Real Coffee with Scott Adams - March 27, 2022


Episode 1695 Scott Adams： Headline Lies, Plus My Prediction How Mushrooms Will Change The World


Episode Stats

Length

59 minutes

Words per Minute

149.28598

Word Count

8,844

Sentence Count

621

Hate Speech Sentences

14


Summary


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Good morning everybody and today will be the most amazing and educational coffee with Scott Adams of
00:00:06.420 all time and and I know what you're thinking. You're thinking that the standard has been so high
00:00:12.400 up to now that how could I exceed that level of excellence? Well let me tell you just when you
00:00:21.400 think you've had enough I'm going to give you another dose. Today among other things I will
00:00:27.000 teach you how to smuggle a reptile and how magic mushrooms will change the world. It's going to be
00:00:34.460 epic. So so good and what do you need to enjoy it? Well you need to be watching but also you need a
00:00:43.180 copper mug or a glass of tank of chelsea, a canteen, a jug, a glass of vessel of any kind.
00:00:48.140 Fill it with your favorite liquid. Have I ever mentioned I like coffee? And join me now for the
00:00:53.540 unparalleled pleasure. The the dopamine hit of the day. It's the it's the thing that makes
00:00:59.160 honestly it's everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip and you're here for it. Wow. Go.
00:01:06.780 Ah yeah. Yeah. Well lead story today according to CNN a man was arrested at the border from trying to
00:01:22.800 smuggle reptiles into the United States and some of them were endangered. Now Jose Manuel Perez
00:01:32.560 also known as Julio Rodriguez. So he got captured and he had 60 living reptiles hidden in his clothes
00:01:43.340 authorities said 60. So in his actual clothing he had 60 reptiles. Now the question you're asking is
00:01:54.800 is that any kind of a record? Well I don't know what the actual world record is for number of live reptiles
00:02:03.640 in your clothing. I can only speak from personal experience. Most I've ever got was 30. I've never
00:02:13.060 has anybody beat that? I've never had more than 30 live reptiles in my clothing at the same time but this
00:02:20.420 guy got a 60 and I think that speaks well of his professionalism. He may have figured a way to get like
00:02:28.180 you know how in a shoe box if you turn one of the shoes backwards they fit better? You know what I mean?
00:02:34.720 He may have you may have figured out something like that with the reptiles where he's like whoa if I take
00:02:39.320 these two lizards you put them face to face that they don't they take up too much space but if you turn
00:02:45.060 them around you sort of 69 the lizards if you know what I mean saves a little space. So it could be
00:02:51.600 that the story is missed the lead. This isn't really so much about smuggling reptiles as it is about
00:03:00.060 a genius. I mean do you think you could get 60 reptiles into your clothing? This man is a genius. We
00:03:10.860 should hire him immediately for possibly cyber stuff. Now here's the question that a lot of you
00:03:19.220 are asking. If you're going to put 60 reptiles in your clothing what is the proper way to distribute
00:03:24.220 the reptiles for the optimal reptile smuggling situation? That's what you were thinking wasn't it?
00:03:33.000 And here's here's how I would handle it and I'm sure he handled it the same way. Now you've got
00:03:37.620 different sizes of reptiles right? So you've got some snaky things that are just like you know thick
00:03:43.160 strings but you've also got some baby alligators they said. Little baby alligators and this is the
00:03:49.940 way you'd want to distribute them. Now keep in mind that if you get stopped and you're trying to act cool
00:03:55.620 it's going to be hard to act normal if you have 60 live reptiles in your clothing. You'd probably get a
00:04:03.480 little squirmy am I right? Be like hi. Hi officer. What do you got there? Nothing. Nothing. Why are you
00:04:13.640 doing that? What? What am I doing? It'd be a little like that. Now if you're only listening you're missing
00:04:24.380 the best show ever. This was totally a visual gag but it gets better and those of you on audio
00:04:31.220 I'm so sorry for you now because what you're about to miss. All right here's the way you do it. You
00:04:38.940 take the largest lizard. I believe it would be the alligator. You want the alligator to be
00:04:44.440 strategically placed to divert attention from your otherwise squirmy body because if you if you got
00:04:51.840 lizards people are going to notice they're going to notice you're squirming or they might see a
00:04:55.820 little lizard action in your in your arms or whatever. So what you do and I might have to
00:05:01.840 adjust the camera a little bit here. Pardon my red pajamas. So this is the way I'd handle it. I would
00:05:09.360 take the alligators the baby alligators they're about this size and you put them right down the front
00:05:14.680 right here. And then if you're stopped by anybody at the border patrol you use the alligator's natural
00:05:23.500 motions as a distraction from the other reptiles that are distributed around your body. And let me
00:05:29.840 give you an example of how this would look. Excuse me sir will you stop stop right there? And I turn to
00:05:35.440 him and I say what? What? And it you know naturally he's going to look down and let's say there are two
00:05:43.420 border patrol agents. Maybe they're both female because it's funnier. And one of them says excuse
00:05:49.040 me sir do you have something in your pants? And I say no. That's a rather embarrassing question isn't it?
00:05:56.740 I mean I'm happy. I'm feeling healthy. Having a good day. But you know nothing. Are you smuggling
00:06:06.560 anything in your pants? No. What? Smuggling something in my pants? No. Sir? Can you please move along?
00:06:24.260 So that's how I'd handle it. Now I'm no reptile smuggling commercial expert. But I do know a little
00:06:33.420 bit about magic tricks. And if you want somebody not to notice the other 59 reptiles you put one
00:06:39.080 alligator down your front. Boom. You're all good. All right. So that's my first advice to you.
00:06:49.940 So Elon Musk asked if Twitter was you know doing a good job with free speech. Of course everybody said
00:06:56.960 no. And then people said Elon you must buy Twitter and turn it into a fair thing. What do you think?
00:07:07.580 Should Elon Musk? I don't I actually don't think this is really likely to happen. But do you think
00:07:13.600 you should buy Twitter? A lot of people were saying it. It's nothing he said himself.
