Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 2178 Scott Adams： Today I Teach You A New Rule For Spotting Fake News, You'll Love This one

00:00:00.000 No. Save that.

00:00:02.880 You don't get to see that until later.

00:00:07.400 Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization and possibly some of the animals.

00:00:14.760 If you'd like today's experience to go to levels that nobody could even imagine,

00:00:19.740 because it has a whiteboard.

00:00:21.560 Did I mention it? A whiteboard.

00:00:23.960 And if you'd like this experience with a whiteboard to be the best thing that ever happened,

00:00:30.200 all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chelsea stein, a canteen jug or a flask of a vassal of any kind.

00:00:37.400 Fill it with your favorite liquid.

00:00:39.640 I like coffee.

00:00:40.880 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine today, the thing that makes everything better.

00:00:45.040 It's called this simultaneous sip.

00:00:47.640 And it happens now. Go.

00:00:48.660 Go.

00:00:53.240 Ah.

00:00:55.160 Ah.

00:00:56.500 Well, we'll go private here on Locals.

00:00:58.540 It's better if you don't ask me to go private during the middle of the simultaneous sip.

00:01:03.620 Save that.

00:01:04.920 Before or after is good.

00:01:07.920 Well, let's talk about the news.

00:01:10.380 It's all light and breezy and not too many people died, or at least in a news-making way.

00:01:16.820 Probably the same amount of people died yesterday as every other day.

00:01:19.680 But they were, sadly, they were not newsmakers.

00:01:24.520 So, my rule about death, if you know you're going to die anyway, shouldn't you make some news?

00:01:32.660 I mean, not bad news.

00:01:34.120 You don't want to kill anybody.

00:01:35.880 But, you know, do it a little bit interesting.

00:01:39.780 Add a little bit of something-something.

00:01:43.060 Yeah.

00:01:43.200 Whatever.

00:01:44.880 All right.

00:01:45.720 So, according to Elon Musk, he's changing the name of Twitter to X.

00:01:53.440 It will be X.

00:01:55.440 Let me be the first person to say the NPC comment.

00:02:00.360 Are you ready?

00:02:01.380 What will the NPC say?

00:02:02.960 Is it X-rated?

00:02:07.260 It's X-rated.

00:02:08.820 It's X-rated.

00:02:13.000 You ready for that?

00:02:14.260 What else will the NPC say?

00:02:18.440 Can I use it if I don't have an ex-wife?

00:02:23.580 Yeah.

00:02:24.360 We'll expect that.

00:02:25.720 Soylent green is people.

00:02:28.020 That's the important thing.

00:02:29.900 All right.

00:02:30.160 Apparently, there's some god-awful movie called Oppenheimer.

00:02:33.060 And when I say god-awful, there are three big criticisms of this movie.

00:02:39.920 Number one, it's like three hours long.

00:02:43.000 Somebody says three hours long.

00:02:45.820 Do you know why movies are three hours long ever?

00:02:49.020 Like, what is the reason that there would ever be a three-hour movie?

00:02:53.300 You know there's only one reason, right?

00:02:56.180 No, not for the Oscars.

00:02:58.380 No.

00:02:59.360 That's not why.

00:03:00.200 It means that the director has too much power.

00:03:06.760 That's what it means.

00:03:08.380 A good, tight movie, like a 90-minute movie, usually is because the studio had the edit power.

00:03:18.500 So they just said, we're not going to put out a three-hour movie.

00:03:20.960 That'd be crazy.

00:03:22.160 So they just knock it down to something you'd actually want to watch.

00:03:25.140 But if you have a really high-end, best director ever, and maybe some stars, then the studio has to eat whatever they produce.

00:03:35.940 So it might be an Oscar-worthy, tremendous thing, but no way in hell I'm going to watch it.

00:03:42.780 No way in hell I'm going to watch another three-hour movie as long as I live.

00:03:47.980 This is my promise.

00:03:50.660 My promise.

00:03:52.460 I will never watch another fucking three-hour movie.

00:03:56.140 Do you know how many times I thought that was a good idea?

00:03:59.660 Quite a few.

00:04:01.220 Quite a few.

00:04:02.540 I've fallen for that trick, I don't know, dozens of times.

00:04:05.880 I don't know how many three-hour movies there are, but I think I've seen them all.

00:04:09.920 I'm not going to fall for it again.

00:04:11.700 I'm going to take a stand.

00:04:13.400 This could be the best movie ever made.

00:04:15.640 I will not watch it.

00:04:16.800 Three hours.

00:04:17.980 That is not fair.

00:04:20.280 That is not...

00:04:21.360 It's not even respectful.

00:04:23.500 It's not respectful of the audience at all.

00:04:27.000 Anyway.

00:04:28.040 But that's only one thing wrong with it.

00:04:29.520 I saw on the Internet that this movie doesn't have enough people of color,

00:04:35.920 and there's no woman speaking in the movie until 20 minutes in.

00:04:41.620 So, I mean...

00:04:44.520 Yeah, I mean, you want Morgan Freeman to be playing Oppenheimer.

00:04:51.080 I know you do.

00:04:52.580 But you can't have everything you want.

00:04:55.200 So, apparently, just because Oppenheimer was a real person, and he wasn't a person of color,

00:05:03.940 that somehow that seemed reason enough to make him a white supremacist.

00:05:09.560 Now, they don't call him a white supremacist.

00:05:13.080 I just assume, because he's white.

00:05:16.280 I mean, it's just natural, natural assumption.

00:05:19.820 So, a very big mistake to make this movie about a real, live white man,

00:05:24.660 and they cast a white guy to play the part.

00:05:27.540 It's, like, ridiculous in 2023.

00:05:29.240 So, The Hill has a story about a study in The Lancet that getting a proper hearing aid for older people

00:05:38.520 can reduce your risk of dementia by 48%.

00:05:42.420 Isn't that amazing?

00:05:45.300 48% difference just getting a proper hearing aid.

00:05:50.240 Now, this fits with everything else we know about dementia.

00:05:57.280 How many times have you heard that the people who retire and stop reading books

00:06:01.800 and stop challenging themselves, they have a worse time with dementia?

00:06:06.100 It's a pretty well-understood thing.

00:06:08.300 And if you quit your job early...

00:06:11.780 This is actually one of the biggest reasons that I don't plan to retire,

00:06:17.320 you know, until I'm a total embarrassment.

00:06:20.240 Because I know that that's the thing that keeps me alive.

00:06:24.000 The fact that every day, there's something in my day that I say to myself,

00:06:29.580 Oh, God, I'm going to have to do a lot of thinking.

00:06:32.500 Like, today's one of those days.

00:06:34.380 I have a very complicated task I have to do later.

00:06:38.100 I have to change my password on four separate sites.

00:06:42.880 Don't ask why. It has something to do with publishing.

00:06:45.720 But do you know how hard it is for me,

00:06:48.120 with the way my brain is wired,

00:06:51.460 to change four passwords,

00:06:53.440 which is a simple process, right?

00:06:55.640 They'll all have a simple...

00:06:57.080 Do you know the odds of me doing that correctly?

00:07:00.060 And do you know how long it will take?

00:07:02.760 An ordinary person changing a password,

00:07:05.840 five minutes?

00:07:07.400 Five minutes stops?

00:07:09.180 This is an all-day...

00:07:10.400 This is all day for me.

00:07:11.480 I have to actually block out a full day to change four passwords.

00:07:15.440 Because I know that of the four,

00:07:17.720 there's no chance that all four will work.

00:07:21.460 One of them will tell me that I've already opened an account,

00:07:24.680 and I've used every password that can be used,

00:07:27.680 and I can never use another password because I've used them all.

00:07:30.840 And by the way,

00:07:32.460 they're not sure that my username is real anymore.

00:07:35.280 Right?

00:07:36.000 I mean, I'm making that one up.

00:07:37.200 But it feels like you can't do a simple task,

00:07:40.660 like change four passwords all in the same day.

00:07:43.780 It just...

00:07:44.920 Somebody's going to send you the message to your spam.

00:07:48.400 You're going to look, and it won't be there.

00:07:51.100 And you'll wait,

00:07:52.740 and it just will never be there.

00:07:54.660 There's some services,

00:07:55.740 I think it's OpenTable.

00:07:57.860 I had an OpenTable account for the app,

00:08:00.940 like, many years ago.

00:08:02.040 But now I can never use it again.

00:08:03.780 Because it gets in that mode where it thinks you already have an account,

00:08:07.720 but it won't let you in,

00:08:08.660 it won't let you change the password.

00:08:10.420 I forget what it was.

00:08:11.580 It was one of those situations where you literally,

00:08:13.760 you could never use it again.

00:08:15.320 Unless you pretend to be somebody else, I guess.

00:08:19.400 Anyway,

00:08:20.440 so it makes sense to me that hearing aids would improve

00:08:25.520 your prospects of not getting dementia,

00:08:28.520 because it's just one more input.

00:08:30.540 So my belief is that the more input,

00:08:34.980 you know,

00:08:35.120 the more things coming through your ears and eyes and senses

00:08:37.880 and, you know,

00:08:38.860 your brain and all that,

00:08:40.280 that that's the only thing that keeps you from getting dementia.

00:08:43.180 It's just how much is going on.

00:08:45.720 And so keep that in mind.

00:08:48.320 It's not just the hearing aids,

00:08:50.260 it's just everything you do with your brain.

00:08:53.920 All right, well,

00:08:55.020 oh, sad news, sad news.

00:08:56.400 It turns out that the Washington Poop,

00:08:58.420 I mean, the Washington Post,

00:09:00.160 the Washington Post,

00:09:01.520 it's only in the Dilbert Reborn comic

00:09:03.520 that it's called the Washington Poop.

00:09:07.420 Ratbert is actually working at the Washington Poop

00:09:10.180 in the Dilbert Reborn comic,

00:09:11.800 which is available only by subscription

00:09:13.380 if you subscribe on Twitter

00:09:14.800 or scottadams.locals.com.

00:09:17.080 Anyway,

00:09:18.000 Jeff Bezos is reportedly,

00:09:20.300 he wants to take a more direct interest

00:09:21.860 in the business that he owns,

00:09:23.180 the Washington Post,

00:09:23.920 because they reported

00:09:25.980 they lose $100 million a year

00:09:28.380 due to failing subscriptions.

00:09:33.360 Huh.

00:09:34.360 What would,

00:09:35.460 what would cause a business

00:09:38.240 like the Washington Post

00:09:39.800 to lose customers?

00:09:44.160 Let's say they're,

00:09:45.120 they're a news entity,

00:09:47.040 news entity.

00:09:48.460 What would make a news entity

00:09:51.140 lose customers?

00:09:52.660 Well, competition,

00:09:54.020 competition would do it.

00:09:56.040 Does it look like there's

00:09:57.440 a lot more competition for news?

00:10:00.920 Not a serious competition.

00:10:03.020 There is,

00:10:03.560 but not serious.

00:10:05.220 So it's probably not the competition.

00:10:08.580 Is it because they probably

00:10:09.940 have very high expenses?

00:10:11.880 Maybe not,

00:10:13.040 no.

00:10:14.040 Could it be

00:10:14.760 that the news entity

00:10:17.260 is more famous for fake news

00:10:19.320 than real news?

00:10:20.720 Could it be that?

00:10:22.660 When you think of

00:10:23.800 the Washington Post,

00:10:25.580 or I say to you,

00:10:27.020 well,

00:10:27.240 the Washington Post

00:10:28.060 has a political story today

00:10:29.620 about Trump,

00:10:31.200 what's your first thought?

00:10:32.640 Oh,

00:10:33.000 there's some useful news,

00:10:34.660 fully in context,

00:10:36.140 accurate,

00:10:36.680 I'm sure,

00:10:37.740 in which I will learn

00:10:38.660 something that's useful

00:10:39.540 to me as a citizen

00:10:40.480 in my decision making

00:10:42.180 while I vote.

00:10:44.320 No.

00:10:45.360 No.

00:10:46.100 You tell yourself

00:10:47.120 it's fake news,

00:10:48.580 because it always is.

00:10:49.900 You know,

00:10:50.080 depending on the topic,

00:10:50.920 it's always fake news.

00:10:52.500 So you're not going to believe

00:10:53.680 the science they report,

00:10:55.000 because that's probably bullshit.

00:10:56.300 You're not going to believe

00:10:57.120 any of the politics

00:10:57.960 or the opinion.

00:11:00.040 What else do you use

00:11:01.000 newspapers for?

00:11:03.060 To find out the same thing

00:11:04.460 that you can see in a tweet?

00:11:06.160 You know,

00:11:06.380 there's some new study

00:11:07.140 or something.

00:11:07.800 What else is there?

00:11:09.120 Well,

00:11:09.580 there's celebrity news,

00:11:11.120 news about public figures,

00:11:12.380 and we'll talk about

00:11:15.740 how often

00:11:16.300 the news about public figures

00:11:18.140 is accurate.

00:11:19.520 Because on a day

00:11:20.640 when the news

00:11:21.440 is talking about the news,

00:11:23.540 the news about the news

00:11:25.100 is that the Washington Post

00:11:26.100 is losing a lot of money.

00:11:27.880 Wouldn't it be interesting

00:11:28.820 to be on a live stream

00:11:31.200 that teaches you

00:11:31.860 how to spot the fake news

00:11:33.240 even better,

00:11:34.360 which would make

00:11:35.100 the Washington Post

00:11:36.300 go out of business faster?

00:11:38.700 Anybody in for that?

00:11:39.620 Does anybody want to help me

00:11:40.980 put the Washington Post

00:11:41.880 completely out of business

00:11:43.120 simply by teaching you

00:11:44.980 how to better spot fake news?

00:11:46.720 That's all I'll do.

00:11:48.020 That's the only thing I'll do.

00:11:49.660 I'll teach you

00:11:50.220 how to better spot fake news

00:11:51.920 and you should put

00:11:53.060 the Washington Post

00:11:53.820 completely out of business.

00:11:55.640 You ready?

00:11:58.640 That's coming up.

00:12:00.120 I'm going to do the whiteboard

00:12:01.080 in a little bit.

00:12:02.420 But let's do some

00:12:03.060 other stuff first.

00:12:05.920 So I saw a tweet

00:12:07.140 from Owen Gregorian

00:12:08.740 about a Newsweek article

00:12:10.180 about researchers

00:12:10.980 from the University of Colorado.

00:12:13.460 They found about 500

00:12:15.240 different genes

00:12:16.080 that directly influence

00:12:17.500 what we choose to eat,

00:12:20.220 including those involved

00:12:21.480 in our experience of taste.

00:12:23.860 So it turns out

00:12:25.060 that your genes

00:12:25.840 will determine

00:12:27.520 what you like

00:12:28.400 and would also presumably,

00:12:30.980 it makes sense as follows,

00:12:33.020 would have a big impact

00:12:34.160 on who's overweight.

00:12:34.960 For example,

00:12:37.160 I like sweet stuff sometimes

00:12:39.200 in the right context,

00:12:41.240 but I don't like it enough

00:12:42.300 to seek it.

00:12:43.440 I wouldn't look for it.

00:12:45.260 You know,

00:12:45.420 maybe I'd eat it

00:12:46.420 if somebody, like,

00:12:47.920 forced me to be polite.

00:12:49.100 It's like,

00:12:49.400 oh, I made this myself.

00:12:50.620 Oh, did you?

00:12:51.820 You made it yourself.

00:12:52.960 Oh,

00:12:53.500 put a little bit of it

00:12:54.340 in my mouth

00:12:55.000 to show you

00:12:55.580 that I'm supportive.

00:12:56.460 I mean,

00:12:56.620 oh,

00:12:57.140 so I do eat sweet things

00:12:59.080 and sometimes even like,

00:13:00.720 oh,

00:13:00.880 that was tasty.

00:13:01.720 But I'm not really drawn to it.

00:13:05.560 Now,

00:13:06.060 I've always believed

00:13:07.220 that was genetic

00:13:08.860 because I observe

00:13:11.560 people around me

00:13:13.220 and you can look at

00:13:14.660 how quickly

00:13:15.300 they come to get the food.

