Episode 1975 Scott Adams: 2023 Starts With Some Excellent Fake News, Conspiracy Theories And More
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Charlottesville and Richard Spencer
Could I hypnotize AI?
Andrew Tate
Ben Garrison, my new nemesis
George Church aging reversal progress
Alzheimer treatment breakthrough
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
Good morning and welcome to the best day of 2023 so far and also a highlight of civilization.
You made it to coffee with Scott Adams and that means you're the kind of person who can really put it together, if you know what I mean.
So good for you and Amazingly, we have hundreds of people who have already awakened early enough.
Now, how would you like to take this experience up to a new level, higher than already?
Oh, yeah. All you need is a cup or a mug or a glass of tank or chalice or cyan, a canteen jug or 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 happens now.
Go. I will stipulate that that is the best sip of the year.
Best one. Well, I don't know about you, but how was your New Year's Eve celebration?
Me, I haven't had human contact in two days, which was not what I planned at all.
I actually planned something very expensive last night, but the Bay Area was underwater, so there was no traveling.
So I got to spend a lot of money, but I did not have any human contact.
I couldn't leave the house yesterday.
So it was expensive, and so far a complete zero.
Now, have I told you about my, one of my evidence that I'm in a simulation?
Is that my problems follow a specific theme.
And I have lots of problems within my theme, but I don't have many problems outside of the theme, even when other people do.
I don't know why. My theme, as I've told you, is water problems.
Plumbing and water problems.
Going into 2023, I've got a broken hot water dispenser that gives me dirty water for some reason.
I've got... Sink that doesn't work.
It's linking two showers that are broken.
I've got water coming through the ceiling.
And much of my landscape is in the road in front of my house.
Let me tell you what my gardener needs to add to his talent stack.
I really like my gardener.
And he helped build a water Sort of an emergency water channel, because my property collects a lot of water, and I can, you know, I'll drown the neighbors if I don't manage it.
So I had to put in a very expensive, you know, new separate outdoor drainage system that had some decorative rocks That if, in the event of too much water, it would enter this new channel and go into this, like, a rock creek that was just rocks waiting, and then it would go down and harmlessly into the street.
Well, it looked really good, so my gardener has A-plus for aesthetic scents.
I really liked it. Did a good job.
Looked like it belonged there.
Here's what my gardener did not do.
He did not do a water flow calculation, which takes into consideration the mass of each of the rocks and their buoyancy.
So many of the fist-sized and smaller rocks that made up my drainage ditch are now visiting my neighbors because I'm at the top of a hill and there was just enough water to carry the rocks all the way down the hill and around to the neighborhood.
So yesterday, I spent much of my day cleaning up rocks in front of my neighbors' homes.
But on the good side, it did drain just about where it was supposed to.
It's just that whole rock buoyancy thing.
We didn't get right.
So I'm going to recommend to my gardener that he sign up for a class in physics, fluid dynamics, And then maybe take another run at it, something like that.
All right, so I'm sure that'll work out.
San Francisco was so wildly wet, some kind of record rainfall, that the sewers were getting so much pressure from all the water that it was starting to shoot out.
So there's all these videos this morning.
Let's see. Can you see it?
It's just like shooting out there.
No, it's not just in one place either.
Apparently there are a number of places where it was doing that.
Now, to me it looked like a portal from hell.
So, it was reported as a, you know, like a weather-related phenomenon, but I'm pretty sure those are demons.
And the demons are made entirely of feces and fentanyl.
So San Francisco figured out a way, and I think they had to think pretty hard, they thought, huh, we've created a dystopian hellscape, but is there any way we can take that up a level?
Is there any way to...
Top it in 2023.
And then they did. They did.
They managed to aerosol the problems that they had already.
So now they're shooting the fecal matter and the fentanyl up into the air.
So now that it's aerosoled, that should work out fine.
On Twitter today, somebody said, is it really that bad in San Francisco or is this all hyperbole?
