God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorksFind my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.comContent:Politics, Boeing Airline Crash, DNC David Hogg, AI Hallucinations, 3 AI Collaboration Solution, Middle East Embassy Evacuations, Iran Tensions, China Trade Deal, ICE Deportations, Stephen Miller, Sanctuary Cities, Sanctuary States, Riots Photo Op Competition, President Trump, Riot Funding Investigation, American Flag Burning, Terry Moran Fired, China's Nuclear Power Plants, 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.
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.
Because that's what it is.
But if you'd like to take your experience up to levels that no one can even understand with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need for that 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 dopamine end of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the Simultaneous Sip.
And it happens right now.
Go.
Oh, that was good.
Oh, freshly baked coffee.
Oh.
All right, I wonder.
I wonder, wonder.
If there's any science that could have been avoided by just asking me.
Oh, here's one.
According to Eric Dolan in SciPost, it's always Eric.
There's this mega study that shows, and I know this will be surprising, that exercise boosts That's right.
Exercise is good for your brain.
Do you know how else you could have determined this without doing a mega study?
You could have asked me, hey, Scott, is there any situation in which exercise is ever neutral or bad for brains?
And I would say, hmm.
No.
No, there is not.
It's always good for your brain.
Because your body and your brain are the same thing.
It's the same tool.
Yep.
But the thing they added that they think is new is that it's every kind of exercise and every kind of brain in every situation.
So the intensity did not matter.
Yoga and dance?
Just as good.
Which I might have known.
I'm not sure.
All right.
Here's another one.
Let's see if you can get this one first.
Do Democrats dislike Republicans the same amount as Republicans dislike Democrats?
Do you know this one?
It's a new study.
Well, it turns out, this is also a side post, Eric Dolan again.
It turns out that Democrats do dislike Republicans more than Republicans dislike Democrats, according to a study.
How many of you did not know that?
You all knew that, every one of you.
The reason seems to be that Democrats believe that Republicans have a more negative opinion of people who are minorities or have some kind of issues.
Trouble.
All right.
Well, I would argue...
Meaning, if he said to a Democrat, I need to remove this benefit from this one person, but it will save the whole world, the Democrat would say, you monster!
You can't take that benefit away from that one person?
And then the Republican would say, no, you missed the part.
Where I said that would save the entire world.
And the Democrat would say, I don't even know what you're talking about.
You would be mean to this person.
So, sort of like that.
Alright, here's another one.
Do you think that a TikTok video, if it's edited for, you know, persuasion, Can change how voters see politicians?
What do you think?
A TikTok video.
Could it be influential in changing how you see a politician?
Yes!
Again, it's Eric Nolan in side post.
Yes, obviously.
But apparently they did a study.
And they found out that not only can you change how people see politicians, you know, their favorability, but it's especially strong for Donald Trump.
So Trump is right that TikTok works in his favor.
So visuals are influential.
Well, in the bad news, Boeing Dreamliner had a horrible crash.
Air India.
It went down and killed many of the 242 on board.
Now, the reason it wasn't all of them is they had just taken off.
But let me give you some advice about that story, which is, I saw a warning.
That the video is especially hard to look at.
And I said to myself, how hard can it be?
And I watched the video.
Let me give you some advice.
Don't watch the videos.
There were lots of videos of people who got to the crash site when it was fresh.
Do not watch them.
Do not.
It will not make your day better.
Do not watch them.
All right.
Trump and Melania went to the Kennedy Center and they watched Les Miserables.
That's my French.
Excuse my French.
Les Miserables.
And they had a good time.
Apparently, it's the president's favorite play or musical or whatever.
Now, it reminded me of the balance that the president is trying to find between austerity, because, you know, we don't have infinite money, and making sure that America doesn't
So, I don't love it when he wants to spend extra on Air Force One, but I understand that it's a symbol of the country and you want to keep the president safe and, you know, it makes sense.
I didn't love it when Trump said he was going to build a ballroom at the White House.
Because again, we've got these big deficits.
But on the other hand, it is a symbol of the country's health.
It's like the beating heart of the country.
So making sure the beating heart of the country is not only working, but it's extra.
