobra, but if you do get within nine feet, you're still not too safe, even at nine feet, because of that spitting venom.
So we had this spitting venom zebra snake in some neighborhood, and they finally got it.
But here are some other things that we learned.
Number one, if you have a zebra cobra, This TikTok star did not do that, so he's in trouble for that. How many of you would have known that?
That it was a legal requirement?
No, obviously it was a moral and ethical requirement to let people know there's a deadly snake in the neighborhood.
So I think we all agree on the moral-ethical part.
But did you know there was a legal requirement?
I wouldn't have known that.
Here's another one that's weird.
Apparently he's also in trouble for mislabeling the containers of snakes.
Did you know if you put the wrong label on your snake container you can get in legal trouble?
I'm not really good at labeling things.
I'm not good with details.
So I feel like I would not be a good snake farmer because I'd be mislabeling all my containers.
Mine would be like the snake and then there would be like the other snake because I don't really know much about snakes.
So if I put a bunch of snakes in the container, I probably wouldn't spend too much time figuring out the correct label.
I'd be like snake number two, snake number three.
Don't touch the snake.
All right. CNN, and I didn't think I'd ever live to see this, and listen carefully, because you're going to think I'm misspeaking.
So hear my words clearly.
CNN today reported real news.
Let me say it again, because you probably don't believe it.
CNN reported real news today.
It's talking about the city of Charlottesville, and they're taking down their Confederate statutes.
Apparently, that's actually a real thing that's happening.
Now, here's the part that's shocking.
They did a story about Charlottesville and Confederate statues.
They mentioned the Unite the Right event, and they did not mention, not one mention, to the Fine People hoax, which normally they had always reported as fact.
Think about that. CNN did a story about Charlottesville and removing Confederate statues and the Unite the Right rally that sort of was the predecessor of it all.
And they didn't mention at all, not any mention, of the Fine People hoax.
You're welcome. And shout out to Steve Cortez and Joel Pollack for pounding on that hoax since 2018, right?
And we have been pounding that thing and pounding it.
And many of you have been helping on that by retweeting the tweets and the articles and stuff.
Now, I'm not going to say we won.
But I will say that Joe Biden stopped saying the fine people hoax.
And this is the first time I've seen the CNN reported it without the hoax reported as if it were true.
Maybe it's progress.
Well, happy July 10th.
Today is sort of an important day, July 10th.
It's a day when some of you will have a great day today.
I guarantee it.
Many of you watching this are going to go out and have just a great day.
Other people, my enemies, will be choking on their own bile today.
But they know who they are.
And I'll leave that to their imaginations about what's going to happen today, July 10th.
Some days will be good.
Some days will not.
All right. Biden reversed another Trump policy on pregnant aliens.
Now, these are not my words.
I'm using the words from the news.
They're referring to the topic here as a policy on pregnant aliens.
I assume this is something about the UFOs.
I didn't read all the details.
But apparently... Trump had a policy that if you were pregnant and you were an alien and you came to the United States, that they would detain you or not on a case-by-case basis.
But now Biden has reversed that because it was cruel and evil, they say.
And instead, anybody who's pregnant and or nursing will not be detained.
So no detaining for anybody who's pregnant.
So no pregnant aliens will be detained.
So if you see a lot of pregnant aliens, and you can usually tell them because they have antennae, and they might be green, for example, possibly have different number of eyes or features, but you also notice them very pregnant, and you want to stay away from them.
If you've ever seen a pregnant alien, And here I'm assuming we're talking about space aliens, because I didn't read the article, but it seems obvious.
With all the UFOs, this must be what it's about.
Let me do my impression of a pregnant alien.
Okay. I'm going to say that wasn't my best impression.
But that... Was what a pregnant alien looks like.
Let's see. How about that?
Sorry about that.
I just got so excited.
Alright, here's some disappearing news stories.
Alright, I'm going to build a little theme here about disappearing news.
And it starts with a story about The Washington Post editorial board had a piece that said, why are unions and Democrats so opposed to giving poor children a choice in schooling?
And I thought to myself, the reason that this was being tweeted around is that it's rare.
That it's rare.
It's rare that the Washington Post, especially a left-leaning publication, would even have the topic, you know, it looks like an opinion piece, but would even have this topic about opposing school choice and it's bad for poor children.
And here's what I ask you.
Doesn't it seem like the left-leaning news, which is the main news, we'll get to the Mike Serinovich part of this, doesn't it seem that the news Has disappeared the story of school choice.