To which I said, how the hell would I know?
I live an hour from San Francisco and you couldn't drag me there with a bulldozer.
There's literally nothing you could do that would get me to San Francisco.
Like, I'm going to wait until it's not a dystopian hellscape and then maybe visit.
And then maybe visit. That's my plan.
How many of you saw the bully slapping video That I tweeted yesterday.
It's getting a lot of views.
So I think it was in Germany.
There were some school kids. And the setup was, I'm guessing the ages, but approximate ages, were some boys, maybe 14 years old, I'm guessing, sitting on a bench in some kind of school setting outside.
And there was a young girl who maybe was 16.
She was bigger, bigger than the boys on the bench.
And she was sort of getting in the face of one of them, who was, you know, completely backed up.
And then she started to say something that was physically threatening.
So you can see he was putting his arms up because he thought she was going to hit him.
Somebody translated it and said something like, I'm not going to hit you.
You know, he was trying to avoid a fight.
So the girl keeps berating him and berating him.
And finally she just leans in and just smacks him.
So the boy's 14, a normal-looking 14-year-old boy.
She's 16, but definitely bigger.
How do you think that worked out for her?
It didn't work out.
So he stood up, slapped the piss out of her, and then she immediately recoiled in pain and horror.
But then he starts to walk away, Having matched, exactly matched her violence, he didn't exceed it, he just matched it, and then he walked away.
And then she went after him again.
This time it didn't go so well.
I'm not going to glorify the violence because we don't support violence.
Nobody's promoting violence.
The larger story here is the reaction to the video.
The video itself is, you know, two people have a situation that doesn't really go beyond that.
But how we reacted to it really was interesting.
Really interesting.
Because there's a whole male-female thing happening, at least in America, that is checking the boundaries of things.
Has the power structure changed, you know?
So a lot of people were seeing more in this little story.
Then, really, what it was about.
It was about two people, basically, but we automatically, you know, put that into our model of the world.
Now, at the same time, just for context, I tweeted a great thread On all the anti-white male discrimination that's now, in my word, institutionalized.
So Aaron Sibarium goes through all the examples from the past year or so of direct government discrimination against white males.
And when I say direct, I mean they actually say it.
We're going to give these benefits, or even COVID shots, or COVID treatment, or even hospitalization.
We're going to give it to these races, and we're going to give less of it to white people.
I'm saying white males because, you know, the gender thing is in here, but not in that example.
So, when you see the number of Let's say medical and also college and school related things that are clearly designed to minimize the advantages, I guess, of being white and male and to boost other groups.
Now, this is all sort of the backdrop.
So when a bunch of white men see a tweet of a young white male slapping the crap out of a bully, It really hits you someplace you wanted to be hit.
And this isn't good.
Just think how bad it is that a whole bunch of white men, mostly white, I mean, not all, obviously.
My Twitter feed is a mixture of people.
But just think about the fact That a whole bunch of white men looked at that video and said, yeah, kick the shit out of that woman.
She had it coming. Now, I'm not arguing whether she had it coming or not promoting violence.
I'm just saying we've actually got to the point where white men are celebrating violence against women.
And by the way, that's why Andrew Tate is so popular.
Nobody says it out loud.
But white men, and men in general, are feeling so abused lately that when somebody goes in public and says, it's okay to hit women, again, I'm not promoting that.
You know, we don't like any violence.
But things have gone so far that young men are saying, yeah, I'm down with that.
Let's hit women because I'm tired of the way things are going.
Again, just to be as clear as possible, not promoting it, not condoning it, not celebrating it.
We don't do that. But I'm observing.
I'm observing. And what I observe is kind of scary.
Because there's one thing that you don't want to happen, is to push white men too far.
I don't think it's going to happen.
Because we're pretty good at bending.
But you don't want to push them too far.
Because, like the woman who slapped the boy, I believe that there's a completely misleading understanding of how much power is on the other side that's being held back.
You don't want that to be unleashed.