You know, it's got a ballroom.
I can say it's good for the mind of the country.
And he's going to put some money into fixing up the Kennedy Center.
And I thought to myself, I'll never go to the Kennedy Center.
Why do I care?
And then I thought, oh, okay.
It's a high visibility kind of a situation.
And, yeah.
I definitely don't like the idea of a military parade.
I just don't like anything about that.
It's spending money.
It's probably damaging the streets.
It just doesn't look right.
But on the other hand, it does make the country look like it's powerful and nobody should mess with it.
Even though some of my instincts sort of argue against these Trump-like expenses, I feel like he's right.
And my instinct is wrong because you've got to protect the symbols.
The United States is more than just the people and the money and the military.
It's also...
And Trump keeping the idea of America strong by making sure these symbols don't rot, he's right.
Yeah, that's the right play.
Meanwhile, according to Newsmax, I didn't see this anywhere else, but Newsmax says that The DNC has voted to oust Vice Chair David Hogg, and also Malcolm Kenyatta.
I don't know who that is.
But I guess they were both vice chairs.
And it's over a technical complaint that that was the excuse they made.
But they slaughtered their hog, finally.
Now, I've been telling you before that I think David Hogg should not be underestimated because, like AOC, he does have skill.
And if you free him from the confines of being in the DNC, which has a limited role, it might make him stronger.
So keep an eye on him.
Keep an eye on him.
In good news, PJ Media is reporting that GM is going to invest $4 billion in U.S.-based manufacturing plants.
I guess that's because of a response to tariffs on Mexico.
So that would be a win for President Trump as he's trying to And that's exactly what's happening.
So, good for you, President Trump.
Meanwhile, there's a story in Futurism by Victor Tangerman, who says that CEOs of major companies are trying to make AI copies of themselves.
So that the AI copy can answer the sort of routine questions the CEO is always asked.
But they have a problem with hallucinations.
So the main problem with AI is hallucinations.
And nobody's figured out how to get past that.
But I thought I would solve that today because all these CEOs need it and I need it too.
I guess some of the startups they've used would be like personal AI.
These are startups that allow you to clone a person.
And unfortunately, they all have the problem of hallucination.
Delphi, which I've tested.
And Tavis, I've never heard of.
But anyway, each one of those, and any other AI as well, is going to give you hallucinations.
But would you like me to solve that problem right now?
All right.
Okay.
If you demand it, I will.
All you need is three AIs.
You know, not three models, but three completely different AIs.
And you have one AI that's in charge of speaking, but you have everything it says tested first on the other AIs.
So you have two AIs that fact check the third AI.
And the third AI is the only one that gets to talk.
Now, what are the odds that...
I think the odds would be close to zero, right?
Unless the models were also coincidentally trained exactly the same way, in the same order, on the same data, which I don't think happens.
But you tell me, what are the odds?
That all three AIs would hallucinate the same thing.
I feel like it wouldn't.
So I'm wondering if the real problem is that people don't want to pay for three AIs.
You know, if you had Grok and ChatGPT and Anthropic, would they all agree on the hallucination?
Now, doesn't that seem too simple?
Are any of you AI experts, when you hear my idea, do you say to yourself, you idiot.
You forgot the most important thing about AI.
I don't know, did I?
I might have.
But doesn't it seem to you like that would work?
Like every time?
I don't see how it wouldn't work.
But anyway, so if you wanted AI to be solved, there you go.
I just fixed it.
Maybe.
All right.
The Trump administration, according to RSBN, is evacuating the Middle East embassies, at least the non-critical people, Now, here's my question.
If we're evacuating our Middle East embassies, the only reason is we think there's too much risk that Iran will attack them.
Now, what would make Iran attack a U.S. embassy?
Well, the only thing I can think of is if Israel attacked Iran.
So, didn't we always have that risk?
You know, for months and months and months, if not years?
Why are we drawing down the staff now?
I can only think of one reason.
Well, two.
One, we know that an attack is coming.
That would be the most obvious.
Or two, It's part of negotiations, because it suggests that an attack is imminent, and maybe that's what we need to get Iran to agree.