00:07:19.320 Seen lots of yeses. Here's the problem. So there are a number of Twitter clones already right?
00:07:29.020 Don't they end up doing pretty much the same thing? That was the problem right? There's some
00:07:35.900 types of speech that everybody has to ban. And it ends up that you know the the stuff that gets like
00:07:42.420 protected and not banned on the other platforms is such a narrow little area of somebody telling a
00:07:49.300 bad joke basically. So I don't know that building a competitor works and I don't know that owning
00:07:55.320 Twitter works. You're still going to end up banning largely the same things. Now one way you could
00:08:01.220 avoid it is do not have any ads. I think that's the only way actually. If you have advertisers the
00:08:09.820 advertisers won't associate with certain kinds of content and therefore you can't really have a
00:08:14.700 viable platform if you use advertisers as your income. Now if you were you know a trillionaire and
00:08:22.900 you had enough money I don't know maybe you could build a platform that didn't cost money and also
00:08:29.940 didn't have ads. But I doubt it. I mean as rich as anybody is it's still going to cost you like
00:08:37.240 billions a year isn't it? I don't know if anybody would do that. Not even the richest person in the
00:08:42.700 world. So I'm not sure that there's really a play economically business model wise to either buy
00:08:49.560 Twitter or to try to promote a an alternative because they just don't know that they end up
00:08:55.900 that different. Now the the exception would be a subscription service. If you're in a subscription
00:09:02.360 service people tend to all be happy because they're just buying what they want and when they
00:09:07.700 don't want it they can immediately stop buying it. So subscription does solve everything but here's
00:09:13.900 what it doesn't solve. Scale. Right? But subscriptions sort of by definition end up being a smaller universe.
00:09:21.900 So you need something like a Twitter Facebook meta to reach the public if you're going to do anything
00:09:29.500 that's trying to influence a wide bunch of people. So nobody really has a model or they would have
00:09:35.600 done it already I suppose to fix the problems that basically everybody sees. I mean everybody sees the
00:09:41.420 same problem. So here's what I suggested to in reply to Elon. And you've heard this idea but
00:09:50.140 look how well this fits. I said we don't need a new platform we need a supreme court of fact-checking.
00:09:58.380 And then I gave a few elements to what that would look like. Not a not a complete standard. But I said
00:10:05.940 first of all it should be non-government. And then everybody who got mad at me said stop giving the
00:10:12.760 government so much power. And I said no the first thing is non-government. The government's not part of it.
00:10:18.220 And then people said it's a slippery slope until the government takes over. No. I said it's a it's not
00:10:24.240 government. The government's over here. And then that's separate. And then my idea would be like over here
00:10:31.440 without any of the government. And then my critics say you can't give the government that much power to which
00:10:38.120 I say well I'm just gonna fucking shoot myself in the head now. Because I don't seem to be able to get this
00:10:42.580 message across the non-government part. Very key to the whole plan. Secondly
00:10:47.760 I would like to stipulate to my critics that if you have a good idea that you design like a fucking
00:10:55.000 idiot your good idea may not be successful. So I will stipulate if you did the dumbest possible
00:11:02.440 things you would get a bad result. Can we all agree on that? Can we find common ground that if you were
00:11:10.240 to simply appoint for life a bunch of fact checkers you would not get a good result? Can we agree?
00:11:17.980 And if there's somebody whose job it is to be the the picker of the fact checkers again
00:11:23.840 would we agree you're not going to get a good result? All right. So can we agree that there are a whole
00:11:30.580 bunch of ways you could definitely fuck this thing up? In real obvious ways. Because if you give
00:11:37.080 you give anybody any kind of power that's lasting it'll be corrupt. Of course. And so
00:11:43.960 some of the elements one might imagine in a system would be full transparency so that everybody can
00:11:52.060 see everything about it all the time. You can see the minority opinion saying we don't agree with this
00:11:57.460 this fact check at all. Here's why. Have you ever seen a fact check with a minority opinion?
00:12:07.060 Have I not already made a better system? Be honest. Have I not already doubled the value
00:12:15.680 of every fact check organization? Simply allowing that here's their opinion and then here's the best
00:12:22.620 minority opinion. Am I right? Just one change. Okay. Now suppose the fact checkers had
00:12:31.600 comments that could be attached to them so that everybody could comment. I don't think the fact
00:12:38.320 checking sites have comments. Do they? Maybe some do. Can somebody fact check my comment about the
00:12:44.260 fact checkers? When I look at fact check sites I don't think they allow counterpoints in any kind of
00:12:51.640 comment field. Right? How about that? Now that doesn't mean that people's comments are additive
00:12:58.600 but wouldn't you like to be able to see them? Because there are times when people say hey look at this
00:13:03.540 link you forgot about this. I'd like to see that. Now I'm not saying that these specific things I'm
00:13:11.180 mentioning are what you need but you definitely need a very short incumbency. The person who's doing
00:13:18.860 the job of fact checking. Let's say there's a group like a supreme court of fact check. Oh not part of
00:13:25.140 the government. All right. Did anybody miss the part about it should be a private enterprise or
00:13:31.520 organ? Let's say not a non-profit but non-government because you can't have profit and you can't have
00:13:38.300 government. Those are the two things you can't have. Then you want people to do it who you know who
00:13:42.640 they are and they're there for a short time. Could be just a week. Right? Is there any reason
00:13:49.000 that you couldn't appoint people for one week? And then maybe the next people you appoint they might
00:13:55.020 actually go back and change the fact check. Because you'd want to be able to here's another thing you'd
00:13:58.960 want. You'd want to have a process by which you continually re-evaluate your old fact checks as
00:14:05.320 needed and update them. Because as the composition of the fact checkers changes through some very
00:14:13.020 transparent process, maybe some of the old opinions get revised. Wouldn't you like to see the record of
00:14:21.080 what they said and why they revised it? Yes. To me it seems that the entire business model of the news
00:14:27.960 could be replaced by fact checking. Would you go to CNN to read the news when you know it's going to
00:14:38.860 be biased basically every time? Or would you go to the fact check site that has the news, the main
00:14:45.900 opinion and then the minority opinion plus the best user comments that bubbled up? I don't know.
