God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorksFind my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.comContent:Politics, Elon Musk, Tesla, SpaceX, WhatsApp Privacy, Berlin Power System Arson, Greta Thunberg Drama, Iryna Zarutska Murder, Ukraine Refugee Charlotte Murder, Aggressive Genes Hypothesis, Pro-Crime Chicago, Nepal Parliament Arson, Gavin Newsom, CA Behested Payments, Autism Research, Bessent Pulte Conflict, US Debt Crypto Solution, French Government Crisis, France PM Crisis, Qatar Doha Explosion, 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.
Probably the best thing that'll happen to you all day.
Boom boom boom.
from Good morning, everybody, 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 of elevating your experience up to levels that no one can even comprehend with their tiny, shiny human brains.
All you need for that is a copper mugger or a glass, a tanker chelus or stained, a canteen jugger flash vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine, the end of the day.
The thing that makes everything better is called the simultaneous sip and it happens.
Wow, go.
Ah.
Mm-mm.
Well, it looks like everything's working, the sound, etc.
I've been tinkering with my setup, so you never know what could happen.
Well, here's a uh tech story that I don't know if I believe it.
It looks like a prank.
But allegedly there's a company called Alter Ego.
That's a uh little wearable that you put around like sort of like headphones, except doesn't cover your ears.
Sort of like the uh you know, the kind that just wrap around the back of your head.
Anyway, they allege that that that thing can read your thoughts uh well enough to know what you would like to be sending to a screen with almost you know perfect precision and happens kind of quickly, and they showed this demo of a guy who is you know wearing one and he was writing an email by thinking what he wants in the email.
Now how in the world can they pick out the words in your head that you want to send from the words in your head that you don't want to send?
And I thought to myself, how does that work with people who have a conversation in your head all the time?
The way I organize my thoughts to make sure that they make sense, is I put them in sentences, and I think of them as full spoken sentences, and uh and I'll keep rearranging them until they make sense when I hear them, because it's sort of like I'm listening to myself now.
How in the world, and they allege that they can uh they can detect they allege that they can detect um the thoughts, if I can say it right, I'm I'm probably not saying it right,
but something like just when you're gonna verbalize a thought, so they get it when you've decided to verbalize it, but they won't get it prior to you deciding to verbalize it, but in this case you don't actually verbalize it, it just makes up your intention to verbalize it.
Do you believe that there's a thing that can attach to the outside of your head, you know, like little headphone things, little sensors that would be currently sensitive enough and smart enough to determine what you intend to say?
Does that sound even a little bit likely that that's true?
I would love, I would love to know that it is true.
That'd be kind of cool, but I'm gonna go with nope.
Yeah, let's let's let's grade that one.
Nope.
Um but like I say, yeah, I would love to be wrong.
So if that's a real thing, really cool.
But nope.
All right.
Um, allegedly, open AI is uh planning to make a feature length animated movie that would debut at the Canned Film Festival and it'd be done in nine months and a budget of 30 million dollars.
Do you believe that they'll be able to do that?
And if they can do it, does that mean that the tool would allow you to do it?
Because it seems like there'd be a massive storage element.
We're asked to store what it's already done to make sure that what it does next is compatible with all that.
Do you think that will be available to the average person?
Or are they going to demonstrate that if you want the studio model?
Oh, that's the studio model is $10 million a year, because you're going to make so much money making movies.
Maybe.
I am skeptical that you'll be able to use the off-the-shelf open AI to make yourself a movie anytime soon.
Someday.
But no time soon.
So we'll see.
That's pretty ambitious.
I like it.
Well, uh, Elon Musk has decided to make the uh the code on X for recommending what it recommends to you, uh, open source.
So people who know how to look at code can look at it and say, hey, now I know why it doesn't show me James Wood or whatever it's allegedly hiding from people, and why does it show me other things?
So I love that.
That's a uh that is a solid Elon Musk play that uh uh feels sort of sort of uniquely him.
You know, something you wouldn't expect from other people, and I like it.
So speaking of Tesla, yesterday they had a big announcement about what's called the Mega Pack, which is their big battery structures that they sell into power utility grids.
So it'd be become part of an existing grid and it would store power uh when it was cheap to make or possible to make and use it when it was needed later.