But I've been watching Iran for much of my adult life, and they don't seem really susceptible to threats.
It's sort of the opposite.
Very much the opposite, actually.
So, are we being told that there's a military action that's imminent?
And how imminent?
Would we be evacuating, you know, a week before it happens?
Or maybe we did it months before it happens because we don't want to give away too much?
I don't know.
It looks to me like there's going to be some...
Speaking of Iran, according to the Wall Street Journal, the IAEA board, so the weird thing about Iran is that we're having all these nuclear energy, nuclear weapon negotiations, but at the same time, this IAEA Has been monitoring their activity.
Now, it's not enough of a monitor to make a difference.
It doesn't stop them from doing what they're doing, apparently.
But the IAEA just found that Iran is in noncompliance for the first time in 20 years.
First time in 20 years?
Really?
There's nothing non-compliant they've done in a nuclear...
What's all this talk about then?
All right, well, so apparently it has to do with, what is it?
There's something unexplained that Iran is not explaining.
So, yeah, this board is saying, if you can't explain this, then you're in noncompliance.
So, what did Iran do, being in non-compliance?
Well, it said it would open a new uranium enrichment facility.
So, it's going to do more of whatever we don't like.
According to experts, Iran is already producing enough highly enriched uranium For one nuclear weapon's worth a month.
That doesn't mean they're making weapons.
It means they have enough enriched uranium.
Anyway, so the IAEA might lead to some kind of UN Security Council action, and there could be some repercussions there, but things are heating up.
And so my question is this.
Iran's entire approach is saying, oh, no, we don't want a nuclear weapon.
No, no, no.
We need all this uranium enrichment for, you know, peaceful purposes, for medical devices and, you know, just ordinary business.
But why would anybody act this way?
If they had only peaceful intentions, nobody would, right?
You know, in your wildest imagination, can you imagine anybody going to the brink of war, and in all likelihood, actual war, over their insistence that there's going to be, you know, totally peaceful, non-military work on nuclear?
Nobody would do that.
Nobody would do that.
So they've signaled as strongly as they can that they plan to have nuclear weapons, or at least the ability to very quickly have nuclear weapons, which would be pretty dangerous on its own.
So given that I think Trump said his optimism about a deal is kind of low right now.
We're pretty much guaranteed to have military action, aren't we?
The only thing that's a mystery is how much involvement the U.S. might have.
But it does look to me like Israel is going to act.
And maybe the U.N. action where they're finding them being in noncompliance, maybe that's the trigger.
So I wouldn't be surprised if you see some war happening this summer.
Meanwhile, Newsmax is reporting that the U.S. budget deficit fell 9% in May, and the reason is that tariffs boosted our revenue.
So, all right.
So apparently there would have been a $316 billion budget deficit, but it's down $31 billion because of tariffs.
I didn't know that tariffs would make a difference, and I think some of these tariffs are temporary, so don't get too excited.
And so I was looking at the Wall Street Journal to report on what the trade deal is all about.
And I cannot tell if the trade deal is good or bad for America.
Can you?
Is there any way to tell if the trade deal is good or bad for America?
I look at it and I say, all right, so China is going to loosen up on their rare earth minerals holdback.
To which I say, wouldn't that be just going back to where we were?
But a little bit worse because there's some kind of limit on it or now we know they can pull it anytime they want.
It's nice to have our rare earth mineral source back, but that didn't put us ahead.
That's sort of where we were before.
Then there's a...
We're going to restrict the most advanced AI chips from China, which is where we already were.
Okay.
We're going to allow Chinese student visas so they can go to college in the United States, which is where we were.
Right?
There's nothing new about that.
We're just going back to where we were.
And then there's something about tariffs, but neither China nor the U.S. seem to be Mad about the tariffs they've agreed to, which sort of suggests that we're just going back to where we were.
So, can anybody give me an argument about how we came out ahead?
Did we come out ahead on anything?
Did we get a commitment on fentanyl?
No.
Even Lutnik didn't try to bluff that.
You just changed the subject.
Did we get an agreement on the theft of IP?
No.
Not that I'm aware of.
And are we going to start reselling them jet engines and ethane, which is a necessary part of making plastic, I guess?
