In this episode of Coffee with Scott Adams, host Scott Adams talks about how to predict which products will be a hit and which ones will fail, and how to fix the ones that don t work. And then, of course, he talks about his new book, Reframe Your Brain, which is out now.
00:02:21.580But that would be an example of a product that's terrible, like a regular shop vac.
00:02:28.100If you use them, they always fall over.
00:02:30.060And all the cords get, you know, the hose and the cords are all tangled.
00:02:34.960So a shop vac is something that predicts success a different way.
00:02:40.500The way the shop vac predicts that you're going to want it anyway is that you will put up with the worst design of a product in the history of products.
00:02:59.440Now, the fact that I would put, like, two days of effort into fixing my shop vac just so it doesn't fall over every time I move it and get tangled up means that I really wanted a shop vac.
00:03:28.020But the second prediction, second method of prediction, is the extended product.
00:03:34.320Now, this is almost the opposite of the first case.
00:03:38.760The first case is there's something wrong with it and people are trying to fix it or put up with it.
00:03:43.840The second case is that they like it so much they want more of it.
00:03:49.100So it took all of one day from the time that the soft cover was published for Reframe Your Brain that two people ripped it off and put up what they call workbooks,
00:04:02.280which is essentially my book with my name on it and my title, but they put workbook above it and they summarize it.
00:04:11.880Now, of course, this is deeply illegal and unethical, in my opinion, because this particular book, there's nothing wrong with summarizing a book.
00:04:33.980The entire reason that I wrote Reframe Your Brain is to take a bunch of complicated stuff and put it in the shortest, literally two-sentence form.
00:04:42.800The old sentence, the bad way of thinking of it, and then the new sentence that reprograms your brain.
00:04:49.400And somebody immediately, within 24 hours, had published two different books, two different authors.
00:04:56.720And I saw it the first time, and my first impression, let me walk you through this.
00:06:14.200That's almost always a reliable indicator of a hit.
00:06:18.200And it was a wild number one bestseller.
00:06:20.560So the fact that this book is hitting that same kind of energy, that people are stealing it the moment it appears, it's just like massively being stolen.
00:07:25.820We'll talk about these other stories in detail.
00:07:28.060We'll talk about Trump and we'll talk about Elon Musk.
00:07:30.280But if you don't know, both Musk and Trump were targeted in what looks like really transparently obvious political attacks from the Biden administration.
00:07:42.820Now, you could say it's not the administration.
00:07:46.100It's individual, you know, prosecutors.
00:08:45.000But when we're watching this stuff like what's happening to Trump, what's happening today to Musk, we'll tell you about it if you haven't heard.
00:08:52.640These seem so obviously over the line.
00:08:56.360And at the same time, we're not hearing anything from the administration about whether they would or would not put up with more mandates for COVID.
00:09:05.980I mean, just imagine that if Biden were in charge, you'd see a lot more of them, obviously.
00:09:16.020And I don't think he would allow things to go where they are now because it's just so, so obvious that it's criminal.
00:12:04.020So even a threat won't work in this situation.
00:12:09.140You know, I keep thinking, well, what can you do about it?
00:12:11.540You know, what can we do about this situation?
00:12:13.160And I thought, well, you know, what if the people who are, you know, on the other side of this, the conservatives, let's say, suppose they banded together to do what?
00:12:55.080I mean, we're at the point where you have to say, again, the most important reframe, in my opinion, is that citizens are innocent until proven guilty.
00:13:08.080The government is guilty until proven innocence by transparency.
00:13:13.880Transparency is the only thing that gets you a pass.
00:13:16.540If you can let us inside, let us look around, audit when we need to, you know, let people have access to whatever we need to, well, then I'm willing to say, all right, we looked around, didn't find anything, carry on.
00:13:31.620But the moment transparency is not fully in effect, the assumption has to be the worst case.
00:13:39.300So while I have zero evidence that anything happened with all 50 of the state elections, I know I don't have transparency.
00:13:47.140And while I don't know exactly what's going on with all these decisions about Trump being dieted everywhere and whatever's happening to Musk that looks like, you know, transparently political, I have to assume that that's all dirty.
00:14:01.260The operating assumption is that it's all crooked.
00:14:07.040So in my opinion, the lack of transparency allows a reasonable person to say you have a criminal enterprise, but I don't believe it's organized.
00:14:28.820Wall Street Journal had their top editorial piece today was on Vivek Ramaswamy.
00:14:39.420And the general take was that he's too inexperienced in international geopolitical stuff and that he'd get us in trouble with his lack of experience.
00:14:52.580And so two examples would be that he would be willing to end the Ukraine war, you know, negotiate something, make sure Putin doesn't feel threatened from NATO and try to wind that down.
