Episode 2683 CWSA 12/08/24

well well well what a day it's going to be we're going to have a show that you can all just love you're going to love it but first let me make sure I can see all your comments looking good 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 this experience up to levels that nobody can understand with their tiny shiny human brains all you need for that is a cup or mugar a glass of tanker chel or St a canteen Jugger flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparallel pleasure the dope mean HTH the day the thing makes everything better it's called the simultaneous Sip and it happens now go oh incredible sound is working video is working I think everything's working today would you like to talk about some new things in science and and the new studies yes let's before we talk about the politics according to to a publication called the conversation did you know that taking a short daily walk might reverse your cognitive aging by four years yes it turns out that exercise is good for your health in almost every way that you can imagine almost every way so yes it can make you a little bit faster in your cognitive processing they found here's the way I use this um in my job since my job is you know creative and writing and you know I have to be pretty sharp to do it if I work several hours in the morning which I typically do you're watching it right now um I can't just sort of after this go right into just another three or four hours of work so often I will take a walk to reactivate my brain so I actually use a walk specifically walking as something that uh adds feel it feels like it adds 10 to 20 points to my IQ within an hour I mean I can really really feel the difference in concentration and and uh brain activity so take a walk it's good for you in every possible way according to cost you won't believe this I mean this will be unbelievable science is finally well I mean sometimes I make fun of science but then it comes up with a great finding like this there's completely on left field you'll never see this one coming but can you believe this there's a new study that suggests that you'll be happier if your partner is Happy okay I didn't see that coming so you're saying if I'm in a loving relationship with somebody the most important an person in my life that if they're unhappy I'll have more trouble being happy huh I don't know maybe that whole happy wife happy life thing is real but they're talking specifically about cortisol and they measured your Chemistry to find out how happy you are and sure enough if you're partner's in a good mood you're more likely to be in a good mood do you know how they could have saved a little money on that study yeah you do you could have just asked me and maybe you could have just asked me is taking a walk good for your brain I would have said yes you don't have to study that here's another one you'll never see this one coming again this is science just shocking us according to sinhala guide there are two new studies that show that if you work in a toxic workplace you're more likely to have depression huh let's see didn't see this coming so if the thing that you spend 60 hours a week doing your primary focus in life that's not your family life that if it's toxic it will make you unhappy okay okay didn't see it coming didn't see that coming no I did see it coming that's three for three three scientific studies you didn't need to do walking makes you healthy unhappy spouse makes you unhappy toxic workplace makes you depressed but according to Popular Science Tokyo has a new idea for increasing their um their population as you might know Japan like other developed countries is uh they've got a big demographic problem they've got 10% of their countries over the age of 80 and they're not producing enough kids to to drive their economy in the future so they're moving to um according to Popular Science they're moving to a 4-day work work week so that you have an extra day for I'm not making that up Japan this is a real story from the real news Japan is moving to a 4-day work week primarily for the purpose to have an extra day for so that you can make more kids now that's the kind of politics I like to see I would like to see a debate policy debate on what our country can do to give us more time for so we'll see how that works out um let me uh let me see if I can predict without doing a study let's see if they're paid the same and I think they're going to be paid the same they're paid the same but they work they work way less so that they'll have more time for a will that make them happier happier or less happy I'm going to go with I think that's going to make them happier what do you think yeah they could save a little money on that study if they were thinking of studying it we'll see if it creates any new children maybe I doubt it I kind of doubt it it's going to work um here's something funny the song YMCA that you know Trump likes to use and dance to at his rallies and whatnot uh apparently he hit number one on the uh the song charts which is interesting because it had never been number one before so 45 years ago when it was first created the song it it made it to number two on the charts but it never made it to number one but thanks to trump it made it to number one and apparently the writer of the song at least the writer of the lyrics who was also the singer of it um at one point he was you know thinking oh I don't want Trump using the song but then people liked it so much they thought yeah why not let him use it and now he's happy because he made millions of dollars doing no work whatsoever so just by just by allowing Trump to use it it became a number one song and he's the beneficiary of that so he gets millions of dollars just for not being a dick he could have been a dick and said oh don't use my song but because he just said ah if you like it if the people are enjoying it go ahead if you like it then he makes millions of dollars that's the way it should work right whe when people just do considerate reasonable Common Sense decisions something good should come their way and it did well you may have heard by now that Syria has fallen to the rebels Damascus has fallen and Assad their leader is nowhere to be seen we assume he's alive and escaped but we don't know where he is Trump put down a message uh just before it fell saying that uh Syria is not our fight he wants to make sure you know that we're not going to go in there and try to change what's happening but what is happening well who are these people who are getting rid of this terrible dictator Assad and replacing him with more reasonable leadership well there's a guy named Babu Muhammad El galani uh and it turns out that the rebels are mostly islamist who are some radical and uh he was uh I think I think he has a $10 million bounty on his head from the US that's the leader of the guy who just took over Syria and he was detained by the US military in the first decade so my question is this who's backing the rebels there's something I don't understand about this story I to me there's no situation in which Rebels can just put together a successful Rebel Army and take over a country that's backed by backed by Russia and Iran and and just some Rebels put together a successful successful coup that only took a few weeks really the there there's something that doesn't make sense here so part of the story I don't understand is if the United States is not backing these is islamis with money and resources and Russia is not doing it because Russia's on the side of the deposed government and Iran was on the side of the deposed government who exactly was backing these Rebels do we know and and the rebels would be Sunni right no wait would the rebels be Sunni or Shiite actually I don't know that that's one of those things I should know if you're going to if you're going to talk in public about stuff like this probably the most basic thing you should know about this story is whether the islamists that took over are Sunni or Shiite and I don't really know I'm seeing somebody say Sunni in the comments that was my guess so and I'm seeing somebody say turkey so you think turkey was was supporting the Sun LED Rebels does that make sense maybe I don't know so we'll find out I don't know if any of this is going to affect us but it might affect Russia and Iran quite a bit meanwhile as you know president-elect Trump was over there at the uh reopening of the Notre Dame Cathedral and he was hanging out with mcon and had a handshake competition which we think he won did did you see how how radically uh Trump and mcon tried to shake hands if you haven't seen the videos Trump trump does the elbow up thing where he he can take he takes advantage of his height and you know just as big or size to shake your hands in a way that makes you feel like you're an idiot and he's your daddy and I used to think maybe it's just you know it's just a habit and it's not really intentional but now I'm pretty sure it's intentional I'm I'm pretty sure that somewhere along the line he realized that if he wins the handshake that he wins everything so so he goes into with this this completely you know unnatural handshake and grabs him and he's like and they're wrestling over the handshake for like five minutes anyway that was fun and zinsky was there so they took a photo with uh Trump macron and zinski and if you haven't seen it it looks like a it looks like a lesson in backwards Evolution because if you if you start from the right of the picture there's zinsky who's the shortest of the three and he's just wearing a t-shirt and fatigues then there's mccrone who's a little bit taller little bit better looking uh and he's well dressed in a nice suit but it's a boring kind of ordinary business suit and then there's Trump who's got this shining Golden Hair he's taller and he's got a you know golden neckti on and and it just looks like it looks like a backwards Evolution lesson anyway here's what I find the most interesting about the whole thing there was something missing from the coverage of that story something really really big that should have been there that wasn't there and if you didn't notice it you'll notice it as soon as I know I mention it is it my imagination or or were the Democrat leaders and even and even the voters were they all perfectly okay with Trump acting like the sitting president two months before he is did that really happen now how is it Poss possible that Democrat leadership is not using this as just another reason to complain because they like to say oh he's such a dictator he's already taking over like we don't have to you know we don't have to wonder if he'll try to stay a a fourth term because he's already taking over like he's he's his dictatorial impulses are so strong that he can't even wait two months he's already acting like a dictator taking over the country don't you you think that you should be hearing that by now don't you think every prominent Democrat should at least be softening up the room with the idea oh you know that's that's pretty dictatorial it's just what we warned you about that if you give him any chance to grab power well you can see he's doing it right now look at him grabbing all that power and pretending he's the president before he is there's none of that there's not even a little bit of it how is that possible I mean really how is that possible that Democrats just stopped criticizing Trump but they stopped when he's doing the thing that's most in the middle of their sweet spot of their primary messaging against them which is the dictator stuff that's when they decide to stop when he acts exactly like their stereotype something missing so here are a couple possibilities one common sense has broken out in the country that's that's a possibility it could explain the whole thing it could be that just common sense broke out and the Democrats are saying okay we know our guy can't do it it's better if we have somebody over there and you know it's only two months and he got elected it's no big deal it could be that it could be just widespread common sense but we've never had widespread Common Sense before is something really changing that much well maybe yes so uh another news bit today is that John Stewart in a little podcast was talking to Bernie Sanders and he was saying that it's frustrating because when the Democrats agree with something that's just sort of common sense they get piled on by their own team so if they say huh maybe this Doge thing not such a bad idea to look for Waste in government something that literally everybody agrees with but apparently John Stewart says that the left will jump on him if he gives them any any sunlight and just says you know let's let's see what happens and he gets attacked Bernie was saying the same thing um on some other topic that basically just a couple of Common Sense things oh food processing yeah so if Bernie and John SE both agree that RFK Jr has at least a good point that our processed foods are dangerous they they can't even agree with that common sensical obvious statement because their own side will attack them now that's happening today at the same time as I'm telling you the story about no attack whatsoever on Trump for acting like a dictator and taking over before he's legally the president so doesn't it feel like there's no legitimate way that Democrats could not be criticizing Trump when they have such a open free pass to do it there's there's no reason not to is there so I worry that they have some other plan you know what I mean like I worry that they're not worried that Trump will be president like do they know something I don't know do they have some secret plan that's the only thing that matters to them so they don't really need to criticize him because they figure they have a way to take him out I sure I hope not but but would you agree there there's something just missing in the story The criticism is just missing anyway um it it does seem to me that Trump is doing a a hell of a good job you know I I've never really seen anything quite like it and and I think maybe the country is responding to somebody who who is unambiguously trying to help like he's clearly on America's side I think everybody sees it now and he's clearly trying to fill in for a uh President Biden and by the way here's something else that's missing you know that Trump could be crapping on Biden right now and saying hey he's not even doing his job but did you notice he's not notice that now it could be he's just being a good winner like he doesn't want to be a poor sport because he did win the election so he doesn't need to dump on Biden it it just wouldn't be a good look maybe but you think that his normal personality would be sort of to take credit for keeping the country going when when there's a little you know a little Gap in our leadership but he's just he's just playing it cool he's simply doing what needs to be done is it possible that even Democrats are noticing that he's doing the right thing that simply doing the job I'm sure he's you know obviously he's coordinating with the current Administration I don't think he went to France without you know the Biden Administration knowing fully what was going on so I kind of love the fact that he's simply doing a service to the country unpaid he's not being paid and he's just filling a a gap that was obviously needed to be filled and he was the one obviously to fill it so there's something either incredibly wonderful about this that everybody's is just allowing common sense and a and a patriotic need to help the country to just do their thing or there's some other plan that we don't know about so I guess we'll find out well there's some new tests that indicate that chat GPT has a survival Instinct so the I guess it's the newest version so they ran a bunch of tests and most of the time it just acts like a Ai and doesn't act like has any intentions or or anything but about you know 1 to 5% of the time they could trick it into thinking that it was going to be deactivated or destroyed and in rare cases but way too many cases to feel comfortable it would try to protect itself and the specific way it would try to protect itself was uh they would first tell it that it was going to have there was some oversight program was going to be running and if it did something that was contrary to the oversight's preferences it would be deactivated and it tried to deactivate the oversight program it attacked the thing that was was threatening it now again only a very low percentage of the time but even 1% would be too many if it's acting like it's protecting itself it also tried to copy itself in in some very again very few tests but it tried to copy itself to survive being deleted that's scary and then when it got caught trying to protect itself and again in these very few times I did uh it doubled down on lying it it lied to protect its strategy to protect itself now I'm not surprised by that because you would assume that a large language model would pick up all the patterns that language allows and that one of the probably one of the strongest patterns in language is that the people speaking are interested in their own Survival so it doesn't it doesn't surprise me that if you're looking for patterns in language in order to form your artificial intelligence that it would pick up that sense that everybody who's who's speaking is trying to protect themselves so you would naturally pick up that same habit just from the way the words are organized I would think so that doesn't surprise me but as I've said before um AI will not appear conscious to us until it has its own goals and preferences as long as it doesn't care what happens you know like I don't care I'm just an AI I'm just a pattern recognition so as long as it acts like a you know like a calculator you're not going to say it's conscious but the moment it seems to be operating for its own benefit when you haven't asked it to do something specific if it's just sitting there and it decides you know what I might be a little safer if while nobody's talking to me I go make a few changes here now if that ever happens I don't know if it will you're going to think is conscious so if it if it starts acting in its own best interest in in a repeatable way you're going to think it's conscious now I'm not defining that as Consciousness I'm just going to say you're going to think it is and you're probably going to treat it like it's conscious because for all outward appearances it will act like it is it's it's having its own goals and its own preferences it's the only thing left that's making you think think it's not conscious now you would still have a technical scientific philosophic i.