00:13:17.800 From the moment

00:13:18.520 you tell the room

00:13:19.300 full of people

00:13:19.820 that the food is ready,

00:13:21.720 watch who lines up first

00:13:23.240 every time.

00:13:24.480 It'll be the same people

00:13:25.420 if you have the same set

00:13:26.440 of friends.

00:13:27.420 When the pizza comes,

00:13:29.180 see which friend

00:13:29.800 gets to the pizza first.

00:13:30.900 It'll be the same ones

00:13:32.360 every time.

00:13:33.760 They seem to have

00:13:35.320 a genetic craving

00:13:37.860 or preference

00:13:38.620 for food

00:13:39.340 that I simply don't have.

00:13:41.860 Now,

00:13:42.140 some of it is

00:13:42.680 you can train yourself

00:13:43.640 to get rid of some cravings,

00:13:45.420 especially for sweets,

00:13:46.820 by just staying off them

00:13:48.100 for a long time.

00:13:49.360 If you stay off your sweets

00:13:50.780 for a long enough time,

00:13:51.600 they don't even look

00:13:52.180 like food anymore.

00:13:53.940 You've probably not

00:13:54.620 had that experience.

00:13:55.920 But if you do stay away

00:13:56.840 from sweets long enough,

00:13:58.660 it doesn't look like food.

00:14:00.900 Like your brain

00:14:01.700 just redefines it as,

00:14:03.720 oh, that's something

00:14:04.300 like entertainment.

00:14:06.380 Right?

00:14:06.640 If I want entertainment

00:14:07.620 at some risk

00:14:08.860 to my health,

00:14:09.900 well, there it is.

00:14:10.820 But you don't see it

00:14:11.520 as food.

00:14:12.660 You see food as food

00:14:13.820 and you see dessert

00:14:14.800 as entertainment,

00:14:16.440 as you should.

00:14:18.860 But I wanted to add

00:14:21.500 to this that science

00:14:23.540 is finally catching up

00:14:24.620 to where hypnotists

00:14:25.560 were 40,

00:14:27.440 well,

00:14:28.380 actually 50

00:14:29.220 to 100 years ago.

00:14:31.240 There are things

00:14:32.000 I learned 40 years ago

00:14:33.520 in hypnosis class

00:14:34.700 from just a hypnotist

00:14:36.560 without the benefit

00:14:38.100 of any science

00:14:38.880 that are just being

00:14:40.580 discovered as true

00:14:41.520 or have been discovered

00:14:43.440 in my lifetime.

00:14:44.800 In my lifetime,

00:14:46.740 science discovered

00:14:48.240 that alcoholism

00:14:50.440 has a genetic base.

00:14:52.080 is anybody here

00:14:54.700 old enough

00:14:55.280 to remember

00:14:55.760 before that was obvious?

00:14:59.320 What?

00:14:59.880 You didn't know that?

00:15:01.380 Honestly?

00:15:02.060 You didn't know that?

00:15:06.280 Yeah, I think

00:15:07.080 you're kidding, right?

00:15:08.820 Everybody knows

00:15:09.720 that alcoholism

00:15:10.580 has a genetic base,

00:15:12.660 right?

00:15:13.740 I thought everybody

00:15:14.700 knew that.

00:15:16.720 So, you know,

00:15:17.460 it runs in the family.

00:15:18.360 It's easy to demonstrate

00:15:19.400 it's genetic.

00:15:19.960 It's genetic.

00:15:20.980 Now,

00:15:21.620 as a hypnotist,

00:15:24.880 I knew that

00:15:26.420 long before science did.

00:15:29.440 Because you could just tell

00:15:30.700 people were, you know,

00:15:31.640 driven by different desires

00:15:32.980 and they were not,

00:15:34.340 you know,

00:15:34.500 they didn't come from nature.

00:15:36.260 People were just driven

00:15:37.260 by different urges.

00:15:38.680 It was obviously genetic.

00:15:40.440 So that's something,

00:15:41.640 you know,

00:15:42.180 I knew long before.

00:15:45.320 When the large language models

00:15:47.520 were introduced,

00:15:49.000 you know,

00:15:49.400 the AI that we have now.

00:15:53.940 And I said,

00:15:54.940 what you're going to learn

00:15:55.880 is about people.

00:15:57.560 You'll learn about AI,

00:15:58.920 but AI is going to teach you

00:16:00.000 more about people.

00:16:01.240 And what it taught us

00:16:02.200 was exactly what I was waiting for,

00:16:04.460 for 40 years.

00:16:06.340 The humans are nothing

00:16:07.260 but pattern recognition machines.

00:16:09.380 That's all we are.

00:16:10.400 So they reproduced

00:16:11.540 our intelligence

00:16:12.160 just with pattern recognition.

00:16:13.480 If you don't realize

00:16:15.260 that people don't think,

00:16:17.700 we don't actually reason.

00:16:19.720 We just imagine we do.

00:16:21.820 Now, I do think

00:16:22.540 there are some non,

00:16:23.900 let's say,

00:16:24.440 non-emotional topics

00:16:25.760 where people can get

00:16:27.580 to something like

00:16:28.380 a reasoned chain

00:16:29.740 of cause and effect

00:16:30.740 and, you know,

00:16:31.460 something closer to science.

00:16:33.160 But in your daily life,

00:16:35.220 you don't do anything

00:16:35.940 like that.

00:16:36.960 Your daily life

00:16:37.800 is just pattern recognition

00:16:38.920 and cognitive dissonance

00:16:41.340 and confirmation bias

00:16:42.580 and then reinterpreting

00:16:44.240 what you did as smart

00:16:45.280 after the fact.

00:16:47.040 You do it first

00:16:48.020 and then you tell yourself

00:16:49.500 there was a reason you did it.

00:16:51.240 That's actually

00:16:51.800 what you learn in hypnosis.

00:16:54.160 But science is just catching up.

00:16:56.280 Do you remember

00:16:56.680 the first time you heard

00:16:57.860 that there was a part

00:16:59.740 of your brain

00:17:00.200 that doesn't activate

00:17:01.320 until after you've decided

00:17:03.680 to do something?

00:17:04.940 Like the actual reasoning

00:17:06.100 part of your brain

00:17:06.760 isn't even involved

00:17:07.840 until just after

00:17:09.380 you make a decision.

00:17:10.760 It's a rationalizer.

00:17:13.260 All right.

00:17:13.560 Now, science has demonstrated that,

00:17:15.640 that you actually rationalize

00:17:17.200 after your emotional decision.

00:17:19.800 But hypnotists learn that

00:17:21.960 on this, like, day one.

00:17:23.640 All right.

00:17:23.940 People are completely irrational.

00:17:25.880 Everything you think about,

00:17:27.100 people thinking

00:17:27.960 and using reason

00:17:28.940 and all that,

00:17:29.880 complete illusion.

00:17:31.160 Nobody's using reason

00:17:32.360 at all.

00:17:34.200 You know,

00:17:34.440 except in the limited case

00:17:35.800 of maybe balancing

00:17:36.640 your checkbook,

00:17:37.840 you know,

00:17:38.580 doing some actual science.

00:17:40.840 You know,

00:17:41.060 there's some reason there.

00:17:42.460 But not in your daily life.

00:17:43.900 In your daily life,

00:17:44.760 it's just patterns

00:17:46.000 and urges

00:17:46.620 and genetics

00:17:47.920 and stuff like that.

00:17:49.500 And that free will

00:17:50.280 is an illusion.

00:17:51.860 By the way,

00:17:53.180 if free will

00:17:53.900 were not an illusion,

00:17:55.540 I don't think hypnosis

00:17:56.580 would even work.

00:17:59.020 I don't think

00:17:59.900 it'd be a thing.

00:18:01.220 It's very much a thing.

00:18:02.540 So,

00:18:04.200 so I,

00:18:06.020 I could anticipate,

00:18:07.440 thanks to hypnosis training,

00:18:09.200 that the large language models

00:18:11.160 would have a limit

00:18:11.980 and the limit would be

00:18:13.840 they're not going to get

00:18:14.560 too much smarter than us

00:18:15.740 because

00:18:16.920 that's it.

00:18:18.260 That's what intelligence is.

00:18:19.440 It's just,

00:18:19.840 it's just pattern recognition.

00:18:21.680 So,

00:18:23.900 that was interesting.

00:18:26.520 All right,

00:18:26.720 now,

00:18:27.440 apparently Apple AI

00:18:28.420 is coming

00:18:29.100 and maybe sooner

00:18:30.060 than we think.

00:18:31.580 It,

00:18:32.240 it appears

00:18:32.920 there's a possibility,

00:18:34.200 I think this is unconfirmed,

00:18:36.140 that Apple may have done

00:18:37.400 a lot more work

00:18:38.580 on AI

00:18:39.620 than they've told us.

00:18:41.620 And that maybe by fall

00:18:43.880 you'll see Apple products

00:18:45.820 coming out with,

00:18:46.900 you know,

00:18:47.580 not just AI,

00:18:50.300 but some are speculating.

00:18:52.460 Really,

00:18:53.180 really good AI.

00:18:54.680 Because I don't think

00:18:55.740 Apple's going to roll it out

00:18:57.000 unless it beats the shit

00:18:58.800 out of the other products.

00:19:00.500 Would you agree with that?

00:19:02.280 That,

00:19:02.720 that probably,

00:19:03.980 probably Apple

00:19:05.080 has had something

00:19:05.980 that's about as good

00:19:07.720 as ChatGPT

00:19:08.700 for a while.

00:19:10.040 I'm just speculating,

00:19:11.060 but guessing.

00:19:12.460 They're too smart

00:19:13.360 to not be,

00:19:15.600 have done something.

00:19:17.260 There's no way

00:19:18.100 they waited

00:19:18.560 until ChatGPT

00:19:19.760 came out.

00:19:20.740 I don't believe that.

00:19:22.540 But we do see

00:19:23.380 they didn't put it

00:19:24.040 into Siri.

00:19:25.520 So, you know,

00:19:26.260 my guess is that

00:19:27.020 they're waiting for something

00:19:27.900 that's like a leapfrog

00:19:29.320 or, you know,

00:19:30.300 it's a level better

00:19:31.160 than what you're seeing

00:19:32.020 on the market.

00:19:32.840 Just speculating.

00:19:34.080 It could be less

00:19:35.340 than what's on the market.

00:19:36.820 We'll see.

00:19:37.880 But it's a big,

00:19:39.060 big deal

00:19:39.480 and it's coming.

00:19:40.380 And I will remind you

00:19:43.740 when I talk about companies,

00:19:45.900 you should ask me

00:19:46.780 if I forget, right?

00:19:48.300 If I'm talking about

00:19:49.000 some big company's

00:19:50.540 prospects for the future,

00:19:52.220 you should ask me

00:19:53.120 if I own stock.

00:19:54.840 If I forget to tell you,

00:19:56.460 right?

00:19:56.800 So I owned Apple stock

00:19:58.140 until recently.

00:19:59.400 For years,

00:20:00.200 I owned it.

00:20:01.240 And I got rid of it

00:20:02.220 because of the AI risk.

00:20:04.020 I don't recommend

00:20:05.020 you follow my advice.

00:20:06.120 because it looked to me

00:20:08.000 like they were behind

00:20:08.880 on AI.

00:20:09.720 But you don't really know.

00:20:11.500 You don't really know.

00:20:12.460 It's entirely possible

00:20:13.760 that

00:20:14.860 the Apple will,

00:20:17.180 you know,

00:20:17.460 triple in value

00:20:18.320 because of AI.

00:20:19.860 It's also possible

00:20:21.120 that

00:20:21.600 the App Store

00:20:23.240 model disappears

00:20:24.580 with AI

00:20:25.260 and that anybody

00:20:26.660 can make a phone.

00:20:28.700 So here's the other thing.

00:20:30.440 The other thing I predict

00:20:31.820 is that we're not

00:20:33.460 that far away

00:20:34.320 from a phone

00:20:35.100 that's just

00:20:35.640 a screen

00:20:36.480 and all it does

00:20:38.320 is talk to the internet

00:20:39.180 and that's about it.

00:20:40.720 So basically,

00:20:41.400 your phone would just be

00:20:42.380 what got processed

00:20:43.600 on the internet

00:20:44.240 and then got sent

00:20:45.920 to your phone

00:20:46.380 but there wouldn't be

00:20:46.940 any brains in the phone.

00:20:48.640 So if you lose your phone,

00:20:50.480 you go to the store,

00:20:51.420 you pick up another one

00:20:52.280 and you put in

00:20:52.840 the same password

00:20:53.580 you had on the lost phone

00:20:54.840 and it just pops up.

00:20:56.560 It's your phone.

00:20:57.960 To me,

00:20:58.320 it seems like

00:20:58.780 that's the future of phones

00:20:59.980 and the only thing

00:21:01.580 that would prevent it

00:21:02.240 would be,

00:21:02.700 you know,

00:21:03.020 ubiquitous access

00:21:03.940 to the internet

00:21:04.640 which we now have

00:21:05.740 a variety of ways.

00:21:08.420 So I think

00:21:11.400 there is an existential risk

00:21:13.140 to Apple

00:21:13.900 with AI.

00:21:16.300 At the same time,

00:21:17.740 if you were going to bet

00:21:18.620 on, you know,

00:21:19.460 Apple's performance

00:21:20.520 from the past

00:21:21.300 being indicative

00:21:22.420 of the future,

00:21:23.520 what would that be?

00:21:25.360 What would you call it

00:21:26.640 if you used

00:21:27.540 the past performance

00:21:29.120 of a company

00:21:30.120 to predict

00:21:30.940 the future performance?

00:21:32.340 What's that called?

00:21:33.440 There's a word for that.

00:21:35.620 Using the past performance

00:21:36.960 of a company.

00:21:38.000 Thank you.

00:21:38.400 Yes,

00:21:38.620 the word is stupid.

00:21:39.900 Stupid is the actual

00:21:41.560 technical term

00:21:42.400 for imagining

00:21:43.720 that you can predict

00:21:44.680 the future

00:21:45.100 by the past.

00:21:47.240 You know how

00:21:47.740 history repeats?

00:21:50.380 No,

00:21:50.680 it doesn't.

00:21:52.060 Who the fuck

00:21:52.960 told you history repeats?

00:21:54.580 It can't repeat.

00:21:55.900 It doesn't even have

00:21:56.440 the possibility.

00:21:57.500 It's not even

00:21:58.040 one of the possibilities.

00:21:59.780 Yeah,

00:21:59.980 there's some patterns

00:22:00.720 that you'll see

00:22:01.200 over and over,

00:22:02.420 but history can't repeat

00:22:03.880 because there's always

00:22:04.760 a different starting point.

00:22:06.360 Even if you put

00:22:07.020 the same pattern

00:22:07.680 into it,

00:22:08.520 you're starting

00:22:09.140 from something new,

00:22:10.120 so you're going to end up

00:22:10.860 with something new.

00:22:12.740 All right,

00:22:13.580 so I don't know

00:22:14.300 what's going to happen

00:22:14.800 with Apple,

00:22:15.600 but I think that

00:22:16.380 the reason I owned

00:22:19.100 a big chunk of it

00:22:20.080 until recently

00:22:20.740 is that it operated

00:22:22.240 like an index fund.

00:22:24.360 Do you get that?

00:22:25.440 It was such a big,

00:22:26.680 stable company

00:22:27.460 with so many lines

00:22:28.960 of business

00:22:29.560 that it could have

00:22:30.620 a really bad time

00:22:31.640 with any one product

00:22:32.840 and, you know,

00:22:34.680 probably they'd be fine.

00:22:36.460 But AI actually

00:22:37.480 takes a risk

00:22:38.180 to 100%

00:22:39.120 of their product line,

00:22:40.280 in my opinion.