00:14:53.560 Depends on the interface, right? If you do a better interface for anything, people come.
00:15:00.660 Good interface solves a lot of problems. So imagine if you had full transparency, very short
00:15:07.080 incumbencies, some kind of a process which I have not figured out yet, and maybe that's the killer,
00:15:13.240 maybe there's no way to figure it out, but I think there is, of how to select people for very short
00:15:18.060 terms to make some fact check decisions, maybe for one week, maybe for one month, and then immediately
00:15:24.700 get to new ones. Because here's a secret of contract negotiation. You ready for this? So I did contract
00:15:33.260 negotiation professionally for years. If there's some uncertainty or risk about the deal, make it short
00:15:41.480 term. That fixes all kinds of stuff. The problem with any kind of a deal or a contract is that you
00:15:49.320 make a bad one and then you're stuck with it for a long time. So you can fix almost any potential
00:15:54.220 problem by saying, well, let's just do it for a week. We'll make it really short. So you make the
00:15:59.480 incumbency of the fact checkers really, really short. Because if you go a week with a bad fact,
00:16:05.520 well, it might get fixed by next week. And that would be not bad by the standards of these things.
00:16:14.140 So yes, maybe it's a jury system. We haven't fully designed it. But my only point is, if you imagine
00:16:23.080 it couldn't be designed properly, I'm positively wrong about that. Does anybody want to disagree?
00:16:30.620 So my statement is, I'm not saying we would design it properly. I'm saying that if you do design it
00:16:38.520 improperly, it won't work. But I believe it could be designed in a way that everybody would say, yeah,
00:16:45.920 it's sort of like democracy. You complain about everything, but you're like, okay, I get it.
00:16:51.520 There was a process. Now, my contention is, this would embarrass the other platforms
00:16:59.120 into at least addressing the fact that the fact check
00:17:04.740 went a certain way. Because could you imagine CNN ignoring a Elon Musk fact check organization
00:17:15.360 that had come to the opposite conclusion than their own news coverage? If the fact check thing
00:17:22.120 gets big enough and gets its own attention, you really couldn't go against it, could you?
00:17:27.280 Because you'd sort of have to mention it, or if you didn't, everybody who saw your story
00:17:32.360 would immediately tweet at you, hey, the fact checkers say your story is fake news.
00:17:38.480 It would be a way to basically control the worst excesses of all the fake news.
00:17:45.900 Now, having made my case, but acknowledging that I've not fully designed it, I've just given you
00:17:53.040 elements that it seems like it would have to be there. Full transparency, short terms,
00:17:59.120 minority opinion, user comments.
00:18:04.140 So far?
00:18:06.920 Now, you need the most important process, perhaps, is how you pick the people.
00:18:13.500 Suppose you did it randomly.
00:18:15.840 Suppose people who had a certain level of qualifications, and maybe you'd say, you know,
00:18:22.740 I don't know, you had to be certain professions, I don't know, would that be too discriminatory?
00:18:30.220 You would want people who other people looked at and said, okay, that's a smart person.
00:18:36.060 Now, if it were a jury trial, I would be perfectly okay with, you know, the regular citizens making
00:18:44.820 those decisions. That's a pretty good system.
00:18:47.120 Because a jury trial, they can break down the complexity into simple enough that the jury can
00:18:53.180 make good decisions.
00:18:55.240 But I think if you're trying to decide if a fact is true, such as global warming will destroy
00:19:03.060 the world. I don't think you want your ordinary citizens to be making the more complicated
00:19:09.740 fact-check decisions, do you? Well, actually, let me inject some uncommon humility into my
00:19:17.160 live stream and say, I don't really know that, do I? My bias is that you need people of a certain
00:19:24.060 level of credential, both to do a good job, but also for other people to think they're doing a good
00:19:29.000 job. But maybe not. Maybe you could test the system and you find out it's just like the jury
00:19:34.820 system. Maybe, yeah, I see people disagree. I actually respect that disagreement. I could be
00:19:40.820 wrong about that. It could be the average citizens do a pretty good job on this stuff. Who knows?
00:19:45.900 Maybe you see both. Maybe there'd be two systems. You can see what the, you know, if you review
00:19:51.060 movies, a movie review would have the expert opinion and then what the audiences are saying.
00:19:57.240 I find that useful, don't you? That when the experts disagree with the audience, that does
00:20:03.400 tell you something. Wouldn't you like to see a case where with fact-checks the experts say
00:20:08.600 it's true and the audience says it's still not? That would actually be useful, wouldn't
00:20:14.640 it? You wouldn't know exactly who's right, but it would be useful. It would tell you what
00:20:21.220 needs to be worked on or who needs to make their argument better. All right, so I think it
00:20:26.060 could be done. And I also further would think that only somebody as clever as Elon Musk could
00:20:34.140 figure out how to engineer truth. Ooh, I like how I summarized that. Only somebody as clever
00:20:42.120 as Elon Musk could figure out how to engineer a system that produces truth. Because remember,
00:20:50.560 the Constitution and our court systems are that. They're engineered to produce, you know,
00:20:56.260 government and engineered to produce truth and justice. Now, they make mistakes, but you
00:21:03.440 have to admit. All right, let me give you a little thought experiment. Before you had ever
00:21:09.100 heard of a jury trial, could you imagine that somebody would have invented that process and
00:21:16.760 it would work? Think about it. Nobody had ever invented jury trials. And somebody comes in
00:21:22.760 and says, I got this idea. Instead of having the smartest people decide if people go to jail,
00:21:29.400 we'll have these illiterate average citizens, you know, at the time, making these life and
00:21:35.900 death decisions about other people. And they barely know anything except where their horse shits,
00:21:41.680 basically. And they'll make all the important decisions. And not only that, will these completely,
00:21:47.220 you know, random citizens make all these decisions. But here's the good part. The rest of
00:21:54.840 the public will consider that a really good system. Do you think you could have sold that system?
