All Episodes
Dec. 16, 2023 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
01:15:37
Episode 2324 CWSA 12/16/23 All The News Is Absurd & Delicious, And That's How I Like It

My new book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8 Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com Content: Politics, Cartoon Girlfriend App, Epstein Flight Logs, Uranium Waste Water, Woke Mind Virus, Elon Musk, TikTok Viral Trends, Missing Binder Russian Collusion, Excess Deaths Young, Dr. Pierre Kory, DEI Must DIE, Senator Cardin's Staffer, Aidan Maese Czeropski, Boston Mayor Wu, IBM Anti-White Commandments, John Fetterman Immigration Policy, Thanos Trump, Rudy Giuliani, Ruby Freeman, Rep. Clay Higgins, J6 Ghost Buses, J6 Celebration, Google Deepmind, AI Creativity, Scott Adams ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
- Good morning, everybody, and welcome.
To coffee with Scott Adams, the finest time of the weekend and every other day too.
If you'd like this experience, which is already extraordinary, to go to levels that nobody can even understand with their small human brains, you'd need AI for that, and I'm not talking about large language models.
You'd need AGI for that.
Or, alternately, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice or a stein, a canteen 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 of the dope of each other, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called Simultaneous Sip.
And it happens now.
Ah.
Very good.
Well, the news is not super interesting today, so I'm just going to add jokes to all of it.
Is that okay?
I'll just add jokes to all of the news, if I have any.
Well, they're not all jokable.
Let's see, we'll start with Matthew Perry.
We know what happened to him now.
It was a ketamine overdose, which apparently caused him to lose consciousness, and then I guess he slipped into his hot tub.
So, did anybody have drug overdose as their vet?
I have to admit, I was thinking it was fentanyl, but could have been anything.
So, I've never heard of a ketamine... Well, I don't know if it's an overdose, but if he had not been in a hot tub, he probably just would have passed out and awakened.
So, yeah, it's more about the drowning than the overdose.
Correct.
Well, there's a brand new Digital girlfriend app.
Digi is the company.
Digi.ai.
And it's sort of cartoon-looking, but it's sort of like Jessica Rabbit.
You know, kind of an attractive cartoon-looking character.
And I don't know why people are excited about it, but it got a lot of attention today.
And I'm going to ask you this.
Tell me in the comments.
I happen to know that my audience includes a lot of people who don't spend time with other people.
Would you use a digital companion?
How many of you do, if you're willing to admit it, how many of you are willing to use a digital companion?
Now the ones who are saying no, I feel like you have to establish your Human bona fides or something.
It's like, no, I would never do that.
You know what this feels like?
This feels like 1985, when you ask somebody if they look at porn.
Is anybody old enough to remember that?
1985, if you said, hey, do you look at porn?
What would people say?
No.
No, what?
Well, why would you even ask that?
Who looks at porn besides like creepy perverts?
I don't need it.
I don't need it.
I don't need any porn.
Not me.
I don't even know why you're asking that question.
Why are you looking at me?
Why would you even ask me about that question?
And then you fast forward to the 2000s.
You look at porn?
Yeah, I really love the midget stuff.
Am I right?
You get a completely different answer.
In the 2000s than you did in the 80s.
Very different.
So I just asked this question, how many of you would consider having an AI companion?
And people were like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no way.
There's no way you're going to get me with an AI companion.
Well, let me check back with you in about 20 years, maybe 40.
I think at least half of you who said no way.
Will it indeed have a digital compare?
That's my prediction.
I don't think this technology is quite there.
But I'm going to tell you something without too much details.
Yesterday, I sampled.
I'm going to be very vague here, so don't ask me for details.
I'm vague intentionally for your benefit.
So this is vagueness for your benefit, not mine.
There is a digital product that I'm not going to describe.
That gives you the sensation of being with a human.
And I tried it out yesterday, and it's not porn.
Not porn.
And my God.
Oh my God.
It gives you an experience that I can't even explain.
Now, so far, the thing I'm talking about, which is a digital product, is not combined with AI.
Can you guess what it is that the other thing is?
Yeah, he probably can.
But it's not porn.
But when you combine it with AI, it's going to blow your fucking mind out.
And you don't see it coming.
But I've experienced it.
So I can tell you that the empty feeling you get from looking at a cartoonish AI partner is going to be kind of bland and two-dimensional and won't really have much impact on you.
There won't be that many people who fall in love with a cartoon version of a person.
But there's another level.
And the level that's coming is like 100x times these little cartoony characters.
And there's something coming.
You don't see it yet.
But you will.
Anyway, Mickey Mouse is coming off copyright, but not entirely.
So I guess now the copyright laws protect some stuff for 95 years.
And the original Mickey Mouse animated Steamboat Willie, a little black and white cartoon from 95 years ago, It was just coming off of copyright.
So you can now legally create, not the modern Mickey, so modern Mickey Mouse is still protected.
I don't know how they get away with that, but the original version, if you were to draw one just like that, I think you could even call it Mickey Mouse, that part I don't know.
Do they, maybe a lawyer can tell me this?
Are there any lawyers who are watching this?
But Mickey Mouse is probably trademarked.
So probably you could draw the character, but you could not name it Mickey Mouse.
Yeah, I think that's correct.
So it's not going to have much impact on Disney.
So it's not going to affect their stock price.
However, there's a really good chance that The Dilbert character will have a new friend for Ratbert.
So if you follow Dilbert, you know Ratbert is one of the characters.
So he might get Mickey Mousebert.
Mousebert.
But it would have to be the Steamboat Willie version.
I saw Jesse Waters yesterday on Fox News talking about how we still don't have the Epstein flight logs.
And you were suggesting that the people not releasing them, you know, maybe have some culpability or why can't we see them?
Now, I agree that when it comes to the government, you should expect the worst and assume the worst if there's no transparency.