Yes.
Which is exactly what it used to be.
Right?
So, the Wall Street Journal summarized it as we just are moving back to where we were, but the deal is leaning a little bit in China's direction now.
So, even our hometown newspaper, the Wall Street Journal, Is saying that we came out behind.
What do you think?
So, I'd love to hear an argument where we came out ahead.
On anything.
On even one thing.
Nothing on fentanyl?
Nothing?
Are we coming out ahead because we've got a little bit of extra tariff on them?
I don't know.
It's a little unclear to me that anything happened except that China said we're not going to have basically not negotiated anything.
That's what it looks like.
Well, I had a question this week about the Home Depot deportations.
So as you know, it's fairly common for...
And then you take a few day workers with you and you pay them cash and you're both happy.
I didn't understand that because I didn't understand why the Home Depot workers would be the worst first.
Because were we not promised that the order of the deportations would be the criminals and the worst of them first.
And the Home Depot employees, They would be the ones who are trying to work, trying to claw their way into some kind of a life.
But there's no really indication that they're especially criminal.
So why would we reverse from the thing that I've been telling people, You know, just calm down.
Don't worry.
You know, we're going to do the worst first, and we'll basically never get to the end of the worst.
So the way I rationalized that I was okay with very aggressive deportation is that I didn't think it was entirely real, meaning I'm very much in favor of getting rid of people who were criminals and the gangs, etc.
But I didn't think that ice would have enough resources to ever get to the bottom of that well.
So in my view, you know, those Home Depot people and your gardener and your housekeeper, if you have a housekeeper, to me they all seem kind of safe because it would take, you know, five years to get rid of the bad people.
And then we'd probably have adjusted.
We'd say, all right, well, we thought we wanted to get rid of everyone, but it turns out maybe we're better economically to keep the people who have jobs and they're paying taxes and they've been good citizens and they've assimilated.
So while I completely understand the argument that says, no, everybody has to go back, That wasn't the deal.
That wasn't the deal.
The deal was there would be an order to it.
And that's the deal I signed up for.
Meaning when I said, you know, I support President Trump and I'm in favor of his border policies, I wasn't talking about picking up people at Home Depot.
So I feel like I got stabbed in the back.
Because I'm a public figure.
Who has publicly supported very strongly President Trump's approach to immigration.
And the worst first was very clearly a central part of that plan.
And that is now reversed.
So I got screwed by my own side.
Do you think I can let that go?
Now, I understand the argument, oh, but Scott, it's really better to deport everybody who is illegal.
I understand your argument, but my argument is that's not what I was promised, and it's not what I put my face on, and it's not what I backed.
That's not what I voted for.
All right, so And I don't know exactly how to turn that off.
But at the moment, I feel totally screwed because I was sort of out front saying, yeah, this is fine.
Don't worry about it.
But it's not what they promised.
Now, so I did a little research on why the change.
As far as I can tell, the change is because the ICE couldn't get the numbers that we wanted.
So if they had focused on the worst first, especially in the context of these sanctuary cities, the difficulty in getting enough people so it looked like deportation was even working was just too high.
Because, you know, you get caught up in the court cases and the protests and, you know, the cities would fight everything and that's where all the bad people are.
You know, mostly the blue cities.
So I feel as though there was a political reason that Stephen Miller sort of pressured ICE to go after the less dangerous people.
And it was because of sanctuary cities.
Is that your understanding?
That if sanctuary cities did not exist, that they could do worst first all day long, and they would never run out of the worst.
Because they would go to the city, they'd say, you know, do you have anybody in your jail who's illegal?
And they'd say, oh yeah, we got, you know, five more this morning.
And then ICE would say, all right, we got five more criminals.
And they would send them away.
So, here's my request.
If the reason that Home Depot is being targeted, and I'm using Home Depot as a stand-in for just more casual deportations as opposed to going after hardened criminals, if that's the reason, then the administration needs to be saying that really loudly.
Separately, I understand that There's plenty of complaints about sanctuary cities.
And then separately, there's the targeting of the Home Depot non-criminal beyond the crime of coming into the country.
You need to tie those together.