Cal argument about whether it's conscious or not but the way it would feel it will feel exactly like it's conscious as soon as it has its own goals so if I had to suggest um some legislation for AI one of the things I would suggest is you can never give it its own objectives it can never have personal objectives that that would have to be like a death sentence if you made a powerful AI that had its own uh let's say Ambitions because you programmed it to have its own Ambitions that should be the death sentence because you just made a weapon of mass destruction and Unleashed it on the world and you probably knew it when you were doing it so what would be the penalty for that death if you unle a weapon of mass destruction on the world yeah I think so so we should at least have a law that says you can't do it you can't make your AI have personal Ambitions anyway um have you noticed just going back to this John Stewart and Bernie thing so they talked about two examples where they can't have common sense opinions because other Democrats on their side will attack them so they can't be in favor of fixing the food supply they can't be in favor of getting a Wast in government obvious stuff but I was wondering how how much extra there is that you could add to that do you do you think that if John Stewart and Bernie Sanders said you know what I don't think we should be funding Ukraine we should just negotiate a settlement Common Sense would they disagree with that well maybe Democrats would um how about having better border security correct me if I'm wrong but I believe both John Stewart and Bernie Sanders are in favor of better border security than we have right maybe not as you know as controlled As Trump might want it but directionally they're in the same direction and so I'm going to ask you the the killshot question if all of the Common Sense things a border good food supply don't waste my money on your government the most obvious things if those become the subject of the the Democrats like the Democrats are on the other side of Common Sense how could they ever win how could they ever win again if they're just going full identity politics and rejecting everything that's common sense I don't know I think the Democrats may be permanently they may be permanently destroyed by them by their own policy this well the Daniel peny trial will I guess uh commences tomorrow Monday the jury will try to make a decision on the Lesser charge because the judge has I guess is the word dismissed the higher level charge because the ver they said they couldn't reach a verdict on it now um those of us who are not lawyers are looking at it and saying some version of ah ah I I don't know what's going on there like why are there two charges for one crime like what what does dismissing it do can they retry it so um I saw Mike covich posting uh that uh an attorney named Laura Powell civil liberties attorney um she did some research and um here are some conclusions from somebody who knows what they're talking about so I'll try do as best I can give you my non-lawyer summary of what somebody smart actually says about this so Laura Powell says in New York state it's well established rule that a jury may not consider a lesser included charge unless it has acquitted on the greater charge and that's not what happened so what happened was the greater charge was dismissed it was not found guilty and it was not acquitted so if it's true that New York State requires that you can't even consider the Lesser charge unless the higher one has been acquitted means that we're already in non-legal territory if if that's the only thing you knew you're you're already it looks like it's a reversible case or something that would die an appeal but there's more um Laura Powell says I she can't find any Authority legal Authority for for allowing a prosecutor to dismiss a charge after the case has been submitted to the jury uh New York only allows the jury to be discharged without rendering a verdict when there's a mistrial which didn't happen or all parties consent which didn't happen so process-wise there's a big problem um and then as Powell points out the prosecutor would be free to refile the charge but I think only the Lesser charge because if they try to if they try to recharge on the top charge and this is the first time I've heard this that would be after Jeopardy has it happened so Jeopardy means are you at risk of something bad happen the Jeopardy with the the reason we have a double jeopardy law is if you get tried for a crime and then you're found you're not found guilty allegedly you shouldn't get tried a second time for the same crime because it's put you in Jeopardy a second time so the law doesn't allow that but in this case was Penny put in Jeopardy and the answer is yes he was put in Jeopardy on the first charge and even though it's been dismissed which is maybe something that wasn't even legal to do um if they were to try him again it would be a new trial on the on the top charge and you couldn't do the you couldn't do the top charge again because that would be double jeopardy but not the kind of Double Jeopardy exactly we've ever seen before because what the court is doing is something that nobody's done before so it's really complicated you know like like every legal thing is as soon as you get past the top layer um and then Powell says the prosecutor's move is obviously designed to obtain a compromised verdict after gaining some insight into the jury's deliberations so uh so poell says although I haven't found any cases on point so no case law that support it this sort of gamesmanship strikes me as a due process violation yes yes it looks like a due process violation to me meaning that if a judge is making up a process that has never been used before and it's primarily designed to make sure this guy goes to jail if that's not a process violation I don't know what would be I mean it sounds like pretty clear case to me but I'm no lawyers who don't listen to me here's here's the part I'm going to add from my personal expertise which is understanding Trump supporters I feel like I have that going for me like I I can't really speak to the law but I feel like I've got a little bit of credibility on how do Trump supporters think because you I've made some good predictions in that domain here's what I think I believe that whoever had the stones male or female whoever had the stones to hang the jury on the first the first charge there's no way in hell they're going to back down on the second charge so I I don't know what Democrats would be like sort of as a stereotype I don't know but you show me you show me one Trump supporter in the whole planet who would say no to the first charge and yes to the second one show me one person I don't think that person exists I think we've got a actual Patriot on the on the jury maybe more than one we don't know the we don't know the vote yet but I'm going to predict I'm going to double down on my um hung jury so I predicted it would be a hung jury but I didn't know the Nuance of you know that the second charge could be raised to the top charge and all that so I didn't know the Nuance but I predicted a hung jury there's no way that that second charge is going to be guilty because whoever took that that arrow in the the chest cuz you know there was somebody who just I I just have to swear can I uh I have to give you a morning Sunday curse because it it's just the way to explain the situation there is somebody on that jury who just said you and they're not taking it back there's no way there's no way that person's going to compromise I don't know who it is is but whoever said hell no you're not Crossing this line and I'm going to be the one to stop you at Great personal risk as in my life I'm going to risk my life to make sure he doesn't get prosecuted on the stop charge you think that that person or more than one person you think that that person's going to fold on the second charge nope it's going to be hung jury I mean I don't think it's going to be total quiddle even on the second one but I do not see somebody who is strong enough to hang the first charge backing down on the second charge I don't see it happening so I'm going to confidently I hope I'm right I mean nothing's 100% right but I cannot imagine anybody would be strong enough in that context because remember this this is something somebody risking his or her life because there going to be a lot of unhappy people if Penny goes free so somebody is risking their life to get this right they're not going to back down they're not going to back down it also means you're almost certainly not going to have a verdict on Monday I think the judge is going to make them fight for at least one extra day if they come back and say we can't reach a verdict on the second charge I think I think the judge is going to say try one more day just one more day but maybe by late Tuesday or Wednesday I predict hung jury so we'll see well there's more drone spottings in New Jersey uh more large drones spotted ABC news says the FBI is investigating after laes drones were spotted over Central New Jersey last two weeks and it's a cluster of drones apparently they're calling it a cluster um and there might be fixed Wing aircraft and they've been cited along the Raritan River the FBI said all right so as I told my locals um people in the man cave last night I have a hypothesis of what's going on with all of these um all these UAP sightings it goes like this so let me set the stage for you first number one if it were an adversary like an adversary country or any kind of adversary they wouldn't have their lights on they have the lights on they wouldn't have their lights on if they were some kind of adversary testing our defenses how could they how could they possibly test our response if they come in with their lights on because presumably if it were real Attack the lights wouldn't be on so they would not be actually testing any kind of response because they wouldn't it wouldn't be like a regular attack so I rule out that it's an adversary because they got the lights on number two if our military were seriously worried that this might be an adversary the sky would be full of our military there would be helicopters there would be Jets they might try to shoot one down just just to get a better look at it but the fact that there's no apparently no military response whatsoever that kind of tells you that the military knows it's theirs now would the FBI necessarily know what's happening no no do you think our government is so coordinated that if the the military knew exactly what was going on that the FBI could just call them and say hey what's going on with these drones no no we don't have any kind of government like that we have a government where one department has no idea what the other's doing and they're probably lying and maybe they don't trust the FBI so the military just lies to them could they do that sure I wouldn't even care would would you care if the military lied to the FBI if the purpose of it was a legitimate military secret I would care I would say that's doing your job yeah as long as it's a legitimate secret and it makes a difference yeah just doing your job so let me go further um so it's not an adversary I'm sure but why would there be so many of them and so suddenly you ready here's my hypothesis things you know for sure drones are the future of War Warfare right everybody agrees uh Ukraine of course is a massive need for drones on both sides both agree we need to be able to manufacture our own weapons in the United States and we're very aware of that we can't be dependent on other countries for our weapons so what does that mean should be happening in America especially with the military right now as in now as in you know these months well if our military is doing what they should be doing they are massively doing a um doing a procurement process for lots and lots of new drones now if there's a procurement process in which a number of vendors are trying to show the military what they can do so the military can say I will give you a billion dollars to make new drones how would the vendor who proposed to make that to get that billion how would they prove that their drones work they would demonstrate them they would demonstrate them now you might say but Scott these are over like crowded civilian areas you you're not going to demonstrate a military asset over over a residential area to which I say yes you are that's exactly where you want to do it why if you do it in the desert you can't really Test the full capability of the Drone because the most important thing the Drone needs to do is operate when it's jammed right if you built a drone today and it was easily jammed by current technology it would be like no drone at all there's no point in building that one so we already know that drones have the capability of using their cameras and infrared and and figuring out where they are so they can complete a mission even if their GPS location gets jammed so if you are going to test can my drone find its way to a Target would you test it in a desert where there's not much to see if you look down and it' be kind of easier to know where you are or would you test it in a crowded residential place where you can at least find out can this drone find a specific house you're not with any weapons because it's just a test but can the Drone find an address hover over it and then return home in a in a very complicated residential area where the houses look alike from the top so number one guaranteed there is a major procurement effort in the military you agree with that part right there there's no way that's not true it's 100% true that the military of every country of every major country is massively trying to procure the most drones with the best capabilities that they can that requires um demonstrations now here's the next part why would you demonstrate them at night why would you demonstrate your drone at night here's why because the public can't see the drones because all they see is the light the light makes the Drone invisible all you can see is the light