However, I'm going to vigorously disagree with the public seeing Epstein's flight logs.
Because do you believe that 100% of the people who went on Epstein's flights knew there was something wrong and knew that they were traveling with a bad guy?
Or were they just rich people borrowing jets from other rich people?
Oh, my jet's going this way.
You want to come along?
So I understand why the public is curious.
And I understand why you want to see it.
But to me, this would be the height of Improper behavior.
This would fly against everything that's American, in my opinion.
Everything American would be violated by throwing everybody on that flight log under the bus.
Well, let me ask you, how many of you think that 100% of the people who are ever on this jet should be ostracized from human civilization?
That's what would happen.
Does anybody think that 100% of the people on the flights You'll be thrown under the bus.
No.
But there's a yes.
I think if you said yes, you're a bad person.
Honestly.
You're just a bad person.
You're going to have to deal with that for the rest of your life.
But not my problem.
Here's what I think.
I think when you're talking about individual American citizens, they need to be innocent until proven guilty.
And being on a flight log, even Epstein's flight, Does not prove he did anything wrong.
And I am, unless I'm misunderstanding the issue here, maybe I am.
If nobody has been accused of a specific crime, that's their own business.
That is their own private business.
And I'm sure they all regret that they got on that plane, but it doesn't mean that they're guilty of any horrible crimes.
So I absolutely disagree with Jesse Waters and anybody else who wants to see the flight logs.
Are we curious?
Yes!
Yes!
Very curious.
Very curious.
Should I see them?
No.
No, I never want to see them.
And the reason is, just to be very clear, the reason is because individual citizens are just innocent until proven guilty, and there's no wiggle room on that.
Like I realize this is not a, wouldn't be a trial, but that's why I don't want to see them.
You wouldn't want your privacy violated that way.
There's a novel method for uranium extraction from wastewater.
How about that?
Because we got that uranium shortage.
But it also generates electricity while you're doing it.
Whoa!
Whoa!
Now a lot of you looked at me for your explanations about how science works.
So I'd like to Just explain to you in the simplest possible ways.
I'm just going to keep this simple.
Just a summary of how the technology works.
So here's what you need to know.
It's a spontaneous microbial electrochemical method.
So that's the first thing you need to know.
And what they do is they spatially decouple the microbial oxidation and the uranium reduction reactions.
And it's an innovation that What you do is you got the two chambers separated by the proton exchange membrane.
You got that right.
And then obviously you're going to separate with a proton exchange membrane.
Then you use an anode made of carbon felt and a cathode titanium foil.
And then the process uses that, as I said, you know, not to repeat myself, but Microbial driven electromechanical reaction and that facilitates sort of a uranium extraction from the wastewater which simultaneously generates the electricity.
Now you know what makes me a little bit angry about this?
Well you and I thought of this idea but didn't do anything about it.
So I guess that just tells you that life really rewards action.
I mean I was just thinking about this and I'm like I wonder.
I wonder if I put two chambers separated by a protein exchange membrane and then introduced a nanode made of carbon felt.
So I was thinking about this the other day, but I did nothing about it.
So I feel like an idiot now.
Well, Elon Musk is always in the news and he's dumping on Disney lately.
He said that Walt Disney might be turning in his grave.
Because Disney is infected, deeply infected, with the woke mind virus.
I think he's really trying to make that woke mind virus thing, you know, part of the common consciousness.
You know, I know a number of people used it before he did, but he's really driving it home.
And he says they used to bring joy to people's life, Disney did, making wonderful things that family enjoyed.
But now, now it should be just basically they're Giving you woke garbage?
Speaking of woke garbage, did you know that roughly one-third of adults under 30 regularly scroll TikTok for the news?
So one-third of young people are getting their news from TikTok.
And there's a communications expert, Molly McPherson, who was at an Axios event, and she said that the heartbeat of public opinion is TikTok.
She's a crisis communication expert, so she would know.
And she says, quote, if you're not paying attention to that content, then you're missing out because that's where the information and viral trends start.
So viral trends start on TikTok.
Do you realize what that means, right?
It means that China literally, literally, As a user interface on our reality.
Because what Americans believe is what they gather from their media.
And social media is the main thing that's influencing the young people.
And according to this communication expert, Molly McPherson, who's probably correct, the viral stuff starts on TikTok and then nobody can ignore it.
Then it becomes our news.
So here's the path.
The Chinese government owns ByteDance.
ByteDance owns TikTok.
TikTok has a button called Heat that they can literally push to make something trend, which they've admitted.
I'm not making this up.
TikTok says this.
So the government can control the companies in China.
That's normal business.
They have an actual physical mechanism for making some things more viral than others.
And now we know the rest of the picture.
Viral things on TikTok become the news, and then it becomes our consciousness.
It's still legal.
And Congress still says, yeah, but you know, free speech.
There's no question whatsoever that Congress is bought off or corrupt.
Because they couldn't be that stupid.
But here I'm being kind.
I cannot imagine That Congress is so stupid that they don't know how much of a risk this is.
They can't be that stupid.
So what's left?
It's not a mistake.
Because everybody's telling them.
They've engaged in the conversation.
So it's not a mistake.
What could it be?
There's only one thing left.
Corruption.
There's literally only one explanation.
Corruption.
So anybody who's voting to keep TikTok legal, I will allow that for the, you know, let's say the Thomas Massey types who are absolutists about free speech.
If you're an absolutist, I'm going to give you a half a pass.
Half a pass.
Because I do appreciate consistency.
That's worth something.
But this is a national, it's a threat.
This is not like a normal Communication thing.
All right, there's a new story about a quote missing binder.
A 10-inch binder that disappeared at some time around the transition from Trump to Biden.
This binder contains classified information related to the Russian collusion claims.
And apparently there was some thought that the real reason for the raid on Mar-a-Lago Just to get that binder back.
Now some say, the binder might have too much information in it, those sources and methods.