Because if the reason that the Home Depot people are getting scooped up is that ICE is...
It's like, as long as there's sanctuary cities, we can't do worst first.
Do you feel me?
As long as there are sanctuary cities, we don't have the option of doing the worst first.
If you tell me that, And then I see that some of the Home Depot people are being deported.
I'm not going to love it because it's not worse first.
But I'm going to at least understand it.
And that's better than having a knife in your back and not understanding it.
But either way, I'm getting fucked by my own side.
Let me be clear about that.
I don't like it.
I feel like I have been personally, personally abused by this process.
I feel lied to.
I feel lied to.
It's sort of promises made, promises not kept.
And I'm not going to ignore that.
I'm not going to ignore that at all.
Now, one of the things I love about having a Republican audience, As we talked about, the Democrats dislike the Republicans more than the Republicans dislike the Democrats.
The Republicans are willing to listen to an argument.
And so I gave you an argument.
Some of you loved it, some of you hated it.
But you're still willing to let me talk, right?
You're not hating on me.
You might not like that opinion.
You might disagree with it.
But that doesn't make us enemies.
We're still on the same side.
Right?
So, you know, the positive message here is that you can have pretty strong disagreements, but as long as you're pro-America, America first, and we're sort of all aiming in the right direction.
But some of us have a difference of how to get there.
That's all good.
That's all fine.
We're not Democrats.
So we're going to talk about something else in a minute that will be a similar thing where you might not like what I say, but it won't make much difference in terms of the size of my audience or anything else because you allow that, which I appreciate a lot.
Anyway, so I'd love some answers on that question.
Meanwhile, let's check out the photo op competition.
You call them riots.
Some call them protests.
But apparently there are now 19 states with 200 rioters busted in L.A. According to the New York Post, The rioting slash protesting is going to Atlanta, Chicago, and Seattle, hundreds of protesters here and there, thousands of storms the streets in 35 cities in 19 states, blah, blah, blah.
But I see it all as a photo op competition.
So the game that's being played...
And so far, Trump is winning because he's done the most clever thing.
If you assume that people who watch the news are mostly just casual watchers.
Maybe 5% of the public really digs in and figures out the context and knows the numbers and stuff like that.
But 95% of the country is just looking at the pictures.
And if they see a sprung picture and they see it a lot, then that will change their opinion.
But what Trump has done, cleverly, is he sent in the Marines, but they haven't been deployed.
So I've seen no picture of any Marines.
Secondly, he's deployed the National Guard sort of over the complaints of the governors.
And they've been, as far as I know, they've only been deployed to protect federal buildings, which don't appear to be under any special kind of attack.
And then, they're all just sort of staying out of the way.
What does Trump do after deploying two branches of the military?
And then having them do basically nothing?
Now, guarding federal buildings is not nothing, but if it causes the protesters to go somewhere else, well, then it ends up looking like nothing.
So there's no pictures.
So you've got zero pictures of Trump's military doing anything bad or illegal.
Somebody's saying that the Home Depot thing is a hoax.
I'm not going to read that, Andy, because while I know the story about the individual Home Depot stuff is not necessarily true, I'm using the Home Depot as an example of people who are not criminals who might get picked up.
So it's an example.
It's not based on specific Home Depot situation.
But let me finish.
So Trump says, I've been laughing about this all morning.
He says, if I didn't send in the troops to Los Angeles the last three nights, that once beautiful and great city would be burning to the ground right now.
But what exactly did the Marines and the National Guard do in Los Angeles?
Were they putting out the fires?
It's sort of perfect.
He can claim success without any visible evidence whatsoever.
And at the same time, the pictures that are being produced are still of...
You know, the flag waving people in fires.
So he's winning the photo op competition hard, but also he's winning the, you know, did you respond quickly and with enough vigor to meet the situation?
And almost anybody watching would say, well, yeah.
I mean, if you've already pre-deployed the military two branches.
But they haven't done anything dangerous.
They haven't hurt anybody.
They haven't really gotten involved in the action.
But they could.
They could, right?
So, it's sort of perfect for Trump.
Anyway, the longer it goes, the better for Trump.