00:22:01.860 Think about it. That is something that if it didn't exist, you would never convince people that
00:22:07.780 would work. Am I right? You know I'm right. You would never be able to convince people that
00:22:12.680 system would work. And it turns out it's the best one we have. So when you're looking at the, you know,
00:22:19.640 can you engineer a system that would produce truth for the news, a fact check? If you think that that
00:22:28.100 can't be done, just have some humility, because I don't think you would have seen that a jury of your
00:22:35.220 peers would have worked if it didn't already exist. I don't think you would have seen it. I wouldn't
00:22:39.780 have. I'm not sure I would have. I don't know. I really don't know if I would have gotten behind
00:22:45.940 that if I'd never heard of it before. And then the other thing that Elon Musk could do that nobody
00:22:51.520 else could do, and I think I almost mean that literally, something he could do that maybe no one
00:22:58.780 else could do. And I don't mean just the money. He could A, B test it through embarrassment.
00:23:06.340 The through embarrassment part is the superpower part. He could put up something and have it fail
00:23:12.680 and say, whoops. Just say, well, that was a huge failure. Let's try the second one. Whoops.
00:23:20.480 Total failure. Yeah, let's try another one. And then maybe he has it on the third try.
00:23:25.120 Who else could do that? Seriously. Who else could fail like right in front of you and then say,
00:23:33.140 let's try it again. We'll tweak this. He could. Kanye could. Damn it. Damn it. You're right.
00:23:40.120 Yeah, Kanye could do that. But Elon could do it. All right. So he's not the only one. Yeah,
00:23:45.520 Kanye could do it. All right. Update on the Taylor Hawkins tragic story. 50-year-old drummer
00:23:54.120 for the Foo Fighters died suddenly, and nobody was surprised that today the urine toxicology test
00:24:01.060 said that he had 10 psychoactive substances in his body, including THC, tricyclic antidepressants,
00:24:11.880 benzos, and opioids. What would be one of the things that would be in the category of opioids?
00:24:18.940 Unspecified. Unspecified. What would be one unspecified specific opioid that is sometimes
00:24:27.640 known to kill people? Yeah. Now, there's no mention whether fentanyl was involved, and I'm
00:24:33.960 not entirely sure they can determine, can they? I would think they could, right? We may never
00:24:40.660 know. However, this also brings up a very disturbing fact. What would be the cause of death on the death
00:24:50.960 certificate if somebody has 10 drugs and they die of an OD? What would they say on the death
00:24:59.900 certificate? And I hate the fact that a bunch of you are going to know the answer to this.
00:25:05.140 Do you know why a bunch of you are going to know the answer to this? Because you've experienced
00:25:10.060 it, as have I. So unfortunately, I know the answer to this question because I had to go
00:25:15.120 through it. The answer is you can't identify the one drug that killed somebody. So there's
00:25:23.640 some generic term about a multiple drug overdose. So what if fentanyl is killing twice as many
00:25:33.940 people as we think? Because that may actually be possible. Don't know. But my stepson's death
00:25:44.620 was not listed as fentanyl. That was just one thing he had. But what kills you? Right? It's
00:25:53.200 not the... It wasn't the THC in his blood, was it? It wasn't the beer. Probably there was only
00:26:01.600 one thing that killed him. But he had 10 things. So the doctors say, well, you never know. It's,
00:26:06.240 you know, maybe the fentanyl. So here's the argument. You never know if the fentanyl by itself
00:26:11.780 would have been enough. But certainly you do know, because of the outcome, that the fentanyl
00:26:18.020 plus the other stuff definitely was enough. So since you can't know it was the fentanyl,
00:26:24.080 you give it a generic thing. What does that mean for our fentanyl death numbers?
00:26:31.680 Is there any possibility or any chance at all that they're not understated? They have to be,
00:26:39.040 right? Am I wrong? I'd love to see a doctor's opinion on this because I'm way out of my area. But if
00:26:45.820 these multiple drugs, which is very typical, by the way, and overdose is typically multiple drugs,
00:26:54.000 I think, I would think almost all the time. Because people who take stuff, take stuff.
00:26:58.420 You know, they don't stop with the one thing. So I don't know if that will come out as a fentanyl
00:27:07.040 story or not, but I wouldn't be surprised. In a related story, there's a non-profit that can make
00:27:12.700 fentanyl test strips. A little piece of paper you can stick in your drugs to find out if there's
00:27:18.780 any fentanyl in what you thought was your, I don't know, heroin or fake Xanax or cocaine or
00:27:26.820 whatever. But I don't know that that's going to get a lot of play. You know what I mean? I don't know
00:27:33.860 how many addicts are going to waste some of their product for the purpose of testing it. Because you'd
00:27:41.040 have to use up some of it for testing, right? Kind of expensive. So I just don't see junkies using
00:27:47.640 test strips. I like the idea. It's better than not having them. But it's a pretty small plug.
00:27:54.440 Well, I guess there was an audit of the FBI, internal audit. And there's some report came
00:28:01.460 out that's highly redacted. But it found 747 compliance errors in 353 separate cases. So
00:28:09.600 about two compliance errors per case in the category of sensitive investigative matters.
00:28:17.380 So in other words, the stuff that's important. So there were two investigative errors or compliance
00:28:25.220 errors on average for every case. And the Bureau acknowledged the audit findings were unacceptable.
00:28:33.580 What would be the acceptable number? So 747 compliance errors, average of two per case.
00:28:43.160 That's too much. What would be the right number? One per case. Now, if you've worked in a big
00:28:50.120 organization, you might see this a little differently. Allow me to explain. If you went to any major
00:28:56.800 corporation and looked at anything that anybody's doing in a project, how many compliance errors would
00:29:03.500 you find just in a corporation that has broken its own internal rules or maybe some statute or law?