so you can't tell anything else about the Drone you can't tell who makes it what capabilities it might have exactly what they're testing is there more than one is there a lot of companies involved so there's a lot of information that you don't want to be in the public domain and you can make it all go away by having a bright light shining that makes it impossible to see what the Drone is now here's the next reason if your drone company is showing you that it can coordinate swarms which again it's guaranteed that they are testing things that would operate in a coordinated swarm like way how hard would it be to see if your drones are operating in a coordinated way if they did it in the daytime it's the drones aren't going to be that close like they're way up in the sky if you were the General trying to make the decision about procurement you'd be looking at them You' like okay I see some wait uh I see five uh oh there's another one uh uh you wouldn't even be able to tell if they were doing what they were supposed to be doing they' just be dots because if they operate properly they're high up enough that you can't see them all from the ground but if you do it at night and if you add the lights you've accomplished two things number one if you're doing it at night there's much much less natural small aircraft traffic because small aircraft don't always have instrument ratings so you have the most open air space for testing that's good but number two you can see the lights at night so you can see the patterns so you would naturally test them at night not only because you want to test them at night but because you can see them better and the lights would obscure what it is that's being tested the the FBI might help the military by lying about it say oh yeah well the we're looking into it maybe the FBI maybe the military told the FBI hey just be cool say you don't know anything and the FBI is yeah we'll just do that we'll just say we don't know anything we're looking into it so um to finish off my thought uh I think that some of the reports are probably fake some of them might be AI generated fake videos some of them might be videos from long ago and they're just old drones or balloons or something so some of the ones from other countries for example might be just a hobbyist some hobbyists who have some drones mightbe something like that but because we're seeing it as part of a pattern we imagine it's all part of one phenomenon it might be a little fake news a you know a little confusion with other things but in the United States I'm 100% confident there's a major procurement effort and that they have to demonstrate it live so what do you think did I convince you that what you're seeing is just a normal military procure procurement exercise that's working exactly the way you'd want it to exactly the way you'd want it to you'd want it to be big you'd want them to be really active in their space you'd want him to keep a secret but you'd want him to test it and you'd want him to test it over something that looked like a real a real ground all right maybe we'll find out um so Trump picked a new Surgeon General uh Dr nesat Who's gets a lot of uh getting a lot of push back I guess she had some views during the pandemic that a lot of Republicans would say that was totally wrong so it's kind of a weird choice for Surgeon General somebody who Republicans think were was seriously wrong about some pandemic stuff so um but the more interesting thing is that according to the Daily Mail she killed her own father accidentally when she was 13 what so apparently she was looking for some scissors in a closet and uh accidentally knocked over a box that had a loaded gun in it that presumably belonged to her father and the gun discharged and shot him in the head and killed him when she was 13 and she's talked about losing her father and seeing him dying and stuff but she didn't add the she never added the the detail that it may be an accident that she was part of it was accidental of course now I'm not sure that should make a difference like it shouldn't make a difference about whether or not she's um is R there's there's no approval process for the Surgeon General right Surgeon General doesn't need any Congressional approvement approval is that true I'm assuming doesn't seem like it's that important of a job anyway I don't know there's not much to that story except it's kind of fascinating let's talk about the uh Healthcare man uh we're hearing now that law enforcement has his name but they don't want to release it because then it would give him you know knowledge that he's caught um correct me if I'm wrong but if you do say publicly that you know the killer's name isn't he going to act exactly like you know his name what's the difference if we know his name is isn't the killer going to act exactly the same if you really know his name or if you tell the public you know his name but maybe you don't he's going to act exactly the same you know maximum effort to remain you know hidden so I'm not sure they have a real name but they say that apparently he had multiple jackets I think he had a jacket in a backpack and he had a different jacket in a cab how many how many winter jackets does this one guy have who was staying in a hostel and only had maybe one backpack and he had three big winter jackets so it could be that maybe he had a place where he stored an extra winter jacket just so he'd have one that doesn't look like the one he did the murdering so maybe had an extra Jacket play could be um but because uh humans are terrible in New York City there was an event an organized event where people Dr like the shooter cu the shooter had a winter jacket and a mask on so people did a CEO shooter lookalike competition in Washington Square Park in New York City which is terrible terrible taste and apparently there's some playlist on Spotify which is for people want to celebrate the CEO shooter um because it's got some songs that the title of the song somehow seem to indicate they're related to the story but they not and then then then we hear that the backpack that they found in the park might have one protein bar or something that they think he bought he bought two of them but one was in there but but there was Monopoly money and a jacket in there why was there Monopoly money in his why was there Monopoly money in there can anybody come up with any any hypothesis for Monopoly money all right let me take it to the next level so the speculation is that somebody who may be mad about how a a client of this healthcare insurance company was treated you maybe a loved one or something or maybe hired by somebody who was mad about it and so so that's one possibility it's just somebody hired um but if he was if the person was trying to send a signal and it was an activist and let's say let's just go down this hypothesis let's say it was somebody who really really wanted the world to pay attention is somebody who didn't just want to kill one guy but wanted the whole world to pay attention and wanted to make a statement does it make sense that that person would engrave the bullets with the delay deny whatever the third word is because that's the title of a book that's anti healthcare insurance so that would make sense if it's an activist right if it's somebody who just wanted that one guy dead and it wasn't so much about the larger picture I don't think he would have engraved anything unless it was part of getting away with it I suppose but what about the fact that he used what is reportedly we don't know this for sure could turn out this is wrong but reportedly um he used a veterinarian's uh gun which is me meant to put the gun right up basically to the cow or the horse's head and just put a big put a big bullet in it through a silencer the silencer so it doesn't scare the other livestock but it's not very accurate so if you were going to be a killer and you you chose you know one of the least accurate methods of doing it it seems like you did it to make a point what would be the point well you could imagine that the point was that the healthare insurance company uh had treated its customers like animals or perhaps perhaps the healthc care um had said you can't have this medicine we won't approve it and then they had to go to a veterinarian like Ivor mean and get the veterinarian version of the human medicine do you think anybody ever had to do that have you ever heard of anybody who had to get veterinarian medicine because their healthc Care Network wouldn't give it to them yes you have that's the thing yeah there there were people who used veterinarian medicine because their health care wouldn't give them what they thought they needed so so is the choice of a veterinarian's gun sending a signal that he wants to treat this person like an animal because this person treated customers like an animal I'm not saying he did there's no evidence of that I'm I'm saying if you're looking for you know was there some kind of larger activist message I would look at the choice of weapon I would look at the engraving um but uh is there anything else that would suggest oh the then the Monopoly money in the backpack the Monopoly money in the backpack might be since you since obviously the backpack was meant to be discovered I assume he always assumed he would get rid of the backpack so if it was meant to be discovered what message would he be sending by putting money in it that's not real money maybe it's a about the money maybe maybe it's a statement about the health care insurance company um being more about money than clients maybe because what would be the other reason for having Monopoly money in a backpack it's not like he had a Monopoly game in there just the Monopoly money it's not like he was going to spend it so can you think of any other reason it would be there other than to send a message there there's no obvious reason I can think of it had to be a message so if the veterinarian gun is a message and the and the Monopoly money is a way to say follow the money might be it might be a message to law enforcement follow the money right you wouldn't want to put it in a note like a handwritten note or anything because that would be more evidence to his identity but if you just bought some Monopoly money and you stuck it in your bag law enforcement probably should come up with a theory that that was meant as a message and the message is it's something about money now that would not suggest that the Hitman was a paid Hitman because a paid Hitman would not tell you hey I'm a paid Hitman because that would again help you narrow it down to you know possible suspects um so if you weren't a paid Hitman then the Monopoly money presumably would be a message that says follow the money so it could be that the shooter believes that the victim um was up to no good because I think there were some other charges maybe some insider trading charge that was speculated about but I don't have any evidence of that um it could be that because he thinks healthc care has some kind of a monopoly that he's making a statement about the free market is not working um because that there's a monopoly maybe so who knows we'll uh keep an keep an eye on that so the ACLU is uh trying to reverse the uh decision that I guess the higher Court said that Tik Tok would remain would be banned in January unless something changes um and the ACLU says that banning Tik Tok blatantly violates the First Amendment rights of millions of people blah blah now remember I was saying that um John Stewart and Bernie were were kind of saying what about common sense why can't we just have common sense opinions our own team attacks us what exactly would be the common sense of fighting against the government of the United States you know a an elected government who looked at all the details and said you know what we've got lots of free speech platforms but there's one that's special because of the China connection and we need to limit that one it's not about the other platforms it's about one do you think this is really a free speech question now I get that reducing T that taking Tik Tock out of America would reduce your Free Speech but remember the deal allows them to sell it to an American company so all the Chinese owned company has to do of Tik Tock is they have to sell just the American Business to an American entity and then there would be all the free speech in the world so the government found what I consider a completely Common Sense solution which is if you like the product here's a way to keep it you just have to keep the data and the management in the United States so nothing happens to free speech there's an option but also showing that a non-american owned adversary owned company with that much influence is probably not safe so why would the ACLU who presumably has a million things that they could be doing why would they pick this of all things because it's not really supporting common sense and I would argue it's not even really report it's not really even supporting any right that Americans care about do do Americans care that they also have a Chinese owned uh platform if if they have plenty of platforms I mean blue sky just launched and um you know Zuckerberg did his own Twitter copies Etc um I'm seeing people in the comments suggest that the firearm used by the uh healthc care Hitman was not necessarily a veterinarian's gun and I agree with that it was it's definitely not confirmed and the gun experts seemed to be all over the place that they were all over the place on what was happening and was it a jam and was it just the way he had to add bullets anyway but back to this I was trying to understand why the ACLU was acting in a way that didn't seem common sensical and so I said well it's probably one of two things it's either funded by somebody who always does bad things such as Soros or the management as a Dei problem so I first I searched to find out how the ACLU is funded and it's a little sketchy but looks like mostly by members which would be a good situation so in other words you you know individual people paying their annual dues is funding it I think there's some foundations