Right? The news has just disappeared that story.
And you don't realize until somebody plays it, you don't realize just...
Jesus fucking Christ.
Fucking bastards.
All right, I'm going to fix my microphone a little bit, but...
Don't fucking talk about the audio anymore.
The problem's on your side if you've got an audio problem.
All right. So enough about that.
So we're seeing a situation in which the whole school choice debate is basically treated as not an issue when it might be the most important issue in the country.
In my opinion, if you were to pick the one most important thing, it would be school choice.
Certainly fixing the options for...
Black Americans and anybody who's low income who doesn't have a good school.
But we don't really see much debate on that in the news, do we?
We don't have much debate on that.
And so you can see that the news decides not only what is news, but what we even debate on.
They just keep it out of the news, and it's just not a story.
So we're going to tie some stories together here, but let me do the stories first.
Let's say you wanted to follow the science.
Because that's a good idea, right?
And let's say you were in California and you read that today.
The CDC said on Friday, I guess yesterday, that fully vaccinated teachers and students do not need to wear masks.
So that's what the CDC says.
Now, do you think that the CDC is using science to make their decisions?
Well, I think they are. Right?
It's the CDC, probably using science.
So what did California do when the CDC said you don't need masks if you're fully vaccinated?
California followed the science in the opposite direction and said, oh, you totally are going to need masks to go back to school.
Fuck you.
Fuck you.
Fuck, fuck you, Governor Newsom.
Now, I've got to say, I have not been too engaged in the recall Newsom saga.
I prefer it.
I think that he's worthy of recall.
But I don't know what the odds are.
The odds are low, I think, that he actually gets recalled.
But that process is underway.
And when I see that California is ignoring science, or at least CDC's version of science, which actually is people-friendly, I say to myself, why is that?
Can you give me some reason, California, in which your guidelines would be different?
And it turns out there is a reason.
So now the CDC says you don't need masks if you're vaccinated to go back to school.
California says you do.
And here's California's reason that they're disagreeing with the CDC. Here's California's reason.
At the outset of the new year, students should be able to walk into school without worrying about whether they will feel different or singled out for being vaccinated or unvaccinated.
Treating all kids the same will support a calm and supportive school environment.
Are you fucking kidding me?
Really? Are you fucking kidding me?
California is saying directly that they're going to ignore the science because it will make kids feel better and not tease each other about being vaccinated or not vaccinated.
Are you fucking kidding me?
You fucking idiots.
You're going to send kids who are fully vaccinated into school and make them wear a fucking mask all day.
Really? You've gone too far.
Too far. Too fucking far.
So I'm going to give you, in a little bit, a plan for how to beat Newsom in the recall.
Now, I hadn't been, like I said, I haven't been involved in any way.
But there is a very clear path to beat him, especially with this mask thing.
The mask stuff alone should be enough to kick him out of office, right?
Unless the governor comes out against that, and I don't think it's going to happen.
That should be the end of him.
As soon as you go against the CDC's recommendation for masks, that should be it.
You don't even need to talk about other fucking things, really.
That's it. Because you're going to piss off kids and their moms.
Forget about the dads, because nobody cares about dads.
But you're going to piss off the kids and their moms, and this is going to be some trouble.
And I'm going to add to this trouble in a little bit.
But... Here's my plan for beating Governor Newsom.
Now this requires a good candidate, right?
So I'm going to tell you what a good candidate could do to win the election.
The perfect candidate would be a socially liberal Republican.
So that's the first start.
You have to be socially liberal because it's California.
There's just no way around it.
You know, you're not going to get elected unless you're socially on the right page.
And Arnold Schwarzenegger was a good example.
So Schwarzenegger was clearly socially liberal, but he was a Republican otherwise on the hard-headed stuff.
And that's kind of what you're going to need.
But here's the specific plan that would win the governorship in California.
Number one, propose pairing nuclear power plants, small ones, the new designs that are safer, with desalinization.
And build a lot of them.
Now you say to yourself, but Scott, that would take 20 years and everybody opposes nuclear and desalinization takes so much energy that it's not cost effective.
Well, it's more cost effective if you put it next to a nuclear power plant.
And here's the thing.
Much like build the wall, feel the visual.
I want to put a nuclear power plant next to a desalinization plant, and we want to do this pair of things all over California so that we have enough water and enough energy forever, and we've also dealt with climate change, and we've done it in the most scientific way.
Now, that message is really visual.
And it's also a complete solution, but you're going to have to beat the fact that it takes 20 years to do it.
So you're going to have to lead with a Republican message that you've got to get rid of the regulations and the NAMBA stuff, and you're going to have to really educate the public on why they need this.
So you would say, number one, I've got to educate the public.
That they think that the old nuclear is the dangerous stuff, and it's not going to be the old nuclear that we're proposing.
We're proposing the newer, you know, at least Generation 3, but probably Generation 4, we're proposing that we go hard at getting rid of regulations, maybe get the federal government involved in some way.
But the visual of nuclear plus desalinization, even if it takes longer than you think, Is a solution.
And it would be the first time anybody had one.
Right? Even if it's hard, at least it's a solution.
What is the other solution?
More solar panels?
No. There isn't really any other solution.
So you would be the only governor who is even proposing a frickin' plan.
How about this? You're a Republican and you say, we know that California is going to catch on fire any moment now.
Apparently it's going to be the worst fire season of all time because it's the driest.
And what is the governor's forest management plan?
Do you know? I don't know.
I live here. I live in a state that's going to be literally on fire within weeks.
Within weeks, I won't be able to go outdoors.
Literally, I won't be able to go outdoors because the air quality will be too low.
And I don't know what my governor is even doing about it.
So if you're going to run against him, come up with a forest management plan and tell us what it is.
I just want to hear one.
It could be that Newsom has a plan or even that he's working on it or even that he's doing a good job.
I don't know. But I'm not hearing about it, so you could beat him on that.
Next, of course, you would say no masks for kids in school.
That's enough to win the election, really, if you just did that one thing.
If you weren't bad on anything else and you said, look, I'll do the same thing Newsom's doing but no masks in school.
I'll just take his entire platform.
I'll do everything he's going to do With one change.
Just one change. I'm just not going to require masks in schools.
You would get elected immediately.
Because people would say, well, we'd like to do some, but except for that mask thing, so we'll vote for you.
Now I'm exaggerating a little bit to make a point.
Of course, you'd want to be strong on crime and also on forcing addicts into treatment, sort of maybe a Dr.
Drew, Michael Schellenberger kind of approach to things that make sense, and basically all the smart people would agree with it, really.
And then here's my kicker for you.
Are you ready? Here's the really persuasive part, because if you want to get attention, you've got to say some controversial things, right?
Here's the most controversial thing you'll ever hear from, potentially, from this.
Suppose you were a Republican running for governor in California, and you knew that the Democrats were going to call you a racist, and if you came out against critical race theory, well, then they'd really call you a racist.
So how do you come out against critical race theory without being against critical race theory?
And still get attention and still get elected.
Here's how. You favor it.
You say, I'm totally in favor of critical race theory, as long as there's also school choice.
Eh? Eh?
Because it is a world in which parents do get to decide, somewhat, how their kids are socialized.
So if you want your kids to be socialized in a critical race theory, intersectionality kind of thing, there will be options for that.
If you want your kids to not be exposed to that, we'll give you some options for that, but we've got to have school choice, and we've got to push as hard as we can for school choice, because if we get that...
You and I don't have to argue about what your kids are being taught versus mine.
I'll just send my kids where they get taught what I want them to teach.
I'm not done yet.
Not done yet. I would also say, in addition to critical race theory, which if you would like to teach it to your kids, I'm all for it, because it has some good points to it.
And you have to say it has good points.
So you start with, oh yeah, there's definitely institutional racism, lots of work to be done.
Critical race theory gives us a good framework for it, but there are legitimate criticisms to it, and parents get to decide.
I would say this.
If you're going to teach critical race theory, which says that you're being, let's say...
Your progress or your future is being limited by race, if that's what we're going to teach kids, it is only ethical and moral that you also teach them life strategy.
Eh? Wouldn't you like it if the kid who learns that race is what's holding him back could simultaneously learn some strategy that says, look, but because of this racial imbalance stuff, you could go to any Fortune 500 company, let's say you're a black woman, you know, or whatever, You could go to any Fortune 500 company and say, look, I've got all the qualifications you're looking for, as do the other applicants, right?
I might not even be more qualified than the other applicants, but you need some diversity.
It's one of your top goals, and I can give you diversity.
I'm also just as good as the other applicants.
I have all the qualifications.
You will get that job basically every time.