So apparently, I didn't know this, but um apparently they're making billions of dollars on this line of business.
So that's part of Tesla.
So uh I remember hearing uh Adam or saying Adam Townsend, he did a post uh several years back in which he said that Tesla was actually an energy company uh in disguise as a car company.
And I don't know if I buy that a hundred percent or that he even meant it a hundred percent, but um how big could that business be?
I mean, if they're if they're the top or even number two in the business uh putting in enormous battery packs, then the interesting thing is that he's got a company, the Mega Pack battery thing that would be benefiting from AI,
because AI is gonna require that you know every form of energy and saving energy and storing energy becomes super valuable because we can't get enough of it.
AI will be sucking up all that energy.
So he's got a very compatible company there.
And at the same time, speaking of compatible companies, um his uh SpaceX company is doing a deal to buy a whole bunch of spectrum from Echo Star, which apparently will be key to turning their satellites,
because SpaceX is a very compatible company with Starlink, you know, the network of uh Elon Musk satellites that are around the Earth already.
They were launched by SpaceX.
So those are the two most compatible companies you can imagine, except if you if you could have a satellite company, what would be the best thing you could introduce next?
A phone that happens to work, or you work with somebody else on phone service all over the globe, and it looks like that's what he's gonna do.
So he's gonna have batteries all over the globe, and AI is gonna drive that demand.
He's got he's gonna have uh uh or he has he's already got satellites all over the world, and they're not far away from turning that into um worldwide phone service that would compete with everybody.
Apparently, the speeds would be great, the latency would be low, and uh he's really he's looking to take cell phones.
I mean, just even imagine the enormity of that business, and uh and Musk is sort of you know, year after year, he's just building these assets.
They can walk right up to the domain of cell phone industry, and possibly take over the entire industry because he's built exactly the right compatible assets from rockets to satellites,
um to batteries, you know, which you need for phones, so and then of course they have access to the best engineers and it all kind of kind of comes together, doesn't it?
Anyway, um there's a ex-engineer at Meta, or he was at Meta, who claims that uh WhatsApp, the app that's owned by Meta, um, had some privacy problems, and specifically what he said was um there were about 1,500 listen to this.
He claims that there were uh 1,500 WhatsApp engineers that had full access to private user data with no logs, no audits, and no way to know if anything was taken.
Now, user data would include their messages, right?
So there were 1,500 people who all they had to do was want to, and they could look at all your private messages in what you thought was your super private message thing.
Remember what I tell you about privacy?
The only protection you have is to be uninteresting.
That's it.
So there were, you know, presumably you know, most of the millions of people who used uh WhatsApp had nobody look at their messages because there were no reason to, they're not very interesting.
But if they had any reason at all to look at your messages, and let me let me just put you into the room.
Let's say you're one of those engineers, and if this allegation is true, and I'm not sure it is, right?
So I'm not gonna take it at face value, but what if it is?
What if it's true that there were 1,500 people who could anytime they want look into everybody's messages on WhatsApp, and nobody would catch them, and they knew that.
What would happen when they get a divorce?
What would happen when you know they get into a relationship that breaks up?
Do you think all 1500 of those engineers said to themselves, you know, I could just look at all of her messages back as long as I wanted to, but uh nah, nah, I'm not gonna do that.
I'm not the kind of guy who would find out something really useful and have no risk whatsoever of ever getting caught.
I'm not that kind of guy.
Or am I?
So yeah, if these allegations are true, I would say that would be something to worry about.
Um apparently there was some massive power outage in Berlin this morning.
50,000 homes without electricity.
There are two high voltage masts, you know, big artificial towers that caught on fire.
Uh it's a suspected arson attack.
Well, I would think so if there are two of them, unless they were right next to each other.
You know, You would think it would be a pretty big coincidence if two of them caught on fire.
I would even say it's weird if one of them catches on fire, because how much burnable material is in a is in a cell phone tower.
I don't know, or high voltage tower.
Either way, it can't be much of it.
It's not like it's made of wood.
So, yeah.
I believe they all need a Tesla Powerwall to get past that kind of risk.
Well, you know that Greta Dunberg is now an activist about the Palestinian cause.
And uh she's uh she's on a second uh cruise, if you can call it that, she's on a flotilla.