00:22:42.120 Now, again,

00:22:43.580 it could be that

00:22:44.520 the risk

00:22:45.440 managed properly

00:22:47.640 in an Apple way,

00:22:48.960 the way they always do,

00:22:50.300 could be the thing

00:22:51.380 that triples

00:22:51.920 or 10Xs

00:22:53.040 their stock price.

00:22:54.720 but the risk

00:22:56.580 is not like

00:22:57.520 it used to be,

00:22:58.340 right?

00:22:58.920 So owning a little bit

00:22:59.980 of Apple

00:23:00.340 probably makes

00:23:00.900 a lot of sense.

00:23:02.340 Oh, shit,

00:23:02.840 that's advice.

00:23:04.700 Yeah,

00:23:04.880 the only advice

00:23:05.480 I'd like to give you

00:23:06.160 is diversification.

00:23:07.800 I feel like that's fair,

00:23:09.220 right?

00:23:09.640 Because that's what

00:23:10.240 everybody would say

00:23:11.100 is a good thing.

00:23:12.000 So if you're looking

00:23:12.600 at Apple,

00:23:13.220 maybe think of it

00:23:13.960 in terms of diversification,

00:23:15.500 that's the only thing

00:23:16.200 I'll say about it.

00:23:16.880 Now, I do own

00:23:18.560 a QQQ,

00:23:21.260 you know,

00:23:21.600 an index fund,

00:23:22.280 which has Apple

00:23:22.960 as a big component.

00:23:24.160 So I get the secondary effect

00:23:25.860 either way.

00:23:27.080 So I'm not completely out.

00:23:29.280 All right,

00:23:29.740 I saw that

00:23:30.440 CNN's Smirkanish

00:23:33.560 was talking about

00:23:34.700 the popularity

00:23:36.280 of Joe Biden

00:23:36.940 and saying it was

00:23:38.040 the second most

00:23:39.400 unpopular president

00:23:40.420 in modern history.

00:23:41.360 Jimmy Carter

00:23:41.920 was the most unpopular.

00:23:44.100 So what does it tell you

00:23:45.420 when CNN

00:23:46.920 and Smirkanish

00:23:48.480 in this case

00:23:49.080 is talking about

00:23:50.420 Joe Biden

00:23:50.880 being the second

00:23:51.560 most unpopular president?

00:23:53.620 Does that tell you

00:23:54.420 that CNN

00:23:54.920 is in the bag for Biden?

00:23:57.540 No.

00:23:58.340 This does not feel

00:23:59.420 like a story

00:23:59.980 they would have done before.

00:24:01.960 I don't believe

00:24:02.700 they would have done this

00:24:03.660 when he was running

00:24:05.200 against Trump

00:24:06.240 or a negative story

00:24:07.920 in general.

00:24:09.320 And we also saw

00:24:10.340 that the

00:24:10.780 Jake Tapper

00:24:12.620 interviewed the IRS

00:24:13.780 whistleblower

00:24:14.640 who has the goods

00:24:25.960 on the Bidens.

00:24:27.440 Can you even imagine

00:24:28.440 that that happened

00:24:29.160 in the world you live in?

00:24:31.160 The only thing

00:24:31.980 I can conclude

00:24:32.780 is that CNN

00:24:33.880 has very much decided

00:24:35.220 they don't want

00:24:35.980 Biden to be

00:24:36.780 the guy they have

00:24:37.740 to defend

00:24:38.200 for the next four years.

00:24:39.860 Imagine being CNN

00:24:40.940 and saying,

00:24:41.640 oh shit,

00:24:42.660 we're going to have

00:24:43.940 to defend Biden

00:24:45.080 while he's just

00:24:47.040 crumbling into dust.

00:24:48.700 We're going to look ridiculous.

00:24:50.520 You've got to give us

00:24:51.400 somebody we can defend.

00:24:53.400 Right?

00:24:53.980 Give us anybody

00:24:55.460 who looks better

00:24:56.340 than Trump

00:24:57.560 to at least

00:24:58.280 the base.

00:25:00.060 So it does look like

00:25:01.440 all indications

00:25:03.800 are that the

00:25:04.900 Gavin Newsom switcheroo

00:25:07.140 is in full play.

00:25:10.280 Does anybody think

00:25:11.180 it would be

00:25:11.540 anybody except

00:25:12.540 Gavin Newsom?

00:25:14.500 Can you think

00:25:15.140 of one name

00:25:16.060 of who the

00:25:17.960 at least,

00:25:18.540 you know,

00:25:18.740 let's say the

00:25:19.240 alleged deep state

00:25:21.000 Democrats,

00:25:21.960 who else would they

00:25:22.720 want to put there?

00:25:24.420 Yeah.

00:25:25.520 Let me make

00:25:26.820 a prediction for you

00:25:27.920 that I will die

00:25:28.940 on that hill.

00:25:29.800 You ready?

00:25:31.340 Michelle Obama

00:25:32.260 will never run

00:25:32.980 for president.

00:25:35.560 Never.

00:25:37.000 Michelle Obama

00:25:37.840 will never run

00:25:38.520 for president.

00:25:40.260 Here's another one.

00:25:41.780 RFK Jr.

00:25:42.780 will never,

00:25:44.020 ever be on

00:25:45.040 the same ticket

00:25:45.680 as Trump.

00:25:47.500 There's no chance

00:25:48.480 of that.

00:25:50.140 And every time

00:25:51.080 I see it

00:25:51.720 on the internet,

00:25:55.200 somebody's saying,

00:25:55.860 hey, I've got an idea.

00:25:56.840 Because everybody

00:25:57.240 thinks they thought of it.

00:25:58.880 How many of you

00:25:59.540 thought you were

00:25:59.980 the first ones

00:26:00.580 to think of,

00:26:01.220 I've got an idea.

00:26:01.840 what if,

00:26:04.220 just stay with me,

00:26:05.500 what if,

00:26:06.760 Trump picked

00:26:07.540 RFK Jr.

00:26:08.360 as his running mate?

00:26:09.880 How many of you

00:26:10.580 thought you thought

00:26:11.220 of that,

00:26:11.720 like, before anybody

00:26:12.580 thought of it?

00:26:14.860 No.

00:26:16.240 Some of you did.

00:26:18.120 It's never going

00:26:19.000 to happen.

00:26:20.260 There's nothing

00:26:21.080 in our world

00:26:21.660 that could make

00:26:22.120 that happen.

00:26:23.680 All right.

00:26:25.180 But if I'm wrong

00:26:26.040 about it,

00:26:26.720 then I will

00:26:27.280 eat crow

00:26:28.180 right in front

00:26:29.680 of you

00:26:30.000 and admit

00:26:30.780 my weaknesses.

00:26:33.620 But probably not.

00:26:35.180 All right.

00:26:37.260 So, yeah.

00:26:38.400 It looks like

00:26:39.140 the Democrats

00:26:39.620 are gunning

00:26:40.940 for the Bidens.

00:26:42.980 In my opinion,

00:26:43.740 the only reason

00:26:44.620 that Biden

00:26:45.620 wants to be president

00:26:46.840 is so he can

00:26:47.960 pardon himself

00:26:48.660 and his son.

00:26:50.620 I honestly

00:26:51.500 don't see

00:26:51.920 a second reason.

00:26:53.260 Do you?

00:26:54.820 Because do you

00:26:55.600 believe that

00:26:56.160 Biden thinks

00:26:56.920 the only way

00:26:57.520 the Democrats

00:26:58.100 can win

00:26:58.560 is if he runs?

00:26:59.360 No.

00:27:00.960 Do you think

00:27:01.500 that this is

00:27:02.060 what he wants

00:27:02.680 to do

00:27:03.060 at his current

00:27:03.660 age?

00:27:05.080 No.

00:27:06.720 No.

00:27:07.140 He looks

00:27:08.120 like a desperate

00:27:08.980 man.

00:27:10.420 He's acting

00:27:11.060 like he's

00:27:11.600 desperate

00:27:11.980 to stay

00:27:13.740 out of jail

00:27:14.160 and keep

00:27:14.500 his son

00:27:14.780 out of jail.

00:27:16.240 Now,

00:27:16.980 what do you

00:27:17.820 think would

00:27:18.240 be President

00:27:19.400 Trump's

00:27:20.400 main incentive

00:27:21.920 for running

00:27:22.580 for office

00:27:23.160 also?

00:27:25.840 To pardon

00:27:26.640 himself.

00:27:27.060 So,

00:27:29.560 ladies and

00:27:31.740 gentlemen,

00:27:32.320 may I,

00:27:34.260 let's say,

00:27:34.900 humbly suggest

00:27:35.780 that if you

00:27:38.120 live in a

00:27:38.560 country which

00:27:39.800 is on the

00:27:40.480 verge of

00:27:41.280 nominating two

00:27:42.800 people who's

00:27:44.220 at least among

00:27:45.380 their top two

00:27:46.080 reasons for

00:27:46.740 running for

00:27:47.160 office are

00:27:48.720 their only way

00:27:49.500 of staying

00:27:49.920 out of jail.

00:27:52.480 That's what

00:27:53.120 we've done.

00:27:54.440 So,

00:27:54.700 congratulations,

00:27:55.480 public.

00:27:55.740 We all

00:27:57.380 did that.

00:27:58.720 Hey,

00:27:59.380 give yourself

00:27:59.860 a pat on

00:28:00.300 the back.

00:28:01.300 You're part

00:28:01.940 of a system

00:28:02.580 that elevated

00:28:04.080 the only two

00:28:05.020 people who

00:28:05.540 shouldn't be

00:28:05.920 running for

00:28:06.340 office right

00:28:06.860 now.

00:28:07.740 In fact,

00:28:08.240 you could

00:28:08.540 scour the

00:28:09.120 country looking

00:28:10.440 for somebody

00:28:11.080 who would be

00:28:11.560 a worse

00:28:12.080 choice than

00:28:13.180 somebody running

00:28:13.860 for president

00:28:14.440 to stay

00:28:14.980 out of jail.

00:28:16.180 Now,

00:28:16.680 in my

00:28:16.960 opinion,

00:28:18.440 the Trump

00:28:19.340 charges at

00:28:19.960 least are

00:28:20.320 kind of

00:28:20.640 trumped up,

00:28:21.620 but they're

00:28:22.660 still there.

00:28:23.260 I think

00:28:25.080 that they're

00:28:25.540 minor infractions,

00:28:26.840 normal person

00:28:27.460 wouldn't be

00:28:27.900 prosecuted,

00:28:28.660 that kind

00:28:28.980 of thing,

00:28:29.480 but they're

00:28:30.280 still there.

00:28:31.780 How in the

00:28:32.540 world did we

00:28:33.080 get ourselves

00:28:33.660 in this

00:28:34.020 position,

00:28:35.200 ladies and

00:28:35.980 gentlemen?

00:28:37.120 We did this,

00:28:37.940 didn't we?

00:28:38.740 Do you think

00:28:39.520 you could really

00:28:40.040 blame the media

00:28:40.740 for this one?

00:28:42.380 Because you

00:28:43.060 know exactly

00:28:45.100 what's going

00:28:46.380 on with both

00:28:47.120 these candidates.

00:28:48.380 You know.

00:28:49.040 You know you

00:28:50.420 did this

00:28:50.840 intentionally.

00:28:52.060 Everybody who

00:28:52.680 answered a

00:28:53.160 poll tweeted

00:28:53.900 about a

00:28:54.420 preferred

00:28:54.940 candidate if

00:28:55.720 it was either

00:28:56.160 one of those.

00:28:57.760 I mean,

00:28:58.080 not every one

00:28:59.280 of you

00:28:59.500 individually,

00:29:00.140 obviously.

00:29:00.740 But when I

00:29:01.140 speak about

00:29:01.580 you,

00:29:01.880 I mean the

00:29:02.540 public.

00:29:04.700 Yeah.

00:29:05.340 I think

00:29:05.960 blaming this

00:29:06.560 one on the

00:29:07.020 media is

00:29:07.540 going too

00:29:08.020 far.

00:29:09.500 I think we

00:29:10.320 got to take

00:29:10.800 this one.

00:29:11.880 I think the

00:29:12.360 public has to

00:29:13.040 accept that

00:29:14.600 with full

00:29:15.460 knowledge and

00:29:16.700 completely

00:29:17.100 conscious,

00:29:18.220 we chose to

00:29:19.340 have a

00:29:19.600 presidential race

00:29:20.500 so far.

00:29:21.340 in which the

00:29:22.740 two main

00:29:23.160 candidates are

00:29:23.740 just trying to

00:29:24.240 stay in a

00:29:24.680 jail.

00:29:27.000 That's a

00:29:27.600 real thing.

00:29:29.480 Right?

00:29:30.040 Now I do

00:29:30.620 think it's

00:29:31.120 Trump's best

00:29:31.900 bet is to

00:29:32.700 get elected

00:29:33.440 and pardon

00:29:33.880 himself.

00:29:34.740 And I don't

00:29:35.200 think he did

00:29:35.700 anything that

00:29:36.260 should be

00:29:36.940 jailable.

00:29:37.660 At least

00:29:37.940 nothing I've

00:29:38.440 seen.

00:29:40.480 Yeah.

00:29:41.220 Well,

00:29:42.020 the difference

00:29:42.940 between the

00:29:43.460 two candidates

00:29:44.000 is that

00:29:44.560 Trump has a

00:29:45.440 second and

00:29:46.460 third reason.

00:29:48.260 Right?

00:29:48.520 Trump's second

00:29:49.220 and third

00:29:49.580 reason would be

00:29:50.380 revenge.

00:29:51.340 let's not

00:29:54.460 pretend that's

00:29:55.240 not part of

00:29:55.800 it because

00:29:56.620 you and I

00:29:57.280 and some of

00:29:58.160 the others

00:29:58.460 want that

00:29:58.900 same revenge.

00:30:00.160 You want

00:30:00.780 revenge on

00:30:01.280 the system

00:30:01.880 if not on

00:30:03.500 individuals.

00:30:04.740 Right?

00:30:05.040 I want

00:30:05.460 revenge on

00:30:06.180 the voting

00:30:06.680 system.

00:30:07.800 I want

00:30:08.480 revenge on

00:30:09.180 an election

00:30:09.620 system that

00:30:11.000 is designed

00:30:11.980 not to be

00:30:12.880 credible.

00:30:14.040 It's designed

00:30:14.800 that way.

00:30:15.740 It's not

00:30:16.400 designed to be

00:30:17.440 believable.

00:30:18.160 It's designed

00:30:18.800 to not be

00:30:19.460 believed because

00:30:20.860 it's not

00:30:21.520 auditable

00:30:21.960 fully.

00:30:23.480 There's lots

00:30:24.040 of parts that

00:30:25.000 are auditable

00:30:25.500 but it's not

00:30:26.360 fully auditable

00:30:27.100 and it

00:30:27.960 wouldn't be

00:30:28.300 impossible to

00:30:29.040 be fully

00:30:29.500 auditable

00:30:29.880 and we

00:30:31.260 want it to

00:30:31.880 be.

00:30:32.420 So it's

00:30:32.740 got to be

00:30:33.060 intentional.

00:30:34.580 It's got

00:30:35.360 to be

00:30:35.720 intentional.

00:30:36.880 Our system

00:30:37.680 has to be

00:30:38.600 designed to

00:30:39.520 be not

00:30:39.960 credible or

00:30:41.120 at least to

00:30:41.600 be riggable.

00:30:43.360 Same thing.

00:30:44.000 So design

00:30:46.080 is destiny.

00:30:47.060 I would

00:30:47.600 assume that

00:30:48.440 given our

00:30:48.820 current design

00:30:49.460 of the

00:30:49.740 election

00:30:50.000 systems that

00:30:50.820 a rigged

00:30:51.520 election is

00:30:52.640 a guarantee

00:30:53.340 from the

00:30:53.920 design.

00:30:55.380 The design

00:30:56.240 guarantees it.

00:30:57.720 It just

00:30:58.200 doesn't tell

00:30:58.660 you when

00:30:59.140 or how

00:31:00.000 much.