I saw Chris Cuomo say the news is sort of the best case scenario for But I've also seen dueling polls.
I think it was Jessica Tarloff on The Five on Fox News was saying that some of the support for Trump's immigration policies have plunged.
But at the same time, I've heard there are polls which say that Support for Trump's handling of the protests slash riots is above average.
In other words, there are more people who support it than don't.
So I think we've got two separate things happening, which is the polls are all over the place.
I think it depends what they ask and how they ask and exactly when they asked it.
In the end, I think that as long as Trump's military doesn't hurt anybody or do anything ridiculous, I think Trump wins in the end.
Yeah.
All right.
FBI Director Kash Patel, he told Just the News that they're going to investigate the people behind the protests.
So the people behind it would be the money people.
So FBI will look at the money trail.
I don't know that that means that any of them are breaking the law necessarily, depending on what they're doing or funding.
But Representative Andy Biggs from Arizona, he wants to see those activist organizations who are committing crimes.
Have them investigated and criminally prosecuted.
But again, I don't know exactly what the crime would be.
Because is it illegal to organize a protest and fund it?
Because they would not be the people who are throwing the rocks.
But if you funded people that you know 1% of them might throw rocks, Have you broken the law?
I don't know.
But if they have broken the law, of course, something needs to be done.
All right, let's talk about the flag burning.
Whenever this comes up, I like to add my opinion to it.
Thomas Massey posted on X. He said, burning your own American flag is neen-arted.
You know, I guess intentionally misspelling retarded.
But it's not illegal, nor should it be.
He says, no one should want a federal government so powerful that it can lock you up for a year for burning your own stuff.
Now remember that Trump is in favor of jail for burning a flag.
But Thomas Massey's not.
He goes, thankfully, our Constitution prohibits Congress from making such stupid laws.
All right.
So I posted my opinion on this.
You've heard it before, but I'll put it in different words this time.
So one reason I respect the American flag, and it's just one reason that I respect the American flag, is that it gets stronger.
When protesters burn it.
Yeah, that's a feature, not a bug.
It gets stronger when you burn it.
Now, that's the kind of flag I want.
I don't want any weak, wimpy flag that if you burn it, it somehow has destroyed the country or weakened the country.
No, no.
And then I want you to know that, like most of you, I'm also offended.
When I see an American flag being burned, like I can feel it, you know, like a person who loves their country.
I just feel it like, oh, God, are you burning my flag right in front of me?
So I feel it.
But that feeling is also when I most vividly feel the power of the flag.
And I like having a flag that can make me feel something.
And can make me feel the power of the country that it represents.
So for my money, if you've got a wimpy, stupid flag you can burn and it causes so much trouble that somebody thinks they need to lock you up for it, that is an inadequate flag.
I want a flag that you can burn right in front of the Supreme Court.
And the Supreme Court will say, there you go, free speech.
And that's it.
And then the more you burn it, the more it reminds people that America is a place where you get to have unpleasant opinions and you can express them in public.
And you can do it all day long.
And what happens is the country doesn't get weaker.
It just reminds us every day that we've got this flag that gets stronger when you try to burn it.
So that's my take.
That's my reframe.
Meanwhile, ex-ABC News correspondent Terry Moran, that poor bastard who's having the worst month of anybody ever.
So he gets put on leave, and then he gets fired from ABC for having some hard-to-explain bad opinions about Stephen Miller and Trump, I guess.
He has announced on a video that he's going to be a Substack blogger, but not right away, because it's going to take some time for him to figure it out.
And I thought to myself, That's sort of embarrassing.
After 28 years doing a job for ABC News, and then you get fired and you're announcing you're a Substack blogger.
That's not going to work for a lot of people.
But good luck.
Meanwhile, the publication called Futurism, So Ohio State University has just announced that starting this fall, every single one of its students will be forced to use AI in class.
So instead of banning AI, you know, because it's a way that students can cut corners or, you know, potentially cheat.
They're going the other direction.
And they're saying that it's a requirement that you know how to use AI and that you know how to use it in every single class.
Now, what do you think of that?
Do you think the colleges should ban AI because then you don't learn the same?