Uh they're going over there to protest Israel's treatment of the Gazans or something like that.
But apparently she got to Tunisia in the in Tunisian waters, she may have, and uh this is disputed, so we don't know if this is true, but allegedly um a drone uh attacked their boat.
Now I think it caused something on fire, they say, but it didn't uh didn't kill anybody, nobody was injured, so that's good.
But there is some dispute.
The Tunisian authorities say there was no drone hitting your boat, somebody dropped a cigarette on some life life preservers.
So they were either one of two things, they were either attacked by another country in a bold raid in which they sent a drone from a long distance or they had somebody stationed there waiting for Greta, and then they tried to assassinate her uh without leaving a trace by using their sophisticated drones, so that's one possibility.
The other possibility is that Greta was taking a smoke break, and she was she was just out by the life preservers, you know.
Uh I'm having a real good time protesting this Gaza situation, flick, and then she flicks her lit cigarette into the life preservers, and the next thing you know, uh we better tell people that was a drone.
So we don't know what happened.
My point is the fog of war makes it impossible to know how much of that story is true, if any of it.
Well, you know the story about anthropic, the AI company that got sued by a bunch of a bunch of uh authors, and the authors you know banned it together as a class and sued, and uh they won.
And so the authors were gonna split up 1.5 billion dollars.
That was the judgment, and uh who knows how much their lawyers were gonna get, but what would be typical?
Class action?
Does the lawyer get or the lawyer firm?
Do they get a third?
Um, what what is typical?
So if it had been, let's say 1.5 billion and lawyers get a third, you know, they'd be looking at uh half a billion dollars for some lawyering.
But apparently it was it had to be overseen by a judge, and the federal judge that was gonna oversee it looked at the deal that the lawyers made and said, uh really this doesn't even look like you did this deal for the benefit of the authors.
It looks like maybe you did the deal for the benefit of the lawyers, because it would not be irrational for a lawyer to say, seriously, they're they're offering us 1.5 billion.
I don't know.
Have you guys done the math?
That's a hundred million dollars a piece.
All we have to do is say yes, and we will get a hundred million dollars a piece.
We will never have to worry about money again.
All you have to do is say yes, Or you could fight that case for months and maybe it would get appealed and maybe they'd win.
You know, maybe the other side win.
But but you'd fight to try to get more for the authors, because if the authors win with this measly 1.5 billion dollar award, um, it might first of all set the price low for other lawsuits for other entities, but uh it doesn't work out to much per author.
So an author would lose you know their their entire intellectual property for all practical purposes, and in return they would get I don't know, a thousand dollars if they were well established.
So the judge just said nope and put a pause on it.
I don't know where it goes next, but uh the federal judge didn't think it looked like a proper deal.
I don't know, maybe.
Um so you know, you've noticed that I've been ignoring the story about the um the Ukrainian refugee woman who got stabbed to death in Charlotte when she was on the light rail train.
Well, it turns out that now it's it's morphed from a crime story.
Um, Gary, off the keyboard.
Uh for it's morphed from a crime story uh into a big political story, because now the uh let's call it the anti-Trump press of the world has decided that the way the people on the right,
the uh MAGA supporters are uh talking about it somewhat obsessively, is that uh it's obviously kind of racist, and so uh CNN had a big hit piece on that, and I wasn't gonna talk about it because I don't do crime, but now that it's sort of a political thing and a persuasion thing, and you know it's it's now uh slopped into my domain.
Uh I'll give you my thoughts on it.
Number one, if she had not been a hot blonde, would we be talking about it?
You tell me.
If she had not been a hot blonde, literally some kind of a model, I think, would we even be talking about this?
Don't people get stabbed and murdered kind of often, you know, way more than you know, because it's not somebody pretty, and they're not from Ukraine, and it's not a uh black attacker and a white victim.
But if she's pretty, and we've got video, that that makes a big difference.
Um and it fits into a narrative that a lot of people are seeing in the larger world, you know, beyond this one one thing.
There's a lot of discussion about the crime rate and who's committing the crimes, and you know, is that something that needs to be addressed?
So it kind of fits their rights narrative perfectly, and it's it's just made for meme, and um it's just made to be viral because of her looks.
So the uh you know, the anti-MAGA people, they're doing their best to try to figure out how it can be racist.