00:31:00.960 So it

00:31:01.400 doesn't

00:31:01.620 necessarily

00:31:02.020 change the

00:31:02.520 election and

00:31:03.620 it doesn't

00:31:03.900 necessarily

00:31:04.280 change any

00:31:04.860 specific

00:31:05.440 election but

00:31:06.960 it's guaranteed

00:31:07.520 by design.

00:31:09.060 Design is

00:31:09.560 destiny.

00:31:11.440 All right.

00:31:12.540 Here now

00:31:13.380 your lesson

00:31:14.180 on how

00:31:14.700 to identify

00:31:16.680 fake news.

00:31:19.980 Here's a new

00:31:20.420 rule.

00:31:22.180 The quote

00:31:23.820 taken out

00:31:25.240 of the middle

00:31:25.740 of a sentence.

00:31:27.840 Now I've

00:31:28.300 told you that

00:31:28.820 quotes,

00:31:29.740 any kind of

00:31:30.280 a quote by

00:31:31.020 a famous

00:31:31.440 person,

00:31:31.960 a public

00:31:32.320 figure,

00:31:33.160 is usually

00:31:34.040 in a context.

00:31:35.920 So you

00:31:36.200 already do

00:31:36.520 that,

00:31:36.880 right?

00:31:37.300 If you

00:31:37.720 saw one

00:31:38.620 sentence,

00:31:39.400 you'd say,

00:31:39.820 oh,

00:31:40.000 that's probably

00:31:41.160 out of context.

00:31:41.900 But worse

00:31:43.740 than that

00:31:44.340 is the

00:31:45.780 few words

00:31:46.740 taken out

00:31:47.420 of a

00:31:47.680 sentence.

00:31:48.780 So it's

00:31:49.200 bad enough

00:31:49.640 that it's

00:31:50.000 a full

00:31:50.320 sentence

00:31:50.920 taken out

00:31:51.720 of,

00:31:52.000 let's say,

00:31:52.520 the paragraphs

00:31:53.220 around it.

00:31:54.520 But you

00:31:54.940 can go to

00:31:55.360 another level

00:31:56.040 and take

00:31:56.460 just two

00:31:56.960 words

00:31:57.440 out of a

00:31:59.040 full

00:31:59.220 sentence.

00:32:00.120 What are

00:32:00.480 the odds

00:32:00.980 that if

00:32:01.440 you see

00:32:02.380 a report

00:32:03.120 of a

00:32:04.200 public

00:32:04.520 figure,

00:32:05.140 this is

00:32:05.560 the important

00:32:05.920 part,

00:32:06.160 a public

00:32:06.500 figure,

00:32:06.940 not just

00:32:07.300 somebody you

00:32:07.740 know,

00:32:07.920 public

00:32:08.860 figure,

00:32:09.880 and they're

00:32:10.500 being demonized

00:32:12.100 on social

00:32:12.600 media and

00:32:13.100 in the

00:32:13.360 news,

00:32:14.240 over two

00:32:15.380 or three

00:32:15.740 words from

00:32:16.960 a larger

00:32:17.400 sentence.

00:32:19.200 How many

00:32:20.000 times is

00:32:21.400 that going

00:32:21.760 to be

00:32:21.940 real?

00:32:23.760 A few

00:32:24.500 words from

00:32:25.420 a larger

00:32:25.820 sentence.

00:32:28.220 Basically

00:32:28.780 never.

00:32:30.060 Basically

00:32:30.420 never.

00:32:31.140 You want

00:32:31.380 some examples?

00:32:32.960 Sure you

00:32:33.320 do.

00:32:34.600 RFK Jr.

00:32:35.380 is in

00:32:36.440 trouble for

00:32:37.220 as The

00:32:37.820 Hill,

00:32:38.500 the publication

00:32:39.360 The

00:32:39.620 Hill,

00:32:40.400 says that

00:32:41.200 he used,

00:32:42.360 he said

00:32:42.740 that COVID

00:32:43.160 was,

00:32:44.080 quote,

00:32:44.560 now this

00:32:45.000 is The

00:32:45.380 Hill's

00:32:45.860 words that

00:32:47.260 they picked

00:32:47.620 out of

00:32:47.920 his sentence,

00:32:49.460 and the

00:32:49.780 sentence was

00:32:50.460 picked out

00:32:50.880 of a

00:32:51.260 larger

00:32:51.520 context.

00:32:52.760 And the

00:32:53.120 words they

00:32:53.460 picked out

00:32:53.820 was ethnically

00:32:54.720 targeted.

00:32:55.840 So those

00:32:56.220 are the

00:32:56.440 quote words.

00:32:57.360 He said

00:32:57.680 that COVID

00:32:59.380 was ethnically

00:33:00.380 targeted.

00:33:02.900 What do

00:33:03.660 you think

00:33:03.940 might have

00:33:04.420 been

00:33:04.720 left out

00:33:05.620 in the

00:33:05.820 sentence?

00:33:06.240 I don't

00:33:06.480 know the

00:33:06.780 answer to

00:33:07.160 this.

00:33:08.040 But if

00:33:08.300 he said

00:33:09.300 that COVID

00:33:10.500 was ethnically

00:33:12.280 targeted,

00:33:13.400 is it

00:33:13.760 possible,

00:33:14.440 and I

00:33:15.060 don't know,

00:33:15.860 I'm just

00:33:16.180 asking,

00:33:16.920 is it

00:33:17.280 possible that

00:33:17.860 he said,

00:33:18.620 you know,

00:33:19.340 the way it

00:33:19.760 looks,

00:33:21.080 it acted

00:33:22.100 as if it's

00:33:23.280 ethnically

00:33:23.860 targeted?

00:33:25.100 Did the

00:33:25.740 rest of the

00:33:26.160 sentence say

00:33:26.700 it looks

00:33:27.220 like it,

00:33:27.940 it acts

00:33:28.700 that way,

00:33:29.360 or the

00:33:30.160 outcome was

00:33:30.900 as if?

00:33:32.160 Those all

00:33:32.860 mean different

00:33:33.300 things.

00:33:33.740 same words,

00:33:35.900 but what

00:33:36.320 is just

00:33:36.680 before them

00:33:37.220 and what

00:33:37.480 after them

00:33:37.960 completely

00:33:38.460 changes the

00:33:39.080 meaning.

00:33:39.840 Because if

00:33:40.540 you found

00:33:40.920 out that

00:33:41.500 RFK Jr.

00:33:42.380 was simply

00:33:42.860 raising an

00:33:43.440 eyebrow,

00:33:44.560 saying,

00:33:45.040 we should

00:33:46.240 understand why

00:33:47.900 this affected

00:33:48.800 people in

00:33:49.620 different ethnicities

00:33:50.480 differently,

00:33:51.520 and then he

00:33:52.240 makes a

00:33:52.640 separate claim

00:33:53.340 that's connected

00:33:54.040 that the

00:33:55.680 U.S.

00:33:56.020 has been

00:33:56.480 investigating,

00:33:58.060 let's say,

00:33:59.220 ethnically

00:33:59.920 targeted

00:34:00.760 bioweapons.

00:34:04.380 We should

00:34:05.160 imagine that

00:34:05.860 other,

00:34:06.500 the adversaries

00:34:07.460 would be

00:34:07.820 doing the

00:34:08.260 same.

00:34:09.280 Now,

00:34:09.580 even if

00:34:09.940 there's no

00:34:10.360 evidence that

00:34:10.900 anybody ever

00:34:11.640 did any

00:34:12.140 experiments on

00:34:13.020 ethnically

00:34:13.680 targeted

00:34:14.300 bioweapons,

00:34:16.300 even if there

00:34:16.840 was no

00:34:17.140 evidence,

00:34:18.680 don't you

00:34:19.060 think it

00:34:19.400 might be

00:34:19.880 true?

00:34:21.560 I mean,

00:34:21.960 if you were

00:34:22.880 in that job,

00:34:23.580 wouldn't it

00:34:23.880 occur to you

00:34:24.540 that it'd be

00:34:25.840 better if it

00:34:26.300 didn't kill

00:34:26.660 your side?

00:34:28.580 That'd be

00:34:28.960 like right

00:34:29.980 at the top

00:34:30.480 of the list

00:34:31.040 of things

00:34:31.960 you'd look

00:34:32.340 into.

00:34:33.160 You know,

00:34:33.320 it'd be a

00:34:33.660 big variable.

00:34:35.240 So,

00:34:36.220 if we

00:34:37.180 observe,

00:34:38.240 as RFK

00:34:38.880 Jr.

00:34:39.280 points out,

00:34:40.400 that different

00:34:40.900 ethnic groups

00:34:41.680 may have

00:34:42.400 been,

00:34:42.780 of course,

00:34:43.240 all data

00:34:43.660 about COVID

00:34:44.400 is sketchy,

00:34:45.400 but the data

00:34:46.060 suggests that

00:34:47.700 maybe some

00:34:48.300 groups had

00:34:49.020 a completely

00:34:49.740 different

00:34:50.100 experience.

00:34:51.260 Wouldn't you

00:34:51.720 want to know

00:34:52.100 more about

00:34:52.540 that in the

00:34:53.700 context of a

00:34:54.520 world in

00:34:55.480 which probably

00:34:56.340 everybody who's

00:34:57.580 doing bioweapons

00:34:58.500 research is

00:35:00.000 at least

00:35:00.360 looking into

00:35:01.100 ethnically

00:35:02.940 targeted stuff.

00:35:05.720 So,

00:35:06.720 here's the

00:35:07.980 rule.

00:35:12.400 If you see

00:35:13.320 a partial

00:35:13.980 quote,

00:35:15.420 so it's

00:35:15.720 got to be

00:35:16.000 a partial

00:35:16.400 quote,

00:35:17.220 taken out

00:35:17.980 of a

00:35:18.160 sentence,

00:35:18.920 so it's

00:35:19.200 not even

00:35:19.540 the full

00:35:19.840 sentence,

00:35:21.240 it's the

00:35:22.560 person

00:35:22.920 complaining

00:35:23.520 is paid

00:35:25.720 to

00:35:25.980 complain.

00:35:27.780 Are the

00:35:28.640 people who

00:35:29.080 write bad

00:35:29.760 stories about

00:35:30.680 RFK Jr.'s

00:35:31.820 comments,

00:35:32.780 are they

00:35:33.300 paid to

00:35:33.860 complain?

00:35:35.160 Yes,

00:35:35.600 they're

00:35:35.760 writers.

00:35:36.580 They're

00:35:37.040 writers who

00:35:37.540 work for

00:35:37.880 an entity

00:35:38.360 that if

00:35:39.520 it didn't

00:35:39.980 support the

00:35:40.640 side that

00:35:41.140 reads it

00:35:41.520 the most,

00:35:42.380 they would

00:35:42.840 lose all

00:35:43.240 their money.

00:35:44.900 So if

00:35:45.420 CNN started

00:35:46.100 reporting all

00:35:46.820 the same

00:35:47.140 things as

00:35:47.540 Fox News,

00:35:48.200 they would

00:35:48.400 go out of

00:35:48.720 business.

00:35:50.020 So there's

00:35:50.540 somebody to

00:35:50.980 make money

00:35:51.520 from the

00:35:52.840 story they're

00:35:53.740 putting forward,

00:35:54.320 the narrative.

00:35:55.340 So it's a

00:35:56.240 partial quote,

00:35:57.920 the people

00:35:59.280 who are

00:36:00.040 promoting it

00:36:00.760 are making

00:36:01.140 money,

00:36:01.580 directly or

00:36:02.100 indirectly,

00:36:03.100 assume there's

00:36:03.600 an E at

00:36:04.080 the end of

00:36:04.420 make,

00:36:05.240 and it

00:36:06.140 involves a

00:36:06.760 public figure.

00:36:08.160 Now the

00:36:08.640 public figure

00:36:09.280 thing is the

00:36:10.000 real key,

00:36:11.740 right?

00:36:12.220 Because you

00:36:12.580 don't see this

00:36:13.080 so much about

00:36:13.640 your neighbor.

00:36:15.580 So you need

00:36:16.040 a public

00:36:16.440 figure.

00:36:17.420 RFK Jr.'s

00:36:18.220 perfect.

00:36:19.200 So they use

00:36:19.960 him as the

00:36:20.480 vessel for

00:36:21.460 which they

00:36:22.000 put their

00:36:22.760 bullshit in

00:36:23.320 from every

00:36:23.740 side,

00:36:24.320 and then

00:36:24.820 they blame

00:36:25.220 him for

00:36:25.600 it.

00:36:26.760 So they

00:36:27.340 make up a

00:36:27.840 bunch of

00:36:28.200 ridiculous

00:36:28.860 bullshit,

00:36:30.120 they pick a

00:36:30.900 public figure,

00:36:32.180 and they

00:36:32.500 blame the

00:36:32.900 public figure

00:36:33.500 by taking

00:36:34.080 two words

00:36:34.720 out of an

00:36:35.380 entire

00:36:35.740 conversation.

00:36:37.220 Two words.

00:36:38.920 Do you

00:36:39.340 think that's

00:36:39.700 ever happened

00:36:40.180 before?

00:36:41.460 Are there

00:36:41.820 any other

00:36:42.360 examples in

00:36:43.140 the news

00:36:43.600 in which

00:36:44.960 somebody took

00:36:45.460 a partial

00:36:45.920 quote and

00:36:47.760 made something

00:36:48.220 of it?

00:36:49.300 Well,

00:36:50.720 how about

00:36:51.160 this?

00:36:51.920 I saw a

00:36:52.840 tweet just

00:36:53.400 today,

00:36:53.860 coincidence,

00:36:54.320 from Ibram

00:36:55.740 Kendi.

00:36:56.900 You know

00:36:57.340 Ibram Kendi

00:36:57.980 because he's

00:36:58.580 a CRT and

00:37:02.500 DEI and

00:37:03.820 ESG kind

00:37:04.960 of proponent.

00:37:07.160 So does

00:37:08.440 Ibram Kendi

00:37:09.200 make money

00:37:10.140 from saying

00:37:12.040 provocative

00:37:12.560 things?

00:37:13.580 Yes.

00:37:14.220 That's his

00:37:14.660 job.

00:37:15.540 He writes

00:37:15.920 books,

00:37:16.380 he's a

00:37:16.700 pundit,

00:37:17.020 so he

00:37:17.660 basically makes

00:37:18.280 money.

00:37:18.660 And then

00:37:20.660 the quote

00:37:23.320 is something

00:37:23.820 about a

00:37:24.380 public figure.

00:37:27.340 So it's

00:37:27.980 coming from

00:37:28.440 somebody who

00:37:28.840 makes money.

00:37:30.020 It's about

00:37:30.540 a public

00:37:30.940 figure.

00:37:32.120 In this

00:37:32.480 case,

00:37:32.960 DeSantis and

00:37:33.820 Florida.

00:37:34.600 So Florida is

00:37:35.320 like a stand-in

00:37:36.020 for a public

00:37:36.580 figure, but it's

00:37:37.360 really DeSantis.

00:37:38.500 So you've got

00:37:38.780 your public

00:37:39.200 figure, and

00:37:40.420 now where's

00:37:40.860 the partial

00:37:41.300 quote?

00:37:42.320 You ready for

00:37:42.760 the partial

00:37:43.120 quote?

00:37:43.460 This is

00:37:44.840 Ibram Kendi's

00:37:46.060 tweet.

00:37:47.060 And slavers

00:37:47.680 defended slavery

00:37:48.820 by claiming it

00:37:50.140 was a positive

00:37:51.640 good.

00:37:53.880 Yeah.

00:37:54.300 The two words

00:37:55.120 in the

00:37:55.300 quote are

00:37:55.560 positive good

00:37:56.260 for black

00:37:58.180 people.

00:37:58.620 I don't think

00:37:59.000 anybody said

00:37:59.540 that.

00:38:00.660 Correct me if

00:38:01.120 I'm wrong, but

00:38:01.740 he's putting a

00:38:02.860 quote, positive

00:38:04.520 good, around

00:38:05.280 something that

00:38:05.820 actually nobody

00:38:06.520 said.