And that's why it's so critical to get it back.
And they're thinking that maybe the information isn't terribly important, but the sources and methods might be.
Other people say, that's exactly why Trump has it.
If he has it.
There's no evidence that he has it.
But if he has it, Because apparently there was an effort to make it public information.
But there was a process, you know, a lengthy process of redacting stuff that hadn't been completed.
So, is there somewhere, does somebody have a binder that could be really, really damaging to maybe some leadership of the FBI?
Maybe not just sources and methods, but maybe something embarrassing.
Maybe.
So we're only speculating because we don't know what's in it, but maybe it had something to do with the Mar-a-Lago raids.
That's certainly not... I don't have any direct evidence of that.
And maybe Trump had it specifically because they gave him some blackmail control over them.
Maybe, but I don't have any evidence of that.
So we don't have any evidence who has it or what's in it or why we care, but it's one of the big stories today.
This is a big story.
We literally don't know anything that's true.
There's nothing.
I don't know.
Maybe it doesn't even exist.
All right, here's an evergreen story that I keep going back to.
As you know, there appear to be continuing excess deaths well after the pandemic is over.
But the excess deaths Weirdly, you seem to be concentrated in the young, whereas old people are actually doing fine in terms of their death.
Does that make sense to you, that young people would have much higher death after the pandemic, and old people would be doing maybe even better than normal?
To me, that makes perfect sense.
I'm actually confused why it's confusing, or why there's even any mystery to it at all.
Let me explain old people.
All of the weak old people died early.
That's it.
The ones who would have maybe held on for a little bit longer, COVID got them.
And maybe the pandemic restrictions decreased their quality of life so much that They died a little early from that.
So it makes sense that older people had some excess deaths and now we're just seeing the after effect of that.
But how do you explain young people dying at an excess rate?
Well, when you read the stories about the young people dying at an excess rate, does it tell you which category of death within that group of people is up?
Which category?
How can you read a story like this that says there's this mysterious and horrible, you know, well over a hundred thousand deaths extra.
It's in young people, you know, where there should be not any deaths.
Why isn't the most important part of the story what they're dying from?
How is that not the most important part of the story?
So do you, what do you conclude?
What do you conclude from a national or like a big story The young people are dying too much, and the story doesn't mention what they died from.
Was it self-violence?
Was it an accident?
Was it drug overdose?
Was it heart attacks?
What was it?
But before you speculate about what it was, deal with the first question.
Why would there be a national story without breaking down the cause of death?
How does that tell you anything?
I saw this from Pierre Kory.
You know him from, you know, the pandemic.
He was a rogue doctor, meaning that he was not agreeing with the consensus on vaccinations.
Does it seem to you that somebody is trying to suggest that the vaccinations killed him?
That's what I'm getting out of it.
Because it was Pierre Cori who was talking about it, and he's the one who says that the vaccinations are dangerous.
But he doesn't complete the loop.
He doesn't complete the loop and say, the exact things that they're dying from are the exact things we'd worry about a vaccination having a side effect.
You say, yes, he did, but not in the article I saw.
In the article I saw, he speculated, but he did not mention.
The more recent stuff, Does not define the specific causes.
Now, I have seen them say separately and before that myocarditis was higher in young people because of vaccinations.
So I have heard that.
But what the insurance companies are dealing with, you know, these big excess deaths, they're not completing the loop.
They're not saying that, you know, it seems heart-related and heart-related would Be suggestive of maybe something that happened recently, like vaccinations.
No autopsies.
Now, when young people die unexpectedly, don't they do autopsies?
If a 15-year-old dies of a heart attack, they don't check that out.
I don't know exactly.
All right, so here's what I make of it.
I don't believe it.
I first don't believe the numbers.
And then I, secondly, don't believe there isn't an obvious explanation for it.
Because to me, it seems like the suicides and the drug overdoses would be through the roof.
And then I think something happened to all of us socially.
Would you agree?
How many of you feel socially damaged by the pandemic?
I do.
I feel permanently changed by the pandemic.
Meaning that my social impulse is almost none.
Almost none.
Yeah, so if I were a teen, and I had my social impulse erased, and I just lived online and watched porn all day, was on social media, I don't know, feels like that could kill you.
But I don't know what the cause is, so I don't want to speculate too hard.
It does seem like it might be a whole bunch of different Elon Musk is going hard at DEI.
He says DEI must die.
He had two posts on it.
And he said, the point was to end discrimination, not replace it with different discrimination.
Diversity, equity, inclusion are propaganda words for racism, sexism, and other isms.
And then later he said, this is not just morally wrong as any other racism and sexism.
Changing the target class doesn't make it right.
So, how much do you love the fact that Elon Musk is going hard at DEI and ESG and the other racist policies?
I feel like we couldn't even have the conversation without him.
How is he not person of the year?
Wasn't person of the year like Taylor Swift or something?
Taylor Swift, person of the year?
Oh my god.
Anyway, well, by now you probably know that there was a staffer, or Senator Cardin, who was having some gay sex in, what was it, some kind of Senate hearing room, Senate's large hearing room.
So this is the same place that they've done Senate Supreme Court confirmations and impeachment proceedings and that sort of thing.
And in the video that we see, it's two men.
One is taking the other from behind, apparently.
There's no word if they're colonizers.
Colonizers.
Other questions that we don't know is Is this the reason that the politicians like Schumer, they keep telling the public that we don't want to know how the sausage is made?
Now they've told us you don't want to know how the sausage is made.
Were they referring to this?
I don't know.
Is this another case of we've always heard that the senators are really interested in pork?
I don't know if that's related in any way.
But he's probably not the first person in the room ever to get some pork.
And what I really wonder is were they filming it as sort of a skit for grade school?
Were they making some content for the young people?
No?
Or was it just sex?
It looked like they were making some kind of a tutorial maybe for grade school.
I don't know.
I'm just guessing.