And I do believe, I've seen it myself, that in the comments, not so much what the big influencers are saying.
That's that doesn't sound racist to me, but a lot of the comments are flat out as racist as you could possibly be.
Now you could argue whether that needs to be stopped or not, and you could also argue um, is it racist if you're talking statistical?
Right.
So that that's what people would say.
It's like, well, if I'm just talking about the statistical risk, that's not that racist, is it?
But there are other people who are using certain language that you would most of you, I think we would agree is over the line.
So, but that's the real world in the real world, there are people who are gonna go over every line, and you see that on line.
So I would imagine that your feed would be different from mine, which would be different from everybody else's.
I may see more of it than you do.
Um We believe, but I'm not positive this is true.
So there's still a little fog of war in this story.
But is it true?
Because I haven't seen it, and I wouldn't know if it was real if I saw it, that there was a video that came out after the main murder video on the train that showed the murderer saying, quote, uh that he got that white girl, which would um strongly suggest that he had a racial motive, even if he's a crazy person.
So you know, that's that's good enough to throw it in that uh, you know, does it prove something about the bigger world box?
Um personally I saw this as more like a crazy person situation, but I saw uh Greg Goffeld's uh monologue.
I was watching that, and he points out that for a crazy person, he certainly made a lot of uh let's say sane judgments about how to get away and you know how to plan it, and you know, that so it's it's always a mixed bag.
It's not so crazy that you're running around naked throwing your feces, but you know, there are pockets of non-craziness.
Um so what do you do with that?
So obviously race was part of the story and remains part of the story.
Um then Trump, Trump seizing uh on a situation because he he's uh anti-crime, as you know, and uh so now CNN says he's seizing on the moment uh because it's you know it's getting a lot of attention, so he wants to maybe get in front of it.
Um anyway, he's I guess he's threatening to withhold federal dollars from the city of Charlotte because of that murder.
And uh I don't know who said this.
I saw a quote online, but the quote might have been Trump, but somebody said, I guarantee that if I find what I think I'm going to find, they're not going to have your federal tax dollars going to their public transportation system, zero none.
So there's some allegation, but I'm not entirely sure who's making it, unless it's Trump.
Um that they know something about Charlotte that's corrupt or dirty.
Now, have you noticed the pattern yet that every local government is corrupt, where it seems that way?
Except, correct me if I'm wrong.
It it feels like it's just always democrat government.
Yeah, every story, I I know it's not literally true.
There are they're obviously Republicans who have been arrested and indicted and stuff for for crimes.
It's not like it doesn't exist, but the news that I see isn't something like 10 to 1 in one direction, and what do you do about that?
It's like 10 to 1, isn't it?
All right.
Um then the then that murder is bringing into the larger conversation.
Um, the following statistics that I see literally every day on social media.
I don't know if these are exactly true or true enough, but it's what people are saying.
So that's the important part.
Um, but uh I keep seeing on social media people saying black people make up 13% of the US population, but they claim, and I don't know if this is true, that that black people commit 56% of the murders.
Now, is that true?
And then do you um do you further calculate how many of them were uh other black people who were the victims?
Because it would be mostly, right?
Like, would it be three quarters of their victims would also be black or more?
More than three quarters, right?
Um there's a whole bunch of other statistics.
Uh, the murder rate among black people lose six to eight times higher than among white people, blah blah.
So that's the sort of stuff that's going around social media.
And uh Elon Musk is getting into it by saying that uh a small group of criminals um are the repeat violent offenders.
Now that is a far less racial way to approach this.
So I think Elon Musk is probably the you know going on the most productive path.
Because as soon as it gets into race, nothing happens.
You everybody just hates everybody, so you can just forget that.
But if you were to focus on the repeat offenders, um that's purely a you know behavioral thing, and it it only kicks in if objectively speaking, somebody's been you know convicted a certain number of times for a certain number of things, certain type of things.
So but the vast majority of all crime is committed by people who have at least three prior arrests.
So these are you know pretty measurable things.
Um Elon's saying if we look at that and and lock up the repeat criminals, our crime situation would be vastly improved.
Um, I remember when that was a uh that was a thing in California.