00:38:07.300 Am I right?

00:38:09.640 Isn't he

00:38:10.280 using the

00:38:10.760 quote as an

00:38:12.280 example of what

00:38:13.220 people are

00:38:13.640 thinking?

00:38:14.400 He's not

00:38:14.820 using it as

00:38:15.380 an actual

00:38:15.880 quote.

00:38:16.300 Am I right?

00:38:17.280 I believe nobody

00:38:18.940 ever said those

00:38:19.660 words, positive

00:38:20.960 good.

00:38:22.680 Now, I only

00:38:23.520 know that because

00:38:24.160 I pay attention.

00:38:25.980 I've read about

00:38:27.040 this story enough

00:38:27.740 to know that was

00:38:28.360 never in this

00:38:28.940 story.

00:38:29.940 Suppose you

00:38:30.580 didn't know

00:38:30.960 that.

00:38:32.240 Wouldn't you

00:38:32.680 assume he's

00:38:33.160 quoting an

00:38:33.660 actual person

00:38:34.380 who said

00:38:35.960 slavery was a

00:38:36.700 positive good?

00:38:37.440 You would

00:38:37.780 assume that,

00:38:38.320 right?

00:38:39.100 Remember,

00:38:39.840 follow the

00:38:40.400 rule.

00:38:41.480 It's a

00:38:41.800 partial quote.

00:38:43.220 It involves a

00:38:43.900 public figure.

00:38:46.200 All right?

00:38:46.620 So all of

00:38:47.440 your antennas

00:38:48.000 should have

00:38:48.300 been up.

00:38:49.920 And then he

00:38:50.520 goes on.

00:38:51.860 It's a positive

00:38:52.560 good for black

00:38:53.080 people.

00:38:53.480 Today, Florida's

00:38:54.880 Board of

00:38:55.300 Education, so

00:38:56.660 now the Board

00:38:57.100 of Education is

00:38:57.880 sort of a stand

00:38:58.520 in for Florida

00:38:59.900 and DeSantis.

00:39:00.900 So it's really

00:39:01.360 about a public

00:39:01.900 figure, right?

00:39:02.860 If DeSantis had

00:39:03.740 not been the

00:39:04.260 driver of it,

00:39:04.960 this wouldn't

00:39:05.460 be a thing.

00:39:08.120 And then it

00:39:08.800 said that the

00:39:09.700 Board of Education

00:39:10.320 of Florida approved

00:39:11.800 new black

00:39:12.440 history standards

00:39:13.180 for enslaved

00:39:15.180 people and

00:39:16.160 saying that the

00:39:17.140 enslaved people,

00:39:17.960 the black people,

00:39:19.100 developed skills

00:39:20.040 that, and here's

00:39:20.820 the partial quote,

00:39:22.080 could be applied

00:39:22.980 for their

00:39:23.420 personal benefit.

00:39:26.220 Sometimes slaves

00:39:27.220 learn things that,

00:39:28.920 quote, could be

00:39:29.620 applied to their

00:39:30.280 personal benefits.

00:39:31.560 What do you think

00:39:32.100 the first part of

00:39:32.980 the sentence was?

00:39:34.520 What do you think

00:39:35.020 the second part of

00:39:35.740 the sentence was?

00:39:37.040 And what do you

00:39:37.460 think the context

00:39:38.160 was?

00:39:38.500 Now, I don't

00:39:40.140 know, but I'll

00:39:41.360 tell you the

00:39:41.820 context I heard.

00:39:43.700 That if you were

00:39:44.320 a slave and you

00:39:45.020 were working in

00:39:45.560 the field, that's

00:39:46.580 like the worst

00:39:47.160 work, and you

00:39:49.040 learned, let's

00:39:49.680 say, to have

00:39:50.120 to shoe a

00:39:50.620 horse, like you

00:39:52.200 watched somebody

00:39:53.120 and you learned

00:39:53.900 a skill to shoe

00:39:54.720 a horse, you

00:39:56.060 could improve

00:39:57.100 your situation

00:39:57.900 from the worst

00:39:58.700 thing in the

00:39:59.120 world to

00:40:00.120 slightly less

00:40:00.880 worse.

00:40:02.240 Still slaves,

00:40:03.120 still terrible,

00:40:04.020 everybody agrees

00:40:04.880 it's the worst

00:40:05.360 thing in the

00:40:05.660 world, but at

00:40:06.320 least you got

00:40:06.680 out of the

00:40:06.920 field by

00:40:08.480 learning a

00:40:08.960 skill.

00:40:10.380 And then,

00:40:12.000 presumably, when

00:40:13.080 slavery ended,

00:40:14.440 maybe some of

00:40:14.920 those skills

00:40:15.440 could be used

00:40:16.480 productively.

00:40:17.700 Now, does

00:40:18.240 anybody think

00:40:19.080 that whoever

00:40:20.440 was saying

00:40:21.180 the sentence

00:40:22.780 could be

00:40:23.520 applied for

00:40:24.060 their personal

00:40:24.620 benefit, is

00:40:26.140 there anybody

00:40:26.560 who thought

00:40:27.300 that that

00:40:27.700 meant, well,

00:40:29.280 you know, they

00:40:29.720 had a pretty,

00:40:30.540 pretty good?

00:40:31.560 I'll tell you.

00:40:32.740 You think

00:40:33.240 you've got a

00:40:33.740 good?

00:40:34.560 Well, let me

00:40:35.140 tell you how

00:40:35.640 happy those

00:40:36.180 slaves were.

00:40:36.620 No, nobody's

00:40:38.000 saying that.

00:40:39.200 And you

00:40:39.580 know nobody's

00:40:40.380 saying that.

00:40:41.540 Right?

00:40:42.360 So, there's

00:40:43.760 your fake

00:40:44.080 news.

00:40:45.760 Partial quote

00:40:46.580 about a

00:40:47.320 public figure

00:40:48.000 from somebody

00:40:48.980 paid to make

00:40:49.660 trouble.

00:40:50.820 There isn't

00:40:51.240 the slightest

00:40:51.740 chance that

00:40:53.300 any of this

00:40:53.760 is true.

00:40:54.940 Not the

00:40:55.620 slightest.

00:40:56.640 All right.

00:40:57.280 Now, for

00:40:58.280 your, just to

00:40:59.400 round out this

00:41:00.020 point, there

00:41:01.280 are a lot of

00:41:01.800 sources of

00:41:02.680 information, but

00:41:03.900 they do not

00:41:04.400 have all the

00:41:04.940 same credibility.

00:41:05.880 And while I

00:41:07.720 think my

00:41:08.120 audience understands

00:41:09.100 it, you know,

00:41:09.860 which things are

00:41:10.520 more credible than

00:41:11.220 others, the

00:41:12.500 general public

00:41:13.400 needs a lesson.

00:41:15.060 Now, I'm going to

00:41:15.720 show you roughly

00:41:16.740 what that lesson

00:41:17.520 should be.

00:41:18.740 Okay?

00:41:19.620 So, I'm going to

00:41:20.200 kind of do it on

00:41:20.940 the fly here.

00:41:22.260 But there are

00:41:23.460 lots of ways that

00:41:24.160 we learn things,

00:41:24.900 and they're not

00:41:25.460 all equal.

00:41:28.260 Let's say you

00:41:29.260 see there's a

00:41:30.480 scientific event,

00:41:32.220 preprint, or

00:41:32.840 let's say

00:41:33.560 activity, in

00:41:34.740 which they

00:41:35.020 produced a

00:41:36.000 preprint paper.

00:41:37.940 Preprint.

00:41:39.120 So, somebody

00:41:39.600 says, yep, we

00:41:40.240 did this study,

00:41:40.900 it's a preprint.

00:41:42.040 What level of

00:41:43.320 credibility would

00:41:44.620 you give a

00:41:45.280 preprint study?

00:41:46.940 And that means

00:41:47.600 that it has not

00:41:48.300 been peer

00:41:48.940 reviewed.

00:41:50.700 Close to zero

00:41:52.140 would be the

00:41:52.620 right answer.

00:41:53.500 Right?

00:41:54.180 Close to zero.

00:41:55.720 But how many

00:41:56.220 people would know

00:41:56.780 that?

00:41:57.980 Who would know

00:41:58.640 that?

00:41:58.920 Do you think

00:41:59.720 the general

00:42:00.140 public, when

00:42:00.880 they hear

00:42:01.100 there's a

00:42:01.520 study, and

00:42:02.680 it's written

00:42:03.040 up in a

00:42:03.480 preprint, do

00:42:04.640 they know that

00:42:05.180 that has no

00:42:05.660 credibility?

00:42:07.520 Probably not.

00:42:08.840 Right?

00:42:09.160 They probably

00:42:09.880 think it's over

00:42:10.560 50%, don't you

00:42:12.100 think?

00:42:12.740 Or maybe, they

00:42:13.480 probably think

00:42:13.900 it's about 75%

00:42:15.100 likely.

00:42:16.080 Because, you

00:42:16.460 know, we're

00:42:16.780 scientists.

00:42:18.120 Scientists.

00:42:19.280 Now, suppose

00:42:20.060 that same thing

00:42:20.920 got peer

00:42:22.020 reviewed.

00:42:23.700 What's the

00:42:24.160 credibility of

00:42:25.280 one, any

00:42:26.140 one, peer

00:42:27.480 reviewed scientific

00:42:28.560 journal, give

00:42:29.920 me your

00:42:30.460 number, your

00:42:31.040 estimate of

00:42:31.940 just generally

00:42:32.640 credibility.

00:42:34.740 It's less than

00:42:35.520 50%.

00:42:36.360 Your common

00:42:37.860 sense would

00:42:38.620 put it way

00:42:39.160 above 50%.

00:42:40.320 But it's been

00:42:41.200 studied, right?

00:42:42.460 It's been studied

00:42:43.060 by a lot of

00:42:43.540 people.

00:42:44.300 You can't

00:42:44.920 reproduce half

00:42:46.780 of the things

00:42:47.420 that pass as

00:42:49.040 peer reviewed.

00:42:50.000 Do you know

00:42:50.400 why?

00:42:51.360 Do you know

00:42:51.740 why peer

00:42:52.340 reviewed has

00:42:53.740 such a bad

00:42:54.280 record?

00:42:55.620 Because peer

00:42:56.340 review is

00:42:56.760 bullshit.

00:42:57.060 It's just

00:42:58.720 complete

00:42:59.080 bullshit.

00:43:00.540 The person

00:43:01.460 who does

00:43:01.760 the peer

00:43:02.080 review is

00:43:03.240 just basically

00:43:04.080 looking to

00:43:04.940 see if it

00:43:05.360 looks like

00:43:05.760 science.

00:43:07.140 That's about

00:43:07.640 it.

00:43:08.440 They're not

00:43:08.940 checking the

00:43:09.440 data.

00:43:10.340 They're not

00:43:10.820 going and

00:43:11.320 recollecting the

00:43:12.180 original data.

00:43:13.500 All they're

00:43:14.060 doing is

00:43:14.420 saying, okay,

00:43:14.960 you had some

00:43:15.400 data, you

00:43:15.960 say it's

00:43:16.400 true, I'm

00:43:17.560 not checking,

00:43:18.980 and then you

00:43:19.500 did this

00:43:19.980 manipulation with

00:43:21.120 it, and you

00:43:21.600 look at it

00:43:22.020 and go, all

00:43:23.020 right, it

00:43:23.260 looks like

00:43:23.600 somebody who

00:43:24.100 knows what

00:43:24.520 statistics are

00:43:25.540 did it, so

00:43:26.800 you've got

00:43:27.060 data they

00:43:27.640 say is

00:43:28.020 true, statistics

00:43:29.420 that I

00:43:30.040 haven't looked

00:43:30.440 at in great

00:43:31.120 detail, but

00:43:31.680 on the

00:43:31.980 surface it

00:43:32.560 looks, at

00:43:33.400 least they

00:43:33.700 did the

00:43:33.980 math right,

00:43:35.160 and then

00:43:35.480 they say

00:43:35.760 it's peer

00:43:36.080 reviewed.

00:43:37.280 That gives

00:43:37.860 you almost

00:43:38.320 no comfort

00:43:39.220 whatsoever.

00:43:40.920 So peer

00:43:41.640 review is a

00:43:42.500 completely

00:43:43.020 nakedly

00:43:43.940 broken system,

00:43:45.140 has been

00:43:45.580 forever, it's

00:43:46.320 widely reported

00:43:47.140 at this point,

00:43:48.040 but if you're

00:43:48.620 not a nerd who

00:43:49.360 pays attention

00:43:49.920 to the news,

00:43:50.840 how would

00:43:51.140 you know

00:43:51.420 that?

00:43:52.800 How many

00:43:53.420 people that

00:43:54.020 you stop

00:43:54.560 on the

00:43:54.880 street, and

00:43:56.420 you said

00:43:56.840 peer-reviewed

00:43:57.620 scientific

00:43:58.020 journal, how

00:43:58.840 likely is it

00:43:59.460 right?

00:44:00.960 Don't you

00:44:01.300 think most

00:44:01.700 people would

00:44:02.120 say 90%, 75%,

00:44:04.540 it's actually

00:44:05.800 closer to 40%

00:44:08.200 or below,

00:44:09.520 right?

00:44:10.300 How about

00:44:11.040 anonymous

00:44:11.700 source?

00:44:13.540 Let's say it's

00:44:14.120 in a really

00:44:14.700 fine publication

00:44:15.820 like the New

00:44:16.420 York Times, or

00:44:17.620 the Washington

00:44:18.100 Post.

00:44:19.640 The Washington

00:44:20.320 Post, let's

00:44:20.900 say they have a

00:44:21.360 story with an

00:44:22.280 anonymous source,

00:44:23.220 let's say it's

00:44:24.780 about politics,

00:44:26.120 specifically it's

00:44:26.960 about politics,

00:44:28.000 and it's

00:44:28.320 negative for one

00:44:29.780 political figure.

00:44:32.600 Zero.

00:44:33.860 Yeah, the

00:44:34.320 correct estimate

00:44:35.220 is zero.

00:44:36.140 I don't think I've

00:44:36.880 ever seen one

00:44:37.460 that was true.

00:44:38.920 Can you remember

00:44:39.560 one that was

00:44:40.040 ever true?

00:44:41.540 Ever?

00:44:42.360 I don't remember

00:44:43.120 any.

00:44:44.020 So if you're not

00:44:44.840 a certain age,

00:44:46.620 you haven't seen

00:44:47.360 how many times

00:44:48.180 this comes and

00:44:49.480 goes, but I

00:44:50.840 have.

00:44:51.400 I've seen

00:44:51.840 enough.

00:44:52.100 I don't think

00:44:52.940 any of them

00:44:53.340 are true.

00:44:54.240 So on the

00:44:54.940 surface, if you

00:44:55.940 see a Washington

00:44:56.580 Post story from

00:44:57.380 an anonymous

00:44:57.860 source, you

00:44:59.020 should just

00:44:59.340 laugh.

00:45:01.180 That's the

00:45:01.720 right approach,

00:45:02.280 just laugh.

00:45:03.200 They're not

00:45:03.560 even trying.

00:45:04.820 How about a

00:45:05.640 video?

00:45:06.860 Video.

00:45:08.060 Let's say

00:45:08.720 there's a news

00:45:09.280 story and they

00:45:09.940 just show you

00:45:10.420 the video.

00:45:11.500 You can see

00:45:12.440 for yourself,

00:45:13.120 you can hear

00:45:13.560 for yourself.

00:45:15.880 What percentage

00:45:17.000 would you put

00:45:18.420 on the

00:45:18.760 credibility of

00:45:20.180 a video?

00:45:25.520 30%, maybe

00:45:27.140 30%.

00:45:27.920 Somebody said

00:45:29.640 30%, I'd

00:45:30.520 agree with

00:45:30.880 that.

00:45:31.440 That's where

00:45:32.000 my personal

00:45:33.140 lesson is,

00:45:33.640 around 30%.