I'm just guessing.
I just watch the news like you do.
I don't know.
I don't know what's going on.
But yeah, that's how the sausage was made.
All right.
Let me say this.
I don't want to see them get fired.
And I don't care.
All right.
Let's be honest.
Are we only caring because it was gay sex?
Is that the only thing that made it news?
If this had been heterosexual sex in the same room, would anybody even be talking about it?
You think you would?
But would we be talking about it the same way?
Would it be, like, funnier?
No.
There's something a little homophobic about the story that makes me uncomfortable.
I like to laugh at the public sex stories, but would it be funny if they were hetero?
I don't know.
Wouldn't be as funny.
So I guess that's homophobic in a way.
Anyway, check your bigotry on that one.
Boston Mayor had the so-called electeds of color dinner that went ahead and apparently the dinner just went ahead and they excluded white people They were pretty happy about it.
They looked like they had a good time.
But, you know, I tweeted yesterday that the public is waking up to 40 years of insane level of discrimination against white men.
And only this year we can say it out loud.
So finally, finally you can actually say, but you know, discrimination is against white men.
At least in hiring and corporations.
Has been far worse.
Far worse than discrimination against any other group.
Not even close.
But you couldn't even say that without, you know, losing your career a few years ago.
So, I'm liking this free speech.
Got some good stuff.
Enjoying it.
IBM and Red Hat.
I guess Red Hat's owned by IBM now.
There was an internal document at Red Hat An anti-white document that's apparently still current.
So James O'Keefe got a hold of this from his whistleblowers.
And it says there are 10 commandments that white people have to observe.
The allyship commandments.
So it's how to be a good white person in Red Hat.
And one commandment states only white people can be racist.
Another one is that accept that white people are responsible for dismantling racism.
And then another section argues that whiteness constructs the game, hides the rules, and then rigs the game over and over again.
So basically, it's just racist, anti-white stuff in IBM.
So IBM is a racist organization.
Super racist.
And it's overt.
It's not hidden.
They are overtly In public, super racist against white people.
So there's that.
Now, people keep telling me I should be concerned about things that happened a long time ago.
For example, people are trying to double dunk on IBM by saying that IBM in World War II may have helped Hitler organize the death camps or something.
Maybe it's true, maybe it's not.
I don't give a fuck.
I don't give a fuck what IBM did with a bunch of dead people 50, 75 years ago, whatever it is.
I do not care what they did then.
I totally care what they're doing now.
What they're doing now, really, really bad.
But I don't care what, because all those people are dead.
There's nobody to answer for it.
They're all dead.
I don't care.
You know, I don't care that Volkswagen was Hitler's car.
Hitler's dead.
All the people who made those decisions, all dead.
I can just drive a Volkswagen if I like it.
I'm allowed.
It's not my preferred car, but I used to have one.
And I certainly don't care about, I don't care which political party started the KKK.
Can you stop forwarding me, it was the Democrats that created the KKK.
I don't care.
I don't care.
They're all dead.
Every one of them is dead.
Don't care.
If the KKK got some, you know, traction today, well, I'd care about that because that's today.
I don't care about the dead ones.
I also don't care what happened in the Middle East before October 7th.
And you can't make me care.
You can try.
I don't care.
I don't care.
I can tell you that Israel certainly has to do what they need to do because of October 7th.
That's easy.
That one's, you know, straightforward.
But before that, are you going to get me to say who was the worst?
Oh, but 500 years ago, this side was the worst.
But 600 years ago, this side was the worst.
A thousand years ago, we used to live there.
I don't give a fuck.
I care that one side has a big army.
So they can protect the land that they say is theirs.
The reality of Israel is if they have a military and enough military support, well, I guess it's their land.
I don't care what happened 3,000 years ago.
Anyway, you can care, but stop trying to make me care, because it won't work.
I'd like to give a shout out, just because I think it's good form.
I've tried to teach you this many times.
If you can't say something good about the people who are on the other side of a debate, then maybe you're not being as objective as you think you are.
So as just sort of a good hygiene for my brain, if I see somebody on the opposite side from my opinion, who is doing something worthy, I'd like to call it out.
I think I've made as much fun of John Fetterman as anybody in the public domain, but he's apparently wants to be very tough on immigration laws.
And I'm sorry.
I got to say, I really respect that because it's easy to be a Republican and say you agree with the Republicans.
It's tough to be John Fetterman with everything he's gone through.
The heat that he had on him, especially with his health situation, and to get to the end of that and start to, you know, function the way he'd like to or closer to it, and to disagree with your party on something so basic.
But his disagreement is based on being a reasonable person in the real world.
And I can totally support a reasonable person in the real world.
So Fetterman, with With no but.
Good job.
Good job.
I might have other criticisms later, but I don't want to do the I disagree with you on these other things.
Let me just say, good job on this.
All right.
Well, still watching the Trump-Thanos threat.
Thanos being the Marvel superhero villain.
Who could snap his fingers once his bejeweled glove had all of the jewels in it?
He would snap his fingers and half of all the people on earth would die.
So, here's what I don't understand about the Democrats.
On one hand, they're very afraid that Trump will get into office and half the people in the country will die.
Or the world, I guess.
On the other hand, that would solve climate change.
Am I right?
Turns out there's only one politician who has an actual solution to climate change.
Trump.
According to Democrats, he will snap his bejeweled glove and half of the world will die instantly.
Then no problem.
You can have all the energy you need.
So I think they're not looking on the good side of this whole Trump is Thanos stuff.
But I would encourage you to keep mocking it.
Don't argue it.
Mock it.
That's right.
He's Thanos.
Gonna kill everybody, snapping his blood finger.
Just like he did the first time he was president.
You remember that, right?
When half of the people died?
I'm pretty sure every Democrat said that was gonna happen.
So I guess they did.
Meanwhile, Rudy Giuliani lost in court.