I think it got reversed, but for a time there was that three strikes thing, and people argued before that was implemented that if you locked up the people who did the vast majority of the crimes, you know, the the three strike people,
they re they actually argued that if you locked up in jail and kept them there forever, the people who did 80% of all the crimes, that it wouldn't change the crime rate.
That was actually what smart people were saying in public in their arguments.
Well, it's not going to change the crime rate, just because you put the people who do all the crimes in jail forever.
And I used to uh jokingly say, So let me see if I understand your hypothesis.
Your hypothesis is that if they lock up a hundred percent of the people who are doing 80% of the crimes, that the crime rate won't go down, but rather the people who were not planning to do any crimes would increase the number of crimes they were committing beyond what they had planned to make up for the repeat criminals being in jail.
That's that's how you would get a balance and nothing would change, right?
And the the conversation would uh quickly turn into insult because when people realize how dumb their opinion is, that's that's not really an opinion opinion, is it?
That's really just somebody's a dumb fuck.
People who are in jail don't commit crimes outside of jail.
I mean, unless they have access to a telephone, I guess, or a henchman to do their work like a crime boss, but generally speaking, if you're in jail, it does stop you from murdering, mostly, except in jail.
Well, if you're wondering why are some communities more dangerous than others, and you don't have enough of a racist opinion about why, let me give you a uh a lesser a lesser racist opinion about why some places are more dangerous.
Um apparently, according to Neuroscience News, aggression is contagious, meaning that if you observe your parents in particular, so it's more a family thing, uh, observing strangers doesn't have the same effect.
It must have some, but uh if you observe family members being physical, yeah, you're more likely to be that way yourself.
But I went immediately to Grok and I said, uh, can you tell me Groc is uh violence and aggression?
Are those things ever hereditary?
Because it would make sense to me that if they were hereditary, you know, not 100%, but at least in any way, that uh it might not be because you're watching your family be aggressive, it might be because you all have the aggressive gene.
So it seems to you that maybe the cause is that you're observing it or you're around it, but it could be, according to Grok, that uh there are some people who think that aggression is about 50% um inherited.
So studies of twins, I guess.
50% of variants and aggressive behavior might be genetic.
So here's my suggestion for fixing things.
If the if the people who are who are being violent, um are being perpetuated by seeing their family being violent and it becomes this this cycle, maybe the best thing you could do, because it's hard to fix that directly.
I mean, you know, what are you gonna do?
Uh people spend time with their family.
How are you gonna stop that?
So if you can't do anything about it, I've often wondered if the best solution isn't for people to apply for let's call it a grant or a scholarship to move out of whatever bad place has a bad example that's being set for them.
Not just in this regard, but someplace safe where they can you know really concentrate on school or whatever.
Don't you think that that would be one way to save a failing neighborhood?
Literally to let people say, all right, give me your best argument.
If you're really serious about you know having a successful honest life, write us a little thing or send us a video, and you know, maybe we'll sponsor you or a number of people sponsor you to get enough money to move to a place that's lower crime, better schools.
So it would be great if the people who have the ability to thrive in a different atmosphere had the opportunity to get there, and they wouldn't always be able to do it themselves.
So just an idea.
Well, there's a Chicago alderman who was uh ribbing into um both the governor and the mayor, Johnson and Prisker, um, about the topic of uh Trump offering aid to Chicago.
Newsmax is reporting this, Michael Katz, and uh it's basically saying, and he's obviously uh Democrat as well, but he's on their team, and if he he's even he's saying, um no, we got a little bit too much crime here, maybe you should accept his help.
So if you're wondering if uh reasonable common sense people would agree with Trump, well, there you go.
Sounds like he's a very reasonable alderman.
But uh here's a question that I asked that you might be asking yourself.
How much should I care about crime in Chicago if I don't live in Chicago?
And the people who do live there are electing people who allow this much crime, and probably could do something, i.e.
let Trump come in with some extra help.
They probably could do something to lower it, but for whatever reason, their priorities are not that.
Um I supposed to care a lot.
I mean, I I very much wanted Trump to move the National Guard into Washington, DC, even though I don't live there because it's my capital, right?
It's my capital, of course I want that cleaned up.
Of course, that that represents me.
But if the people in Chicago um don't want the help, should we really force it upon Them.
I mean, they do have the ability to vote in people who would change that.
And they apparently are not choosing that path.