00:29:12.200 Let's say it's a substantial project. Probably every one. Yeah. Because we have
00:29:20.040 so many rules and regulations and standards that you really can't do anything important without
00:29:26.320 breaking a few. So do you think that the FBI could even get their job done without intelligently
00:29:35.200 cutting some corners? Yes-ish. But I would imagine if you're an agent and you're tasked with being
00:29:45.220 efficient, probably the only way you can be efficient is by ignoring the rules of your own
00:29:50.840 organization. That would be very typical, right? The only way you can get anything done in a corporation
00:29:55.960 is figuring out a way around their own rules. Literally. Am I right? Anybody who's worked for a big
00:30:02.220 company, you know, watch in the comments, you'll see confirmation that, yeah, it's coming already.
00:30:08.000 If you work in a big company, your biggest problem is figuring out how to get around your own
00:30:12.580 internal organization. So it looks like the FBI, probably exactly the same problem as any big
00:30:19.260 organization. Certainly. Certainly the same problems. And it looks like the FBI agents are making the
00:30:25.520 mistake of trying to do their jobs. Now that would be the friendliest interpretation. The friendliest
00:30:31.820 interpretation is sometimes you just got to break your own rules to get anything done. Doesn't mean it's evil.
00:30:37.220 But on the other hand, it's the FBI. If there's anybody who shouldn't be breaking any rules,
00:30:45.800 it would be the FBI because there's so much at stake. So I can't give them a pass. You know,
00:30:52.360 nor should you. We can't say, well, everybody, everybody's a little sloppy. You know, it doesn't
00:30:57.400 work that way for the FBI. So yeah, they got it. They got to fix that. But certainly everything
00:31:02.840 we've thought about their reliability is being confirmed. Well, here's big news on Ukraine.
00:31:10.300 You know, it seems like every day had been like every other day. You know, all the news is Russia
00:31:17.300 still attacking. But now we've got some actual new news. So Sean Penn vowed to destroy his Academy
00:31:26.260 Award if Zelensky isn't invited to speak at the Oscars. So Oscars, Russia-Ukraine war. You can see why
00:31:37.800 Sean Penn thinks that these two things should be paired. Because what I want with my mindless popcorn
00:31:43.100 entertainment is a little bit more war talk in the middle of a war. So good idea from Sean Penn to combine
00:31:50.400 those two art forms, first of all. And second of all, I think that he's starting a trend that
00:31:56.700 I could back. And I too would like to support Sean Penn. And this is the award I got for Outstanding
00:32:13.800 Cartoonist of the Year in 1997. It's called the Rubin Award. Now this is the, like the
00:32:20.380 Academy Awards for cartoonists. And if Zelensky doesn't get to speak at the Rubins, I will destroy
00:32:30.040 this. I will destroy this. And not only that, but I mean, just look at me. Obviously, I've had more
00:32:38.940 awards than one. For example, one of my best awards here, very proud of this. This was the
00:32:47.720 Deep High Scott Adams Celebrity Waiter for the Radisson Hotel in 2009. So there were a lot of
00:32:56.580 celebrity waiters that year. But none really reached the standard that I achieved. Now this award means
00:33:05.900 a lot to me, my Celebrity Waiter Award. And if we don't immediately lower the temperature for climate
00:33:16.440 change, immediately, and I'm talking in the next month, if we don't get the climate change fixed
00:33:23.680 the next month, I'm going to destroy this. This, this will be just shards, completely destroyed.
00:33:31.260 I'm not done. I mean, like you think that's all the awards I've won. Now, I also won the
00:33:38.900 Shumei Adams 2003 Masters Tennis Championship, which was held on my tennis court between me and
00:33:46.680 one other person. Now, the good news is, the worst anybody did was come in second. There were only
00:33:54.780 two of us. But I did prevail. And I did go to the trophy shop and make myself an award.
00:34:01.520 Now, that doesn't make it any less prestigious, the fact that I went and made an award for myself.
00:34:07.680 Some of you will complain and say that means less. It doesn't. It doesn't. Now, this award will be
00:34:15.940 completely destroyed if I see any masking in public. If I see anybody with a mask in public,
00:34:26.720 I'm going to take this and just going to smash it on the ground. And I realized that I'm going to
00:34:33.940 have to accomplish a few more things to get a few more awards, because there's a lot of society that
00:34:40.860 needs to be fixed. And if I can join with Sean Penn and destroy my personal awards to fix the world,
00:34:49.220 I feel I feel I should do that. And so I'm with you, Sean. Let's do this.
00:34:58.840 Well, let's talk about Ukraine. Ukraine won't negotiate losing any territory.
00:35:03.960 What? It seems like there's not much left of Ukraine, but they won't negotiate any loss of
00:35:11.220 territory that they've already lost. Those Ukrainians are holding tough, let me tell you.
00:35:16.440 But if Ukraine won't negotiate, and of course Russia won't negotiate, because they wouldn't
00:35:22.400 have anybody to negotiate with on the territorial stuff, and it's the only thing they want, or
00:35:28.000 the main thing they want, has this not become a decapitation war? So isn't the entire war down
00:35:35.340 to, can they kill Zelensky before Putin is, I don't know, maybe taken out by his own people
00:35:43.320 or something like that? So if nobody's willing to negotiate, does it just go on forever because
00:35:51.520 the two leaders, I mean, they should both be assassinated at this point? No, I'm kidding.
00:35:57.940 Don't demonetize me. Nobody should be assassinated. I'm just saying that I can't love either one
00:36:03.700 of them at this point. Don't love either one of them. So Biden went overseas and only made
00:36:12.160 two blunders that we've heard of. He accidentally suggested that U.S. troops would go to Ukraine,
00:36:18.660 which of course would trigger World War III. And he also seemed to call for regime change
00:36:26.660 of Putin, which would also trigger World War III. So it was a pretty good trip, pretty good trip,
00:36:35.740 because he only did two things which have a pretty good chance of triggering the entire
00:36:40.440 annihilation of civilization. Civilization. But civilization had a good run, and
00:36:48.160 the mainstream media is going sort of softly on him for these things. And indeed, the White House
00:36:57.360 quickly clarified that when Biden says that Vladimir Putin must go, that really they're not
00:37:05.000 talking about regime change, even though those words sound exactly like it. What they're talking
00:37:11.260 about is that he should assert less control over his neighbors. So if you say the sky is blue,
00:37:20.380 the White House will say, I think you're misinterpreting that sky is blue comment.