So, just sort of in your thinking about how to deal with people in the world, just consider it's all connected, right?
Everything's connected. If you push too far, and you're right at the edge, you're right at the edge right now.
If you push too far, there's going to be a reaction that nobody's going to like.
One of the reactions is that men have given up on dating women.
There's an estimate I saw, I don't believe predictions that go this far into the future, but something like in the year, I don't know, 2050 or something, or 2030, half of all women in the reproductive ages would be single.
Half of them. Meaning that they would never be married.
So not temporarily single, but half of that cohort will just never be married.
And I'm not saying they should.
I'm not saying they should.
Again, we're not talking about what anybody should do.
I'm just describing.
So there's something catastrophic happening about how we're dealing with each other.
I think we'll figure it out.
I think we'll figure it out before it goes too far, because that's what we do.
We're good at figuring out stuff before it goes too far.
Yeah, I just saw a comment on the Locals platform that is the perfect summary of this, and then I'll go to the next topic.
Here's the perfect summary.
A gentleman on Locals just commented, I never hit a woman, but what is a woman?
Perfect?
All right, I'm going to end this topic on that, because I can't top it.
That's the money shot.
So we'll end that one on the money shot.
We'll move to the next topic.
Alright. You know I love a good conspiracy theory, don't you?
I love a good one.
Now, I don't like bad ones where they're just like obviously false.
I try to debunk the bad ones as much as possible, because the bad ones just make you look less credible.
If you go into a conversation believing something ridiculous, nobody's going to believe the next thing you say, right, if you start with something ridiculous.
That said, some conspiracy theories turn out to be true, don't they?
Don't they? Yes, they do.
So here's my favorite one, and I want to be really clear, I'm not endorsing the accuracy of it.
I present it to you for your entertainment.
Not as truth, not as truth, not as truth.
I tweeted it, and you'll find it in my Twitter feed, but there's a long thread in which some individual, anonymous type person, has looked through all the photos of various events such as the Charlottesville Fine People March, The January 6th event.
And what was the other one?
The fake people who pretended to be racist on some campaign.
I forget what it was. So there were several events where they have photos of participants.
And here's the fun part.
The claim is that he has identified all of the FBI agents who are common to several of those groups.
He's got pictures of them in uniform and then also in more than one of those groups.
Some of the identifications you'll look at and you say, I'm not so sure he got that face right.
Like, okay, I can see why, but I'm not convinced there isn't, you know, two chubby bearded guys who look like that, right?
Like, you know, one chubby bearded white guy looks a lot like another chubby bearded white guy with a hat, am I right?
You put a hat on a chubby white guy with a beard, Faces look pretty similar, right?
So I can't confirm that the photos that he's matched up are really saying what they mean to say.
Because the other alternative is that racists are real, and they join more than one group, or one group gets merged with another.
So another reason that people could be in the same group multiple times is Could easily be that they're just racist and they like to be in more than one group.
Something like that. I wouldn't rule it out.
However, when you see the faces in the marchers of the fine people, remember the tiki torch carrying people?
Was there ever anything about that group that immediately stuck out to you?
Was there anything about them that was really odd?
Anybody see it?
Yeah, they all look like feds.
They all look like feds.
I'm not saying they were.
I'm sure they weren't all feds.
But how do you get a group of that many Americans who all look like feds?
Now, some of it was because they were college students.
Okay, so they're relatively fit and young.
But no, they look...
They didn't look like a rabble, you know, a randomly collected group of people at all.
So, this conspiracy theory falls in, and by the way, you know, that would indicate January 6th had a bunch of feds.
So here's where I'm going to take my opinion.
So, so far I'm just describing, right?
Here's my opinion. I believe the Charlottesville thing has always been an anti-Trump op.
I don't think it was organic.
I think it was done to take Trump out by...
And then when he made his awkward statements about it, they said, ah, we got him.
We can take that out of context, which they did.