At what point does it just seem their problem?
So I don't know how much of my tax dollars I want to spend sending the military or any form of the military into Chicago.
It's not that it wouldn't work.
I think it would work.
And I think politically probably be a total winner.
But I don't know.
If it's because of my empathy, um, don't ask me to have more empathy than they have for themselves.
That doesn't make sense.
But not more empathy than they have for themselves.
Anyway, uh, I guess Trump's Trump and the team won another court victory.
So now a judge is uh gonna allow the uh the ICE, I guess, to sweep up immigrants and raids, um, and partially they can use the race of the people as part of their decision making, but it can't be all of it.
So if the only reason they stopped somebody to find out their status was because they looked like they were um Hispanic, that would not be allowed.
That would be pure racism.
But um the court has allowed the Supreme Court, has uh now allowed that it would be one of the elements you might look at.
So, for example, if they were Hispanic uh and standing at the Home Depot, I'm making that up, and speaking only Spanish, uh I don't know.
There might be some other elements, but you could use it as one variable but not the variable.
Um I don't know how I feel about that.
Um, so moving on.
Um apparently uh Nepal is having some issues, the parliament building is on fire, and the public had revolted.
Um except there's there's something a little bit weird about this Nepal situation, as in why it happened.
Um so I guess it started because the country was trying to ban some fake social media accounts, but the issue of banning some fake fake, right?
Fake social media accounts, that turned into um the public being mad about corruption and digital censorship that turned into riots in the street, and then the um it looks like you know, maybe the country has fallen.
I can't tell.
But here's the thing.
When you hear that Nepal has uh you know done this street protest against the government and burned down a building and dragged down some of the politicians, I don't know what happened to them, but some of them got dragged out.
Um do you assume that that happens spontaneously?
Or do you believe that there's just no such thing anywhere of a you know this kind of uh organized thing, unless there's some external source, maybe a color revolution kind of a situation, some foreign country, maybe maybe some intelligence people within the country, you know, who knows.
But uh I'm way beyond imagining that this kind of stuff happens on its own.
So I would have some questions about who might have been who might have been involved behind the scenes, if you know what I mean.
Um anyway.
So according to a post I saw on X by Wall Street Apes, there's some independent uh investigation uh about uh Gavanusom's association to some NGOs,
which allegedly all these uh uh democrat conspiracies and alleged corruption things were also complicated, uh, where he allegedly was doing something called behested payments.
So this would be legal.
So allegedly somebody like Newsom could go to a bunch of rich donors and say, Hey, uh, I behest you to uh put a bunch of money into these NGOs, it's a charity, it's really good.
And then the rich people go, oh, got it, wink wink.
So if I put a bunch of money into the charities, then you'll be good to me when I need a favor.
Well, I can't say that, but if you put a bunch of money in these charities, I sure would be good for those charities, and then you work it out with the charities, or you've chosen them because they're working with you, where they say, if you can get us a bunch of money from a bunch of rich people in return for you giving them favors, we'll make sure that a bunch of this money benefits you directly or indirectly.
So the allegation is that uh 400 million dollars have flowed through this process, and uh it's hard to imagine that Governor Newsom didn't give anybody any favors for being a conduit allegedly.
Don't know if any of this is true, but uh if he if he really were the conduit for 400 million dollars flowing through, uh it's hard to believe he didn't get a taste of that, maybe not directly, but through circuitous roots, which is how they do it.
That's how they do it.
Um so again, I remind you that all local government, and maybe all government, is corrupt.
Um, so Health and Human Services is going to release a report that uh seems to tie Tylenol use in pregnant women with autism, but there is apparently uh there's some conflict in the science.
There's some science that suggests there is a link, and some some science that suggests there's not.
So, what would you and I assume about that?
We should assume that we don't know anything, because there's some science that says there's a link, some says it isn't.
We don't really trust either one of them.
So I don't trust any data or certainly any study like that.
Uh I'm way beyond being able to trust them.
But at the same time, um at the same time, let's see what else is happening.
Uh, President Trump, I guess he reposted a video on social media that uh linked vaccines to autism.
So according to Modernity, who's reporting that.
So it looks like if you read the tea leaves, the government is going to suggest that there are you know more than one thing that might be behind autism, and uh maybe they're not gonna say we know 100% sure what it is or how much each of these contribute.