00:37:24.580 What he's saying is your dog has fleas. And you think to yourself, well, none of those words,
00:37:32.460 like that's not even close, really, is it? And then the White House says, please, please,
00:37:41.380 Peter Doocy, don't be that way, Peter Doocy. You need to understand that when the president says
00:37:47.700 the sky is blue, he really means if you look at the context that your dog has fleas. And that's
00:37:54.840 pretty obvious. Yes, you have been gaslighted by the White House. It was just, it was misspeak.
00:38:00.920 Now, of course, Biden is not planning on sending troops, and he's not planning on a decapitation
00:38:07.780 strike on Putin. And even Russia kind of ignored it and said, well, that's sort of up to the Russian
00:38:13.140 people. It was kind of probably a good play for the Russians not to make that a big deal.
00:38:21.680 Because I think they want to downplay any story about Putin being in jeopardy, right? Because it
00:38:27.580 wasn't that an interesting response from Russia? Imagine if you will, Russia, imagine if you will,
00:38:34.360 Putin calling for the removal of Biden in ways that sounded like maybe you mean violently.
00:38:40.660 That would be a pretty big story. Pretty big story. Shouldn't it be a pretty big story the other
00:38:46.280 way? I mean, it is pretty big story. But Russia, instead of playing it up like maybe you think they
00:38:52.840 would, it's like, hey, hey, these guys think that taking out a leader is good. Hey, stop
00:38:57.300 it. Instead, they minimized it. They minimized it by saying, no, it's up to Russian people.
00:39:05.000 You know, basically, they just treated it like trash talk, like it didn't have any real world
00:39:09.100 meaning. That was exactly the right way to play that. Because do you know what the Russians
00:39:16.160 don't want to be in? Any kind of conversation about removing Putin, even if the dominant opinion
00:39:24.880 is that he should not be removed? You don't even want to have the conversation. Because
00:39:29.660 do you know what matters? Is it important things? Is that what mattered to us? No, no. There's
00:39:38.480 no evidence that important things matter to us. What does matter to us? Well, what people tell
00:39:45.840 us we should think about? And how often we're exposed to it? What we think is important is
00:39:51.840 what we're exposed to the most. That's it. That's the whole mechanism. If the only thing
00:39:57.240 you were exposed to was some trash on the sidewalk, that would be your biggest problem in the world.
00:40:04.340 That's the only thing you're thinking about. I mean, it wouldn't change the fact that somebody
00:40:08.260 might nuke you in 10 minutes. But the only thing you're exposed to is this trash on the sidewalk.
00:40:13.180 It's the biggest problem in the world to me. So the only thing you have to do to make something
00:40:18.460 the biggest problem is to expose people to it a lot. The last thing that Russia wants
00:40:24.060 is a conversation about whether Putin should or should not be removed. Do you know why?
00:40:32.620 It's thinking past the sale. If you can get people to discuss whether he should or should not be
00:40:38.400 removed, you've already gotten them to agree there was something removable in the topic.
00:40:46.300 Something removable. The war crimes. And indeed, most people would agree with that. So imagine the
00:40:51.380 Russian people who don't know what the hell is going on suddenly finding that the news keeps
00:40:55.740 talking about whether Putin should be removed by his own people. And you're in Russia and you hear
00:41:02.120 that and you're like, wait a minute. Why is that even a national topic? I thought the war was going
00:41:08.620 well. Everything looks good. Why would the Russian people remove him? He's popular. So it's pretty good
00:41:15.180 persuasion to get the Russian people to yak about how inappropriate it was for Biden to mention it.
00:41:22.100 Let me be even-handed. If Trump had said that and left some ambiguity so he could say, oh, I didn't mean
00:41:31.480 take out Putin, and it caused everybody to talk about removing Putin, I would have called it genius.
00:41:40.920 You know I would have. I would have called that genius. I think Biden blundered into it.
00:41:48.740 But Russia did exactly the right thing by minimizing it. So if Biden had blundered in a way that was an
00:41:59.300 actual blunder, I mean it was a blunder to do it, I think. But I don't think it was blunderous.
00:42:05.840 Meaning that if it had been a blunder, Russia would have amplified it. Am I right? If Biden mentioning
00:42:13.340 Putin being removed by any means, if that had not been good for the war effort of the Ukrainians,
00:42:21.520 the Russians would have been talking about that like crazy. Hey, hey, hey, hey, why are you talking
00:42:26.140 about that? Unfair. Hey, yeah, we did some bad things, but look what you're doing. Hey, yeah,
00:42:31.680 okay, we bombed some civilians, granted, but look what you're doing. You're trying to assassinate
00:42:37.180 leaders? No, no. So it could be one of the best blunders. Biden made. All right. And of
00:42:50.760 course, CNN is reporting that the Ukrainians are counterattacking and reclaimed several
00:42:55.520 cities. How true does that sound to you? Are the Ukrainians, quote, counterattacking and
00:43:05.000 counterattacking to the extent that it should be a headline? All right. Obviously, there are
00:43:11.280 counterattacks. I think that's obvious. But are they counterattacking to such a degree that
00:43:19.440 is important and could change the course of the war? I don't know. Who knows? But, you know,
00:43:28.720 we don't believe anything that comes out of the war zone. But here's what I think about reclaimed
00:43:34.340 several cities. Here's how to interpret it. Is there any indication that the Russians plan to
00:43:42.040 conquer and hold every town and hamlet and city? There's no evidence of that at all. There's plenty
00:43:52.340 of evidence that they needed to fight their way from wherever they were to wherever they were going,
00:43:57.160 which probably included going through cities and smaller ones and, you know, taking out the
00:44:02.500 defenses there so that they sort of clear the space to move where they want to move.
00:44:08.020 So in my best guess, these so-called reclaimed cities are ones that Russia didn't want, wasn't
00:44:16.920 trying to hold, was just passing through. I think it's fake news. What do you think? Do you think
00:44:23.400 there's any chance that there's a serious Ukraine counterattack that's really, like, making a
00:44:32.660 difference? Somebody says, you must be young. Hey, that's my line. They named no cities. No, you
00:44:41.040 know, I was going to say that, and then I thought maybe I read it wrong. Right? Because it seemed like
00:44:48.120 there were, the news was saying that the Ukrainians had recaptured some cities but didn't mention them.