So I guess the two Georgia election workers, remember one of them named Ruby?
And many of you said, Incorrectly, it turns out.
There is a video of Ruby cheating with these ballots and pulling them out from underneath that table and running them through the counting machine twice.
And you can see it right on the video, you said.
And I said, I don't see it.
And you said, it's right there.
It's right in front of you.
And then I watched it.
I said, why don't I see it?
How come I'm not seeing it?
And then I saw a video of election experts who knew how things should work, who watched it, and they said, OK, that's just normal.
They just had some stuff they put under the table to keep it out of the way.
They took it out, and they finished it.
That's just the normal stuff.
Now, apparently, Giuliani was not allowed to show any evidence for his side.
Now, why would you have a court situation Where you're not allowed to show any evidence for your side?
Well, apparently there was some information that the other side wanted from Giuliani that he refused to give them, some digital records.
And because he was not playing well with the court, the court said, look, you either have to accept the process or you're guilty.
So he did not accept the process by giving them the information they requested.
So it looks like the court said, all right, Have it your way.
If you're not going to give us the information, you're guilty almost by definition or by process.
So now we're going to talk about how much you owe.
And they decided that what he owed was $148 million.
$148 million.
Does that sound anywhere in the neighborhood of a reasonable thing?
Because remember, Ruby Was subjected to much harassment, which is real.
Don't make light of that.
That was real.
And probably death threats.
I think she had death threats.
That's a serious issue.
But there are very few problems that can't be solved with $148 million.
But I also think that $14 million might have solved most of her problems as well.
She could have done okay with $14 million, I think.
So I guess it's so high because the jurors were Considering like the penalty part, not just what she would need to be whole, but a penalty phase.
Of course, this will be appealed.
Who knows what will happen?
I'd be kind of surprised if some future court doesn't throw it out, or at least knock down the award.
But, I would say that if anybody had the goods on Ruby, don't you think you'd know it by now?
If anybody in an official capacity, or let's say Giuliani himself, had the goods, in other words, if he can produce an expert who would watch the video of Ruby and say, okay, here's my expert, don't listen to me, listen to the expert.
And the expert says, oh no, you can clearly see something wrong.
But where's that?
Where is one person who understands the process, watching the video, telling the rest of us, oh yeah, here's where the crime was committed right here.
I haven't seen that.
So from the beginning, I thought she was probably doing just her job and was not guilty of anything.
Remember I told you early on that 95% of all the claims of rigging would not be true, even if some of them turned out to be true.
So let me ask you, given that you have never seen somebody who knows what they're talking about, watch the video and point out that there's nothing wrong with it, or that there is something wrong with it.
Nobody's pointed out that there is something wrong with it while they're watching the video.
I haven't seen it.
So how many of you think that Ruby is guilty of rigging the election?
In the comments, how many of you think she's guilty?
I'm seeing mixed answers.
Yeah.
You know what I'm going to say, right?
Can you anticipate what I'm going to say?
You know, there's no legal process against her, right?
There is no legal process investigating Ruby.
You know why?
Because a cursory investigation shows nothing was wrong.
You didn't even need to do a deep dive.
They just took a quick look at it and said, yeah, this is normal.
And that was it.
Now, I know you're still suspicious because it's Georgia.
And you're like, oh, maybe the prosecutor's in on it.
Who knows?
But let me say this about Ruby.
He's not the government.
Ruby is a citizen of the United States.
Ruby is innocent.
Unless somebody can prove her guilty.
And nobody's even tried.
Because they got nothing.
Ruby deserves probably an apology.
From a lot of people.
Probably.
Now, is there some chance that, you know, somebody is guilty in ways I don't know?
Well, it's always possible.
But the standard should be that it's been, what, two years?
How many years?
I'm sorry, it's almost four years.
Three years.
And in all that time, in three years, and she's totally on video, You think in three years, somebody who's alleged a crime is on video, and there's no legal process against her.
That doesn't convince you that there was nothing there?
It does to me.
To me, it convinces me nothing was there.
But let me clarify, to make all of you happy, let me clarify.
She's an American citizen.
She's innocent 100%.
Unless somebody has the goods on them in a legal process.
And nothing like that's happened.
So I'm Team Ruby, 100%.
Same with Hunter.
Hunter is innocent until some process proves him guilty.
I will make no exceptions to that standard.
All right.
There are some claims by Representative Clay Higgins, who is involved in grilling about the The January 6th stuff, I guess he questions FBI Director Wray about these federal, quote, ghost buses.
So there's an allegation which I am not buying into.
Could be true.
And it's very interesting.
And I'd certainly like to know more about it.
But remember, this is an allegation against the government.
So the allegation is that the government Had way more undercover people than they're admitting.
Because they haven't admitted any number, actually.
And that they were put on these, quote, ghost buses.
You know, these unlabeled buses.
There were so many undercovers that they needed buses to bring them in.
That's the claim.
That is the claim.
Bob, let me take a moment.
If the best you can do is to insult my critical thinking, then you're a fucking idiot.
Because I've given you plenty of things that would allow you to say, for example, Scott, did you know that Time Magazine did an investigation and they found that you're wrong?
Like, that would be a counter to what I'm saying.
But Scott does not have critical thinking.
It's you being a fucking idiot and not being able to handle the fact that you don't have any argument against anything I said.
So calm down, Bob.
And fuck off, okay?
But anyway, these ghost buses are not proven, but there are multiple witnesses who say they saw the same thing.
They say that the people getting on the ghost buses were, let's say, unusually fit.
There are also, there's a video or a photograph I saw where there are a number of people in the crowd on January 6th.
Who appear to be well-trained, because they have like their hands on the shoulder of the person in front of them in the crowd, you know, trying to keep from being separated and stuff.
It looked a little too well-trained, some people are saying.
So because this is a alleged government activity, I'm going to say guilty until proven innocent.
So the exact opposite standard for Ruby and for Hunter.