00:45:34.380 Even if you're

00:45:35.600 looking at it,

00:45:36.720 even if you're

00:45:37.300 hearing it, and

00:45:38.140 even if it's

00:45:38.760 completely accurate,

00:45:40.560 about 30%.

00:45:41.640 Because what

00:45:42.700 they leave

00:45:43.140 out is what

00:45:44.640 happened just

00:45:45.340 before the

00:45:45.900 edit, and

00:45:46.980 what they leave

00:45:47.540 out is what

00:45:48.200 happened just

00:45:48.800 after, that's

00:45:50.400 how you got

00:45:50.760 the fine

00:45:51.180 people hoax

00:45:51.840 and the

00:45:52.760 drinking bleach

00:45:53.420 hoax.

00:45:54.460 Those were

00:45:54.920 videos and

00:45:55.700 the Covington

00:45:56.240 kids hoax,

00:45:57.040 and also

00:45:57.900 the Trump

00:45:59.820 overfeeding

00:46:00.520 the koi fish.

00:46:02.480 All of them

00:46:03.080 are the same

00:46:04.020 technique.

00:46:05.100 The video is

00:46:05.740 real, it's

00:46:06.400 exactly what

00:46:07.740 is there, it's

00:46:08.340 exactly what

00:46:08.880 happened, it's

00:46:09.980 just the

00:46:10.400 beginning and

00:46:10.960 end were

00:46:11.240 taken out to

00:46:11.800 change the

00:46:12.200 context.

00:46:13.600 How about a

00:46:15.340 full quote as

00:46:16.600 opposed to a

00:46:17.080 partial quote?

00:46:17.740 So it's a

00:46:18.980 real thing

00:46:19.400 somebody said.

00:46:20.920 That part is

00:46:21.860 established, let's

00:46:22.600 say, with

00:46:22.880 documents or

00:46:23.460 whatever.

00:46:24.880 And so he

00:46:25.320 says, somebody

00:46:25.760 said, it's not

00:46:26.700 a partial quote,

00:46:28.280 what credibility

00:46:29.080 do you give a

00:46:29.980 full quote?

00:46:33.520 No more than

00:46:34.660 20% credibility,

00:46:37.580 no more than

00:46:38.240 that.

00:46:39.160 Because a full

00:46:40.020 quote still has

00:46:40.860 the problem of

00:46:41.540 being taken out

00:46:42.200 of its larger

00:46:42.800 context.

00:46:44.080 Do you know

00:46:44.500 why something is

00:46:45.380 news?

00:46:45.740 news, this

00:46:46.800 is the

00:46:47.180 Scott Alexander

00:46:48.280 observation which

00:46:49.720 changed my

00:46:50.380 life.

00:46:51.620 This little piece

00:46:53.480 of knowledge, I've

00:46:54.100 said it before, but

00:46:54.820 it fits in this

00:46:55.940 context, the

00:46:57.340 reason something

00:46:58.220 becomes news is

00:47:00.000 because it's not

00:47:00.620 true.

00:47:02.020 Do you

00:47:02.640 understand why?

00:47:04.280 The reason it's

00:47:05.300 in the news is

00:47:06.000 because it's not

00:47:06.580 true.

00:47:08.240 Because things

00:47:09.220 that are true

00:47:09.820 don't surprise

00:47:10.780 you.

00:47:11.700 They're not

00:47:12.120 newsworthy.

00:47:12.680 They're not.

00:47:15.520 So the only

00:47:16.240 thing the news

00:47:16.800 does is something

00:47:17.580 that will make

00:47:18.060 you go, what?

00:47:19.460 Are you

00:47:19.960 kidding?

00:47:21.040 And reality

00:47:21.760 doesn't do that

00:47:22.440 too much.

00:47:23.460 Or not enough

00:47:24.280 to sustain the

00:47:25.280 business model.

00:47:27.180 So if you see

00:47:28.500 something that,

00:47:29.460 let's say you

00:47:30.180 read tomorrow,

00:47:31.560 that Hunter

00:47:32.100 Biden was found

00:47:33.560 on the side of

00:47:34.220 the road

00:47:34.680 cannibalizing a

00:47:36.280 stray dog.

00:47:37.420 He was just

00:47:37.900 eating it with

00:47:38.480 his bare teeth.

00:47:39.820 And that was

00:47:40.180 the story.

00:47:40.620 What would

00:47:42.180 be your

00:47:42.660 impression of

00:47:43.820 the likelihood

00:47:44.420 of that being

00:47:45.100 true?

00:47:46.300 You should

00:47:46.860 immediately say

00:47:47.900 no.

00:47:49.080 The reason it's

00:47:50.100 a story is

00:47:51.560 because it's so

00:47:52.200 wildly implausible

00:47:53.640 that your brain

00:47:54.760 explodes when you

00:47:55.540 hear it.

00:47:56.840 So the more

00:47:57.460 like Hunter

00:47:59.040 cannibalizing a

00:48:00.020 stray dog with

00:48:00.820 his bare teeth,

00:48:01.780 the more the

00:48:02.500 story's like that,

00:48:04.300 the less likely

00:48:05.080 it's true.

00:48:06.980 The reason it's

00:48:08.580 in the news is

00:48:09.540 because it's

00:48:10.060 untrue.

00:48:11.440 So once you

00:48:12.400 get rid of the

00:48:12.980 model that if

00:48:14.100 it's true and

00:48:15.700 important, that's

00:48:16.960 like a direct

00:48:17.660 path to the

00:48:19.040 news.

00:48:21.500 Not if it's

00:48:22.340 boring.

00:48:23.320 If it's true and

00:48:24.860 important, it does

00:48:26.160 not become news.

00:48:27.460 Not automatically

00:48:28.520 because nobody

00:48:29.480 cares.

00:48:30.700 Let me think of

00:48:31.320 something that's

00:48:31.900 true and not in

00:48:33.440 the news.

00:48:36.220 Pollution doesn't

00:48:37.140 seem to be getting

00:48:37.980 worse in America.

00:48:39.320 Have you seen all

00:48:40.720 the big stories

00:48:41.520 about the

00:48:42.580 pollution, at

00:48:43.320 least overall,

00:48:44.140 you know, in

00:48:44.660 pockets, yes.

00:48:45.640 But overall, no,

00:48:47.320 it's not a story.

00:48:48.700 It's just sort of a

00:48:49.560 good thing that's

00:48:50.460 about what you

00:48:51.100 think it is, and

00:48:52.100 that's about it.

00:48:53.180 It's a big deal.

00:48:54.660 I mean, the

00:48:55.400 actual environment

00:48:56.280 that you have to

00:48:56.880 live and breathe

00:48:57.480 and drink, it's a

00:48:58.820 big freaking deal.

00:49:00.300 But it's not news

00:49:01.440 because it's just

00:49:02.780 what you expected.

00:49:03.480 But the day you

00:49:06.040 get Hunter Biden

00:49:06.880 eating a stray dog

00:49:08.240 with his bare teeth

00:49:09.280 on the side of

00:49:10.520 the road, last

00:49:11.840 news, it just

00:49:12.720 didn't happen.

00:49:14.440 All right.

00:49:16.100 How about a

00:49:17.060 whistleblower under

00:49:18.160 oath?

00:49:18.640 One whistleblower

00:49:19.720 under oath with

00:49:21.180 no documents to

00:49:22.960 back it up.

00:49:23.600 One whistleblower

00:49:24.560 under oath with

00:49:26.840 no backup.

00:49:29.380 No supporting

00:49:30.300 documents and no

00:49:31.440 friends who saw

00:49:32.640 the same thing.

00:49:34.440 Credibility?

00:49:38.420 50%.

00:49:38.860 Yeah, if you

00:49:41.180 say less than

00:49:41.780 50, I won't

00:49:42.420 argue with you.

00:49:43.460 So I'm seeing

00:49:43.960 estimates, you

00:49:44.560 know, 20 to

00:49:45.180 50%.

00:49:45.800 That's about

00:49:46.620 right.

00:49:47.780 If there's no

00:49:48.560 supporting evidence,

00:49:50.020 just one person,

00:49:52.440 not good enough.

00:49:53.860 Suppose you have

00:49:54.420 two.

00:49:55.580 Suppose you have

00:49:56.100 multiple whistleblowers

00:49:57.340 and they're both

00:49:58.840 under oath and

00:50:00.280 they have the same

00:50:01.020 story.

00:50:01.420 where are you

00:50:02.780 now?

00:50:04.000 Yeah, you're up

00:50:04.520 around 75, 90%,

00:50:06.300 aren't you?

00:50:07.820 And then the

00:50:08.420 whistleblowers

00:50:08.980 produce the

00:50:09.660 documents,

00:50:12.380 emails, and the

00:50:13.900 documents agree with

00:50:15.940 both whistleblowers

00:50:17.220 under oath.

00:50:20.440 You're up close to

00:50:21.860 100%.

00:50:22.480 I'm going to say

00:50:23.360 nothing's 100%.

00:50:24.360 But you're up to

00:50:25.800 95.

00:50:27.560 Yeah, it might

00:50:28.440 even be 99,

00:50:29.640 right?

00:50:31.220 Exactly.

00:50:32.920 All right.

00:50:33.640 So here is what I

00:50:34.940 would love to see

00:50:35.740 as a standard for

00:50:38.340 the news.

00:50:39.340 Imagine you had

00:50:40.260 an AI news bot

00:50:42.940 and you told the

00:50:44.320 AI, all right,

00:50:45.440 look at all the

00:50:46.040 other headlines and

00:50:46.920 stories in the other

00:50:47.620 publications,

00:50:48.140 take them and

00:50:50.340 compile them,

00:50:51.740 and then put a

00:50:53.080 grade on them for

00:50:53.960 credibility.

00:50:55.840 So it would collect

00:50:56.560 all the stories of

00:50:57.580 the, like the

00:50:58.060 Ibram, you know,

00:50:59.000 Kendi quotes and

00:50:59.980 the RFK quotes and

00:51:01.020 it would say,

00:51:01.980 uh, okay, give that

00:51:03.420 a, you know, give that

00:51:04.860 a 2 and a 10 for

00:51:06.000 credibility.

00:51:07.420 Yeah, we'll give

00:51:08.060 this one a, you

00:51:09.260 know, give this one

00:51:09.940 a 1 and, you

00:51:11.340 know, maybe this is a

00:51:12.540 0.

00:51:12.800 We'll give the

00:51:14.240 one whistleblower, uh,

00:51:16.720 you know, a 5 and a

00:51:18.120 10.

00:51:18.920 Two whistleblowers

00:51:20.120 will give a 7 or an

00:51:21.440 8 and two whistleblowers

00:51:22.960 with documents, boom,

00:51:25.020 10.

00:51:26.240 10 doesn't mean

00:51:27.180 100%, but 10.

00:51:29.440 How much would you

00:51:30.460 love to see the

00:51:33.260 stories you're seeing

00:51:34.220 with an overlay of

00:51:35.960 the credibility based

00:51:37.800 on the quality of the

00:51:38.920 evidence?

00:51:40.280 Now, another one

00:51:41.020 would be, uh, the

00:51:42.020 other one I use

00:51:42.700 is, uh, are the

00:51:44.440 left and the right

00:51:45.220 reporting this story

00:51:46.360 the same?

00:51:47.560 That's a really good

00:51:48.540 one, right?

00:51:49.840 So if the left and

00:51:51.100 the right both say

00:51:51.900 there's a hurricane,

00:51:53.480 probably a hurricane.

00:51:55.120 That's a very good

00:51:55.820 chance.

00:51:56.440 Very good chance.

00:51:57.620 If the left and the

00:51:58.680 right say, uh, Trump

00:52:00.480 made a giant mistake

00:52:01.700 and then they, you

00:52:02.920 know, show it to you

00:52:03.860 in the video and the

00:52:04.740 documents and

00:52:05.300 everything, probably

00:52:06.060 true.

00:52:07.000 Because even, you

00:52:07.800 know, even his

00:52:08.380 friends say it

00:52:09.080 happened.

00:52:10.320 But suppose one

00:52:11.420 entity says it

00:52:12.220 happened and the

00:52:13.560 other entity says it

00:52:14.560 actually didn't

00:52:15.140 happen.

00:52:16.780 Did it happen?

00:52:18.740 And it goes either

00:52:19.460 way.

00:52:20.480 So it could be CNN

00:52:21.360 says yes, Fox

00:52:22.400 News said no, or

00:52:23.320 doesn't cover it, or

00:52:24.740 the reverse.

00:52:26.160 Fox News says it

00:52:27.140 happened and CNN

00:52:27.920 just says it

00:52:29.380 didn't.

00:52:30.860 You need both of

00:52:31.980 them to say it

00:52:32.620 before you can be

00:52:33.400 confident.

00:52:34.740 Doesn't mean the

00:52:35.700 one source is wrong.

00:52:37.320 But you shouldn't

00:52:37.880 have confidence in

00:52:40.060 anything that's only

00:52:41.380 from one side, the

00:52:42.260 other side says it

00:52:43.000 didn't happen.

00:52:44.320 Because you do see

00:52:45.220 examples where one

00:52:46.800 side is just purely

00:52:47.720 lying and it did

00:52:48.680 happen.

00:52:49.800 It did.

00:52:50.700 So it's not 100%.

00:52:51.700 But the only thing

00:52:53.300 that gets close to

00:52:54.180 100% is when the

00:52:55.820 enemies agree on the

00:52:56.960 facts.

00:52:58.340 Then you're pretty

00:52:59.160 confident, but not

00:53:00.480 great.

00:53:01.860 All right.

00:53:02.580 Kamala Harris said

00:53:03.620 in a tweet that

00:53:05.040 extremists want to

00:53:05.980 replace history with

00:53:07.020 lies.

00:53:07.500 is talking about

00:53:08.540 the slavery and

00:53:10.600 the slaves benefiting

00:53:11.940 somehow from

00:53:12.760 learning skills.

00:53:15.320 Allegedly.

00:53:16.520 And she said

00:53:17.960 extremists want to

00:53:19.060 replace history with

00:53:20.020 lies and we will

00:53:21.100 not stand for it.

00:53:22.820 And then in

00:53:23.540 Florida she stands

00:53:24.380 with them, blah,

00:53:24.900 blah, blah.

00:53:25.540 Did anybody tell

00:53:26.380 Kamala that fake

00:53:28.460 news didn't start in

00:53:29.600 2015 when Trump

00:53:31.400 came down the

00:53:31.980 escalator?

00:53:34.120 They're actually

00:53:34.820 people who are

00:53:35.660 modern adults who

00:53:38.680 like can wear

00:53:39.320 suits and look

00:53:41.300 good and they

00:53:42.680 can get jobs and

00:53:43.640 they went to

00:53:44.220 college and

00:53:44.820 everything.

00:53:45.900 Actually went to

00:53:46.560 college and

00:53:48.020 somehow believed

00:53:49.840 that history is

00:53:50.560 real.

00:53:52.720 How many of you

00:53:53.580 think history is

00:53:54.320 real?

00:53:56.240 I mean the big

00:53:57.120 events are, but

00:53:58.140 I'm talking about

00:53:58.680 the interpretations

00:53:59.680 of why.

00:54:01.100 it's not real.

00:54:05.920 Let me tell you

00:54:06.820 something that

00:54:07.480 most of you won't

00:54:08.600 believe, but a few

00:54:09.440 of you will.

00:54:11.740 If they wrote the

00:54:12.960 history of the

00:54:14.300 last six years

00:54:15.520 that I've been

00:54:16.140 involved in

00:54:17.180 politics, they

00:54:19.240 wouldn't even be

00:54:19.840 close.

00:54:22.460 Because the

00:54:23.300 things that are

00:54:23.840 really driving

00:54:24.580 things are

00:54:25.600 completely unknown

00:54:26.460 to the news.

00:54:27.820 I don't know how

00:54:28.500 any historian would

00:54:29.580 find out.