They might say, well, as far as we can narrow it down, it might be these things.
So um, but I do believe I do trust that if any big decisions are made about uh vaccines, I do trust that that would be based on data that we can all see.
So people have a chance to say, you read that data wrong, or they collect that data wrong.
So that's common.
All right, Andrew Cuomo, who as you know is running for mayor of New York against Mayor Adams and the communist guy, Mam Dami.
Um, and uh Curtis Sliwa.
So Andrew Cuomo, I just watched him on a video and he said uh Democrats want someone to defend them against President Trump.
I am that person because I have done That now, is it my imagination?
Or does Andrew Cuomo have the easiest job in the world, which would be to become mayor of New York, given who he's running against.
Shouldn't he easily be able to win this?
It feels like he should.
But here's what he's doing wrong.
Mom Dami comes in and he talks about affordability.
And people go, Oh, you have my attention.
That's exactly what I'm worrying about.
Cuomo comes in and he's making it about attacking Trump.
Now, I don't argue that people are asking him to attack Trump.
I'm sure they are.
But really, he he doesn't see that that's not the winning message.
The winning message is what Mom Donnie's doing.
He says, You got a problem, I will I have a magic plan to deal with your biggest problem.
So it's just jaw-dropping and head shaking that when he's talking about why you should, you know, make him the mayor, it's to fight Trump.
That that's that's just the worst reason anybody ever had to run for mayor.
Well, there's a rumor going around that Scott Bescent, Treasury Secretary, and Bill Poulte, um, who is head of uh the federal housing finance, whatever it is, I can never remember the name of the organization, Freddie and Fanny.
And uh apparently they went to a dinner, and uh Scott Bissent threatened to punch Poulty in the face, and he wanted to step outside and and fight him.
So uh and then reportedly, but I don't believe anything about this story at this point.
We never know the real context of these things.
Um reportedly Bill wasn't sure if he was serious, but he said he was serious about punching him.
And uh so I don't know how the dinner ended or who picked up the check, but uh that sounds pretty bad.
I guess uh Bissent was complaining because he believed that uh Bill Poulty had said something negative to him about to Trump.
Uh I don't know what that was allegedly, but I don't know how to feel about it because it would depend entirely upon what it was he may or may not have said to Trump.
You could certainly imagine that it could have been something really important that Trump would need to know, in which case, you know, Poulty had to do it, that that would just be part of his job.
Um, but you could you could imagine that uh Bissent wouldn't like it no matter what it was, so um I like Bill too much to have an opinion on this, so I'm just gonna say that uh we'll never know exactly what happened in that situation, but I don't think Bill's gonna be talking to anybody about anything important unless it's important.
So we'll never know what that's about.
Um so there's a new uh laser defense weapon to shoot down drones, and it's uh better than ever before.
It can kill 50 drones a minute, which actually doesn't sound like that many.
50 drones a minute if they're sending a swarm of a thousand drones, um, unless it's the really big ones that don't come that don't swarm.
I don't know.
But uh here's what I was uh wondering as I was reading that story.
What are the odds that uh drones become the main weapon of choice at the same time that lasers finally become cost effective to shoot them down?
Is that kind of weird that those two technologies that have both been out there for a while, you know, years and years, but they both kind of matured at the same time that just when the drones can do all kinds of things and there can be thousands of them in the sky, you know, uh autonomously attacking you, is exactly the Same time that we've built all these deadly lasers that can shoot them out of the sky.
I mean, what are the odds that those two technologies are peaking at about the same time?
I don't know, it's weird.
It's a simulation.
Well, uh, one of the Russian advisors to Putin accused the US and accused Trump of thinking about using crypto to wipe out our debt.
Now, if you like me, you said, wait, how uh how would you do that?
How would you wipe out 35 trillion dollars worth of debt with crypto uh without making things worse?
Now you might remember that I've asked that question a bunch of times, but not saying how it would happen, but asking if there's any way to make it happen.
And I the answer that I got from everyone is uh no, you you can't like do it with one magic trick of crypto.
You might be able to make crypto your only money and then inflate away the value of the dollar over time, and maybe that's literally the only way we'll ever get out of it.
So that might happen.
But uh so I I went to Grok and I put that story in there, and I said, is that something that could ever work?