00:44:53.600 And I thought, oh, I probably read it too fast and they were mentioned. But somebody else noticed
00:44:58.980 that, that they didn't mention the cities? I mean, that's all you need to know, right? If they don't
00:45:03.440 mention the city, you know. All right. Here's my most wild prediction of the day, and I feel pretty
00:45:12.940 confident about this. I'm going to tell you how mushrooms will make America dominate China.
00:45:19.600 You ready for this? And I mean this. This is real. So here's something you might not be aware of,
00:45:27.620 but you're pretty smart, so maybe you are. Let's see. Were you aware that only maybe two years ago
00:45:36.880 it was impractical to do illegal mushrooms? And by the way, ladies and gentlemen, I'm not
00:45:45.000 recommending any illegal drugs. Children, if you're watching this, don't. Go to bed immediately,
00:45:51.140 even though it's the morning. Go back to bed. And don't do drugs. I'm talking about what's going
00:45:57.600 to happen, not what I want to happen, okay? 2020, it was kind of impractical because you couldn't
00:46:04.980 find it easily. It would be hard to know what quantity. You would be more afraid of the legal
00:46:10.880 consequences. But in the last two years, there have been huge movements toward decriminalizing.
00:46:17.840 I suspect, and I don't know this for sure, but I suspect that in California, for example,
00:46:22.500 if you got caught with some small user quantity of mushrooms, that probably basically nothing would
00:46:30.120 happen to you, I think. I mean, I don't know that. But I think locally, it's so at least mentally
00:46:37.120 decriminalized, mentally decriminalized, not technically, that I don't even know if the court
00:46:44.240 systems would do anything. I think they'd just send you home. I'm not sure. But I think in California,
00:46:51.100 it's basically close to legal, just because the court system doesn't care. I'll need a fact check
00:46:58.660 on that, but I'm not sure. However, in 2022, the mushroom business has matured. And you can now buy
00:47:07.940 chocolate bars that are metered. So you know, if you take this little square, it gives you this kind
00:47:14.320 of effect. If you take two of those squares, this kind of effect. Now, they appear to be widely
00:47:21.960 available, at least in California. If they're widely available, they've solved the biggest problem of
00:47:28.880 dosage, so that you feel a little bit safe. I mean, this is not FDA approved stuff, right? But you're
00:47:34.960 going to feel safer if somebody did the work of putting it in a nice package and metering the doses.
00:47:40.340 Once it becomes easy, here's what's going to happen. Our old ways of looking at things are going to
00:47:45.920 just dissolve. When enough people in a society have had the mushroom experience, again, I'm not
00:47:53.300 recommending it. I'm just describing it. Their sense of what is possible will change, and their sense of
00:48:02.940 what can't be changed will be obliterated. Obliterated. And this is going to happen in a big
00:48:10.560 way in the United States in the next few years. I'm talking about two to five years. If you've
00:48:16.420 noticed how quickly mushrooms went from a secret topic to a headline topic, pretty much in all the
00:48:24.840 major media, and it's even bipartisan. I mentioned this yesterday. Both Republicans and Democrats
00:48:30.120 are working on bills to decriminalize, legalize, make it medically available, etc. So it's definitely
00:48:38.820 going to happen. There's no doubt about it. Mushrooms are going to be really big in the United
00:48:43.760 States. Will they be big in China? Probably not. They're not so big on drugs, are they? What's
00:48:50.780 going to happen is our old frames will dissolve. It will cause a total social re-engineering for
00:48:56.160 everything important, from school to family to work. And the outcome of that is that the
00:49:03.920 United States will destroy its old frames faster than other countries. What happens when you
00:49:12.740 destroy your old way of doing things faster than other countries? You dominate them.
00:49:21.540 You dominate them. And I actually think, and this is not a joke, that nobody understands how big this
00:49:32.440 is. There are a few people who do. I would love to hear an opinion from, let's say, Mike Cervich. I don't
00:49:41.740 think he'll disagree, but I'd love to hear his opinion. People who have not had any experience with this
00:49:49.760 realm don't have any idea what's coming. This will be a total rewiring of our consciousness. Remember
00:49:59.880 I told you that Trump would change everything about reality? And he did. He didn't just change
00:50:06.320 politics. He changed our ability to perceive the world objectively. And we learned that it's just
00:50:12.180 purely subjective, and that we're all living in completely different movies, and we have no idea
00:50:16.540 what's going on. So I correctly predicted that years in advance, and it happened. And that was a weird
00:50:23.720 prediction, wasn't it? I was the only one that made it. And I'm doing it again in this realm.
00:50:30.940 There will, you know, and it might only take a, I don't know, 10 or 20 percent penetration into the
00:50:38.240 public. I'm not talking about everybody doing mushrooms. I'm talking about a penetration.
00:50:42.160 Let me ask you this. What would happen if the rate of mental illness in this country
00:50:48.580 was cut in half in five years? Do you know what mental health is as a cost to society? It's through
00:50:59.500 the roof. It's enormous. Mushrooms could probably cut that in half in five years. Think about it.
00:51:08.920 That's just crazy. People who have done mushrooms often tend to go on and do amazing things. I don't
00:51:16.240 know if it's a causation or correlation. It could be that people who take risks take all kinds of
00:51:21.380 risks. That would make sense. But having experienced mushrooms when I was in my 20s, just once,
00:51:29.440 it's my opinion that it changes you so fundamentally and so permanently that it makes you more effective.