00:15:07.100And the Wall Street editorial board believes that there's a way better, there's a better option than that and that he's doing the dumb one.
00:15:17.160Do you know what the better option is?
00:15:19.180Does everybody know what the better option is than stopping a war that we don't need?
00:16:00.200Now, when I say beat them, I mean, you know, beat them down to the point where China would say, I mean, just hold this in your head.
00:16:08.680That their better idea than ending an optional war, the better idea is to beat down that superpower until China didn't want to deal with them.
00:16:40.620And then here's the other one that, because Vivek doesn't want to protect Taiwan forever,
00:16:46.720he says, once we get our microchip business here, then that's China's business.
00:16:51.540And the Wall Street Journal says, but if you let Taiwan go, you're selling out Japan because China's obvious intentions are to take over the whole South China Sea.
00:17:04.300Maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe that is their intention.
00:17:10.360But is, is Taiwan the thing you're going to defend?
00:17:15.340Now, I, I, I get that we should defend, you know, to some extent our, our allies.
00:17:23.520That's sort of what the ally thing is about.
00:17:25.580But do we have to be everybody's, we have to be everybody's police force on the other side of the world, on the, on the beach practically of China?
00:17:35.120That's, that's, that's where we're going to be the police?
00:17:38.300You know, I don't, I don't have a great idea, by the way.
00:17:41.480I'm not sure what's the right thing to do on Taiwan.
00:17:45.800There might be something you can negotiate that had some other element besides Taiwan that, that gives everybody something like a good result.
00:17:53.320I don't know, maybe, but, um, I'm kind of suspicious of that, uh, editorial.
00:18:02.440Speaking of suspicion, and I'll get to Trump and his mugshot and all that, um, I'm not sure I want to, uh, support, uh, Vivek anymore.
00:18:14.180And I have the same problem with Trump.
00:18:16.640So I, I wouldn't move to Trump because I've got the same fucking problem.
00:26:13.020Do you think Trump didn't know he was creating the meme of memes that will be the single most popular meme in the history of human civilization?
00:28:22.880Well, there's a thing called the 14th Amendment.
00:28:34.020If you didn't know that, this says you can't run for federal office if you supported or gave aid or comfort to an insurrection or rebellion.
00:28:43.460I wonder why they called January 6th an insurrection instead of what it obviously was, a protest that had violent elements.
00:31:23.960So, the level of fuckery that's involved here is, there is the worst part.
00:31:34.260What percentage of the general public do you think understands what I just told you?
00:31:39.100Specifically, that the Constitution bars you from running for a federal office if you were an insurrectionist.
00:31:45.960And, two, that January 6th was a protest that the Democrats tried to make an insurrection for the purpose of using this constitutional little technicality to take somebody who won at least, you know, close to half of the votes, or more, depends who you're talking to.
00:32:11.160How much of the public understands this?
00:32:20.000It's easy to imagine that if you hang out with other people who care about what you care about, it's easy to imagine everybody knows the same stuff.
00:32:36.720It works because the news won't cover it.
00:32:39.720Do you think CNN is explaining this to their audience every day?
00:32:42.560All right, CNN audience, let me see if you understand this.
00:32:47.080January 6th could be called several things, but if you call it an insurrection, you might get to trigger this part of the Constitution to keep somebody out of office for a reason that was clearly not anticipated in the Constitution.
00:33:02.000The Constitution didn't say that asking for a recount or doubting the election or having a protest or even a protest that got violent.
00:33:13.800None of those things should trigger the 14th Amendment.
00:33:35.180If I didn't read his writing specifically, honestly, I wouldn't know this because I read all the news and I didn't see it in the regular news.
00:33:46.320I saw one person who has a platform and he doesn't have the biggest platforms.
00:33:51.820He gets published in a number of places.
00:34:49.820So the government has put two incompatible laws on SpaceX and decided that they're going to pursue one of them that's in complete conflict with the other.
00:35:04.060Now, somebody smart, who goes by the name of Compass Prime, said this, and give me a fact check on this if you know.
00:35:15.760It said, quote, they'll try to get Elon on a process crime.
00:35:20.240Going after SpaceX was so they can use FISA to collect every communication Musk makes two hops away.
00:35:28.960Because it's not just who you talk to, but then maybe you can get to who you talk to, who you talk to.
00:35:35.260And there are national security considerations with ITAR.
00:35:38.740I guess that's the part that says you can only hire Americans for certain businesses, you know, if they're defense-related, I guess.
00:35:46.340And that makes it FISA-eligible because their ITAR, I guess ITAR would have something with international.