And Grok said, not really.
So Grok would went into all the details, but basically said, no, you know, every way that you could go with that, this is me paraphrasing it, but every way you could go with that with some kind of clever crypto thing would make something way worse, and you know, would be unacceptable.
So no, that probably won't happen.
Um, but you can see why they're afraid of it, because the US has played around with the gold standard, for example, in the past.
Well, Politico is talking about France's government collapsing, a lot of collapsing happening lately.
So the uh Joshua Berlinger is writing about this.
So I guess McCrone Astro Point now is fifth prime minister in less than two years.
Um there's protests and things are falling apart.
So um I don't think I hate to say it, but I don't really see a way that France can survive.
Do you?
I no, I suppose that would be true of everybody in the medium run, but I don't see I don't see a path.
Um I hate to say that because you know I'm pretty optimistic, and I generally don't buy into the oh, this country is going down the drain.
You know, we've talked about, you know, I don't think China's really about to go down the drain.
I don't think Russia's really about to go down the drain.
And I don't think France is going down the drain this year.
Um, but it seems like just demographically they're in an unrecoverable situation.
But we'll see.
And I guess uh McCron is mad at the US for uh borrowing visas for most Palestinians, but like that's the biggest problem.
Uh he's got 75 cities in lockdown, uh and he's worried about Palestinian uh visas.
All right.
Um in other news, Israel has reportedly said yes to Trump's suggestion for a uh Gaza ceasefire.
So that would make you think, uh, we're 50% toward peace, because at least one side said yes.
Um, except that what Israel is uh requesting, and what uh I guess Trump is requesting, um, requesting would be too weak, demanding, is that they give up all the hostages and lay down their arms.
Now if you were Hamas, do you think you're gonna give up your hostages and lay down your arms?
Because what happens to you the minute that that happens?
It's not like part of the deal is for safe passage or something.
It's not like you're gonna get a you know, you're gonna be pardoned.
100% of the people who have a weapon and are in a tunnel and are working for Hamas, a hundred percent of them are gonna be in jail or killed.
Why exactly would they want to hurry that up uh while they have hostages?
So to me, uh it's easy for Israel to say, uh, we will accept your total surrender so that we can do what we want with you.
So I get why they say yes, but how in the world is is Hamas ever gonna say yes to that?
Well, unless you know the they have no other choice, and everything's worse.
And that's it, looks like that's where things are heading.
It's gonna get a lot worse.
But uh just before I got on, apparently there was some kind of big explosion in Qatar or Qatar, as you like to say, uh in Doha.
Some say it was an Israeli assassination strike as senior Hamas officials.
But uh, I heard that just before I went live.
So by now we probably have better information, but we're still in the fog of war.
So I wouldn't believe anything about that story yet.
Uh I definitely wouldn't believe that it was an Israeli attack yet.
It totally could have been.
Uh you know, I wouldn't rule it out, but uh too soon.
I would I wouldn't jump to that conclusion.
So I wouldn't trust any of the reports coming out.
But if it were true that uh Israel figured this was a good time to take out their leadership in uh Qatar.
Well there's probably no no bad time to do it.
And uh San Mateo, one of my local airports here, uh, is launching uh the first flying car with vertical takeoff.
Um it's gonna test flights at Half Moon Bay and Hollister, and you could you can buy one for or and you could put in a pre-order for your flying car at $300,000.
Now I think you know that that there have been news stories about flying cars for 30 years, uh and we're always right around the corner.
Oh, we're so close.
You are gonna have a flying car any minute now.
Well, maybe it's happening.
Maybe we'll see.
But if it does, can we agree on one thing?
If we get our flying cars, that is the golden age.
Everybody agree.
We still need to work on our affordability, but uh in many other ways, golden age.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, sorry about my cat-related disturbances.
If it sounded a little choppy over here, I was fighting a cat with one hand and using my brain to entertain you with my other hand.
All right, that didn't work.
Flying cars will be a disaster.
It does seem like it would be a problem.
Um, unless the flying cars are uh self-driving by law.
I can imagine that it would keep them out of trouble.
All right, thank you, Sergio.
I'm gonna say uh few words privately to the beloved members of locals.
The rest of you, I'll see you tomorrow, same time, same place.