00:51:35.040 It actually just makes you able to achieve more. That's what it felt like. And I think other people
00:51:41.540 have had similar experiences. And I'm seeing in the comments, yeah, just once. Now other people say,
00:51:49.960 you know, different dosages and, you know, take them over time and get different. I don't know. I have
00:51:55.420 no opinion about what's a proper dose of anything. But that was my experience. And other people have had
00:52:01.100 a similar experience. So you're going to see America dominate China. And it's going to be in large part
00:52:08.800 because the mushrooms will change our effectiveness in a way that China can't compete. Because culturally,
00:52:15.080 I just don't think they're all going to be taking mushrooms. In this country? Yup. And let me tell you
00:52:21.980 already that Silicon Valley, I guess I could tell you this. I've told you this before.
00:52:32.100 Do you know why Silicon Valley is so successful?
00:52:36.980 Lots of reasons. Really smart people, you know, universities nearby. Once you get a concentration
00:52:44.720 of people, then it's easier to get more of those kinds of people. It's all those things. But
00:52:49.700 the people in Silicon Valley are not operating under normal human conditions. They're starting
00:52:58.360 out as really capable people, and then they're finding ways to take it to the next level. And
00:53:04.040 they're basically brain hacking. And it's the people who can hack anything. They can hack computers,
00:53:09.800 network systems, countries, and now they're working on their own brain. Do you think that the
00:53:14.580 smartest people in the world who can hack anything could collectively, as they're working together,
00:53:20.120 you know, with this thing, do you think that they can figure out how to boost their own performance
00:53:24.120 by finding the right combination of legal and, in some cases, illegal substances? And the answer is,
00:53:31.960 if you think drugs are about junkies, well, unfortunately, most of it is. But there's a small
00:53:40.120 percentage of the world who are not addicted and are using it scientifically and in a very calculated,
00:53:48.980 engineered way, A-B testing, you know, really doing the research and the testing and talking to other
00:53:55.420 people and comparing notes and stuff. And those people are operating at just a higher level than
00:54:00.940 that humans have ever operated at. Let me say it again. If you took the smartest person,
00:54:09.080 you know, the smartest people in Silicon Valley, and let's say you already said, oh, these are the
00:54:14.600 smartest you can get. You know, others might be as smart, but this is about as good as you can get.
00:54:19.240 And then you said, all right, now this group, we're going to say you should start experimenting with,
00:54:24.560 you know, neurotropics and everything from minerals to various legal and illegal microdosing.
00:54:32.280 Do you think they're doing that already? Like crazy. They are doing A-B testing on themselves
00:54:39.580 like crazy. Are they good at it? They're good at everything.
00:54:45.640 Just hear that part again. These are the smartest people in Silicon Valley. Are they good at hacking
00:54:54.540 their own brains with chemistry and testing? They're good at everything. If there's anything
00:55:02.360 you need to understand, that collectively, this is a group of people, they don't fail collectively.
00:55:09.780 Individually, you know, companies fail, et cetera, of course. But collectively, yeah, yeah, it is working.
00:55:18.700 And they will tell you that. And it makes a big difference. Now, what's the downside? A lot. All right?
00:55:26.100 A lot. Don't you think that there's anybody in Silicon Valley who thought they were just being smart,
00:55:31.640 who ended up, you know, drifting into too much drugs and becoming addicts? Of course. I mean,
00:55:39.900 I don't know. I've never heard of any story, but I wouldn't, right? And so don't think that any of
00:55:46.200 this is safe. I'm saying these are risk-taking people by nature. The entrepreneurs are risk-takers.
00:55:52.060 And they are definitely juicing themselves and taking themselves to a level of human cognition and
00:55:59.740 capability that society has probably never experienced in the history of humankind.
00:56:06.320 So there's some fun stuff ahead because the best and the brightest are testing their ways to new
00:56:11.260 levels of effectiveness. And in a way, that's the most important story that's happening right now.
00:56:16.620 You could take anything in the world and then look into the future and say, how is climate change
00:56:22.500 going to be addressed or remediated or solved? Well, it's probably going to be a whole bunch of
00:56:29.580 really smart people. And would you bet against at least one of those smart people who makes an
00:56:34.620 impact, you know, invent something, starts the company, whatever, would you bet against one of
00:56:39.160 them having had some experience with psychedelics? I don't know the answer to this, but do you think
00:56:46.040 Elon Musk has ever experienced psychedelics? He's probably spoken about it. Does anybody know the
00:56:51.620 answer to that question? I think you're guessing. I see some people say yes, but you're guessing,
00:56:59.120 right? I don't know that that's ever been confirmed. But here's the thing. I feel like you could,
00:57:07.980 it takes one to know one. You know what I mean? Here's a weird thing about a psychedelic experience.
00:57:15.620 If you do it once, you can often pick people out of a crowd who have done it. Am I wrong? I mean,
00:57:23.800 not out of, not strangers out of a crowd, but you, but you could know somebody for a while and just say,
00:57:28.920 I know what you've done. Am I wrong? Anybody who's had the experience? Yeah, I'm seeing confirmation.
00:57:38.380 Yeah. Because if you think it doesn't change you permanently, you're really wrong. And the same way
00:57:43.940 that travel changes you. That's the best analogy. It's a bad analogy, but the best one I can. I
00:57:51.540 believe that you could pick out people fairly easily who are widely traveled. Would you agree
00:57:58.200 with that? If they, if they never mentioned their travels and you just would talk to somebody on
00:58:04.980 some topic for a while, don't you think you could pick out some, you know, not, and I'm not talking
00:58:09.300 about somebody who's born in another country and has an accent or something. I'm talking about just
00:58:13.420 somebody who doesn't have any tell except just the way they act and talk and think. I'll bet,
00:58:20.880 I'll bet you could pick out somebody who has traveled a lot because their, their mind would
00:58:24.540 be more open. And I think you could pick it out pretty quickly. I think. Now that ladies and
00:58:31.180 gentlemen concludes the amazing, amazing content, which we call Coffee with Scott Adams. I think you'll
00:58:39.080 agree it's among the best things you've ever seen in your whole life, uh, matched only by possibly
00:58:46.040 tomorrow. And so, um, I bid you adieu on YouTube. Thanks for joining. And, uh, I'm going to talk
00:58:55.260 to the people on the locals for a little bit and, uh, I'll see you tomorrow.
00:59:01.080 And, uh, uh, I'll see you tomorrow.