Right? So, if you're a Republican, say, I embrace critical race theory and what it teaches, but it's teaching you to be helpless unless you augment it, make it better, improve on it, tell you what to do about it.
Right? Get some school choice.
Go to a Fortune 500 company, use their own policies to your advantage.
Strategy. Would you oppose that?
Well, if you do, you've got school choice.
And on intersectionality, as I've said before, I would embrace it as a Republican.
And I would say, you know, this is a perfectly good conversation for everybody to understand how people are being discriminated against, but why would we limit it?
Let's expand it.
Embrace it to death.
And add Republicans as a category of people who are discriminated against.
Or let's just say non-Democrats.
I'm going to give you an example of a non-Democrat Who is being discriminated against right now?
It's a real thing. It's in the headlines.
Well, it's on Twitter anyway.
It didn't make it to the headlines. But we'll talk about that in a moment.
So you should add the categories of people who are short, ugly, old, Republican, Christian, and make sure that you know that all the categories that are discriminated against are accounted for.
And then just be in favor of it.
The candidate that I just described, especially if they said they'll work on lowering your taxes and making it a better business environment, I think would get elected easily.
Yeah, in boldness, right?
I think that candidate would get elected easily.
But it would have to be a Schwarzenegger type of person who's Republican in the hard-nosed stuff but has all the social equality goals of maybe an Arnold Schwarzenegger.
I won't say that he has goals for that, but he's socially liberal.
Somebody's suggesting Dave Rubin to run for governor.
He'd be great. As I'm just thinking about it.
If you were...
Would Dave Rubin be like the best governor?
He might actually be.
Because he seems completely immune from the politics of stuff.
So what would be better than a married gay man running for governor who is not wed to any political ideology?
And would just like to make things work.
He'd be a really strong candidate.
I don't think he has interest in it, but he has all the tools.
Definitely the communication tools.
All right. Here's a trend I've been watching, just to give you an update on it.
There's a company called Mighty Homes that do these kit homes.
Now, when I say kit, it doesn't mean the homeowner can put it together.
But they make, you know, just panels and windows that just, you know, they hook together in order and it's really easy to assemble them.
Now, some people say, hey, these are not attractive enough or whatever.
And that's something that will, of course, improve in the future.
But keep in mind that most homes are not attractive.
How often do you drive past a home and say, well, that's an attractive home?
Homes are not really attractive.
So if you could make the cost lower and make it easier to build, you'd have something.
But as many have pointed out, the local zoning laws make it nearly impossible to do any kind of construction that's not the normal kind.
So how do you get past the, really, it's just a total roadblock of all the local ordinances?
And I would just say this.
There probably isn't anyway.
You probably can't get past it without, you know, working every state individually, and it'd be a mess.
But imagine, if you will, a President Trump.
Somebody who understands, you know, building and construction and knows about all the obstacles to it.
Do we need a federal set of building guidelines that if you meet them, the federal ones, they would supersede any local ones?
Now, I don't know what problems that would be constitutionally.
You know, it would be, of course, usurping power from the states.
But would people mind?
Would we be worse off?
Would it work? I'm seeing lots of no, no, no.
Oh, God, no. No, keep in mind, what I'm saying is that the states keep their rules, just as they are.
The states keep their rules.
But the only exception would be the homes that would have a sort of a federal blessing if they met certain standards.
So I'm seeing people have, in the comments, this is pretty interesting, I'm seeing lots of comments along the lines of you don't want the federal government to have more control.
I get that. I get that.
Plunging home values, somebody says.
Really? Really? I don't know.
I don't think so. Why would the home values plunge?
Because these would be good homes.
We're not talking about building trailer parks.
I'm talking about attractive homes that just don't cost that much.
Oh, building is the most local activity.
So you want your control to be driven down to the most local level.
I get that. But we have a very specific problem, which is if you allow the control at the local level, you can never improve your building process.
Now, let me stop all of you from saying, oh, it's like the Sears Homes kits.
No. Nothing like that.
And then some of you are going to say it's like tiny homes.
Oh, I get it. Tiny homes.
No. I'm not talking about anything like the Sears kits of long ago.
I'm not talking about anything like a tiny home.
I'm talking about using current technology, not ancient technology, current technology to do something way better or different than anything that's ever been done before.
And I'm not talking about making them small.
Make them a full-size regular home, Just less expensive.
So that's coming, and Mighty Homes is one example of it.