00:54:30.740 I see things

00:54:31.760 regularly that

00:54:33.600 describe why

00:54:34.940 things are

00:54:35.340 happening, that

00:54:36.120 I can determine

00:54:38.040 or high

00:54:38.420 credibility kinds

00:54:40.080 of stuff, and

00:54:41.440 it's nothing like

00:54:42.240 what's in the

00:54:42.700 news.

00:54:43.420 The news is

00:54:44.060 completely

00:54:44.740 disconnected from

00:54:46.680 why anything

00:54:47.380 happens.

00:54:48.360 They're a little

00:54:48.800 bit good on

00:54:49.380 what.

00:54:51.080 Hurricane did

00:54:52.000 happen.

00:54:53.760 The electoral

00:54:54.960 college did

00:54:55.740 vote.

00:54:56.760 That kind of

00:54:57.220 stuff.

00:54:57.720 The Supreme

00:54:58.220 Corps made this

00:54:59.120 ruling.

00:55:00.080 That's good.

00:55:00.900 But the why

00:55:01.760 of why anything

00:55:02.600 happened, that's

00:55:05.260 not in the

00:55:05.640 news.

00:55:06.600 That's always

00:55:07.460 unknown to the

00:55:08.220 public.

00:55:09.400 And I know

00:55:10.520 more whys than

00:55:11.500 historians.

00:55:13.260 I mean, there

00:55:13.540 are major,

00:55:14.880 major stories

00:55:15.620 that I personally

00:55:16.620 know are not

00:55:17.680 real and never

00:55:18.440 will be real.

00:55:19.540 Because the

00:55:20.220 thing that they

00:55:20.740 don't know,

00:55:21.260 they'll never

00:55:21.600 know.

00:55:22.840 Because of who

00:55:23.560 was involved and

00:55:24.280 how they did

00:55:24.760 it.

00:55:25.500 So I

00:55:26.680 personally know

00:55:27.520 that the

00:55:27.920 history of my

00:55:28.900 lifetime will

00:55:29.620 be ridiculous.

00:55:31.020 It'll just be

00:55:31.560 stupid.

00:55:32.560 It won't even

00:55:33.100 be close.

00:55:34.280 And you

00:55:34.580 believe that the

00:55:35.260 ancients had a

00:55:36.060 better process?

00:55:37.940 I mean, it's

00:55:39.080 trite to say that

00:55:40.040 history is written

00:55:40.820 by the winners,

00:55:41.560 but it's even

00:55:42.860 beyond that.

00:55:43.800 It's not just the

00:55:44.500 winners.

00:55:45.580 It's the person

00:55:46.140 who wrote it.

00:55:48.340 I mean, I guess

00:55:48.960 you have to be a

00:55:49.480 winner to even get

00:55:50.220 the job of writing

00:55:50.980 history.

00:55:51.720 But it's not even

00:55:52.600 the winning.

00:55:53.480 It's just that it's

00:55:54.240 individuals, it's

00:55:55.020 humans.

00:55:55.920 It's some human

00:55:56.640 with getting

00:55:58.440 paid.

00:55:59.800 Maybe somebody

00:56:00.540 wants to write a

00:56:01.140 history book and

00:56:01.900 all they want is to

00:56:02.640 get paid so they

00:56:03.300 make some stuff

00:56:03.900 up.

00:56:05.560 So it's not even

00:56:06.500 just winning.

00:56:07.300 It's that people

00:56:07.840 do it.

00:56:08.840 Humans write

00:56:09.460 history.

00:56:09.940 It couldn't

00:56:10.220 possibly be true.

00:56:12.540 Let me design a

00:56:13.660 system for you.

00:56:14.440 All right.

00:56:15.160 Let's design a

00:56:15.800 system.

00:56:16.640 We want a system

00:56:17.420 that records

00:56:18.180 accurately all the

00:56:19.760 major events and

00:56:20.760 the reasons for

00:56:21.400 them in history.

00:56:22.620 All right, good.

00:56:23.300 All right, that's

00:56:23.580 what we want to

00:56:24.100 do.

00:56:24.500 Now let's design

00:56:25.220 a system to get

00:56:26.060 that done.

00:56:27.220 All right, we're

00:56:27.880 going to pick

00:56:28.280 people who get

00:56:29.000 paid no matter

00:56:30.120 whether it's true

00:56:30.960 or not.

00:56:31.920 We'll call them

00:56:32.600 historians.

00:56:34.020 And they will be

00:56:36.280 just as flawed as

00:56:37.500 they are in every

00:56:38.620 other element of

00:56:40.240 human activities.

00:56:42.060 And then we'll

00:56:42.600 assign them to get

00:56:43.560 us our accurate

00:56:44.240 history.

00:56:45.400 Who makes that

00:56:46.320 system?

00:56:47.920 Design is destiny.

00:56:49.600 Right?

00:56:50.060 Our history making

00:56:52.080 and recording

00:56:52.740 process,

00:56:53.580 is designed to

00:56:55.420 make them all

00:56:55.980 lies.

00:56:57.900 You get that,

00:56:58.840 right?

00:56:59.520 It's not designed

00:57:00.320 to be accurate.

00:57:01.580 It's designed to

00:57:02.940 create lies that

00:57:04.540 create the

00:57:04.980 narratives that

00:57:05.720 drive civilization.

00:57:07.380 And by the way,

00:57:08.340 I don't even know

00:57:09.100 if that's a

00:57:09.480 problem.

00:57:11.140 So here's where I

00:57:12.540 give you the old

00:57:14.360 switcheroo.

00:57:15.500 It might be better

00:57:16.620 to have fake

00:57:17.920 history.

00:57:18.260 In fact, I could

00:57:20.560 make a pretty

00:57:21.060 strong argument

00:57:21.760 that fake history

00:57:23.200 is way better

00:57:23.860 than real history.

00:57:26.120 Because it means

00:57:27.080 that somebody said,

00:57:28.320 you know, we can

00:57:28.920 accomplish this or,

00:57:30.140 you know, the world

00:57:30.660 would be better or the

00:57:31.740 country will be

00:57:32.380 stronger if we just

00:57:34.280 sort of decide this

00:57:36.260 is our history.

00:57:37.580 Because what you do

00:57:38.580 in the past, or I'm

00:57:40.060 certain, what you

00:57:40.980 do, the decisions

00:57:42.160 you make next, are

00:57:43.720 almost entirely

00:57:44.800 driven by not just

00:57:46.840 your capabilities,

00:57:48.080 but who you think

00:57:49.160 you are.

00:57:50.780 How important do

00:57:51.720 you think it is to

00:57:52.480 my future decisions,

00:57:53.900 just everything, that

00:57:55.560 I define myself as a

00:57:57.360 patriotic American?

00:58:00.300 Like, in your mind,

00:58:01.040 you think, well, that

00:58:01.800 doesn't really affect

00:58:02.600 too many things,

00:58:03.560 except, you know,

00:58:04.200 maybe your vote or

00:58:05.140 something.

00:58:05.740 But I would argue

00:58:06.700 that it affects

00:58:07.260 everything I do.

00:58:08.100 my definition of

00:58:11.240 myself as a

00:58:13.520 patriotic American,

00:58:15.040 that informs

00:58:16.280 littering.

00:58:18.460 Right?

00:58:19.220 Like, I've got a

00:58:20.080 piece of garbage in

00:58:20.840 my hand and I'm

00:58:21.360 walking down the

00:58:21.960 sidewalk.

00:58:22.920 Does an American

00:58:24.080 patriot just drop it

00:58:26.080 on the sidewalk?

00:58:27.900 Do I litter?

00:58:29.380 No.

00:58:30.400 Because that's not

00:58:31.240 who I am.

00:58:32.300 I'm an American.

00:58:34.400 Right?

00:58:35.200 And I take that

00:58:35.960 seriously.

00:58:36.440 And all the

00:58:38.400 history of what

00:58:39.220 an American is,

00:58:41.060 which is, you

00:58:41.780 know, pure

00:58:42.180 propaganda, right?

00:58:43.300 I've just been

00:58:43.960 programmed the way

00:58:44.660 every kid was

00:58:45.360 programmed.

00:58:46.260 So I've been

00:58:46.720 programmed to have

00:58:47.380 this feeling of

00:58:48.160 America as sort of,

00:58:49.340 you know, special

00:58:50.060 and, you know,

00:58:51.320 we're, if we see a

00:58:53.640 problem, we solve it.

00:58:55.060 Actually, that's

00:58:55.760 maybe the single

00:58:57.460 most important part

00:58:58.800 of being American.

00:59:00.220 You see a problem

00:59:01.480 and then you just

00:59:03.120 go solve it.

00:59:03.720 We're really big

00:59:05.740 on problem solving

00:59:06.760 as opposed to

00:59:08.100 history, right?

00:59:09.300 Maybe in Europe

00:59:10.120 it's more about

00:59:10.740 history.

00:59:11.760 But in America

00:59:12.680 it's like, that's

00:59:13.820 broken.

00:59:14.960 That shit's broken.

00:59:16.000 Let's fix that

00:59:16.520 right away.

00:59:17.340 Fix it.

00:59:18.220 So I see the, you

00:59:19.620 know, the garbage

00:59:20.340 in my hand and I'm

00:59:21.680 looking for a solution

00:59:22.620 which is the garbage

00:59:23.820 pail.

00:59:24.620 So that's just part

00:59:25.580 of being an American.

00:59:27.100 If I didn't think I

00:59:28.200 were an American, I

00:59:29.040 think I might drop

00:59:29.780 the garbage on the

00:59:31.280 ground.

00:59:31.580 I don't care.

00:59:33.400 It's not my country.

00:59:35.320 So I don't think you

00:59:36.760 understand how

00:59:37.620 important history is

00:59:39.060 to give you a

00:59:40.500 definition of who

00:59:41.760 you are and then

00:59:43.180 that informs all of

00:59:44.340 your decisions.

00:59:45.080 Even stuff like

00:59:46.120 working hard and

00:59:46.860 obeying the law.

00:59:48.440 That's American,

00:59:49.980 right?

00:59:50.800 I mean, you could

00:59:51.320 easily imagine if you

00:59:52.500 didn't have that

00:59:53.080 programming, you'd

00:59:54.400 wake up into the

00:59:55.220 system and say,

00:59:56.020 all right, what's

00:59:56.480 easier, stealing or

00:59:57.460 working?

00:59:58.520 Huh, stealing looks

00:59:59.460 good.

00:59:59.700 So the

01:00:02.080 civilization requires

01:00:03.240 some kind of

01:00:04.140 agreed-upon lie

01:00:05.700 about who we are

01:00:07.460 and why we're

01:00:07.900 here.

01:00:09.000 I'm not sure you

01:00:09.820 need the truth.

01:00:11.680 All right, Elon

01:00:12.720 Musk tweeted,

01:00:14.640 the scariest answer

01:00:15.640 to the Fermi

01:00:16.480 paradox, that's the

01:00:17.800 question of why we

01:00:18.820 haven't seen aliens

01:00:19.740 if there are so

01:00:20.380 many of them

01:00:20.860 allegedly.

01:00:21.920 The scariest answer

01:00:22.860 to the Fermi

01:00:23.460 paradox is that

01:00:24.860 there are no

01:00:25.460 aliens at all.

01:00:26.440 that we are the

01:00:29.780 only candle of

01:00:30.700 consciousness in an

01:00:32.120 abyss of darkness,

01:00:33.560 to which I say,

01:00:36.200 kind of a downer

01:00:37.960 today, kind of a

01:00:39.640 downer.

01:00:41.320 But I added, of

01:00:43.360 course, if we're a

01:00:44.000 simulation, which I

01:00:46.820 think we are,

01:00:47.500 billion to one

01:00:48.240 odds we are,

01:00:49.100 then being alone

01:00:50.020 would be the normal

01:00:50.800 state, just like a

01:00:52.260 video game.

01:00:53.360 If you play a video

01:00:54.260 game, it's limited

01:00:55.460 to, you know, one

01:00:56.460 planet or a few

01:00:57.380 planets maybe, but

01:00:58.780 it's not the

01:00:59.300 universe.

01:01:00.840 So the nature of a

01:01:03.560 video game or any

01:01:05.200 simulation that we

01:01:06.080 would build is that

01:01:06.840 it would be limited

01:01:07.480 in its scope and it

01:01:09.480 wouldn't need other

01:01:10.160 aliens on some

01:01:11.020 planet we never go

01:01:11.920 to.

01:01:13.440 So it seems to me

01:01:16.020 it's just more

01:01:16.560 evidence of being a

01:01:17.340 simulation, but that

01:01:20.200 doesn't mean you're

01:01:20.760 alone.

01:01:21.860 It means the

01:01:22.340 opposite.

01:01:22.640 It means that

01:01:24.460 there's a creator

01:01:25.360 dimension, and

01:01:27.180 maybe those

01:01:27.880 creators had a

01:01:28.880 creator dimension

01:01:29.940 above them.

01:01:31.120 So actually, if

01:01:32.020 we're alone, it's

01:01:33.340 more indicative of

01:01:34.420 being infinitely

01:01:35.460 surrounded by

01:01:38.040 creator dimensions.

01:01:40.280 We just don't have

01:01:40.820 access to them.

01:01:42.200 So it's like being

01:01:42.860 alone on the

01:01:43.920 other side of a

01:01:44.500 wall, right?

01:01:45.940 There's somebody

01:01:46.360 on the other side

01:01:46.860 of the wall, it's

01:01:47.400 just you can't

01:01:48.100 touch them and deal

01:01:48.940 with them.

01:01:49.620 But we wouldn't

01:01:50.180 be technically alone.

01:01:51.400 And maybe our

01:01:52.480 own creators are

01:01:53.380 watching.

01:01:54.500 That's what it

01:01:55.020 feels like.

01:01:56.380 My actually lived

01:01:57.480 experience is that

01:01:58.540 there's somebody

01:01:59.080 watching.

01:02:00.440 How many of you

01:02:01.020 have that?

01:02:01.860 You might say it's

01:02:02.520 God or somebody

01:02:03.280 else or maybe your

01:02:04.540 spirit guide.

01:02:05.620 But how many of you

01:02:06.380 have an ongoing

01:02:07.280 feeling that there's

01:02:08.960 some entity that's

01:02:10.040 watching you?

01:02:11.120 I totally have that.

01:02:12.240 I don't have

01:02:13.140 religious belief.

01:02:14.660 But I have a strong

01:02:15.640 feeling of being

01:02:16.280 watched.

01:02:16.720 I always have.

01:02:17.300 from my earliest

01:02:19.420 memories as a

01:02:20.200 child, I was

01:02:21.660 sure somebody was

01:02:22.500 watching.

01:02:23.640 Now, you'll call

01:02:24.260 that God, and I

01:02:25.560 won't argue with

01:02:26.260 you.

01:02:27.160 But the simulation

01:02:28.500 theory gives you a

01:02:29.960 creator as well.

01:02:30.760 It's just a

01:02:31.200 different form.

01:02:33.120 All right.

01:02:35.260 Also, the simulation

01:02:36.300 theory I like because

01:02:37.620 it explains, you

01:02:39.660 know, everything.

01:02:42.580 All right.

01:02:43.140 Enough of that.

01:02:43.740 But I had the

01:02:47.600 greatest day today

01:02:48.580 so far.

01:02:51.540 Do you know how

01:02:52.260 long I've been

01:02:52.880 arguing that when

01:02:54.320 somebody debates

01:02:55.300 with an analogy,

01:02:56.840 you know, the

01:02:57.140 analogy is the

01:02:58.100 logic of their

01:02:59.600 debate, and I

01:03:00.820 keep saying, no,

01:03:01.680 analogies don't

01:03:02.620 prove anything, and

01:03:03.460 then you would say,

01:03:04.820 yes, they do.

01:03:05.460 They do prove

01:03:06.040 something.

01:03:06.480 In this case, it

01:03:07.060 works.

01:03:07.760 It's telling you,

01:03:08.520 you know, history is

01:03:09.360 suggestive and

01:03:10.180 patterns and blah, blah,

01:03:11.180 blah.