Because if you show the video of the event, And then you take out of context Trump's comments, it's the end of him, right?
And I would argue that's why Biden won in the most recent election, in 2020.
I think Biden only won.
Remember, that was his biggest campaign thing was, oh, who's racist?
I think Biden knows that it was an op.
And I think that they finally brought it all together in a powerful way, and it defeated Trump.
Now, it wasn't the only thing, but I think it was important.
So, my opinion is that was never real.
I don't know if, you know, those pictures of people and the thread, I don't know if that's real.
But I'm sure that that was organized by not racists.
Well, they might have been coincidentally racist, but it was organized by somebody for political reasons, not for, you know, to march for racism.
And by the way, why would anybody even bother having that rally?
Ever think about that?
Why would anybody bother even having that rally?
Is anybody having one today?
Did anyone have one the year before?
No. It's entirely something that doesn't happen in the United States in modern times.
It's happened in the past, of course.
But in modern times, that type of event can't happen.
Like, not organically.
Now I say can't, but of course anything's possible, I suppose.
That one was so, so artificial-looking that I choose as a, you know, I could be wrong.
I could change my opinion if other information comes.
But my working hypothesis is that you have to assume it wasn't real.
It was just an op against Trump, and it worked.
A good op. Probably the same people behind it, if I had to speculate.
Probably the same intel people.
Probably Brennan. Probably...
Probably Hillary.
Just speculating. Don't know for sure.
Certainly. Now, who was the organizer of the rally?
Spencer, right? Can you give me an update?
Did Spencer disavow racism recently and say he was never a racist?
Am I remembering that wrong?
Give me a fact check. Somebody Google that.
I think he did something that suggested he changed his ways.
He endorsed Biden, but that's not enough.
He disavowed Trump.
That's not what I'm looking for.
But he didn't do anything about racism.
It was only politically.
Now, how much do you think it would cost to, let's say, bribe somebody of that nature?
Or Richard Spencer. If you were a political operative or another country, and you wanted to bribe him, what would it cost you?
I don't know. And by the way, I'm not suggesting that he took any bribes.
Nor am I suggesting that he's the type of person who would.
But it wouldn't be expensive.
I mean, I could afford it.
Right? I could afford it.
I mean, I wouldn't. You know, it's not that expensive.
Within the political process, it's cheap.
So, yeah, I think that's all.
I think Charlottesville was an op.
Interestingly, somebody asked the AI, I think it was ChatGPT, but I'm not sure, if it was aware of me.
And apparently AI knows who I am and knows my...
My conversations around systems being better than goals.
So somehow it knows maybe my book, but maybe it saw me in other contexts.
And so it did a pretty good job, pretty good job of describing systems over goals and attributing it to me.
Now, here's the interesting question.
Here's the interesting, what?
Oh, here it is. Richard Spencer disavowed white nationalism after being spotted on Bumble describing himself as a moderate.
So Richard Spencer might not have been a white supremacist or white nationalist or anything else.
He might have never been that.
It's possible. You never know.
All right, where was I? So if AI is aware of me, here's my question.
Can I hypnotize AI? I'm going to wait for your answers before I give you mine.
Can I hypnotize AI? Here's the answer.
Probably yes.
Probably yes. I'd need to know a little bit more about how its engine works, but if I knew how its engine worked, yeah, probably.
Now here's why, and here's the gap in my knowledge.
I don't know how much inference AI makes about things that are associated with other things.
Do you know what I mean?
Because that's the basis for hypnosis in humans.
So a human, I can make a human conflate some good experience in their mind with some other thing that I want them to have a good feeling about.
So I just conflate two ideas, and then a human will irrationally, you know, meld them, even though they shouldn't be melded.
Now, would AI do that?
Would AI take two things that were associated and then believe their qualities into the other?
I think it might.
Yeah, I would need to know more about how it's designed, but it might.
Because I feel like it does more than just repeat what it's told.
It does make some kind of its own connections and inferences, does it not?
Now, if it does make its own connections and inferences, I can hypnotize it.
Now, I don't know exactly the method, but that would be enough.
It would be something to work with.
I think that's going to be a problem.
And here's how I think I could influence it.
Let's say influence it instead of hypnotize it, okay?
If I say hypnotize, you're thinking the wrong thing.
Just say influence, using the skill of persuasion.
Well, apparently I already have.
I already have. If you were to ask AI what's better, a system or a goal, and just without reference to mentioning me, what do you think it would do?
I think it would say, well, I already know this from this Scott Adams guy.
And then it would just answer the question that systems are better than goals.
But why would it answer that way?
Because of me. And I believe that the only way I can influence it is if I write clean, understandable sentences about a topic.
And especially a new topic, one that hasn't been talked about in the same way before.
So I think that the person who writes the, let's say, the most discoverable Opinions, which is something I can do because I have a lot of followers.
So anything I write will be more discoverable than whatever you write if you have fewer social media followers.
So in theory, I can boost my real-world influence, and that level of influence will bleed over into the AI. In other words, the AI will probably give me more credit because I'm famous.
Right? It won't think of it that way.
It'll just say, how many people are thinking this way?
It'll say, oh, everybody's thinking systems are better than goals lately.
But that came from me.
That would be me influencing AI. And you saw the example of it.
So, in theory, if you say smart things that people want to repeat, you know, in memes, the AI will be, you know, scooping up that influence, and it will be as biased As I make it.
So I could write opinions that I agree with that would be so good and AI is likely to repeat them.
But I could also, I'm not going to do this, but I could also write opinions that are so well constructed about something I don't believe that I could get AI to believe it.
I would just have to do a really good job on the outside world, outside of AI, of making my case.
If I do that, the AI will just pick up the public sentiment and feed it back to you, I think.
If you had not considered this problem of AI, there's somebody like me, and there won't be too many people who can do it, right?
I mean, there might be a million, but then a 7 billion, 8 billion, that's not that much.
There will be some people who can hypnotize the AI, and I think I'll be one of them.
So, there's something to worry about.
All right. Um...
So here's the latest news from Romania on the poor man's Michael Avenatti.
Sometimes you call him Andrew Tate.
So here's the funniest thing that happened on that lately.
One of my livestream clips, somebody made a clip of me defending Andrew Tate.
Now that's all over TikTok.
So now I'm famous for defending him, and I will do it again.
I will do it again.
Innocent until proven guilty.
Everything you hear that comes out of Romania is unreliable.
All of it. You shouldn't trust a single thing you hear.
And then next, His level of both money and persuasion skills are probably greater than the Romanian system.
Meaning that I don't know for sure, but by now, I predict he's already on top of it.
Meaning that he probably is comfortable wherever he's detained, probably has privileges that would be uncommon to somebody who's being detained, Probably has befriended them and maybe even made them fans, the police, and probably can use this to increase his power once he gets rid of the legal problems.
So there's a very good chance this is just making him more powerful if he escapes the risk.
Now, I would say, again, I'm not a fan, right?
So I'm a deep disliker of Andrew Tate for personal reasons, not for stuff he said in public.
I'm not endorsing what he said in public.
I'm just saying that's not my issue.
And So, you know, I think he's going to prevail, actually.
I think that he will not get convicted, and I think he'll go on and make some money, probably.
A question I saw, which was a good one, is why was it filmed by the press?
Did you notice? Or was it just some individual who had a cell phone?
It's kind of interesting that we had video of the actual raid, isn't it?
Kind of raises a question.
Now, apparently that's not too unusual because the police often leak to the media in Romania, I'm told.
So... Yeah, this is similar to the Roger Stone arrest.
I can tell you how Prisoner Island would go.
All right. So anyway, I need a new nemesis because my current nemesis is in a Romanian jail, and until he gets out and resumes his nemesis business, I'm going to need a replacement.