And I would say that even the Mighty Homes model, which looks really good, it looks like a pretty well-thought-out model, but it's probably the Model A. If you were going to look at the automobile industry, it's like a Model A. Yes, and there's things called SIPs, Structural Integrated Panels.
Is that what SIP stands for?
So that's been around for a while, but I think the thing that they do wrong is they make these giant panels that you need a crane to put up.
Can't you make the panels like one foot by one foot so you just snap them together like Legos, put them on the back of a pickup truck, unload them one at a time, and then the homeowner just snaps them together?
Do you really need the whole panel to be delivered by a crane?
I don't know. I feel like there's improvement to be made there.
I love the story of these Spotify employees who are mad about Joe Rogan's content.
Are you following that?
Sparky says there are different environments across the USA. Yeah, you would have a different kit for every environment.
That's right. So your winter kit and your summer kits or your warm weather kit would look different.
But you could work all that out.
So you'd just have a set of requirements for all of those options.
So the Spotify employees are mad at Joe Rogan.
And this story...
It was the most delightfully useless story.
Like, none of this matters to any of us.
But I love the word, still upset.
It's the still that makes it funny.
Because when I first read the story, Spotify employees are upset with Joe Rogan's podcast.
I thought, oh, there's a story.
Joe Rogan has done something that makes these employees upset, and that's worth knowing about.
Interesting media story.
But time goes by, and they add the word still.
Spotify employees still upset.
They're still upset. And for some reason that's funny, because they can't find a way to be happy.
I can't imagine going to work, and I can see if somebody had a bad feeling about some specific opinion that Joe Rogan had, I can see that they would express it, and I can even see that they might tell management.
But if weeks have gone by, and this is still your biggest problem, is the stuff that Joe Rogan said on the, wait for it, stuff that Joe Rogan said on the, wait for it, most popular podcast in the fucking world.
Maybe you should get over it.
Because it's the most popular podcast in the world.
He's doing something right.
Because you couldn't be doing something wrong and also have the most popular podcast in the whole fucking world.
So he's got that going for him.
But these Spotify employees...
I would just love to see a photo of the Spotify employees that are upset.
Because don't you know that that would be a funny picture?
If you just took all the ones that are mad at Joe Rogan and just said, we'd like a group picture.
Oh, no reason. No reason.
We just think you're awesome. So we'd just like to take a group picture.
See what you look like.
Don't you think that would be a funny picture?
You know it would. That would be an interesting group of people.
But here's the funniest part.
What if none of this is true?
Or what if it's a little bit true, but it got exaggerated?
Have you ever heard of better marketing?
Spotify is getting all this national attention about Joe Rogan, who they just paid $100 million to for his show.
And so they've got this enormous investment, and they really need to promote it.
If they just did advertisements, how effective would that be?
Well, it'd help, right?
I'm sure they did that. But what could be better than saying Spotify's own employees are trying to get it kicked off the air?
And by the way, it's the most popular thing in the country.
You couldn't beat that.
This is the best marketing I've ever seen.
All right. Here's a funny story.
True story. There was an internet personality test.
You've seen those. Who knows how much science, I doubt there's much of it, behind it.
But Christina and I both took the personality test.
And one of the things they do, and it's one of these, you know, it comes up with an INTG, whatever, Those kinds of personality profiles.
So I don't think there's much science to it, but they're fun to do.
And I did mine, and both Christine and I answered the same set of questions.
So I saw her questions, and I saw her answer, and she saw mine.
So same set of questions.
And when I answered them just with my own answers, it decided that I'm an advocate personality.
So an advocate, according to this personality test, is the rarest of all personality types.
And people who share it, the same personality as I have, according to this test, would be Mother Teresa.
So Mother Teresa would come out the same on this.
Martin Luther King.
Feeling pretty good.
Feeling pretty good about that.
And Nelson Mandela.
Look at me. So those are the three people who would have the same personality profile as I do.
Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, and Nelson Mandela.
It's just another reason I identify as black, because I'm with, you know, two out of three awesome people, plus Mother Teresa, who is living, well, not living, but she's on the road to sainthood.
So, you know, I don't know.
I'm not really nominated for sainthood yet, but I don't see any reason that it's out of my reach.
So that's what I came up with.
I'm an advocate in the model of those three people.
Christina did the same test, and she came out that she has the same personality type that movie bad guys are based on.
And she is associated with the personality type of Vladimir Putin.
All right, moving on.
There's a head of the Social Security Administration.