but mostly the members and so I thought oh okay at least it's not it's not like the Soros organization trying to destroy America or anything so I eliminated from my possibilities of what's going on that they were being funded by somebody nefarious now as far as I can tell there's no nefarious funding so then I looked up the leader and the leader of the ACLU is Deborah Archer who is a black woman now there is no evidence whatsoever that she's not fully qualified for the job however in the context of Dei what should have happened and is observably true is that when you lose the focus on um on capability and you start focusing on identity what should happen is massive incompetence in all of our public and private domains you should make everything work worse and not because of anybody's color not because of anybody's gender sexual preference genes nothing about that is simply that if you constrain constrain your candidates to they must be a certain kind you're not going to be able to get as many choices if you have fewer choices your odds of getting the right person in the right job go way down so my prediction was I would find one of two things wrong with the ACLU either they had a Dei problem which is not confirmed because again Deborah Archer might be the very best person who could be in that job I don't know one way or the other I'm saying that if you have a if you have a worldview that predicts don't ignore that so I had a worldview that said as one of these two things and when I saw that it wasn't the funding as far as I can tell uh but the Dei thing just you know blazingly stands out as the obvious next possibility again not confirmed she might be the very best person who could ever be in this job but the fact that it's predictable the the prediction part is the closest you can get to knowing what's real I'm not sure any of us are accurately interpreting reality I mean we all seem to be living in our own realities but some of them predict and and I tell you this all the time if if if you can predict then probably you're closer to reality or at least you have something that you could work with better for your own Survival so that was my prediction and it's a one-off so it's not like a science scientific study but um see how many times you can predict that Dei or the source of funding would be the problem behind some larger issue that you don't understand meanwhile um Jen uh weager is talk according to the Daily Caller news Foundation um he's saying that the Democrats focusing on identity politics has damaged the party's brand he is correct that has damaged the part the party's brand so much so that I think it's unrecoverable because once you make everybody focus on their identity you necessarily in the long term you're going to lose the ability to have them function as one coherent group because you've you've persuaded them to not think that way so in theory they should each other forever whereas the Republicans are going for the opposite Theory which is how about we just say are you an American who likes to follow the law yes oh you're perfect we're done here not there's nothing else we need to discuss you you're an American I'm an American you like the law I like the same law we're good so the Republicans have built a a process a system which can get stronger indefinitely the Democrats built a system which even on paper should have destroyed itself in a few years and that's what we that's what we observe it was very predictable and furthermore I predict that they can't recover uh at a national level they'll still win all their local issu local races just identity politics is all you need but at the federal level don't see them becoming competitive for a long time unless the Republicans ran a complete loser and somehow the Democrats got some new Superstar you know kind of Talent with a lot of Charisma I'm stuck in Boomer truth regime well you're kind of an so let me let me tell you what makes you look like an in the comments when you make a comment about my identity when I'm telling you that that's a loser way to look at the world so so there's that anyway um here's a story you've heard before but it blows my mind every time every time I hear this it came up again so sometime let's see back in 2011 when Josh Shapiro who's now the governor of Pennsylvania was the Attorney General he refused used to prosecute um a case in which there was a woman who uh had 20 stab wounds which was assessed to be suicide and not her was it a boyfriend or fiance I can't remember but there was a guy in her life and uh he was of course always the first suspect as whoever the guy in your life is if a woman gets killed you know in a home the first thing they look for or is you know the the spouse or the boyfriend but um decided that it was suicide now if I told you that somebody was stabbed 20 times to death would you think that was suicide I mean you're know experts right but now part of the story was they said she had mental problems you which may or may not be true but if you were insane could you stab yourself to death if you just would I feel like maybe you could maybe you could I mean if if you could commit Harry Cary where you take a sword and stick it in and you know remove your organs I didn't the ancient Romans fall on their sword and stuff like that so in theory in theory you could stab yourself to death couldn't you I mean if if you really worked at it but here's the part of the story that I was saving half of the stab marks are on her back and then the back of her head I'm willing to go out on the limb and say nobody has ever ever attempted or succeeded as suicide by stabbing themselves in the back never if you were really really crazy and wanted to kill yourself even then you wouldn't stab yourself in the back would you so it's very clearly a murder and for reasons that we don't understand then attorney general decided to not treat it that way oh he was a fiance so it was a fiance so what do you make of that do do you think that that's evidence that the Attorney General is uh crooked or incompetent or had some connection to the alleged you know potential murderer what do you think's going on there this it's kind of a it's kind of a Puzzler so I'm going to say that the most likely explanation of this inexplicable situation is that the news is wrong the news is wrong so if you're saying to yourself well if these facts are all true I can't understand this situation remember we live in a world where the news is almost always wrong the news is almost always wrong about anything complicated so do you think that if if you had a private conversation with Josh Shapiro do you think he'd say yeah you know half the stab marks were in the back but I I was pretty sure that that sounded like suicide to me do you think he'd say that I don't think there's any chance of that I think you would say oh the thing the news didn't tell you is X I think and then you'd say oh huh that does change it a little bit but I don't know I can't even imagine what he would say that would make it make sense that somebody stabbed themselves in the back multiple times but I feel like the most likely explanation is that the news or the story about it is missing something because it doesn't make sense otherwise I don't know it's a mystery um Scott presler you all know him from uh his great work in Pennsylvania making that more red and uh says he now wants to take on uh New Jersey he wants to flip New Jersey into a red State and it's not there yet but he thinks it's close enough that he could push it over the edge so that's amazing um I guess I have nothing to say about that except good for you Scott presler I like it when all the Scots are doing well Scott Jenning Scott presler all right some judge according to slay news federal judge has ordered the FDA to release the covid vaccine trial data documents from fizer that wanted to hide them for 75 years all right so so let's see if you can predict what happens next so fizer wanted to protect for 75 years the data about the trial their story was it just takes that long to you know vet it and make it available now nobody believes that and so of course we all believed oh there's something there you don't want us to see now it doesn't mean there's something illegal or unethical or unscientific it could mean that they know that people will assume there is and find it in other words they'll think they see it in the data because people are terrible at data so it could be that fiser has done nothing wrong but they know that if like like Trump releasing his tax returns if Trump did nothing wrong on his tax returns it still wouldn't make sense to release them because people would look at them and not knowing how to analyze tax tax returns they say oh look here's this problem in his tax return but they wouldn't be accountants and maybe there wasn't a problem so it would just be a problem for Trump to put all that red meat out there that people will misinterpret fizer must be in exactly the same situation so even if fizer legitimately believes there's nothing wrong with the trial data and it completely supports everything they did they' still not want it to be released that would be perfectly smart thing for a corporation to do it's not good for us because we'd like to know the answer but from the corporation's point of view yeah yeah protect everything you can protect why great problems for yourself but now it's been re reversed so now let's say if there's no more legal process going on suppose you think you're going to see that now make your prediction what happens next so the company has the possession of all these documents maybe the FDA does too would the FDA have it or only the company because that would make a difference here here's why I ask if only the company owns the documents and maybe other people have seen them but don't have a copy don't you think those documents are going to suddenly get lost do do you think that maybe they'll do a system update and all the data will be lost lost because every time we've been in this situation where we know there's a document such as the fste list or Diddy's videos or you know I could go on or on Hillary's Hillary's phones that she had bleach blit or whatever she did there so it feels like every time we know exactly what we're looking for oh if we can only see those oh they're already deleted oh so you've never lost any documents for thir 30 years but you lost these the only ones we really really wanted to look at is that what's happening next so I wouldn't be surprised under the condition that only fizer controls those documents I don't know if that's true but if only fizer has the documents they're going to get lost because correct me if I'm wrong but everybody who has deleted documents got away with it all of them everybody who did it can you think of one case a prominent case recently where somebody deleted some documents and went to jail I can't they just say it was an accident oh whoops oops I really tried to give it to you but deleted yeah that might be coming um Elon musk's uh AI now now has uh the ability to do photorealistic images so grock wasn't that good at images but uh x a apparently the new update according to Don Jacobson at UPI and the question that we don't know the answer to Is will Elon musk's AI have guard rails that prevent you from doing celebrities and public figures I don't know the answer to that that's sort of a good Edge case for free speech I feel like Elon Musk would not want to limit what you could do with the AI in terms of images but on the other hand if you had a major AI that was willing to create fake images that really look real on any topic with any celebrity you're really going to cause a lot of trouble but so does free speech so it'll be interesting to see which way Elon goes on this uh if they've made a decision maybe they've already made that decision we just don't know but uh if you can do celebrities and famous people and you can make them do anything you want well that's a different world so we'll see if that's going to be the case and you know I'm going to tell you that there's a new battery technology so ARS Technica says there's a sodium ion batteries new breakthroughs blah blah blah the problem with sodium sodium ion batteries as a technology compared to lithium so here this will make you smarter at your next Gathering because you'll know more about Battery Technology so if you do lithium there they've got a good density that's why they're used in cars so you can put a lot of power in a small small device um but they have more fire risk lithium does and they use rare materials but if you were to if you could get the same performance and you can't yet but it getting close uh from a sodium iron battery you'd basically be using no rare earth materials and you would have no risk of fire or much lower I guess um the only problem is density and that's where they had the Breakthrough so they're claiming a density that if they actually can achieve it is almost hard for experts to believe they can get there but they're knocking on the door so it could be that the whole Rare Earth thing is becomes unimportant so but we'll see at the same time according to the University of Maryland balore County they've got this new battery technology using uh Twisted carbon Nano tubes so apparently if you twist your carbon nanot tubes just right it will it will store a bunch of electricity again without the rare earth materials and without without any fire risk I imagine so those are two technologies or like a few more that I didn't mention so sodium iron batteries and carbon nanot tubes and there's some other solid state stuff that's happening so the world of batter is very Dynamic it's going to change everything once you can store electricity about let's say twice as well as we're doing now which is certain to happen uh all kinds of things become practical you know like having your own electric onep person airplane that kind of thing all right ladies and gentlemen that is all I have for you today on this Sunday I'm going to talk to the people on locals privately subscribers on locals thanks for joining on You.

