Alex Jones is in hot water for a tweet about a distant star. Three people are struck by lightning in Washington, D.C. and the media tries to make it seem like climate change is to blame. Alex Jones is being sued for $49.3 million.
00:07:51.960That does not sound like something that will stand up on appeal.
00:07:57.480And I don't know anything about anything.
00:08:00.340And even I think it won't stand up on appeal.
00:08:02.500Because isn't there a part missing here?
00:08:07.400There's a part where they have to prove that he knew that it wasn't true, what he was saying, right?
00:08:13.060I didn't see any evidence presented that would suggest he knew that.
00:08:17.920If you could be sued for $50 million successfully, and I suspect it won't be successful, but don't know yet.
00:08:25.960If you could be sued for $50 million for saying something that you believe to be true, and it turns out to be wrong, do you want to live in that world?
00:09:14.800To me, they look like a couple that could last the ages.
00:09:18.680I mean, it's not like either of them have any issues, so I'm surprised that didn't work out.
00:09:27.540Well, Israel's under attack, pretty major attack, rocket attacks coming in from Gaza, and the Iron Dome is stopping some of them, but it looks pretty grim over there.
00:09:41.260And I'm seeing some videos where apparently you have like 10 to 15 seconds to get to a bomb shelter, if you're in one of the affected areas in Israel, to get to a bomb shelter from the time that the alarms go.
00:09:53.780How many people are within 10 to 15 seconds of a bomb shelter?
00:11:46.100So, one actress destroyed two houses with a mini Cooper, and I'm thinking, how many actresses with mini Coopers would it take to take care of this whole Gaza rocket situation?
00:12:00.240Because I feel like you just drop enough actresses with mini Coopers over in the whole Gaza area, and just say, do some chores.
00:12:42.280Well, what do you think artificial intelligence thinks about that question?
00:12:48.860So, I keep mentioning Machiavelli's Underbelly, the Twitter account where there's a lot about AI, and we see a lot of questions being asked to AI by the owner of the account, who shall remain nameless.
00:13:08.100So, Machiavelli's Underbelly, that's the Twitter account, he tweeted this.
00:13:15.020He said, I'm available as an AI conductor for political campaign strategy, and AI empowered and automated mimetic warfare operations to the first politician who offers me $1 million for the duration of the campaign, plus a $10 million bonus when you win.
00:18:52.880Again, I don't believe there's any human who has ever said in public that I have an ability to get things done in both business and politics.
00:19:42.100Do you think the AI just looked at my Wikipedia page because that's what it was fed to know who I am?
00:19:48.200Or did the AI go and look at everything that can be said about me and then use the Wikipedia page basically to know it's the same person and not much else?
00:20:00.320But it's pretty shocking that this thing had a full-blown, perfectly written opinion about me that isn't too far off from what, let's say, from what other people might say.
00:20:13.860I'm not claiming that it's an accurate summation of me.
00:20:55.980Does anybody remember that in the election between Trump and Hillary Clinton, does anybody remember that early on in that cycle, I offered for $1 billion, I would help Hillary Clinton win the election?
00:23:30.100I haven't followed it closely, but I don't recall the time when China was checking with the United States to see what kind of military decisions they should make.
00:23:56.340Now, I get the part where maybe you want to warn the other side if there's going to be a military exercise, just so there's no false signaling.
00:24:07.180But I imagine they would still do that, because that's good for them as well.
00:24:12.320So have we just learned that we don't need China for anything except manufacturing?
00:24:19.640And that we need to get back as soon as possible.
00:25:55.940I can't think of anything that makes a difference.
00:25:58.700Well, let's talk about Elon Musk and Twitter.
00:26:01.380I finally got a little bit of maybe a beginning of an understanding of why Elon Musk thinks he can prevail.
00:26:08.980Now, the setup is that the deal, the original deal that Elon Musk is trying to get out of, I guess, said that Twitter couldn't guarantee how many bots they had.
00:26:23.340So you're just going to have to do the deal without knowing that for sure.
00:26:28.420But essentially, they did have very clear language that says we're not guaranteeing the number of bots being a percentage of traffic at all.
00:26:36.320Now, so if the only thing he complained about was that there were too many bots, I'm not sure he would have a case.
00:26:47.820Because he signed something that says it doesn't matter how many bots there are.
00:26:52.260I mean, that's as clear as it can get, right?
00:26:54.840Sign this that says you don't care how many bots there are and you're not going to make a big deal about it.
00:27:03.580So that's the way the news is reporting it.
00:27:07.080But there's a level of nuance here that I had not been associated with before.
00:27:13.760And I saw Andrea Stroppa had a tweet in which Elon Musk confirmed that that's the situation.
00:27:25.460So I'll read her tweet and just know that Elon Musk has confirmed that this describes it correctly.
00:27:31.260She says about Musk's counterclaim about Twitter, clearly from the Twitter's SEC filings, the MDAO, and that stands for Monetizable Daily Active Usage.
00:27:46.860So the number of active users that you could put commercials in front of, advertisements, that's how many you can monetize.
00:27:57.400So the number of people you can monetize is different from the number of trolls because you can't monetize a troll if you know they're a troll.
00:28:05.640Nobody's going to want to advertise to a troll or to a bot.
00:28:11.160And so Twitter's filings said that that's what the key metric is, is monetizable users.
00:28:40.580So in other words, Twitter has developed a thing that they measure, measure, that nobody else uses the same measure, so you can't compare it.
00:28:49.980So you wouldn't be able to say, oh, Twitter has more or fewer bots than Facebook or whatever, based on this alone.
00:28:57.940And this says we define, I'm sorry, and then when Musk requested more information about the spam and fake accounts, Twitter provided a vague response.
00:29:14.960They gave some outdated data, then they offered fake data that's, you know, not a real fire hose, Andrea says.
00:29:23.260Then provided a clean data set where they already suspended the malicious accounts.
00:29:27.880So basically, it looked like Twitter was trying to conceal the data rather than present it.
00:29:35.920And Musk said it's a good summary of the problem.
00:29:38.660And then Musk says, if Twitter simply provides their method, their method, that's the key word.
00:29:46.320If they just provide their method of sampling 100 accounts and how they're confirmed to be real, the deal should proceed on original terms.
00:31:07.560You want to spend $44 billion on a company that's got a little metric and the entire value of the company depends on how that metric works.
00:31:18.800And he says, show me the metric and they won't do it.
00:31:42.920And it looks like he's not fighting that point.
00:31:45.740He's not fighting the point of is the data right or wrong, which we all thought he was.
00:31:51.300He's fighting the point of you're selling me or you're trying to sell me a company that has as its claim of value this algorithm that you won't show me.
00:32:01.660Why would I pay $44 million for an algorithm that is the engine of the company and you won't even show me how it works on a sample of 100?
00:33:58.360And then the White House is who determines which ones get investigated.
00:34:02.420And so the scandal here, according to the Democrats, is that there were thousands of things that were thousands of accusations against Kavanaugh that were not followed up on.
00:34:13.980But the FBI says, well, we don't follow up on anything just to follow up.