01:03:11.340 The analogy is

01:03:11.900 important.

01:03:12.840 And then I'll say

01:03:13.460 again, no, it

01:03:14.140 isn't.

01:03:14.560 You just imagine

01:03:15.260 that.

01:03:15.660 That's pure

01:03:16.100 imagination.

01:03:17.360 Analogy is just a

01:03:18.320 different situation.

01:03:19.560 It tells you

01:03:20.000 nothing.

01:03:21.240 So I've lost every

01:03:23.100 one of those

01:03:23.580 arguments.

01:03:24.040 Would you agree?

01:03:25.720 Can we agree I've

01:03:26.580 lost every one of

01:03:27.720 those arguments?

01:03:28.720 People really like

01:03:29.740 analogies as an

01:03:31.440 important part of

01:03:32.100 the debate.

01:03:33.740 Would you agree?

01:03:36.280 Or maybe you

01:03:37.060 think I did win,

01:03:38.460 but I've got the

01:03:40.200 kill shot today.

01:03:41.660 You ready?

01:03:43.460 Um, when I was

01:03:45.680 talking about the

01:03:46.200 simulation, um, let's

01:03:50.280 see, somebody tweeted

01:03:52.060 this, somebody named

01:03:53.100 ShareAdventure1 on

01:03:55.240 Twitter, um, was

01:03:56.780 mocking me and said,

01:03:57.900 simulation theory is

01:03:59.180 religion for nerds.

01:04:01.320 My, how things have

01:04:02.460 come full circle.

01:04:05.140 Simulation theory is

01:04:06.180 religion for nerds.

01:04:07.460 Now, here's what I did

01:04:08.500 in the old days.

01:04:09.740 In the old days, I

01:04:10.540 would say, your

01:04:11.680 analogy is flawed.

01:04:13.860 Because one is based

01:04:14.980 on faith, religion, and

01:04:17.760 the other is based on

01:04:18.580 statistics.

01:04:20.500 Totally different.

01:04:21.960 And that would totally

01:04:22.920 convince you and change

01:04:23.820 your mind, right?

01:04:24.940 No.

01:04:25.640 It would have no impact.

01:04:27.500 Debating the details of

01:04:28.940 an analogy will never

01:04:30.260 win your debate.

01:04:32.000 Never.

01:04:32.340 So, you want to hear

01:04:35.800 what I did instead?

01:04:38.480 I'm so proud of this

01:04:39.880 that I swear I'm going to

01:04:42.020 sprain my arm from

01:04:43.180 patting myself on the

01:04:44.280 back in about a minute.

01:04:46.080 I'm just so happy.

01:04:47.980 All right.

01:04:48.640 So, after I saw the

01:04:49.780 tweet that said,

01:04:50.720 simulation theory is

01:04:51.940 religion for nerds,

01:04:53.620 instead of using my

01:04:54.760 usual anti-analogy thing,

01:04:56.480 I said, I tweeted,

01:04:59.540 analogies give you an

01:05:00.860 LLM level of

01:05:02.200 intelligence in your

01:05:03.140 arguments.

01:05:04.440 Get back to me when

01:05:05.460 you achieve AGI.

01:05:11.940 Yeah?

01:05:14.080 Yeah?

01:05:14.940 Yeah?

01:05:16.060 You feel it?

01:05:18.080 Do you feel that?

01:05:19.920 Yeah.

01:05:20.420 Now, granted,

01:05:23.420 9 out of 10 people

01:05:24.520 will not get the joke.

01:05:26.460 9 out of 10 won't even

01:05:27.540 know what LLM is or AGI.

01:05:29.840 But, if you went and

01:05:31.120 looked it up,

01:05:32.240 it would be pretty funny.

01:05:34.320 So, if anybody's not

01:05:35.540 familiar with those

01:05:36.280 terms, they're AI terms.

01:05:38.340 LLM is our current

01:05:39.680 model of intelligence,

01:05:41.000 which is, we know to be,

01:05:42.260 nothing but a pattern

01:05:43.280 generator.

01:05:45.640 That's what analogies

01:05:46.780 are.

01:05:47.780 Analogies are just,

01:05:48.640 I recognize that

01:05:49.340 pattern.

01:05:51.400 But, real intelligence,

01:05:53.980 the kind we imagine to

01:05:55.280 be like human

01:05:56.020 intelligence, but I

01:05:57.240 think we're imagining

01:05:57.900 it, is called AGI.

01:05:59.680 It has some other

01:06:00.240 words, too.

01:06:01.500 So, instead of

01:06:03.000 arguing the analogy,

01:06:04.460 I'll simply note that

01:06:05.800 that's an LLM level of

01:06:08.000 AI, and I don't deal

01:06:11.480 on that level.

01:06:12.680 But, if somebody wants

01:06:13.480 to upgrade to AGI,

01:06:15.680 that's actually thinking,

01:06:17.520 and not just based

01:06:18.380 purely on pattern

01:06:19.220 recognition,

01:06:19.720 that's a debate

01:06:21.160 I'm all for.

01:06:23.260 So, I love the fact

01:06:24.620 that this comeback

01:06:25.760 requires somebody

01:06:27.000 to do research.

01:06:29.120 It's like homework.

01:06:30.820 Not only am I going

01:06:31.860 to disagree with you,

01:06:33.240 I'm assigning you

01:06:34.100 some homework.

01:06:35.180 You're going to have

01:06:35.640 to study up on this

01:06:36.480 to find out what I

01:06:37.240 just said about you.

01:06:38.420 It's like the perfect

01:06:39.340 tweet.

01:06:40.320 And I would like to

01:06:41.260 authorize all of you

01:06:42.540 to steal that tweet.

01:06:44.800 You can even say it's

01:06:45.600 yours.

01:06:46.500 I'll give you full

01:06:47.480 rights to it.

01:06:48.940 Because analogies

01:06:49.700 must die.

01:06:51.080 We must take analogies

01:06:52.640 out of public debate.

01:06:54.540 Because it's just

01:06:55.660 too unproductive.

01:06:58.040 So, come back to me

01:07:00.040 when you're AGI.

01:07:02.620 All right.

01:07:03.460 I saw a Greg Gutfeld

01:07:04.840 quote on competence.

01:07:06.980 I'm just going to read it

01:07:07.940 because I like this so much.

01:07:09.620 It's kind of a chaser

01:07:11.380 for today.

01:07:12.880 So, Greg Gutfeld

01:07:13.980 tweets,

01:07:14.520 every absurdity today

01:07:15.920 can be traced to

01:07:17.200 an abdication of

01:07:18.160 gatekeepers for

01:07:19.040 competence.

01:07:22.320 New Hampshire

01:07:23.100 pedophile elevated

01:07:24.560 to public office.

01:07:25.780 So, these are the

01:07:26.460 examples.

01:07:27.280 Absurd diversity

01:07:28.140 hires for the

01:07:28.860 military to VP.

01:07:31.540 You know, the VP

01:07:32.540 being a diversity

01:07:33.340 hire.

01:07:34.080 We're told our

01:07:34.720 standards for efficacy

01:07:35.780 are oppressive,

01:07:37.020 but the replacement

01:07:38.140 is so destructive,

01:07:39.500 it will take years

01:07:40.380 to fix.

01:07:41.920 Now, I feel like

01:07:44.300 this is a vague

01:07:45.380 effect.

01:07:47.800 Am I right?

01:07:49.420 Now that you have

01:07:50.300 a credible

01:07:51.460 presidential candidate

01:07:53.300 who is saying

01:07:55.280 that, you know,

01:07:56.120 the affirmative

01:07:59.040 action hiring

01:08:00.100 is ruining our

01:08:02.060 capability as a

01:08:03.160 country,

01:08:04.100 because he can say

01:08:05.720 it and he's not

01:08:06.240 getting cancelled,

01:08:07.140 and he's showing

01:08:07.980 his work.

01:08:09.080 He shows his work.

01:08:10.240 He makes great

01:08:10.860 arguments.

01:08:11.240 It allows the

01:08:12.320 rest of us to

01:08:13.000 play in his

01:08:13.620 sandbox.

01:08:15.260 Now, I think that

01:08:16.100 maybe in a smaller

01:08:16.940 way, I helped as

01:08:18.460 well, by getting

01:08:19.880 cancelled for saying

01:08:21.420 stuff that everybody

01:08:23.160 thinks.

01:08:24.540 So, this is

01:08:25.740 Vivek saying

01:08:26.560 things that

01:08:27.060 everybody thinks

01:08:28.000 that.

01:08:28.620 Everybody thinks

01:08:29.420 that if you focus

01:08:30.300 on something that's

01:08:31.140 not competence,

01:08:32.860 well, you'll get

01:08:33.400 exactly what you

01:08:34.140 designed the system

01:08:35.040 to give you.

01:08:36.400 Right?

01:08:37.120 Design is destiny.

01:08:38.240 So, if the design

01:08:39.640 is we're going to

01:08:40.300 favor your

01:08:41.400 immutable

01:08:41.860 characteristics,

01:08:43.000 not your

01:08:43.860 competence, you

01:08:45.680 get what you

01:08:46.080 pay for.

01:08:47.160 So, I just

01:08:48.440 love, I guess,

01:08:49.320 I love the quote.

01:08:50.740 I love that he

01:08:51.680 said it and

01:08:52.360 tweeted it, but I

01:08:53.700 love most that

01:08:55.380 Vivek allowed us

01:08:56.500 to do this.

01:08:57.720 Just speak our

01:08:59.340 honest opinions.

01:09:00.380 We're not always

01:09:01.040 right.

01:09:01.460 I'm not going

01:09:02.820 to claim that

01:09:03.480 free speech makes

01:09:04.880 me right, but

01:09:06.220 damn it, I want

01:09:06.820 to be wrong in

01:09:08.180 public, if I

01:09:09.880 want to, and I

01:09:11.100 want you to tell

01:09:11.600 me I'm wrong and

01:09:12.220 then show you

01:09:12.660 work and maybe I

01:09:13.360 get smarter, but

01:09:14.640 absolutely, I want

01:09:16.740 the free speech

01:09:18.160 expanded, and

01:09:19.500 you know, once

01:09:20.040 again, Vivek, he's

01:09:22.860 changing the world

01:09:23.880 without being

01:09:25.460 elected.

01:09:26.600 Who does

01:09:27.320 that?

01:09:28.680 Trump.

01:09:30.140 Only Trump.

01:09:31.460 I can't think of

01:09:32.160 anybody else.

01:09:33.020 But running for

01:09:33.860 election, he's

01:09:34.520 changing the world.

01:09:36.640 Now, I would say

01:09:37.300 RFK Jr., same

01:09:38.780 thing.

01:09:40.020 RFK Jr., I'm not

01:09:41.300 even sure he

01:09:41.800 expected or thought

01:09:42.900 he could get

01:09:43.320 elected.

01:09:44.120 He actually speaks

01:09:45.180 about getting his

01:09:46.140 free speech back

01:09:47.120 via process of

01:09:48.580 being a presidential

01:09:49.280 candidate.

01:09:49.940 He says that

01:09:50.440 directly, that he

01:09:51.640 would be too

01:09:52.800 censored, saying

01:09:54.200 the things he's

01:09:54.780 wanted to say

01:09:55.360 forever about

01:09:56.320 health and

01:09:57.720 environment and

01:09:58.580 everything.

01:09:59.900 That he has to

01:10:01.020 be a presidential

01:10:01.760 candidate to

01:10:02.460 have any chance

01:10:03.060 of all of

01:10:04.000 not being

01:10:04.600 squelched.

01:10:07.140 And he's

01:10:07.360 right.

01:10:08.340 But how much

01:10:09.360 do we owe

01:10:10.140 Vivek and

01:10:11.660 RFK Jr.

01:10:13.840 right now?

01:10:14.820 A lot.

01:10:16.260 Big debt.

01:10:17.320 Big debt to

01:10:18.060 those two.

01:10:19.800 All right.

01:10:21.880 And that,

01:10:22.760 ladies and

01:10:23.060 gentlemen, is

01:10:23.880 what I believe

01:10:24.720 will be the

01:10:25.340 finest entertainment

01:10:26.240 that you've

01:10:26.840 seen today so

01:10:29.560 far?

01:10:33.540 Yes.

01:10:34.540 So X, so

01:10:35.840 Tesla, I'm

01:10:36.660 sorry, Twitter

01:10:37.560 will become X.

01:10:40.060 And what do

01:10:43.100 you think of

01:10:43.380 that?

01:10:44.520 What do you

01:10:44.940 think of Twitter

01:10:45.600 becoming X?

01:10:47.180 My understanding

01:10:48.240 of it is that it

01:10:50.640 would be the

01:10:51.120 beginning of

01:10:51.720 turning Twitter

01:10:52.340 into the

01:10:52.940 everything app.

01:10:53.740 So X

01:10:57.020 actually is a

01:10:57.580 perfect name

01:10:58.160 for something

01:10:58.820 that's the

01:10:59.240 everything app.

01:11:00.740 It's also got

01:11:01.620 the X factor.

01:11:04.220 It's easy

01:11:04.860 to remember,

01:11:05.740 easy logo.

01:11:07.360 It's a good

01:11:07.840 choice.

01:11:08.460 It makes me

01:11:08.940 wonder why it

01:11:09.440 didn't exist.

01:11:10.760 Now, correct

01:11:12.680 me if I'm

01:11:13.140 wrong, there's

01:11:13.900 no current

01:11:14.920 stock that

01:11:15.920 starts with

01:11:16.340 X, right?

01:11:18.220 Let me check.

01:11:19.100 I don't think

01:11:19.480 there is.

01:11:20.820 Xerox or

01:11:21.700 Xerox?

01:11:22.260 Oh, Xerox is

01:11:24.420 X?

01:11:24.740 Oh, that's a

01:11:25.140 problem.

01:11:25.980 I wonder if he

01:11:26.520 has to buy

01:11:26.940 Xerox.

01:11:29.680 What would it

01:11:30.340 cost to buy

01:11:30.800 Xerox so

01:11:31.660 they could get

01:11:32.120 that X?

01:11:37.140 SpaceX?

01:11:38.140 Yeah, we got

01:11:38.560 a SpaceX.

01:11:40.340 He likes his

01:11:41.080 X's.

01:11:42.460 Tesla model

01:11:43.280 was an X.

01:11:45.000 So he's

01:11:45.560 put an X

01:11:46.100 in everything

01:11:46.520 he's done.

01:11:47.060 He's clearly

01:11:47.840 been shooting

01:11:48.960 for X for a

01:11:49.760 long time.

01:11:50.940 Text X.

01:11:51.680 Oh, yeah,

01:11:53.340 there's an X

01:11:53.960 in text.

01:11:57.200 And his car

01:11:58.140 models were

01:11:58.820 S3XY.

01:12:00.740 Sexy.

01:12:05.320 All right.

01:12:06.260 Grimes is

01:12:06.820 his X.

01:12:07.960 Oh, yeah,

01:12:08.380 he's got a

01:12:08.740 whole bunch

01:12:09.040 of X's.

01:12:11.740 He has

01:12:12.340 lots of

01:12:12.720 X's.

01:12:13.820 And Hunter's

01:12:14.320 X-rated.

01:12:16.620 X is U.S.

01:12:17.620 steel?

01:12:18.160 No, it

01:12:18.460 isn't.

01:12:19.140 Is it?

01:12:19.500 Generation X?

01:12:22.620 All right.

01:12:24.020 Thank you,

01:12:24.860 YouTube,

01:12:25.340 for joining

01:12:25.900 today.

01:12:27.100 I think

01:12:27.900 it was

01:12:28.140 amazing.

01:12:28.980 And I'll

01:12:30.060 talk to you

01:12:30.480 tomorrow.

01:12:31.460 Same place,

01:12:32.660 same time.

01:12:33.220 Thank you.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - July 23, 2023

Episode 2178 Scott Adams： Today I Teach You A New Rule For Spotting Fake News, You'll Love This one

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript