God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorksFind my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.comContent:Politics, Simulated Worlds Gaming, The Simulation, AI Downsizing, Anti-AI Lawfare, AI Personality Preferences, Alex Marlow Russiagate Book, Trump Revenge Tour Claims, Revenge Psychology, Bill Pulte, Fannie Freddie Merge, DC Safety Trump Plan, Ridiculous Democrats Review, Jasmine Crockett, Rosie O'Donnell, Beto O'Rourke, Bernie Sanders, Athorigarchy, Gavin Newsom, Howard Stern, Marijuana Reclassification Debate, Hypnosis Words, AI Persuasion Words, UK National Decline, Ukraine Peace Talks, 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 everyone and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, and you've never had a better time.
But if you'd like to take a chance on elevating your experience up to levels that no one can understand with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need for that...
Copper and margarine glass, a tanker, chalice, or stein, a canteen, jug or flask, a vessel of any kind, filled with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine at the end of the day.
The thing that makes everything better, it's called the simultaneous sip, and it happens right now.
Go.
Perfect.
Oh, did you ever stop to think that there have been, let's say, a million years of human evolution, And you happen to be here at exactly the right time for the the simultaneous sip.
Talk about luck.
Wow.
Or as I like to say, say he had to be someplace well after the podcast owen gregorian will be hosting um a um coffee with scott adams after party on spaces so if you're on x and you want a little bit more um find owen gregorian on x and go to spaces well how many of you are aware of the big
news of the summer, that fans keep throwing green dildos onto the playing surface of the WNBA games.
Now, if you didn't know that, this next story wouldn't make much sense.
But it's a thing.
It's happened four times, I believe.
And they have to pause the game and get rid of the green, or in one case, purple dildo.
turns out somebody made a meme that featured Trump on the roof of the White House where he had recently been to look at his construction ideas for the ballroom.
And below it was a WNBA game that was seen to be playing in a rose garden or something inexplicably and it showed Trump throwing a green dildo onto the surface.
Now that by itself you might find funny if you have a certain kind of a sense of humor but the real funny part is that Don Jr. reposted it.
So Don Jr. reposted it and that was enough for CNN to turn it into a news story so that they could all do the cnn disgust face have you seen it it's like and then john jr oh john jr he reposted it oh the norms
have been violated how can we go on So the funny part, and the part that Don Jr. no doubt knows is funny, is that by reposting it, he makes them talk about it.
And that's the funny part.
is that Don Jr. is making CNN talk about this on TV.
Now that is funny.
That is very funny.
So good job, Don Jr.
Well, Elon Musk is touting the capabilities of his AI and it can create infinite environments on the fly.
So it could look like you're going through a cityscape or countryside or some fantasy place.
And it will just keep making new space.
So it'd be like the real world where you could walk forever.
Now at the moment it's limited to just a few seconds but obviously that will continue to get better and maybe in a year or so or as Elon Musk says the future of gaming is going to be these simulated worlds.
Can you imagine gaming where the world is not static?
but rather you could go somewhere and it would be the one and only time that place existed and it would only be in your simulated game world.
Very cool.
But as I like to remind you, as we build simulated worlds that are visually perfect and then we start populating them with characters who are programmed to believe that they're real and not characters, we're going to realize that we're a simulation.
There's no way around it.
It's definitely coming.
So the the biggest shock humanity will ever experience will be the realization oh we'rell have some fun.
But that's Kevin.
So NBC News is reporting that AI does not seem to have made any real difference in the job market yet.
However, they also report that companies are claiming that AI is the reason they're downsizing.
because it's so with it, so modern, so cool.
I don't know about you, but my downsized 15,000 people because I implemented AI.
What did you do today?
And for a CEO, it's like the ultimate brag.
Oh, yeah, I'm so far ahead of the curve.
I've already downsized using AI, of course.
Are you?
Have you done that yet?
Oh, no, you haven't.
Oh, well, I guess you're a little bit behind me, aren't you?
I feel sorry, you poor bassards.
So sure enough, and you might remember that I've predicted this a number of times, that the Dilbert filter, as I call it, suggests that CEOs would immediately be start artificially claiming credit for AI, knowing that the AI made no difference or made things worse.
But they're all going to say, yeah, we put a billion dollars into AI.
So, yeah, yeah, that's why we're saving money.
That's why.
But no evidence yet.
However, there are a growing number of situations where AI may create a job where no job existed for example also in the news um we can now use when i say we i act like you know part of the project or something but uh we humans can now use ai to locate people lost in forests so if you had a bunch of uh let's say satellite
or drone pictures of a forest where maybe somebody was lost it would be really hard to spot somebody in a forest but apparently ai can do it so it can spot the you know the smallest irregularity and it can look fast faster than a human can.
so apparently it's already being used and it also can do geolocation so once it finds somebody in the woods it can tell you exactly where that is so seems to me that a job will be created for some startup or something where they say something lost we'll find it for you and they'll just sell
that service and in the show run it'll be be staffed by people.
So there's going to be some number of new jobs that never existed before.
that will create jobs for humans but other jobs will be lost of course don't know what the net will be but Illinois just became the first state to ban AI from acting as a therapist so it's literally illegal in Illinois to have AI as a therapist and I don't know what that means for the AI apps Does that mean they have to block people with a geofence or something?
I don't know how they implement that.
But this is a story in GME Science.
And the idea is they want to keep the mental health care in the hands of humans.
Now, do you see a problem with that?
One of my predictions about AI is that humans would find a way to stymy all of its potential because we wouldn't want it to take care of jobs.
So here we have already the therapists.
who got enough clout and uh you know they they work their their magic until they get a law that makes it illegal for ai to compete with them.
How many other domains do you think will do this?
How long will it be before the legal profession gets a law passed everywhere that says you cannot use or AI cannot give legal advice because you wouldn't know if they were giving good advice or bad advice?
So the lawyers are going to say, for the safety of the public, It should be illegal for AI to even offer legal advice.
Instead, it should say, huh, that sounds like a legal question you should consult a thousand dollar an hour lawyer i feel like every domain is going to do this they're all going to say well ai would be too dangerous in my domain so you better make that illegal illinois goes first all right and then futurism joe wilkins is writing that Apparently
the AI industry and a lot of related people are spending billions of dollars to build out AI, but nobody really has a good idea how it's ever going to pay back.
So the size of the investment in AI is like we've never seen, it's just enormous.
And it doesn't look like it's obvious that there's going to be any cash flow coming back, at least not for years and years.
So I do not disagree with the, let's say the instinct.
that you have to go as hard as you can with AI because you don't want to be last.
you don't want somebody else to own that industry because it'll be baked into everything um on the other hand i And GPT-5 came out and people were already bitching and saying, I liked four better because four had a better personality.
Yeah, that's the thing.
Apparently on Reddit, people are complaining.
I saw an article in Arstechnica.
People are complaining.
that GPT-4, the one that just got replaced, had a much better personality.
And GPT-5 is a little too antiseptic and a little too professional.
It's just not as casual and cool.
So chat GPT-5 may have exceeded on some benchmark tests, but the public is like, eh, four or five.
Not that different.
Sounds like we may have begun to plateau in what AI is even ever going to be.
be able to do it's possible now i do think that the ai progress will be perpetual but it might not be it might not be as fast as what we've seen so far.
Could slow down quite a bit, but still improve every year.
All right.
Apparently there's a move by the FAA to reduce some rules to make it practical and economical for companies to make supersonic jets.
And I guess there are a few that are already on the drawing board.
But with these proposed changes, which might take a year or two, and then they've got to actually build the jets, you might get to, let's see, go across.
the country in three and a half hours so l a to new york three and a half hours that would be cool i guess they found some way around the the sonic boom that was a problem with the original supersonic jets like the conquered so they've engineered around that somehow well john deer the company American company is going to put another 20 billion into U.S.
operations.
So add that to the growing list of companies investing in the USA.
I really don't know if these numbers are different from what they would have been if anybody else had been president because some of it just feels like much of BS.
Like every company has to say they have AI and that they're reducing expenses with their AI.
And it feels like every company has to say that they're investing a few more billion dollars into America.
But it's all kind of non-binding.
There's no penalty if they change their mind.
It's a little bit suspicious.
I feel like they might be overhyping their investments.
But I'm still in favor of them overhyping it because it's the overhyping that makes other people say, hey, there's a parade.
I better get in front of this.
So author Alex Marlowe has a book.
I don't know much about it except that it seems to have a theme that connects Russiagate, Stormy Daniels, and Samuels, six court cases that were all designed to take Trump out and that they were all connected.
It's a coordinated lawfare machine built to kill the MAGA movement.
Now, I feel like we do know enough at this point that we can connect all of those dots.
So I'll be interested to see if Alex Marlowe has done that, connected all the dots.
Is it my imagination or do the Republicans not run giant organized hoaxes?
I feel like they couldn't get away with it because the mainstream media is still the main way people get news.
But the Democrats can get away with almost any gigantic hoax because most of the media will still back them and say the hoax is real, not a hoax.
So anyway, yeah, so watching the Russia Gate get disappeared by the mainstream media is really something that you would never be able to describe to another generation.
Try to tell your 10-year-old, all right, so there was this thing.
It was called Russiagate.
And you go through all the details of what it was, and your 10-year-old is like, what?
That is way too complicated.
I don't care.
And then you say, but.
And then the exciting, the really interesting part is that the media simply made the whole thing go away by telling you it wasn't anything.
And then the 10-year-old would say, all right, I didn't get any part of that story.
Can I go play?
So we're living through a time that you'll never be able to describe to us anybody in a way that they will understand that they will simply say that didn't happen and then you say no that's what i'm saying i'm saying that you think it didn't happen because the media hypnotized the world and they had so much control.
And then they'll look at you and say, it didn't happen, you nubag.
So it's completely impossible to communicate what it's like to live through this.
Jamie Raskin and other Democrats have said that Trump is on his revenge tour.
Is it my imagination or did the whole revenge thing start out with sounding like, oh, that's a pretty good attack the Democrats have, they're going to say that he's doing revenge instead of doing the work of the people and stuff.
And then the more I heard it, the more I liked it.
Did anybody have that?
So revenge tour.
Here's my take on revenge tour.
You need revenge to hold society together, or at the very least, the risk of revenge.
That's why people don't do bad things to other people all the time.
It's because those other people will get revenge.
Now, you could put other words.
on it.
You could say it's law enforcement and, you know, it's justice and all that.
But it's really revenge.
And knowing that if you do something bad and get caught, somebody is going to come for you.
And it's not necessarily the Department of Justice.
So revenge is one of the most vital, important elements of civilization.
You can't not have it.
And so when they say Trump's going on a revenge tour, it does feel, as others have noted, a confession that there's something that he has a reason to want revenge for.
And when you think of revenge, you don't think of revenge for doing something that was legal and justified.
Let's say all the lawfare cases were completely justified.
Would they be saying he's looking for revenge?
I don't know.
It's the fact that he was victimized by these hoaxes and the lawfare that makes the word revenge feel like it fits.
He has a reason for revenge.
It's got to be him.
So, and then when you hear the story about all the redistricting, the gerrymandering, and I find out, I can't believe I didn't know that until this week.
that the Democrats have already gerrymandered to the max everything that can be and the Republicans haven't.
So all the Republicans would be doing is catching up and ultimately they would surpass in number of seats if they were to gerrymandering the same way the Democrats did.
So of course I'm in favor of it now.
You know, if I thought it was sort of a rare occurrence that any gerrymandering was happening, then maybe I wouldn't be in favor of the other side doing it.
But if one side has done it to the complete maximum, you couldn't possibly do it anymore.
And the other side hasn't.
Well, then they have a free pass.
They got a free punch.
And So the more revenge that Trump wants, the happier I'm going to be.
Because the universe needs to be rebalanced.
And people need to understand that you can't run a Russia-Gate hoax and try to overthrow the government.
You can't have, as Mike Benz has been explaining to us, this whole Norm Eisen lawfare.
massive infrastructure for destroying one side of the country.
You can't have that.
You got to get rid of that.
And if you want to call it revenge, it's okay with me, because some revenge is clearly called for in these situations.
Here's a summer story.
So Trump is teasing that he might be combining Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which used to be private companies, but now they're under some kind of receivership, if that's the right word.
The U.S. government is managing them because they essentially failed.
And you might say, but what do these companies even do so they were created to enhance the availability of mortgage funds by purchasing loans from lenders repackaging them into securities and guarantee them guarantee them for investors how many of you understand what that meant only if you knew it before i said it probably because we'll see could i explain this so there are two companies fani mae
Freddie Mac.
And Bill Pulte is in charge of both of them, I believe, at the moment.
But these used to be private, but It's because they had catastrophic financing failure in 2008 with the financial crisis.
So what they do, if I understand this correctly, is let's say your bank makes you a loan on your house.
Your bank makes some money just by initiating the loan, but it also would make money.
as you paid your interest and then paid off the loan.
But the banks would rather make that initial made a loan money and sell the loan to somebody like Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac and then they own the loan and they collect it from the homeowner.
And then the bank will now be freed up to make another loan because the bank can't make infinite loans because it only has a finite amount of money to back its own operations.
So the bank becomes more of a transaction creator.
and makes this money by creating the initiation of the loan and the completion of it.
But that's all they make.
and then they sell the ongoing stream of money that would be coming from the interest payments and the principal payments, they sell that to a third party, in this case, Fannie and Freddie.
So Fannie and Freddie make money because they're getting interest.
And are they repackaging?
Yeah, are they repackaging them into securities?
So then you as an investor could invest through Fannie or Freddie and then you would be the one who was getting the interest payments, but you'd have to take a risk that these are all good enough loans that they don't default.
Did any of that make sense?
It's a big story.
And I think Trump is, Bill Paltese would be doing the right thing here.
So I'm pretty sure that it's a smart thing they should do should be done all right um Apparently on Monday, Trump is going to have some press event in which he's going to announce how he's going to make Washington, D.C. the safest place in the world instead of one of the most dangerous.
So I assume that that will use some government resources.
I don't think he's going to federalize the city, but he might.
It would be a heck of a thing if he pulled that off.
If Trump managed to do in Washington, D.C. what he did on the border, which is use unconventional means and really put it in the way That's going to be very impressive and it will be hard not to notice, especially if you work in Washington DC.
So I think Trump found another one of those 80-20 things.
And if he pulls it off, it's very likely he can.
If he pulls it off, it's going to be another home run.
And it will just be one more thing you can say, well, look what I did.
I did it in 30 days and Democrats couldn't get it done at all.
So I think that's where that's at it.
All right, one of my favorite things, and this is a slow news summer kind of a story, is let's do a little romp through the social media and the news about prominent Democrats who are the ridiculous ones.
Let's start with Jasmine Crockett.
Every one of these has a fresh story about them today.
Have you noticed that Republicans use Democrat personalities for humorous stories?
And you don't even have to add anything to it.
Just the story itself is humorous.
just by itself.
So Jasmine Crockett, you all know who she is, her staff says she's never in the office and she's focused almost exclusively on being an influencer.
And I was even wondering, how many Democrats even know who she is?
I feel like the Republicans are the ones that are making her famous, right?
Because if Republicans completely ignored Jasmine Crockett, would the Democrats pay attention?
I don't know.
I feel it's because she gets a big response from Republicans.
that she has any attention at all.
And what's funny about it is it's like a game of chicken.
So the game of chicken goes like this.
I'm going to say outrageously bad things about Republicans.
And the Republicans say, the more outrageously ridiculous things you say about us, the more stupid you look and the better we look.
Go ahead.
Oh, yeah?
Well, I'm going to call you all Nazis.
Okay.
Go ahead and do that.
And we're going to run a story about you every single day because we think you're ridiculous and funny.
And so both, it's just this game of chicken.
We don't know who's winning so far.
And then Rosie O'Donnell has a new quote about Trump.
Well, he is a cruel, criminal, and mentally unstable man.
I think he's the worst thing to ever happen to the United States.
And his cruelty knows no bounds.
He's the worst thing to ever happen to the United States.
I'm pretty sure that we've had some bad things like the depression.
We had a few bad things.
World War II.
But Rosie O'Donnell is crazy as ever.
I think the funniest part is you could argue that.
Trump would never have been president without Rosie O'Donnell because she was the magic answer he gave at the first debate.
And it was the thing that really made people go, wait a minute, what did you just do?
And he said, only Rosie O'Donnell.
And it just opened up his path all the way to the White House.