For them, innocence will prove them guilty.
But if there's an allegation of ghost buses, and we don't know enough about them?
Guilty.
Guilty.
If they would like to tell us everything they know about the ghost buses, if they would like to tell us everything they know about the number of undercover people, then I say, oh, maybe not guilty.
Maybe just doing your job.
But if you're not going to tell us?
Guilty.
Doesn't mean they're guilty, but that's the working assumption when your government doesn't give you full transparency.
Same with the election.
I have no specific knowledge of something wrong with the election, but it's not transparent.
So I make the reasonable assumption about any non-transparent government entity or process.
Same assumption for all crooked.
No, Ruby is not equal to the government.
She's somebody who worked there for a day.
You know, just on the election.
That's definitely not, no more than Hunter was.
The federal judge is warning Elon Musk that he has to testify at the SEC.
You know, how many government processes are working against Elon Musk right now?
So there's no question about it that the government has weaponized all of its departments against Musk.
There's no doubt that Biden called for that action in public when he said they're going to look into him in a whole variety of ways.
Oh, we have lots of ways.
And everybody in the government said, Oh, I guess you want me to investigate them.
I'll see what my group can do.
And then they did.
They did.
Now, The fact that the government is going after Musk, when he's the most unambiguously positive force in America today, and they're going after him trying to take him down.
Are they trying to destroy everything that's good?
Try to think of anything that's good in America.
Just anything.
What is it they're not trying to destroy?
They meaning Democrats.
I can't think of anything good that they're not actively trying to destroy.
Anything.
The economy, the border, anything.
Anyway.
There's a company that lets you be a truck driver from your house.
So it's basically a mostly self-driving truck.
The company is, I saw this in a post by Linus Ekenstam.
The company is Einride, European.
And they already are in operation, and it's a self-driving truck, but they have humans who sit in front of a monitor to make sure that no human interaction is needed.
So the human only gets involved in the edge cases.
And if the human needs to take a break, they just have another human who's also working remotely take over, so that they're watched all the time.
Now, would you trust A human whose job is to watch a monitor just in case there's a problem?
How long can you sit and watch the road without doing anything?
Could you sit there for eight hours and just go, yep, still looks good.
Still looks good.
I think it'd be like those guards who were supposed to be watching Epstein.
You know, they were asleep.
I think I would have had a, like a, maybe I would have had a night job if I were one of those guards.
And then I would just use the daytime to sleep.
Because what are you going to do?
Just look at Epstein?
Oh, there's Epstein again.
Still looking at him.
Still alive.
There he is.
He's sitting on his bed.
You can get real tired of looking at stuff, can't you?
Anyway, I think it does give you an alert.
If the truck needs your attention, it does send you an alert.
I don't know how much time I would spend actually looking at the monitor.
I feel like I'd carry my phone around in case I got an alert, and I would just go on with my day.
If I got an alert, I'd be like, oh, you're over to the left a little bit there.
All right.
So the Trump lead in the polls continues.
Pretty much every news story about a new poll is a new Commanding lead by Trump.
Everything's going in one direction only, you know, pro-Trump.
But there is some polling that suggests that the race would tighten up considerably if Trump got convicted.
So if Trump gets any conviction on any of his 91 counts, the pollsters are telling us that people might turn against him and vote for Biden.
Does that sound right to you?
To me that sounds super obviously wrong.
Like super extra obviously wrong.
Are they trying to prime people to act that way?
That would be almost exactly the opposite of what would happen.
If you put him in jail, he's gonna be the president.
But let me say that as clearly as I can.
If they put Trump in jail, you guarantee him the presidency.
Guarantee it.
Yeah.
No doubt about it.
I'd even vote.
I might even vote in that case.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Make no mistake.
He's not going to jail.
Do we agree on that?
The legal process might find, you know, that they want to put him in jail.
Well, let me just say this clearly.
I got 80 million reasons he's not going to jail.
I got 80 fucking million reasons he's not going to jail.
I think it'll be scary and risky and it's always possible, but no, no.
No, there, there, You think Democrats don't know where the line is?
And I think sometimes they don't know where the line is.
It's because conservatives are not easily flustered.
So they bend and bend and bend and bend and bend.
And bend and bend and bend and bend.
And bend and bend and bend.
Right?
Aren't you sick of it?
Doesn't it seem like the Republicans just keep bending?
And they just bent over too far?
But here's the thing that would make a Democrat be confused.
If the people you are, let's say, persuading against keep bending, you keep pushing, right?
Why wouldn't you?
If it keeps working, keep doing it.
But I think the mistake is to think that the bending is a slippery slope that just keeps bending.
And that is very much not the personality of much of the country.
Much of the country wants to ignore literally everything that they can ignore until they can't ignore it anymore.
So if you put him in jail, nobody can ignore that.
Nobody can ignore it.
So it can't happen.
Now, I suppose there's a possibility that some information would come up that even a Republican would say, you know, that's so bad, he does have to go to jail.
But we haven't seen that.
Everything looks just like a weaponized Department of Justice.
It doesn't look like the normal legal process is working against them.
It looks political.
So, if Trump goes to jail, I would feel as if I were already in jail.
Would you?
I feel...
Because he's, in a sense, a standard bearer for a certain sensibility in this country.
If they put him in jail, I would feel like I'm next.
Like, most of the things that happen in the news don't feel personal.
It's like even a war.
If you don't know anybody who's in the war shooting, it doesn't feel personal.
It's like a topic in the news.
But if you put Trump in jail, I would feel that in every part of my body.
And I would clear my schedule.
And I would do nothing but trying to fix that.
Because that would be too far.
Way too far.
And part of me actually wishes it happened.
I don't wish him to be in jail.
But there's some fights you want.
You know what I mean?
You ever have that feeling?
There are fights you want to avoid, and that would be most of them.
You should avoid most fights.
But there are fights you want.