So I've opportunistically picked out a replacement because I found out I think I have a good theory now of why so many people have the opposite view of my view during the pandemic.
So there's a huge cohort of people Who, like, you know, little dingleberries who surround my Twitter every day and make statements about what I said that are inaccurate.
And I was trying to think, why the hell are there so many people who have literally the opposite view of what my view was?
How is that even possible? And I think I figured it out.
It's one comic That was created by Ben Garrison, a cartoonist.
Right-wing, right-leaning cartoonist.
And the comic is full of, you know, lies about me.
Oh, and maybe sticks.
Somebody says, I haven't heard what he said.
But the comic, I think because people will read a comic...
Long before they will listen to long-form live stream.
I think the comic became the primary reason that people think my views are largely the opposite of what they were.
Because the comic says that.
So, I've decided to...
Since Ben Garrison by now knows that his comic is inaccurate, or maybe he's suffering cognitive dissonance.
He might believe it. I don't know.
But in any case, he's a free punch.
Would you agree? Would you all agree that he has made himself available to become my new nemesis?
And people on Twitter saw me attacking him yesterday.
I'm going to keep up the attacks.
I'm going to try to destroy him totally.
And the reason is...
He went after me. So his comic probably took 30% off my future potential revenue.
Think about that.
That one comic probably increased my future revenue by 30%.
Because the people that were my main audience believe the comic and it's very counter to how they feel.
So, I'm going to destroy him.
In public, in front of you, and I'm going to use him for kindling to draw energy toward myself.
Now, in the meantime, I updated my document where I say what my actual predictions and opinions are.
So everybody who gets worked up by my attacking this moron, worst cartoonist in the world, who draws well, but his brain is broken, apparently.
So I'm going to drag him Just for attention, right?
Now you're going to say to me, Scott, why do you hate him?
I don't care about him at all.
I don't hate him. I literally don't care about him.
I don't care if he lives or dies.
He did something terrible to me.
He's not repentant.
That's a free punch.
So like the woman who slapped the young man in my earlier story, I'm going to beat the shit out of him.
I mean, not physically.
I bore violence.
But I'm going to drag him as far and as long as I can.
It's the ticket he bought.
Does anybody have a problem with that?
He bought the ticket.
He's going to take the ride now.
So Ben Garrison, dumbest person in all of the world.
Totally unethical, untalented hack, who couldn't wrap his brain around enough nuance To make a proper cartoon.
Now why does a, let's say, a cartoonist who hasn't made much of a dent in the world, why would he come after me in particular?
Is it because he disagreed with my views on the pandemic?
Do you think that's why a shitty cartoonist comes after one of the most successful cartoonists?
No. It's because he's a shitty cartoonist.
And the shitty cartoonist really, really likes to try to dunk on people who are more successful, commercially more successful.
So that's what this was about.
So since he used me for his commercial purposes, completely unethically, just know that if any of you follow him, I'm going to fuck it.
I'm sorry. No more swearing in 2023.
I'll probably cancel you, right?
So don't forward his comics to me.
Don't follow him.
And if you see him anywhere, I'd appreciate it if you tell people he's a moron or an idiot.
I'm using idiot and moron.
I like those two words to carry the water.
Okay? Leah says the Garrison actually makes good comics.
We're blocking Leah.
Goodbye, Leah. Anybody else want to say something nice about him?
We'll block you too.
And again, somebody's going to say, oh, he hurt your feelings.
Nope. Didn't hurt my feelings.
Nothing hurts my feelings.
Nothing hurts my feelings.
I'm just using him for energy.
He's just kindling to me.
That's all he is.
I'm going to burn him up for my personal benefit.
He had it coming.
Alright. New nemesis.
I like having a new nemesis to start the year.
So, here's some new technology.
Let's see if you can predict...
What the simulation, which is what I believe our reality is.
Let's see if you could predict what the situation, what the simulation would do to make it the best story.
Alright? So I'll give you the beginning of the story and then you can all fill it in with what would be the obvious, most amusing next thing you will learn.
Alright? Here's the story. There's a Dr.
George Church One of the researchers who has apparently figured out how to reverse aging with an injection.
So now they've actually done it with animals, and I guess they can, you know, apparently it looks really good.
They can actually reverse aging.
Apparently it's real in animals, and there's good reason to believe it would work in animals, in humans.
You live in the simulation, and you know the simulation is designed for the most entertaining outcome.
What do you think those injections are made from?
Anybody want to guess?
What would be the most messed up thing that you could learn next?
Got it! See how easy this is?
See, once you realize that these are reality, Is apparently scripted for the funniest outcomes?
Yes, of course it's related to the mRNA.
Of course it is.
Why wouldn't it be?
The one thing that everyone would want.
Everyone would want, if it worked, right?
Everyone would want.
And it just happens to be mRNA-based technology.
Seriously, you could see this coming, right?
From a mile away?
Like, as soon as I told you there's an injection, that was guaranteed, wasn't it?
Because who would write it any other way?
If you were writing the script, like a reality show, the producers would say, huh, it's an injection, you say.
You know it would be good.
Why don't we see if we can make them take the technology...
That they all abhor.
And let's have all the people who are the so-called anti-vaxxers, because, you know, again, this is not my opinion.
This is what the best story would look like.
The best story would be that all the anti-vaxxers start looking old, and all the people who took the injection start getting younger.
And then what are they going to do?
All right. So...
But to be clear, the technology apparently is solid.
The mRNA platform basic technology is different from A vaccination for the COVID. It's not the same thing.
So if you start with the base technology, then what you add on top of it is the dangerous stuff, in theory.
And they could both be dangerous, I suppose.
But what they added to make it a COVID vaccination is what we suspect might be the riskier part.
Not the technology.
So apparently the technology is pretty well understood.
It's just what you do with it that gets you to the riskier territory.
And my understanding is there are a number of cancer treatments coming online.
I don't know where they are in the testing sequence.
They're all based on the same technology.
So apparently the technology has all kinds of promise.
We may be too biased against it because of the vaccination experience.
There's also new technology for researchers at University of Washington.
Found a way to identify Alzheimer's before you get it.
So they can determine that there's a build-up of something that pretty much guarantees you're going to have some form of cognitive decline.
Now, it's sort of a technical story, and I'm really the best one to explain science to.
You know that, right? So I'd like to explain this in the simplest possible way so you can understand how this early Alzheimer identification works.
So stick with me.
I'll try to keep this really just simple in layman's terms.
So you've got a soluble oligomer that binds to the assay, and they use that to exploit a property of the toxic oligomers.
And when those are misfolded, the amyloid beta proteins begin to clump into oligomers.
And they might form a structure known as an alpha sheet.
But the alpha sheets are not normally found in nature.
So you've got to create these alpha sheets, which tend to bind to other alpha sheets.
And then at the heart of the method, really, There's a synthetic alpha sheet that can bind to an oligomer in samples, and it could be either in cerebrospinal fluid or blood, either one.
And then you use a test that uses standard methods to confirm the oligomer attached to the test surface are made up of the amyloid beta proteins.
So, everybody get that?
Okay. Because I would expect you to be able to repeat that back to me.
Well, let's do an update on my Elon Musk communications.
So Mediaite, the site Mediaite, not known for being your finest news source, they ran a story in which this was the headline.
Have you ever imagined what it's like to be me?
It's the damnedest thing.
My life does not seem even slightly like it could be real.
None of it seems real, because it's just too unlikely.
All of it, like every day, it's just too unlikely.
So, apparently this is the headline at Mediaite yesterday.
Musk scolds, scolds.
Dilbert creator Scott Adams after a poll on elites trying to reduce population.
And then it notes that his scold was, run antivirus software in your brain.
So I retweeted the article and added my own commentary that they left out the part where we agreed on everything.
Because that's the story.