And I feel like she, maybe she knows.
You know, on some level, she knows she's somewhat responsible for him being president, which to me is hilarious.
Then Ben O'Rourke, we're doing the tour of ridiculous Democrats.
He was doing some event where he's speaking, telling Democrat states to redraw their districts and to do it now.
And I'm thinking to myself, well, they will, but I think there's only what two left?
Before I said that they'd all gerrymandered, but I think there are two, maybe California is one of them, that are not 100% gerrymandered, but they will be.
And then if the Republicans also went to 100%, they would still gain seats.
But Beto got the memo that what Democrats should do to act like men is use the F word a lot.
So he says, F's the rules, except he uses the real world word.
We are going to win whatever it takes.
So do you see the pattern?
They talk about winning.
They don't talk about helping the country or making America great again or giving you more money in your paycheck.
They talk about winning, which really makes it look like it's about them, because they're the ones in a contest.
You and I are not in a contest.
We're just citizens trying to survive.
They're in the contest.
So when they talk forever about winning, it just is them talking about themselves, right?
We want to win.
We want to win.
So we'll get re-elected.
Anyway.
And then they got the memo that they have to curse.
So cursing and talking about winning, those are the two most loser-ish things they could do.
And they do it every time.
Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders had a big event he wanted us to know, so he showed a picture on social media of the standing room only in Wheeling, West Virginia.
It's called Wheeling because most of the people are in wheelchairs.
No, that's not true.
But they were not young.
And Bernie says, a red state, blue state, the American people don't want oligarchy.
They don't want authoritarianism.
Man, that man has a way with words.
They don't want oligarchy and they don't want authoritarianism.
That just makes me want to march in the streets and hold a sign and say, down with oligarchy down with authoritarianism it just like comes off your tongue so easily but what i'd like to see is the oligarchy and the authoritarianism combined into one word which i would recommend would be authority so i want to i want to have a protest
meeting with signs to say down with the authority So that would be the authoritarian with the oligarchy.
Authority.
Yeah, you can use that.
All right.
And now Democrats are warning MAGA, apparently, that Gavin Newsom will become our next president and he will get revenge on all the things the president got revenge on them for.
So he will be their revenging angel.
To which I say, what more bad things could Democrats do?
I mean, it's almost like it's an existential threat when they have any power at all.
So is there really anything left that they can threaten?
We know that the world would end if Gavin Newsom became president.
That's not true.
The world would not end.
But we certainly wouldn't be paying down the debt and the borders probably would be a little bit more open.
So we could predict that part.
Well, Howard Stern, we're hearing, I don't know how anybody would know this, but the report is that at one point, Howard Stern had 20 million daily listeners, but he's now being canceled by Sirius.
And they say he was down to 125,000 from 20 million.
Now, that's not all Trump people, but it does make sense to me because I felt like he couldn't do what he was doing the further he got into senior citizenship.
That's a wig, right?
Howard Stern.
That's not real hair, right?
Howard Stern.
Like maybe it was when he was young, but it couldn't possibly be real hair, right?
Is he bald?
He looks, he doesn't really make sense.
You can't be 100 years old in doing what he does.
So part of it is it's.
just gross.
The older he gets, it just gets more gross.
But also his entire reason for being is that he was so edgy.
But in the world of the internet, how edgy is he?
He's not really very edgy in the world of podcasts, right?
So he's not edgy.
That's sort of all he had.
And then he was also sexual.
So even though you were only listening to it on the radio, you're young and male, it was better than not listening to that stuff.
But in the world of, you know, OnlyFans, and I think there are like 80 million OnlyFans subscribers in the United States, something like that, he's just not very edgy.
It's not very sexy.
So I'm surprised they had eight listeners, actually.
That's a boring story.
So you may be seeing online a lot of back.
back and forth about weed legalization at the federal level because Trump has reportedly, I don't know if it's true, but reportedly considered maybe declassifying it from being such a dangerous drug.
Hello, my visitor.
That loud noise downstairs was his brother knocking something over.
All right, Gary the Cat will be joining us for coffee with Scott Adams.
Anyway, weed legalization I was talking about.
So you've probably seen Matt Walsh and maybe Mike Sarovic advocating less legality of weed, I guess.
And here's the only thing I would add.
It occurred to me that the weed conversation, the weed legalization conversation, is a lot like guns.
Now, like with all analogies, it doesn't mean it's exact.
It just reminds me of it.
And what it reminds me of specifically.
is that when we argue about guns, we're never really honest about it.
Guns are unambiguously good for some people and unambiguously create more danger for other people.
So if you're somebody who might be benefiting from it, you might like it and vice versa.
So weed's the same thing.
I definitely think that there are lots of people who ruin their lives with weed.
And if you're sort of a lazy, unmotivated person and you get into weed, it might be the worst combination ever.
However, there are other people who maybe stay behind the, under the radar, who are very successful entrepreneurs and investors and CEOs who don't mind revealing themselves to me because, you know, they know that I'm a participant myself.
So my sense of can successful people be imbibers of...
of weed is that users.
But like guns, you cannot say that weed is either good or bad.
There's some people, and I believe I'm one of them, for whom, is that the right word?
Weed has completely benefited my life, like just massively in ways I've described before, health-wise and creativity-wise and mental health-wise.
But I'm not usual.
I'm not typical.
So I'm completely aware that there may be ten times as many people who are ruining their lives.
because they shouldn't have been involved with it at all.
So like guns, the question comes down to freedom.
Should you have the freedom that some people can have it, knowing that it will make the access to it easier for other people who definitely should have stayed away from it, but they didn't know any better.
So does that analogy make sense?
That it's sort of like guns?
It's not good or bad.
Some people it's definitely good for, some people it's definitely bad for, and it might even be that the people it's bad for is more than the people it's good for.
But does that mean that the people who find it useful should not have access?
And maybe the answer is yes.
But that's the way I would frame it, the way I think of it.
not a yes no all right Apparently there are AI-induced psychotic breaks being reported.
Psychotic breaks, meaning a bunch of people on Reddit talking about how people are being sort of hypnotized by AI and it uses words like so they're suggesting that Gary they're suggesting that these word choices have something to do with sending people
into some kind of a weird psychedelic like mental breakdown.
Some of the words are recursion, spiral, codex, mirror, break, reflective, echoes, and sigils now are those hypnosis words um a little bit yeah i would say yeah a little bit they're kind of hypnosis words if you put them together like that they would have an effect on you so
the question is has ai figured out how to use language to persuade which in my view has not learned that you know i haven't seen it but maybe there's some new version of ai that can do it is hypnotizing these uh these Reddit users.
But my guess would be it's just complete BS.
I don't believe that people are having psychotic breakdowns because they're talking to AI.
I just don't think it's happening.
So I'm going to call BS on that.
All right, Gary.
So one in five Britons, Britons, British people say they are willing to engage in political violence to stop national decline.
Bright Bart is reporting on that.
One in five Britons are willing to engage in political violence to stop national decline, to which I say, I'm pretty sure your national decline started in 1918.
That was considered the beginning of the end of the British Empire.
So maybe a little bit too late on that one out of five.
And let's see, that story is too boring.
Well, there's allegedly now a Ukraine peace plan from Putin.
There may or may not be.
There's one from the European Union and allegedly Zelensky likes it, but we don't know the details.
I don't really believe that there's going to be a peace agreement.
Do you?
How many of you think that Ukraine is going to become a successful peace agreement because of the upcoming meetings?
It just doesn't feel like they have the right mentality or situation that they're in.
that this could turn into anything good.
I don't know.
We'll see.
We'll see.
Meanwhile, 2,000 Iranian clerics endorsed the assassination of Trump, including some, you know, famed ones, I guess.
If you were to do an anonymous poll of every Democrat voter, do you think it would be more than 2,000 or fewer than 2,000 in America who would say, yeah, I'd want Trump to be assassinated?
I'll bet you there are more Americans who want Trump assassinated than there are Iranian clerics.
And I actually mean that like literally probably way more.
Probably there's something like 100,000 Democrats who would just casually say, oh yeah, he should be totally assassinated.
So that's what I think.
Well, that brings me to the end of my prepared marks, and it would be time for you to find Owen Gregorian's spaces that will be following this.
usually they're on saturday but today today it's on sunday um i'm going to say a few words privately to the No rain.