By the way, I don't think these personality tests are scientific, so I'm just joking.
The George Costanza strategy looks like it's going to come into play.
Do you remember George Costanza from Seinfeld?
He... I guess he quit his job on Seinfeld once, and then he quit his job in the fictional story.
And he didn't want to quit.
He changed his mind, so he just went back to work and pretended that he had not quit.
I'm looking at some funny pictures going by on the locals chat.
So if you're chatting on locals, where this live stream is also playing, you can include photos and videos and stuff.
So I'm watching those go by.
Anyway, the head of the Social Security Administration, this guy Andrew Saul, Biden fired him, but he's refusing to leave his job.
He's using the George Costanza strategy.
You're fired. Am I? No, you're fired.
You're totally fired. Am I? No, really.
You're fired. Pack up your stuff.
Pack up my stuff. I'm working remotely.
Okay, well, in like a virtual sense, pack up your stuff and get out of here.
You're fired. I'm going to log in on Monday.
No, you're fired.
You can't come to work anymore.
You're fired. Completely gone.
You have nothing to do with this agency anymore.
See you Monday. Now, I guess the background of the story is...
That Trump appointed this person, and I guess he's protected for the term of his appointment, and he's employing his right to stay on the job.
But seriously, if the President of the United States fires you, does it matter if your contract or the rule said that you don't have to go?
I mean, maybe he's good at his job, maybe he's not.
Does that matter? If the President of the United States says you're fired, even if the President of the United States, for some weird reason, doesn't have that power to fire you, shouldn't you leave?
I mean, seriously.
Like, I'm not the person who's going to argue that Trump-appointed people all need to get fired, so I don't know anything about how he does his job, but if the President fires you, Maybe leave.
Maybe the right thing to do is just leave.
All right. Even though he doesn't have to, I guess.
I feel as if this story needs to be part of a class curriculum.
Some of you have heard this by now.
So Mike Cernovich, independent journalist, author, and filmmaker, Mike Cernovich, which is how he's described on publications that like him...
When a publication that doesn't like him describes him, they do not call him an independent journalist, author, and filmmaker, although those are the things he is, among other things.
But he did a...
I guess he did some investigation and found out there's a link between the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center, the SPLC, a group that demonizes and dehumanizes conservatives, well, according...
I think this was in the... Where was it?
Some article I read.
Anyway, he wrote a report and the title of it is How a Convicted Terrorist Used the Southern Poverty Law Center's website to identify targets.
So in other words, somebody looked at who this SPLC says is a bad person and decided to go kill that bad person because the SPLC called them out.
Now, that feels like an article you want to see, doesn't it?
If you found out that some organization that is supposed to be protecting us from bad people, which is the alleged point of the SPLC, they help the social media platforms decide who should be deplatformed or de-boosted, I guess. And so that's their job.
Their job is to make sure that we know who the bad people are.
Turns out that they helped a bad person find and try to kill somebody.
So Cernovich writes this report, and here's the story that makes it kind of special.
Google erased it.
If you do a Google search for the exact title of his, I assume it's on a webpage now, called How a Convicted Terrorist Used the Southern Poverty Law Center's Website to Identify Targets, if you put that full search in there, do you know what comes up?
Wouldn't you think that his article would come up?
Nope. The SPLC comes up.
A whole bunch of SPLC stuff that's not about that article.
Now, suppose you go to DuckDuckGo and put in that same search.
Where does Mike Cernovich, where does his article come up on DuckDuckGo?
First. First.
Where it should be.
Because there is exactly one thing on the Internet, only one, that has this title.
It's Mike Cernovich's new, blockbuster, very important report.
Doesn't exist on Google.
Think about that.
Don't you believe that children should be taught about media brainwashing and manipulation?
Can you imagine sending a child into the world who still believes that the news is real?
That's a real dangerous situation.
Do you want to create a bunch of new citizens, the young people coming up, do you want them to think the news is real?
That's really, really dangerous.
And I think this could be like a case study that high schoolers could look at and say, look, here's an example where a story that was important and true, by the way, did anybody challenge the truth of it?
Not so far.
Did the SPLC say, oh, the facts in that story are incorrect?
I don't think so.
It's not being removed for being untrue, and it wasn't removed for being, let's say, violating any kinds of terms of service.
They just didn't want it there.
They just didn't want it there.
And they changed reality.
This needs to be taught in schools.
Imagine a high school student thinking that everything that they're told on CNN is true.