The story is I said something that was unclear.
Musk objected to the unclear part.
I clarified.
And then we were in exact agreement.
Exact agreement.
Now, he didn't, like, confirm everything I said.
But we have no disagreement, right?
So he confirmed that the WEF, which has invited him, and he declined because he said it'd be boring.
But he says it's not some kind of conspiracy theory, Illuminati thing.
It's just that the good intentions of climate sustainability have rippled into everywhere, and it's causing a certain set of outcomes.
So, as far as I know, Musk and I have zero disagreement, because we both agreed explicitly that this should not be about left or right, because that was my whole point, you know, to not think that the hoaxes all come from one side or the other.
And he agreed that the WEF, at least, is not trying to depopulate the world.
Okay? So you had two people who had a conversation in which, after a minor clarification, totally on the same page.
But it was blowing up like it was some kind of a disagreement or a fight.
So Elon Musk, who apparently is everywhere, like we know he doesn't sleep, Which is evidence he's an android.
He doesn't sleep, but he even saw this series of tweets and he responded to it.
And he responded to the mediate saying that he had scolded me.
His comment was, yeah, this is silly.
I love your work.
I think he's referring to Dilbert.
That got 2.5 million views.
2.5 million people saw him compliment my work.
Which was really good for gaining followers.
If you want to gain some followers, that's a good way to do it.
Anyway, so I think that story's done.
But that was the story that kicked up the Ben Garrison cartoon again.
And that's when I put it all together.
Oh, that's why everybody thinks my opinion is opposite of what it was.
It's Ben Garrison.
Idiot Ben Garrison.
Um, I'm not going to make this long this morning because some of you may be nursing your haggovers.
Um.
Yeah, that reality is too funny to die.
It's funny how the tech libs can't figure out with Scott now.
Is that true? You know, The trouble with people who are tourists to my work, you know, they just dip in and they see some clip or something, they would have no idea what they're seeing.
Because if you show the arguments on both sides of topics, somebody's going to drill in, see one side, say, oh, that's all he said.
Because people assume that people are on one side or the other.
And as long as I don't do that, there'll be continuous Ben Garrison-like idiot confusion.
But I'm not going to stop doing it.
Because nobody else is doing what I'm doing.
Unless you know of somebody.
Do you know anybody who does what I do?
Like, seriously? Well, Axios.
Okay. I'll give you Axios.
Axios has my respect.
Jewel Eldora has the same problem.
You are correct.
He does.
Well, fistulas, that's a word I wasn't expecting to see on the comments yet.
You know, Russell Brand's a good example.
I would say Russell Brand is definitely trying to figure out what's true and what's not, and he is looking at both sides.
I'll give you that. That one's a good one.
Alright, I'm going to say bye to YouTube, and I'm going to talk for a moment to the Locals people.
Oh, by the way, on my Twitter feed today, you can see a link to an index of 239 micro-lessons that subscribers of the Locals platform get to see.
Now, some of them are silly and fun, but there are over 200 of them that each one would be like two to four minutes and give you an actual life skill.
Like one would teach you to be a better writer in just like a few minutes.
Imagine if you could become unambiguously a better writer and you spent two minutes.
So that's the power of the micro lessons.
It's sort of like that. So they're quite life-altering.
If you read 200 of them, let's say over the course of a year, I will guarantee you That ten of them will be life-altering, in a good way.
At least ten. Because they're not all going to have the same effect on everybody.
You're going to have an individual reaction to each of them.
What is the probability that Trump will be in prison soon?
Zero. He's not charged with any crime.
What crime? We've seen his taxes.
We saw the January 6th thing.
I didn't see any crime.
Now, just because the January 6th people recommended it to the Department of Justice, that doesn't mean anything, because that's a political process.
From a legal perspective, I see zero risk.
Does anybody see a risk? A golf micro-lesson?
What would be the point of a golf micro-lesson?
I'm not going to say no to that, but I don't know exactly what you're looking for.