Or should it encourage people to become experts in not only the class, But I have to use AI within that domain.
I'm going to go hard in favor of Ohio State.
I think this might be one of the smartest things I've seen.
Because in the real world, everybody's going to use AI for everything.
And every one of their subjects, from math to biology to history, Now, I've used Grok almost every day for, I don't know, months.
And when I use Grok, I get some context that I didn't know, and I usually remember it.
But it's way easier to look it up with AI than it is to Google.
So I feel, in my own experience, that AI makes me smarter faster than any technology I've ever been associated with.
Now, I don't forget the things I look up on AI, and it's not like I could just take its writing and read it to you on this podcast.
I have to understand it.
And then I put it in my own words, and that's the only model that works.
If I were to just read a script that AI wrote or Grok wrote, you would know it was a script, and you wouldn't love it.
So I think this is a very, what would I call it, forward-thinking and aware.
Ohio State University has at least one person there who is very smart and understands what's coming.
So, yeah, I think all the colleges should adapt to AI, or maybe we should get rid of colleges and just use AI.
That's coming.
Well, let's talk about our nuclear power policy.
Apparently, according to...
But China plans to build 100 new nuclear power plants in the next 10 years.
So 10 nuclear power plants per year for 10 years.
So they have 100 of them.
The U.S. has built only three power plants since 1995.
And I can't name them.
I didn't know we even billed three since 1995.
I thought it was zero.
But, all right, I guess there are three.
So we're way behind.
But the good news and a real test of the Adams law of slow-moving disasters.
Now, the Adams law of slow-moving disasters.
It says that if we all recognize the problem coming, we've got lots of time, we're really good at dealing with the problem.
And the problem coming is that AI is going to use way more electricity than we have.
If we don't do the best in AI, we'll fall behind militarily, economically, and every other way to China and maybe other countries.
Really, we really understand the risk, and we see it coming, and we kind of agree what the problem is.
And we also agree on the solution, which is if you don't make nuclear work and fast, there's probably not a second way to handle all the electrical needs.
I think Elon Musk would say you can get there with solar panels and batteries, but probably we need all of it.
So, the good news, according to The Hill, is that Trump has proposed getting rid of all climate rules for power plants.
So there would be any kind of power plant.
But a lot of the rules were really, allegedly, not really helping the atmosphere or anything else.
The rules were mostly, you know, don't pollute.
Don't add this or that to the atmosphere.
But apparently those rules might have been overdone, so those might get rolled back.
That would make a big difference.
And apparently we've opened, we the United States, a uranium enrichment facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
Because it turns out that we currently import 99% of our U.S. nuclear fuel.
What?
When did that happen?
When did we get to the point?
Scott, you were falling for the Home Depot hoax.
Now, did you hear me explain that when I talk about Home Depot, I'm not talking about a specific Home Depot?
And any specific thing happening at Home Depot's.
I'm using it as a general holder for non-criminal immigrants who are being picked up.
Now, are you arguing that no non-criminals are being picked up?
Because otherwise you're just being an asshole.
All right.
So, I accept.
That the stories, the specific stories about the Home Depot are not representative of anything.
So we're both on the same page, right?
Whatever story there is about any specific Home Depot or even more than one has nothing to do with my opinion.
Everybody understand that?
I use it just as a, you know, like a holding place, basically.
To talk about people who are not criminals.
You got that?
Can you handle that?
All right.
It's not an analogy, asshole.
Oh, God.
So, I'm going to have to block you.
All right.
So most of our uranium enrichment comes from places like Russia.
Not exactly the best source for uranium enrichment.
Canada, okay.
Australia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan.
Anyway, but apparently we've got some sanctions on the Russian stuff, but you can get around it.
So at least we're doing all the right things, at least on paper, to get our nuclear facility going.
Anyway, the Hungarian government has...
That's what they call it.
According to the British Patriot, Retweeting this or reposting it.
Now, apparently, this is something we've known since April, but it's getting more attention just because somebody's posting it around.
Apparently, the film is going to highlight how millions of dollars have been directed towards supporting left-wing political movements in Hungary.
You know, at this point...
But it might be for people who are not following Mike Benz.
If you follow Mike Benz, this will probably look like a repeat.
But if you don't, you might find out some stuff you didn't know.
But watch out for the documentary effect, which makes everything look persuasive.
All right.
According to the register, DARPA is testing a device that soldiers can swallow to make them less stressed.
So apparently it would be an electronic device.
It wouldn't be a chemical.
And the electronics that were in the, let's say, pill form that you swallow would somehow interact with your...
Now, remember I tell you that your brain and your body are the same tool?
Well, here you go.
There's a perfect example.
If you could control your gut environment...
Now, that's a really good example of your brain and your body being the same tool.
Right there.
Anyway, they're just getting ready to study the possibilities there.
So it's not like it's close to being a product.
Maybe they should just skip the robots.
I guess they want to make super soldiers first.
I don't know how long it will be before robots are doing all the fighting, but in the short run, in the short run, it looks like we'll have some super soldiers.
In other news, the new Atlas says that they figured out how to grow a new tooth to replace one that fell out or was removed.
Now, this would be different than an implant.
So, implants have existed for a long time.
But instead of an implant, it would be an actual tooth that would not be organic by itself, but apparently would merge with your organic mouth, and it would grow nerves and act like a real tooth.
That's kind of amazing.
Who's doing that?
I don't know.
Somebody's doing that.
And then I talk about this a lot, but when it's done by MIT, it feels like it's closer to reality.
So MIT has a window-sized device that turns air into drinking water with no power source.
So you don't have to plug it in.
You just put it there.
And it sucks moisture out of the air, even in the desert, and creates water.
And if you add a rack of them, you know, more than one of these window-sized things, you could have enough water for your entire family.
Now, I've talked about this technology before, but apparently the other ones have some issues.
They create water that's a little too salty.
So there are some other issues.
But apparently the MIT version has solved those problems.
Now, it makes me ask this question.
what keeps us from living on the sea?
You know, what is preventing us from living on basically, you know, floating earth, And the answer is quite a bit.
But we're getting closer and closer to the time when you can live on the ocean.
All right, let me tell you my design for ocean living.
There should be a special barge.
So basically, I would imagine a...
So you could walk from one to the other.
But also that each of them would be built so it could be part of the navigation.
So in other words, if your island of boats needed to avoid a typhoon, you could just relocate.
Now, in many cases, you wouldn't need to relocate it at all.
Maybe in most cases you would, because you'd want your weather to be perfect.
So I imagine a bunch of barges that could somewhat easily be connected and then disconnected.
You would want your utility barges to be on the outer perimeter, so if there's a problem with one, you could move to another.
For example, one of your barges could be a garbage barge.
But the garbage barge would need to float away and dispose of its garbage in an appropriate way.
But during that time, maybe a replacement garbage barge can connect.
Likewise, you'd want an indoor, you'd want some kind of a garden barge, maybe indoor, so that you could grow vegetables.
Then you might have a fake, Imagine a barge that's optimized with robots to just fish.
And they can tell they're quite a fish and they can prepare it and you can eat all kinds of fish all day.
So that'd be cool if your AI and your robot were doing all the work.
And what about, let's see, what else would you need?
Yeah, you'd also need a self-sailing ship.
So it would need to figure out, using AI probably, how to sail to the best weather and just in time, etc.
So here's what I think.
Yeah, your biggest problem would be pirate ships, Sergio says.
You're right.
Your biggest problem would be So you'd probably need some kind of security arrangement with an established country like the United States.
But imagine, if you will, a city that's built on barges that are connected together and only the outer ring is the utility ones that might need to be replaced or that might need some maintenance, etc.
I think it'd be pretty cool.
I think it's coming.
It's coming.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, that concludes my comments for the day.
Thanks for joining.
Hope you're not too angry at me.
And hurricanes, no problem.
Well, they wouldn't be a problem because we can see them coming, but also you could relocate where they rarely, if ever, happen.
So yeah, as long as you can relocate, you're in pretty good shape.
Tsunamis?
That's a good question.
You could probably find a place where there's never been a recorded tsunami.
So there's that.
All right.
I'm going to say a few words privately to the people on Logos.