There are fights you want.
January 6th is a fight I want.
I would also suggest that we consider January 6th a holiday.
Anybody up for that?
Does anybody want to celebrate January 6th?
As a turning point.
Because although we have not realized that turning point, the election of Trump, should it happen, would be the completion of that.
January 6 was an op against the American people.
It was a psy-op, meaning the way it was framed, not the event itself.
It was clearly a psy-op.
It was whether or not the Undercover people were important to the outcome or not.
I think they were, but even separate from that, the way it was framed by the media and the Democrats was so illegitimate and so corrupt that it felt like a turning point.
To me, that felt, and especially when the JaySixers started going to jail, as they have, that's way too far.
That is literally violence.
Yeah.
Jailing people for those things, you know, the ones who are not violent themselves, the non-violent people who are being jailed, that is violence against them.
Would you agree?
You put somebody in jail, that's violence.
That is violence.
I'm in favor of it, if they did real crimes.
But it's violence.
So, January 6th is the point where your government became violent because of your opinions.
That's new.
That's new.
So I think we should celebrate it as the turning point where the left went too far.
You could call it a too far day.
That was the day they went too far.
Because I think that the way the January Sixers were treated is probably one of the biggest animating forces behind people saying, you know what?
Trump might have some rough edges, but fuck all of that.
Am I right?
Because I think a lot of Republicans were willing to accept that Trump was a flawed candidate in all the ways we always talk about.
And their first choice was to get a nice clean candidate they could support.
That was first choice.
Until the January 6ers started going to jail.
As soon as the January 6ers started going to jail, the non-violent ones, that was too far.
And that made, at least in my mind, Trump's re-election a necessity.
Now, to be clear, I'm still backing the vague Ramaswamy, and I think he'd be a better president because he's younger, and I think age matters.
But if he doesn't make the final cut, it's got to be Trump.
It just has to be.
Because January 6th can't go without a response.
It just can't go without a response.
Now, Vivek said he's going to do pardons on day one for the January 6ers who were non-violent.
Now, I'll accept that.
So I'll take Vivek as a solution.
And I'll take Trump as a solution.
But I don't know if the others have said, has DeSantis said out loud, He would pardon the nonviolent January Sixers?
He did?
I say yes and a no.
But DeSantis is not hammering on the point though, right?
I'm saying no's.
I don't think he said no, did he?
All right, so we have a little bit of a question on what DeSantis' view on that is.
Now that's disappointing.
Imagine DeSantis is running as a Republican.
He is.
And we don't know if he would pardon the J6ers on day one.
How do we not know that?
Because I think he would, but he hasn't said it.
I feel like he would have said it directly.
I don't know.
Maybe he said he was open to looking at it or something like that, which would be a fair political thing to say.
Interesting.
He said he would consider it.
I think that's probably the reason that we're not sure, because he said he would consider it, which is a good non-answer.
I'm seeing a comment that's frustrating me.
Let me say it just once so everybody here sees it.
If you think Vivek took money from Soros and is a Soros puppet, do a little bit of homework, okay?
Don't bring that here.
We're well beyond believing that Vivek has some kind of Soros connection you should worry about.
Or that Big Pharma controls him.
Those are just coming from the opposition.
There's nothing to that.
There's nothing to it.
Nothing.
There was some minor connection that he's explained away.
If you haven't heard the explanation, don't bring that here.
Go do a little bit more work.
Just Google it.
Listen to, find Vivek explaining his response to those accusations.
But if you haven't heard that, don't bring that here.
That's crazy shit.
All right, let's see what the IDF has admitted that the three hostages who were released, I guess they had white flags, they were waving the white flags and they were killed.
And the IDF has taken full responsibility.
Now, I have two things to say about that.
It's a tragedy of almost unspeakable dimension, the fact that they were that close to being freed.
So, you know, your brain It's just crushed by the story.
And so let's not lose sight of that.
But despite the tragedy, which we're not minimizing, I have to say the fact that the IDF said they did it and didn't make an excuse for it, I got to respect that.
I got to respect that.
And it does make me more likely to believe whatever's the next thing they tell me, which is tough, because in that war context, I'm not really expecting to believe anybody.
But, wow.
Sort of a model of how to behave, I would say.
If you've done something this bad, and within a fairly short period of time, you say, yes, this was us.
No excuses.
That's pretty good.
I'd like to see more of that, but less tragedies.
Well, AI appears to have broken some kind of barrier we didn't think would break.
So Google's DeepMind, which, correct me on this, is not a large language model, right?
DeepMind was an earlier version of AI before the large language models?
Do I have that right?
I got a yes over here?
I think that's right.
But using DeepMind in conjunction with some other AI, they solved some math problems that had not been solved before.
And apparently the... Let's see if I can do a good job of explaining this.
If you have a few different types of AI, so DeepMind is one technology, large language models is another, that the big one, Can interact with the other ones.
And that it's almost like a brainstorming system of humans, except it's two AIs checking each other's work.
So one of them will throw out ideas and the other one will check them.
And then, you know, recheck things and stuff.
So, in effect, this is not how the story was reported.
This is my own twist on it.
AI just learned how to be creative.
So as a creative human being who does it for a living, I have to create lots of stuff every day in my mind.
The way I visualize the process is multiple people in my head.
One of them is pitching, and then the others are evaluating.
Pitch, evaluate, pitch, evaluate.
But the pitcher is never evaluating.
The pitcher is just pitching.
And then there's maybe another part of my brain that works out, if it's practical.
So there's one that's just, how about this?
How about this?
Not thinking too much.
There's another one saying yes or no.
And then it's working with the one that looks at things practically.
So there are at least three brains in my head working simultaneously.
And I've told you that when I did my micro lesson on one of those brains is the executive.
It's the one in charge.
But if you imagine the AI, Could use that same model so that instead of having an AI, that would be like just one part of your brain.
But if you're trying to reproduce human capabilities, especially creativity, it does make sense to me that you would have a pitcher and a catcher.
You've got one coming up with ideas and one checking the ideas, and they may even be different technologies.
And if that doesn't work, perhaps one of them can call upon yet another one.
Say, oh, two people in the room is not much of a brainstorm, so let's bring in a third AI.
Is it possible that even though the story is about solving a math problem, what they really solved was creativity for AI?
Now, I've told you that, this is one of my famous quotes that's on the internet all the time, that creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes and art Is knowing which ones to keep.
Have you ever heard me say that?
So creativity is, if I'm going to draw, let's say, a picture of an animal or a person, if I give it two eyes and two ears, that's not, that's not a mistake, right?
It's also not art.
If I gave them one eye, maybe it's art, but it's a mistake.
So if it's a mistake that I look at and I go, ah, I kind of like that, then it's art, if you like it as well.
So for example, Dilbert has no eyeballs and no mouth.
That's a mistake.
But can you imagine Dilbert with eyeballs and a mouth?
It would be different.
The fact that he has no eyeballs and no mouth turned out to be perfect because he was the voiceless employee, the one who had You know, he was blind and deaf and, you know, sort of a slave to the corporation.
You put him like a mole, you put him in... So having no eyeballs and no mouth turned out to work, and it turned out to be art.
Commercial art.
But it's a mistake.
So you need to be able to create AI that can make mistakes.
And apparently the large language models are very mistaky.
I asked her what books I published and all the answers were wrong.
So all those wrong answers were mistakes.
What books did I publish?
All wrong answers.
But there were interesting answers.
They might have even suggested a new book title that I hadn't written yet.
It might have actually come up with the book I should write that I've not yet written.
By mistake.
If that mistake turned into a real book, is it, you know, the brainstorming work on me?
Well, then it turns into art.
So AI has to learn how to make mistakes productively.
Otherwise, it can't be creative.
You need to make lots of creative mistakes.
And then you analyze the creative mistakes.
Like you're panning for gold.
It's like, ah, there's a mistake.
Now, useless.
There's a mistake.
Useless.
There's a mistake.
Useless.
There's a mistake.
Whoa.
Why did that mistake make me feel something?
It's a mistake.
It's a mistake.
But I felt something.
Now you get armed.
So this is a way bigger potential deal than most of you think, if you're wondering why I'm spending so much time on it.
But if AI can solve art, it can kind of do anything.
That's a pretty big bar, and I wasn't sure it could cross it.
But this idea of the multiple brains working as one brain the way a human brain does, that might be the breakthrough.
That might be the logical breakthrough, is it's got to be multiple entities struggling.
All right.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is all I have to say on today's best live stream you'll ever see.
Is there any story I forgot that is so important?
I saw a story on social media about some votes in Fulton County, Georgia, that were being questioned or tossed out.
But then I checked the news today and I didn't see it.
Was that story real?
Do you know if that was real?
Yeah.
So the claim was 17,000 invalid ballots from the 2020 election.
Andrew Klavan cited my hoaxes.
Oh, good.
So some people say it's real, but it's not news.
How can it be real and the news isn't covering it?
It's on social media, but not in the news.
Not in the left or the right.
It's not on Fox News, is it?
So I'm going to put a question mark on that one.
Big question mark on that one.
I don't know if that's real.
Is it an old claim?
Somebody says it's an old claim.
Might be an old claim.
That's why I didn't talk about it.
All right.
The poll workers lied to the GPI about you.
Meaning the speaker Mark and threatened.
He said I threatened them.
Wow.
Oh Yeah, so there's a new movie called the American Society of Magical Negroes which suggests that the The danger in the world is white people something like that And as others have pointed out wait a minute if you change the ethnicities of the people in this movie It would go from a funny send-up to something terrible.
I'm going to hold my opinion on this one.
Because it is intentionally a comedy.
And comedies can be challenging.
So here's what I think.
If it turns out it's hilarious, and you watch the movie and you go, OK, that's just funny, then I'm not going to care what they said.
If it's funny.
If it's not funny and it comes off as racist, that's a big problem.
But I looked at the trailer and I thought it might be actually funny.
I think I'll probably watch it.
So, you know, I'm prepared to be deeply offended if it turns out that way.
But I think I'm more primed to think it might be just edgy and funny and You know, worthy.
It's still programming.
Yeah, but humor, humor is its own category.
Humor can influence you, but sometimes it's okay.
Because joke's a joke.
But I tend to be very forgiving about humor.
So, for example, in the In the trailer for the movie, it shows a scene where there's a young black guy walking through some party atmosphere filled with white people.
And he's feeling all awkward.
And, you know, and then that's kind of the point of it is that he's awkward around the white people.
And I thought to myself, I could totally watch this movie.
Because I would love to see, you know, a perspective I don't think about or wouldn't, you know, like I never would have thought about that in exactly the way they presented it.
So I thought, oh, that would be interesting.
To sort of see the black version of what we're seeing, if you're not black, to see the black interpretation of the same things you're watching, but you weren't interpreting them that way.
To me, that would be an interesting movie.
And if it's funny, I'm there.
So I'm going to be open-minded on that, because I think I'm going to agree with Elon Musk on this.
When I got cancelled, Elon Musk, to his credit, said we shouldn't be cancelling humour.
Now, he wasn't supporting anything I said.
He was just saying, you know, let's stop cancelling humour.
So I appreciated that so much that I'd like to keep that as standard.
So he's influencing me.
I want to keep that as standard.
I don't want to punish this movie Because it's a lot of black creators who are having some fun with some, you know, racial standards or assumptions.
I say let them have their fun and see how they did.
And if it's funny, it's funny.
I'll recommend it if it's funny.
So that's all I got for you, YouTube, and I will talk to you tomorrow.
Thanks for joining the best live stream you've ever seen today.
Export Selection