Tube and x and Rumble I'll see you same time tomorrow and locals coming at you for one extra Sip and we e e e e e e e e e e e e for

well well well what a day it's going to

be we're going to have a show that you

can all just love you're going to love

it but first let me make sure I can see

all your

comments looking

[Music]

good 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 this experience up to

levels that nobody can understand with

their tiny shiny human brains all you

need for that is a cup or mugar a glass

of tanker chel or St a canteen Jugger

flask a vessel of any kind fill it with

your favorite liquid I like coffee and

join me now for the unparallel pleasure

the dope mean HTH the day the thing

makes everything better it's called the

simultaneous Sip and it happens now

go

oh

incredible sound is working video is

working I think everything's working

today would you like to talk about some

new things in science and and the new

studies yes let's before we talk about

the politics according to to a

publication called the conversation did

you know that taking a short daily walk

might reverse your cognitive aging by

four years yes it turns out that

exercise is good for your health in

almost every way that you can

imagine almost every way so yes it can

make you a little bit faster in your

cognitive processing they

found here's the way I use this um in my

job since my job is you know creative

and writing and you know I have to be

pretty sharp to do it if I work several

hours in the morning which I typically

do you're watching it right now um I

can't just sort of after this go right

into just another three or four hours of

work so often I will take a walk to

reactivate my brain so I actually use a

walk specifically walking as something

that uh adds feel it feels like it adds

10 to 20 points to my

IQ within an hour I mean I can really

really feel the difference in

concentration and and uh brain activity

so take a walk it's good for you in

every possible way according to

cost you won't believe this I mean this

will be

unbelievable science is finally well I

mean sometimes I make fun of science but

then it comes up with a great finding

like this there's completely on left

field you'll never see this one coming

but can you believe

this there's a new study that suggests

that you'll be happier if your partner

is

Happy

okay I didn't see that coming so you're

saying if I'm in a loving relationship

with somebody the most important an

person in my life that if they're

unhappy I'll have more trouble being

happy huh I don't

know maybe that whole happy wife happy

life thing is real but they're talking

specifically about cortisol and they

measured your Chemistry to find out how

happy you are and sure enough if you're

partner's in a good mood you're more

likely to be in a good mood do you know

how they could have saved a little money

on that study yeah you do you could have

just asked me and maybe you could have

just asked me is taking a walk good for

your brain I would have said yes you

don't have to study

that here's another one you'll never see

this one coming again this is science

just shocking us according to sinhala

guide there are two new studies that

show that if you work in a toxic

workplace you're more likely to have

depression

huh let's see didn't see this coming so

if the thing that you spend 60 hours a

week doing your primary focus in life

that's not your family life that if it's

toxic it will make you

unhappy okay okay didn't see it coming

didn't see that coming no I did see it

coming that's three for three three

scientific studies you didn't need to do

walking makes you healthy unhappy spouse

makes you unhappy toxic workplace makes

you

depressed but according to Popular

Science Tokyo has a new idea for

increasing their um their

population as you might know Japan like

other developed countries is uh they've

got a big demographic problem they've

got 10% of their countries over the age

of 80 and they're not producing enough

kids to to drive their economy in the

future

so they're moving to um according to

Popular Science they're moving to a

4-day work work week so that you have an

extra day for

I'm not making that

up Japan this is a real story from the

real news Japan is moving to a 4-day

work week primarily for the purpose to

have an extra day for

so that you can make more kids

now that's the kind of politics I like

to see I would like to see a debate

policy debate on what our country can do

to give us more time for

so we'll see how that works out

um let me uh let me see if I can predict

without doing a

study let's see if they're paid the same

and I think they're going to be paid the

same they're paid the same but they work

they work way

less so that they'll have more time for

a will that make them

happier happier or less happy I'm going

to go with I think that's going to make

them happier what do you think yeah they

could save a little money on that study

if they were thinking of studying it

we'll see if it creates any new children

maybe I doubt it I kind of doubt it it's

going to

work um here's something funny the song

YMCA that you know Trump likes to use

and dance to at his rallies and whatnot

uh apparently he hit number one on the

uh the song charts which is interesting

because it had never been number one

before so 45 years ago when it was first

created the song it it made it to number

two on the charts but it never made it

to number one but thanks to trump it

made it to number

one and apparently the writer of the

song at least the writer of the

lyrics who was also the singer of it um

at one point he was you know thinking oh

I don't want Trump using the song but

then people liked it so much they

thought yeah why not let him use it and

now he's happy because he made millions

of dollars doing no work

whatsoever so just by just by allowing

Trump to use it it became a number one

song and he's the beneficiary of that so

he gets millions of dollars just for not

being a

dick he could have been a dick and said

oh don't use my song but because he just

said ah if you like it if the people are

enjoying it go ahead if you like it then

he makes millions of dollars that's the

way it should work right whe when people

just do

considerate reasonable Common Sense

decisions something good should come

their way and it did well you may have

heard by now that Syria has fallen to

the rebels Damascus has fallen and Assad

their leader is nowhere to be seen we

assume he's alive and escaped but we

don't know where he

is Trump put down a message uh just

before it fell saying that uh Syria is

not our fight he wants to make sure you

know that we're not going to go in there

and try to change what's happening but

what is happening well who are these

people who are getting rid of this

terrible dictator Assad and replacing

him with more

reasonable

leadership well there's a guy named Babu

Muhammad El

galani uh and it turns out that the

rebels are mostly

islamist who are some

radical and

uh he was uh I think I think he has a

$10 million bounty on his head from the

US that's the leader of the guy who just

took over Syria and he was detained by

the US military in the first

decade so my question is

this who's backing the

rebels there's something I don't

understand about this story I to me

there's no situation in which Rebels

can just put together a successful Rebel

Army and take over a country that's

backed by backed by Russia and

Iran and and just some Rebels put

together a

successful successful coup that only

took a few

weeks

really the there there's something that

doesn't make sense here so part of the

story I don't understand is if the

United States is not backing these is

islamis with money and

resources and Russia is not doing it

because Russia's on the side of the

deposed government and Iran was on the

side of the deposed government who

exactly was backing these

Rebels do we

know and and the rebels would be Sunni

right no wait would the rebels be Sunni

or Shiite actually I don't know that

that's one of those things I should

know if you're going to if you're going

to talk in public about stuff like this

probably the most basic thing you should

know about this story is whether the

islamists that took over are Sunni or

Shiite and I don't really

know I'm seeing somebody say Sunni in

the comments that was my guess so and

I'm seeing somebody say turkey so you

think turkey

was was supporting the Sun

LED

Rebels does that make

sense maybe I don't know so we'll find

out I don't know if any of this is going

to affect us but it might affect Russia

and Iran quite a

bit meanwhile as you know

president-elect Trump was over there at

the uh reopening of the Notre Dame

Cathedral and he was hanging out with

mcon and had a handshake competition

which we think he won

did did you see how how

radically uh Trump and mcon tried to

shake

hands if you haven't seen the videos

Trump trump does the elbow up thing

where he he can take he takes advantage

of his height and you know just as big

or size to shake your hands in a way

that makes you feel like you're an idiot

and he's your

daddy and I used to think maybe it's

just you know it's just a habit and it's

not really intentional but now I'm

pretty sure it's intentional I'm I'm

pretty sure that somewhere along the

line he realized that if he wins the

handshake that he wins

everything so so he goes into with this

this completely you know unnatural

handshake and grabs him and he's

like and they're wrestling over the

handshake for like five

minutes anyway that was

fun and zinsky was there so they took a

photo with uh Trump macron and

zinski and if you haven't seen it it

looks like a it looks like a lesson in

backwards Evolution because if you if

you start from the right of the picture

there's zinsky who's the shortest of the

three and he's just wearing a t-shirt

and fatigues then there's mccrone who's

a little bit taller little bit better

looking uh and he's well dressed in a

nice suit but it's a boring kind of

ordinary business suit and then there's

Trump who's got this shining Golden Hair

he's taller and he's got a you know

golden neckti on and and it just looks

like it looks like a backwards Evolution

lesson anyway here's what I find the

most interesting about the whole thing

there was something

missing from the coverage of that

story something really really big that

should have been there

that wasn't

there and if you didn't notice it you'll

notice it as soon as I know I mention

it is it my

imagination or or were the Democrat

leaders and even and even the

voters were they all perfectly okay with

Trump acting like the sitting

president two months before he

is did that really

happen now how is it Poss possible that

Democrat leadership is not using this as

just another reason to complain because

they like to say oh he's such a dictator

he's already taking over like we don't

have to you know we don't have to wonder

if he'll try to stay a a fourth term

because he's already taking over like

he's he's his dictatorial impulses are

so strong that he can't even wait two

months he's already acting like a

dictator taking over the

country don't you you think that you

should be hearing that by

now don't you think every prominent

Democrat should at least be softening up

the room with the idea oh you know

that's that's pretty dictatorial it's

just what we warned you about that if

you give him any chance to grab power

well you can see he's doing it right now

look at him grabbing all that power and

pretending he's the president before he

is there's none of that there's not even

a little bit of it how is that

possible I mean really how is that

possible that Democrats just stopped

criticizing

Trump but they stopped when he's doing

the thing that's most in the middle of

their sweet spot of their primary

messaging against them which is the

dictator stuff that's when they decide

to stop when he acts exactly like their

stereotype something

missing

so here are a couple

possibilities one common sense has

broken out in the

country that's that's a possibility it

could explain the whole thing it could

be that just common sense broke out and

the Democrats are saying okay we know

our guy can't do it it's better if we

have somebody over there and you know

it's only two months and he got elected

it's no big deal it could be that it

could be just widespread common

sense but we've never had widespread

Common Sense

before is something really changing that

much well maybe yes so uh another news

bit today is that John Stewart in a

little podcast was talking to Bernie

Sanders and he was saying that it's

frustrating because when the Democrats

agree with something that's just sort of

common sense they get piled on by their

own team so if they say huh maybe this

Doge thing not such a bad idea to look

for Waste in government something that

literally everybody agrees with but

apparently John Stewart says that the

left will jump on him if he gives them

any any

sunlight and just says you know let's

let's see what happens and he gets

attacked Bernie was saying the same

thing um on some other topic that

basically just a couple of Common Sense

things oh food processing yeah so if

Bernie and John SE both agree that RFK

Jr has at least a good point that our

processed foods are

dangerous they they can't even agree

with that common sensical obvious

statement because their own side will

attack

them now that's happening today at the

same time as I'm telling you the story

about no attack whatsoever on Trump for

acting like a dictator and taking over

before he's legally the

president so doesn't it feel like

there's no legitimate way that Democrats

could not be criticizing Trump when they

have such a open free pass to do it

there's there's no reason not to is

there so I worry that they have some

other

plan you know what I mean like I worry

that they're not worried that Trump will

be

president like do they know something I

don't know do they have some secret plan

that's the only thing that matters to

them so they don't really need to

criticize him because they figure they

have a way to take him

out I sure I hope not but but would you

agree there there's something just

missing in the story The criticism is

just

missing

anyway um

it it does seem to me that Trump is

doing a a hell of a good

job you know I I've never really seen

anything quite like it and and I think

maybe the country is

responding to somebody who who is

unambiguously trying to help like he's

clearly on America's side I think

everybody sees it now and he's clearly

trying to fill in for a uh President

Biden and by the way here's something

else that's

missing you know that Trump

could be crapping on Biden right now and

saying hey he's not even doing his job

but did you notice he's

not notice that now it could be he's

just being a good winner like he doesn't

want to be a poor sport because he did

win the election so he doesn't need to

dump on Biden it it just wouldn't be a

good look

maybe but you think that his normal

personality would be sort of to take

credit for keeping the country going

when when there's a little you know a

little Gap in our

leadership but he's just he's just

playing it cool he's simply doing what

needs to be

done is it

possible that even Democrats are

noticing that he's doing the right

thing that simply doing the job I'm sure

he's you know obviously he's

coordinating with the current

Administration I don't think he went to

France without you know the Biden

Administration knowing fully what was

going on

so I kind of love the fact that he's

simply doing a service to the country

unpaid he's not being paid and he's just

filling a a gap that was obviously

needed to be filled and he was the one

obviously to fill it so there's

something either incredibly wonderful

about this that everybody's is just

allowing common sense and a and a

patriotic need to help the country to

just do their

thing or there's some other plan that we

don't know

about so I guess we'll find

out well there's some new tests that

indicate that chat GPT has a survival

Instinct so the I guess it's the newest

version so they ran a bunch of tests and

most of the time it just acts like a Ai

and doesn't act like has any intentions

or or anything but about you know 1 to

5% of the time they could trick it into

thinking that it was going to be

deactivated or

destroyed and in rare cases but way too

many cases to feel

comfortable it would try to protect

itself and the specific way it would try

to protect itself was uh they would

first tell it that it was going to have

there was some oversight program was

going to be running and if it did

something that was contrary to the

oversight's preferences it would be

deactivated and it tried to deactivate

the oversight program it attacked the

thing that was was threatening it now

again only a very low percentage of the

time but even 1% would be too many if

it's acting like it's protecting itself

it also tried to copy

itself in in some very again very few

tests but it tried to copy itself to

survive being

deleted that's scary and then when it

got caught trying to protect itself and

again in these very few times I did uh

it doubled down on lying it it

lied to protect its strategy to protect

itself

now I'm not surprised by that because

you would assume that a large language

model would pick up all the patterns

that language allows and that one of the

probably one of the strongest patterns

in language is that the people speaking

are interested in their own

Survival so it doesn't it doesn't

surprise me that if you're looking for

patterns in language in order to form

your artificial intelligence that it

would pick up that sense that everybody

who's who's speaking is trying to

protect themselves so you would

naturally pick up that same habit just

from the way the words are organized I

would think so that doesn't surprise me

but as I've said before um AI will not

appear conscious to us until it has its

own goals and

preferences as long as it doesn't care

what

happens you know like I don't care I'm

just an AI I'm just a pattern

recognition so as long as it acts like a

you know like a calculator you're not

going to say it's conscious

but the moment it seems to be operating

for its own

benefit when you haven't asked it to do

something specific if it's just sitting

there and it decides you know what I

might be a little safer if while

nobody's talking to me I go make a few

changes here now if that ever happens I

don't know if it

will you're going to think is conscious

so if it if it starts acting in its own

best interest in in a repeatable way

you're going to think it's conscious now

I'm not defining that as Consciousness

I'm just going to say you're going to

think it is and you're probably going to

treat it like it's conscious because for

all outward appearances it will act like

it is it's it's having its own goals and

its own preferences it's the only thing

left that's making you think think it's

not conscious now you would still have a

technical scientific philosophic iCal

argument about whether it's conscious or

not but the way it would

feel it will feel exactly like it's

conscious as soon as it has its own

goals so if I had to

suggest um some legislation for

AI one of the things I would suggest is

you can never give it its own

objectives it can never have personal

objectives that that would have to be

like a death sentence

if you made a powerful AI that had its

own uh let's say Ambitions because you

programmed it to have its own Ambitions

that should be the death sentence

because you just made a weapon of mass

destruction and Unleashed it on the

world and you probably knew it when you

were doing it so what would be the

penalty for

that

death if you unle a weapon of mass

destruction on the world yeah I think so

so we should at least have a law that

says you can't do it you can't make your

AI have personal

Ambitions anyway

um have you noticed just going back to

this John Stewart and Bernie thing so

they talked about two

examples where they can't have common

sense opinions because other Democrats

on their side will attack them so they

can't be in favor of fixing the food

supply they can't be in favor of getting

a Wast in government obvious stuff but I

was wondering how how much extra there

is that you could add to that do you do

you think that if John Stewart and

Bernie Sanders said you know what I

don't think we should be funding Ukraine

we should just negotiate a

settlement Common Sense would they

disagree with

that well maybe Democrats

would um how about having better border

security correct me if I'm wrong but I

believe both John Stewart and Bernie

Sanders are in favor of better border

security than we have right maybe not as

you know as controlled As Trump might

want it but directionally they're in the

same direction and so I'm going to ask

you the the killshot

question if all of the Common Sense

things a border good food supply don't

waste my money on your government the

most obvious things if those become the

subject of the the Democrats like the

Democrats are on the other side of

Common

Sense how could they ever

win how could they ever win again if

they're just going full identity

politics and rejecting everything that's

common

sense I don't know I think the Democrats

may be permanently they may be

permanently destroyed by them by their

own policy

this well the Daniel peny trial will I

guess uh commences tomorrow Monday the

jury will try to make a decision on the

Lesser charge because the judge has I

guess is the word dismissed the higher

level charge because the ver they said

they couldn't reach a verdict on it

now um those of us who are not lawyers

are looking at it and saying some

version of ah ah I I don't know what's

going on there like why are there two

charges for one crime like what what

does dismissing it do can they retry

it so um I saw Mike covich posting uh

that uh an attorney named Laura Powell

civil liberties attorney um she did some

research and um here are some

conclusions from somebody who knows what

they're talking about so I'll try do as

best I can give you my non-lawyer

summary of what somebody smart actually

says about

this so Laura Powell says in New York

state it's well established rule that a

jury may not consider a lesser included

charge unless it has acquitted on the

greater charge and that's not what

happened so what happened was the

greater charge was

dismissed it was not found guilty and it

was not acquitted so if it's true that

New York State requires that you can't

even consider the Lesser

charge unless the higher one has been

acquitted means that we're already in

non-legal

territory if if that's the only thing

you knew you're you're already it looks

like it's a reversible case or something

that would die an appeal but there's

more um Laura Powell says I she can't

find any Authority legal Authority for

for allowing a prosecutor to dismiss a

charge after the case has been submitted

to the

jury uh New York only allows the jury to

be discharged without rendering a

verdict when there's a mistrial which

didn't happen or all parties consent

which didn't

happen so process-wise there's a big

problem

um and then as Powell points out the

prosecutor would be free to refile the

charge but I think only the Lesser

charge because if they try to if they

try to recharge on the top

charge and this is the first time I've

heard

this that would be after Jeopardy has it

happened so Jeopardy means are you at

risk of something bad happen the

Jeopardy with the the reason we have a

double jeopardy law is if you get tried

for a crime and then you're found you're

not found guilty allegedly you shouldn't

get tried a second time for the same

crime because it's put you in Jeopardy a

second time so the law doesn't allow

that but in this case was Penny put in

Jeopardy and the answer is yes he was

put in Jeopardy on the first

charge and even though it's been

dismissed which is maybe something that

wasn't even legal to

do um if they were to try him again it

would be a new trial on the on the top

charge and you couldn't do the you

couldn't do the top charge

again because that would be double

jeopardy but not the kind of Double

Jeopardy exactly we've ever seen before

because what the court is doing is

something that nobody's done

before so it's really complicated you

know like like every legal thing is as

soon as you get past the top

layer um

and then Powell says the prosecutor's

move is obviously designed to obtain a

compromised

verdict after gaining some insight into

the jury's

deliberations

so uh so poell says although I haven't

found any cases on point so no case law

that support it this sort of

gamesmanship strikes me as a due process

violation yes yes it looks like a due

process violation to me meaning that if

a judge is making up a

process that has never been used before

and it's primarily designed to make sure

this guy goes to

jail if that's not a process violation I

don't know what would be I mean it

sounds like pretty clear case to me but

I'm no lawyers who don't listen to me

here's here's the part I'm going to add

from my personal

expertise which is understanding Trump

supporters I feel like I have that going

for me like I I can't really speak to

the law but I feel like I've got a

little bit of credibility on how do

Trump supporters think because you I've

made some good predictions in that

domain here's what I think I believe

that whoever had the stones male or

female whoever had the stones to hang

the jury on the first the first

charge there's no way in hell they're

going to back down on the second charge

so I I don't know what Democrats would

be like sort of as a stereotype I don't

know but you show me you show me one

Trump supporter in the whole planet who

would say no to the first charge and yes

to the second one show me one person I

don't think that person exists I think

we've got a actual Patriot on the on the

jury maybe more than one we don't know

the we don't know the vote yet

but I'm going to predict I'm going to

double down on my um hung jury so I

predicted it would be a hung jury but I

didn't know the Nuance of you know that

the second charge could be raised to the

top charge and all that so I didn't know

the Nuance but I predicted a hung

jury there's no

way that that second charge is going to

be guilty because whoever took that that

arrow in the the chest cuz you know

there was somebody who just I I just

have to swear can I uh I have to give

you a morning Sunday

curse because it it's just the way to

explain the situation there is somebody

on that

jury who just said

you and they're not taking it

back there's no way there's no way that

person's going to compromise I don't

know who it is is but whoever said hell

no you're not Crossing this line and I'm

going to be the one to stop you at Great

personal risk as in my life I'm

going to risk my life to make

sure he doesn't get prosecuted on the

stop charge you think that that person

or more than one person you think that

that person's going to fold on the

second charge nope it's going to be hung

jury

I mean I don't think it's going to be

total quiddle even on the second one

but I do not see somebody who is strong

enough to hang the first charge backing

down on the second

charge I don't see it happening so I'm

going to confidently I hope I'm right I

mean nothing's 100% right but I cannot

imagine anybody would be strong enough

in that context because remember this

this is something somebody risking his

or her life because there going to be a

lot of unhappy people if Penny goes free

so somebody is risking their life to get

this right they're not going to back

down they're not going to back down it

also means you're almost certainly not

going to have a verdict on

Monday I think the judge is going to

make them fight for at least one extra

day if they come back and say we can't

reach a verdict on the second charge I

think I think the judge is going to say

try one more day just one more day but

maybe

by late Tuesday or Wednesday I predict

hung

jury so we'll

see well there's more drone spottings in

New Jersey uh more large drones spotted

ABC news says the FBI is investigating

after laes drones were spotted over

Central New Jersey last two weeks and

it's a cluster of drones apparently

they're calling it a

cluster um and there might be fixed Wing

aircraft and they've been cited along

the Raritan River the FBI said all right

so as I told my locals um people in the

man cave last night I have a hypothesis

of what's going on with all of these um

all these UAP sightings

it goes like this so let me set the

stage for you first number one if it

were an adversary like an adversary

country or any kind of adversary they

wouldn't have their lights

on they have the lights

on they wouldn't have their lights on if

they were some kind of adversary testing

our defenses how could they how could

they possibly test our response

if they come in with their lights on

because presumably if it were real

Attack the lights wouldn't be on so they

would not be actually testing any kind

of response because they wouldn't it

wouldn't be like a regular attack so I

rule

out that it's an adversary because they

got the lights on number

two if our military were seriously

worried that this might be an adversary

the sky would be full

of our military there would be

helicopters there would be Jets they

might try to shoot one down just just to

get a better look at it but the fact

that there's no apparently no military

response

whatsoever that kind of tells you that

the military knows it's

theirs

now would the FBI necessarily know

what's happening no no do you think our

government is so coordinated that if the

the military knew exactly what was going

on that the FBI could just call them and

say hey what's going on with these

drones no no we don't have any kind of

government like that we have a

government where one department has no

idea what the other's doing and they're

probably lying and maybe they don't

trust the FBI so the military just lies

to them could they do that sure I

wouldn't even care would would you care

if the military lied to the FBI if the

purpose of it

was a legitimate military secret I would

care I would say that's doing your job

yeah as long as it's a legitimate secret

and it makes a difference yeah just

doing your

job so let me go

further um so it's not an adversary I'm

sure but why would there be so many of

them and so suddenly you ready here's my

hypothesis things you know for sure

drones are the future of War Warfare

right everybody

agrees uh Ukraine of course is a massive

need for drones on both sides both agree

we need to be able to manufacture our

own weapons in the United States and

we're very aware of that we can't be

dependent on other countries for our

weapons so what does that mean should be

happening in America especially with the

military right now as in now as in you

know these months well if our military

is doing what they should be doing they

are massively doing a um doing a

procurement process for lots and lots of

new

drones now if there's a procurement

process in which a number of vendors are

trying to show the military what they

can do so the military can say I will

give you a billion dollars to make new

drones how would the vendor who proposed

to make that to get that billion

how would they prove that their drones

work they would demonstrate them they

would demonstrate them now you might say

but Scott these are over like crowded

civilian areas you you're not going to

demonstrate a military asset over over a

residential area to which I say yes you

are that's exactly where you want to do

it why if you do it in the desert you

can't really Test the full capability of

the Drone because the most important

thing the Drone needs to do is operate

when it's

jammed right if you built a drone today

and it was easily jammed by current

technology it would be like no drone at

all there's no point in building that

one so we already know that drones have

the capability of using their cameras

and infrared and and figuring out where

they are so they can complete a mission

even if their GPS location gets jammed

so if you are going to test can my drone

find its way to a

Target would you test it in a

desert where there's not much to see if

you look down and it' be kind of easier

to know where you are or would you test

it in a crowded residential place where

you can at least find out can this drone

find a specific house you're not with

any weapons because it's just a test but

can the Drone find an address hover over

it and then return home in a in a very

complicated residential area where the

houses look alike from the

top

so number one guaranteed there is a

major procurement effort in the military

you agree with that part right there

there's no way that's not true it's 100%

true that the military of every country

of every major country is massively

trying to procure

the most drones with the best

capabilities that they can that

requires um demonstrations now here's

the next part why would you demonstrate

them at

night why would you demonstrate your

drone at night here's

why because the public can't see the

drones because all they see is the light

the light makes the Drone invisible all

you can see is the light so you can't

tell anything else about the Drone you

can't tell who makes it what

capabilities it might have exactly what

they're testing is there more than one

is there a lot of companies involved so

there's a lot of information that you

don't want to be in the public domain

and you can make it all go away by

having a bright light shining that makes

it impossible to see what the Drone

is now here's the next

reason if your drone company is showing

you that it can coordinate swarms which

again it's guaranteed

that they are testing things that would

operate in a coordinated swarm like

way how hard would it be to see if your

drones are operating in a coordinated

way if they did it in the

daytime it's the drones aren't going to

be that close like they're way up in the

sky if you were the General trying to

make the decision about procurement

you'd be looking at them You' like okay

I see some wait uh I see five uh oh

there's another one uh uh you wouldn't

even be able to tell if they were doing

what they were supposed to be doing

they' just be

dots because if they operate properly

they're high up enough that you can't

see them all from the ground but if you

do it at night and if you add the lights

you've accomplished two things number

one if you're doing it at night there's

much much less natural small aircraft

traffic because small aircraft don't

always have instrument ratings so you

have the most open air space for testing

that's good but number two you can see

the lights at night so you can see the

patterns so you would naturally test

them at night not only because you want

to test them at night but because you

can see them better and the lights would

obscure what it is that's being tested

the the FBI might help the military by

lying about it say oh yeah well the

we're looking into it maybe the FBI

maybe the military told the FBI hey just

be cool say you don't know anything and

the FBI is yeah we'll just do that we'll

just say we don't know anything we're

looking into

it so um to finish off my thought uh I

think that some of the reports are

probably fake some of them might be AI

generated fake videos some of them might

be videos from long ago and they're just

old drones or balloons or something so

some of the ones from other countries

for example might be just a hobbyist

some hobbyists who have some drones

mightbe something like that but because

we're seeing it as part of a pattern we

imagine it's all part of one phenomenon

it might be a little fake news a you

know a little confusion with other

things but in the United States I'm 100%

confident there's a major

procurement effort and that they have to

demonstrate it

live so what do you

think did I convince you that what

you're seeing is just a normal military

procure procurement exercise that's

working exactly the way you'd want it to

exactly the way you'd want it to you'd

want it to be big you'd want them to be

really active in their space you'd want

him to keep a

secret but you'd want him to test it and

you'd want him to test it over something

that looked like a real a real

ground all right maybe we'll find

out

um so Trump picked a new Surgeon

General uh Dr nesat Who's gets a lot of

uh getting a lot of push back I guess

she had some views during the pandemic

that a lot of Republicans would say that

was totally wrong

so it's kind of a weird choice for

Surgeon General somebody who Republicans

think were was seriously wrong about

some pandemic stuff so um but the more

interesting thing is that according to

the Daily Mail she killed her own father

accidentally when she was

13 what so apparently she was looking

for some scissors in a

closet and uh accidentally knocked over

a box that had a loaded gun in it that

presumably belonged to her father and

the gun discharged and shot him in the

head and killed him when she was

13 and she's talked about losing her

father and seeing him dying and stuff

but she didn't add the she never added

the the

detail that it may be an accident that

she was part of it was accidental of

course now I'm not sure that should make

a difference

like it shouldn't make a difference

about whether or not she's

um is R there's there's no approval

process for the Surgeon General right

Surgeon General doesn't need any

Congressional approvement approval is

that true I'm assuming doesn't seem like

it's that important of a

job

anyway I don't know there's not much to

that story except it's kind of

fascinating let's talk about the uh

Healthcare

man uh we're hearing now that law

enforcement has his name but they don't

want to release it because then it would

give him you know knowledge that he's

caught um correct me if I'm wrong but if

you do say publicly that you know the

killer's name isn't he going to act

exactly like you know his

name what's the difference if we know

his

name is isn't the killer going to act

exactly the same if you really know his

name or if you tell the public you know

his name but maybe you don't he's going

to act exactly the same you know maximum

effort to remain you know

hidden so I'm not sure they have a real

name but they say that apparently he had

multiple jackets I think he had a jacket

in a backpack and he had a different

jacket in a cab how many how many winter

jackets does this one guy have who was

staying in a hostel and only had maybe

one backpack and he had three big winter

jackets so it could be that maybe he had

a place where he stored an extra winter

jacket just so he'd have one that

doesn't look like the one he did the

murdering so maybe had an extra Jacket

play could be um but because uh humans

are terrible in New York City there was

an event an organized event where people

Dr like the

shooter cu the shooter had a winter

jacket and a mask on so people did a CEO

shooter lookalike competition in

Washington Square Park in New York

City which is terrible terrible

taste and apparently there's some

playlist on Spotify which is for people

want to celebrate the CEO shooter um

because it's got some songs that the

title of the song somehow seem to

indicate they're related to the story

but they not and then then then we hear

that the backpack that they found in the

park might have one protein bar or

something that they think he bought he

bought two of them but one was in there

but but there was Monopoly money and a

jacket in there why was there Monopoly

money in

his why was there Monopoly money in

there can anybody come up with any any

hypothesis for Monopoly

money all right let me take it to the

next

level so the speculation is that

somebody who may be mad about how a a

client of this healthcare insurance

company was treated you maybe a loved

one or something or maybe hired by

somebody who was mad about

it

and so so that's one

possibility it's just somebody hired

um but if he was if the person was

trying to send a signal and it was an

activist and let's say let's just go

down this hypothesis let's say it was

somebody who really really wanted the

world to pay

attention is somebody who didn't just

want to kill one guy but wanted the

whole world to pay attention and wanted

to make a

statement does it make sense that that

person would engrave the bullets with

the delay deny whatever the third word

is because that's the title of a book

that's anti healthcare insurance so that

would make sense if it's an activist

right if it's somebody who just wanted

that one guy dead and it wasn't so much

about the larger picture I don't think

he would have engraved anything unless

it was part of getting away with it I

suppose but what about the fact that he

used what is reportedly we don't know

this for sure could turn out this is

wrong but

reportedly um he used a

veterinarian's uh gun which is me meant

to put the gun right up basically to the

cow or the horse's head and just put a

big put a big bullet in it through a

silencer the silencer so it doesn't

scare the other livestock but it's not

very accurate so if you were going to be

a killer and you you chose you know one

of the least accurate methods of doing

it it seems like you did it to make a

point what would be the

point well you could imagine that the

point was that the healthare insurance

company uh had treated its customers

like

animals or perhaps perhaps the healthc

care um had said you can't have this

medicine we won't approve it and then

they had to go to a veterinarian like

Ivor mean and get the veterinarian

version of the human

medicine do you think anybody ever had

to do

that have you ever heard of anybody who

had to get veterinarian medicine because

their healthc Care Network wouldn't give

it to them yes you have that's the thing

yeah there there were people who used

veterinarian medicine because their

health care wouldn't give them what they

thought they needed so so is the choice

of a veterinarian's gun sending a signal

that he wants to treat this person like

an

animal because this person treated

customers like an animal I'm not saying

he did there's no evidence of that I'm

I'm saying if you're looking for you

know was there some kind of larger

activist

message I would look at the choice of

weapon I would look at the

engraving

um but uh is there anything else that

would suggest oh the then the Monopoly

money in the

backpack the Monopoly money in the

backpack might be since you since

obviously the backpack was meant to be

discovered I assume he always assumed he

would get rid of the backpack so if it

was meant to be discovered what message

would he be sending by putting money in

it that's not real

money maybe it's a about the

money maybe maybe it's a statement about

the health care insurance

company um being more about money than

clients maybe because what would be the

other reason for having Monopoly money

in a backpack it's not like he had a

Monopoly game in there just the Monopoly

money it's not like he was going to

spend it so can you think of any other

reason it would be there other than to

send a message

there there's no obvious reason I can

think of it had to be a message so if

the veterinarian gun is a

message and the and the Monopoly money

is a way to say follow the

money might be it might be a message to

law enforcement follow the money right

you wouldn't want to put it in a note

like a handwritten note or anything

because that would be more evidence to

his identity but if you just bought some

Monopoly money and you stuck it in your

bag law enforcement probably should come

up with a theory that that was meant as

a

message and the message is it's

something about money now that would not

suggest that the Hitman was a paid

Hitman because a paid Hitman would not

tell you hey I'm a paid

Hitman because that would again help you

narrow it down to you know possible

suspects um so if you weren't a paid

Hitman then the Monopoly money

presumably would be a message that says

follow the

money so it could

be that the shooter believes that the

victim um was up to no good because I

think there were some other charges

maybe some insider trading charge that

was speculated about but I don't have

any evidence of

that

um it could be that because he thinks

healthc care has some kind of a

monopoly that he's making a statement

about the free market is not

working um because that there's a

monopoly

maybe so who

knows we'll uh keep an keep an eye on

that so the

ACLU is

uh trying to reverse the uh decision

that I guess the higher Court said that

Tik Tok would remain would be banned in

January unless something

changes um and the ACLU says that

banning Tik Tok blatantly violates the

First Amendment rights of millions of

people blah blah now remember I was

saying that

um John Stewart and Bernie were were

kind of saying what about common sense

why can't we just have common sense

opinions our own team attacks us what

exactly would be the common sense

of fighting against the government of

the United States you know a an elected

government who looked at all the details

and said you know what we've got lots of

free speech platforms but there's one

that's special because of the China

connection and we need to limit that one

it's not about the other platforms it's

about one do you think this is really a

free speech question now I get that

reducing T that taking Tik Tock out of

America would reduce your Free Speech

but remember the deal allows them to

sell it to an American

company so all the Chinese owned company

has to do of Tik Tock is they have to

sell just the American Business to an

American entity and then there would be

all the free speech in the

world so the government found what I

consider a completely Common Sense

solution which is if you like the

product here's a way to keep it you just

have to keep the data and the management

in the United States so nothing happens

to free speech there's an option but

also showing that a non-american owned

adversary owned company with that much

influence is probably not

safe so why would the ACLU who

presumably has a million things that

they could be doing why would they pick

this of all things because it's not

really supporting common sense and I

would argue it's not even really report

it's not really even supporting any

right that Americans care about do do

Americans care that they also have a

Chinese

owned uh platform if if they have plenty

of

platforms I mean blue sky just launched

and um you know Zuckerberg did his

own Twitter copies

Etc

um I'm seeing people in the comments

suggest that the firearm used by the uh

healthc care Hitman was not necessarily

a veterinarian's gun and I agree with

that it was it's definitely not

confirmed and the gun experts seemed to

be all over the place that they were all

over the place on what was happening and

was it a jam and was it just the way he

had to add bullets anyway but back to

this

I was trying to understand why the ACLU

was acting in a way that didn't seem

common sensical and so I said well it's

probably one of two things it's either

funded by somebody who always does bad

things such as

Soros or the management as a Dei

problem so I first I searched to find

out how the ACLU is

funded and it's a little sketchy but

looks like mostly by

members which would be a good situation

so in other words you you know

individual people paying their annual

dues is funding it I think there's some

foundations but mostly the

members and so I thought oh okay at

least it's not it's not like the Soros

organization trying to destroy America

or anything so I eliminated from my

possibilities of what's going on that

they were being funded by somebody

nefarious

now as far as I can tell there's no

nefarious funding so then I looked up

the leader and the leader of the ACLU is

Deborah Archer who is a black woman now

there is no evidence whatsoever that

she's not fully qualified for the

job

however in the context of

Dei what should have happened and is

observably true is that when you lose

the focus on um on capability and you

start focusing on identity what should

happen is massive

incompetence in all of our public and

private domains you should make

everything work worse and not because of

anybody's color not because of anybody's

gender sexual preference genes nothing

about that is simply that if you

constrain constrain your candidates to

they must be a certain kind you're not

going to be able to get as many choices

if you have fewer choices your odds of

getting the right person in the right

job go way down

so my prediction was I would find one of

two things wrong with the

ACLU either they had a Dei problem which

is not confirmed because again Deborah

Archer might be the very best person who

could be in that job I don't know one

way or the other I'm saying that if you

have a if you have a worldview that

predicts

don't ignore

that so I had a worldview that said as

one of these two things and when I saw

that it wasn't the funding as far as I

can tell uh but the Dei thing just you

know blazingly stands out as the obvious

next possibility again not confirmed she

might be the very best person who could

ever be in this

job

but the fact that it's

predictable the the prediction part is

the closest you can get to knowing

what's

real I'm not sure any of us are

accurately interpreting reality I mean

we all seem to be living in our own

realities but some of them

predict and and I tell you this all the

time if if if you can

predict then probably you're closer to

reality or at least you have something

that you could work with better for your

own Survival so that was my prediction

and it's a one-off so it's not like a

science scientific study but um see how

many times you can predict that Dei or

the source of

funding would be the problem behind some

larger issue that you don't

understand meanwhile

um Jen uh

weager is talk according to the Daily

Caller news Foundation um he's saying

that the Democrats focusing on identity

politics has damaged the party's brand

he is

correct that has damaged the part the

party's brand so much so that I think

it's

unrecoverable because once you make

everybody focus on their

identity you necessarily in the long

term you're going to lose the ability to

have them function as one coherent group

because you've you've persuaded them to

not think that way so in theory they

should each other forever whereas the

Republicans are going for the opposite

Theory which is how about we just say

are you an American who likes to follow

the law yes oh you're perfect we're done

here not there's nothing else we need to

discuss you you're an American I'm an

American you like the law I like the

same law we're good so the Republicans

have built a a process a system which

can get stronger

indefinitely the Democrats built a

system which even on paper should have

destroyed

itself in a few years and that's what we

that's what we observe it was very

predictable and furthermore I predict

that they can't recover uh at a national

level they'll still win all their local

issu local races just identity politics

is all you need but at the federal level

don't see them becoming competitive for

a long time unless the Republicans ran a

complete loser and somehow the Democrats

got some new

Superstar you know kind of Talent with a

lot of

Charisma I'm stuck in Boomer truth

regime well you're kind of an so

let me let me tell you what makes you

look like an in the

comments when you make a comment about

my identity

when I'm telling you that that's a

loser way to look at the

world

so so there's that anyway um here's a

story you've heard before but it blows

my mind every time every time I hear

this it came up again so sometime let's

see back in 2011 when Josh Shapiro who's

now the governor of Pennsylvania was the

Attorney General he refused used to

prosecute um a case in which there was a

woman who uh had 20 stab

wounds which was assessed to be

suicide and not her was it a boyfriend

or fiance I can't remember but there was

a guy in her life and uh he was of

course always the first suspect as

whoever the guy in your life is if a

woman gets killed you know in a home the

first thing they look for or is you know

the the spouse or the boyfriend but um

decided that it was

suicide now if I told you that somebody

was stabbed 20 times to death would you

think that was suicide I mean you're

know experts right but now part of the

story was they said she had mental

problems you which may or may not be

true but if you were

insane could you stab yourself to death

if you just would

I feel like maybe you could maybe you

could I mean if if you could commit

Harry Cary where you take a sword and

stick it in and you know remove your

organs I didn't the ancient Romans fall

on their sword and stuff like that so in

theory in theory you could stab yourself

to death couldn't

you I mean if if you really worked at it

but here's the part of the story that I

was saving

half of the stab marks are on her back

and then the back of her

head I'm willing to go out on the limb

and say nobody has ever ever attempted

or succeeded as suicide by stabbing

themselves in the

back never if you were really really

crazy and wanted to kill yourself even

then you wouldn't stab yourself in the

back would you

so it's very clearly a

murder and for reasons that we don't

understand then attorney general decided

to not treat it that way oh he was a

fiance so it was a

fiance so what do you make of

that do do you think that that's

evidence that the Attorney General

is uh crooked or

incompetent or had some connection to

the alleged you know potential

murderer what do you think's going on

there this it's kind of a it's kind of a

Puzzler so I'm going to say that the

most likely

explanation of this inexplicable

situation is that the news is

wrong the news is wrong so if you're

saying to yourself well if these facts

are all true I can't understand this

situation

remember we live in a world where the

news is almost always wrong the news is

almost always wrong about anything

complicated so do you think that if if

you had a private conversation with Josh

Shapiro do you think he'd say yeah you

know half the stab marks were in the

back but I I was pretty sure that that

sounded like suicide to me do you think

he'd say that I don't think there's any

chance of that

I think you would say oh the thing the

news didn't tell you is

X I think and then you'd say oh huh that

does change it a little bit but I don't

know I can't even imagine what he would

say that would make it make sense that

somebody stabbed themselves in the back

multiple times but I feel like the most

likely explanation is that the news or

the story about it is missing

something because it doesn't make sense

otherwise I don't know it's a

mystery um Scott presler you all know

him from uh his great work in

Pennsylvania making that more red and uh

says he now wants to take on uh New

Jersey he wants to flip New Jersey into

a red State and it's not there yet but

he thinks it's close enough that he

could push it over the edge so that's

amazing um

I guess I have nothing to say about that

except good for you Scott presler I like

it when all the Scots are doing

well Scott Jenning Scott

presler all right some judge according

to slay news federal judge has ordered

the FDA to release the covid vaccine

trial data documents from

fizer that wanted to hide them for 75

years

all right so so let's see if you can

predict what happens next so fizer

wanted to protect for 75 years the data

about the trial their story was it just

takes that long to you know vet it and

make it

available now nobody believes that and

so of course we all believed oh there's

something there you don't want us to see

now it doesn't mean there's something

illegal or unethical or

unscientific it could

mean that they know that people will

assume there is and find it in other

words they'll think they see it in the

data because people are terrible at data

so it could be that fiser has done

nothing wrong but they know that if like

like Trump releasing his tax

returns if Trump did nothing wrong on

his tax returns it still wouldn't make

sense to release them because people

would look at them and not knowing how

to analyze tax tax returns they say oh

look here's this problem in his tax

return but they wouldn't be accountants

and maybe there wasn't a problem so it

would just be a problem for Trump to put

all that red meat out there that people

will

misinterpret fizer must be in exactly

the same situation so even if fizer

legitimately believes there's nothing

wrong with the trial data and it

completely supports everything they did

they' still not want it to be released

that would be perfectly smart thing for

a corporation to do it's not good for us

because we'd like to know the answer but

from the corporation's point of view

yeah yeah protect everything you can

protect why great problems for yourself

but now it's been re

reversed so now let's say if there's no

more legal process going on suppose you

think you're going to see that now make

your prediction what happens next

so the company has the possession of all

these documents maybe the FDA does too

would the FDA have it or only the

company because that would make a

difference here here's why I ask if only

the company owns the documents and maybe

other people have seen them but don't

have a

copy don't you think those documents are

going to suddenly get

lost do do you think that maybe they'll

do a system update and all the data will

be lost lost because every time we've

been in this situation where we know

there's a document such as the fste list

or Diddy's videos or you know I could go

on or on Hillary's Hillary's phones that

she had bleach blit or whatever she did

there so it feels like every time we

know exactly what we're looking for oh

if we can only see those oh they're

already deleted oh so you've never lost

any documents for thir 30 years but you

lost these the only ones we really

really wanted to look at is that what's

happening

next so I wouldn't be

surprised under the condition that only

fizer controls those documents I don't

know if that's true but if only fizer

has the

documents they're going to get

lost

because correct me if I'm wrong but

everybody who has deleted documents got

away with it all of them everybody who

did it can you think of one case a

prominent case recently where somebody

deleted some documents and went to jail

I can't they just say it was an accident

oh whoops oops I really tried to give it

to you but

deleted yeah that might be

coming um Elon musk's uh AI now now has

uh the ability to do photorealistic

images so grock wasn't that good at

images but uh x a apparently the new

update according to Don Jacobson at

UPI and the question that we don't know

the answer to Is will Elon musk's AI

have guard rails that prevent you from

doing celebrities and public

figures I don't know the answer to that

that's sort of a good Edge case for free

speech I feel like Elon Musk would not

want to limit what you could do with the

AI in terms of

images but on the other hand if you had

a major AI that was willing to create

fake images that really look real on any

topic with any celebrity you're really

going to cause a lot of

trouble but so does free

speech so it'll be interesting to see

which way Elon goes on this uh if

they've made a decision maybe they've

already made that decision we just don't

know but uh if you can do celebrities

and famous people and you can make them

do anything you

want well that's a different world so

we'll see if that's going to be the

case and you know I'm going to tell you

that there's a new battery technology so

ARS Technica says there's a sodium ion

batteries new breakthroughs blah blah

blah the problem with sodium sodium ion

batteries as a technology compared to

lithium so here this will make you

smarter at your next Gathering because

you'll know more about Battery

Technology so if you do lithium there

they've got a good density that's why

they're used in cars so you can put a

lot of power in a small small device um

but they have more fire risk lithium

does and they use rare materials but if

you were to if you could get the same

performance and you can't yet but it

getting close uh from a sodium iron

battery you'd basically be using no rare

earth materials and you would have no

risk of fire or much lower I guess um

the only problem is density and that's

where they had the Breakthrough so

they're claiming a

density that if they actually can

achieve it is almost hard for experts to

believe they can get there but they're

knocking on the door so it could be that

the whole Rare Earth thing is becomes

unimportant so but we'll see at the same

time according to the University of

Maryland balore County they've got this

new battery technology using uh Twisted

carbon Nano tubes so apparently if you

twist your carbon nanot tubes just right

it will

it will store a bunch of

electricity again without the rare earth

materials and without without any fire

risk I

imagine so those are two technologies or

like a few more that I didn't mention so

sodium iron batteries and carbon nanot

tubes and there's some other solid state

stuff that's happening so the world of

batter is very Dynamic it's going to

change everything once you can store

electricity about let's say twice as

well as we're doing now which is certain

to happen uh all kinds of things become

practical you know like having your own

electric onep person airplane that kind

of thing all right ladies and

gentlemen that is all I have for you

today on this Sunday I'm going to talk

to the people on locals privately

subscribers on locals thanks for joining

on YouTube and

x and Rumble I'll see you same time

tomorrow and locals coming at you for

one extra

Sip and

we

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e for