Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - September 11, 2026


DHS Says Ilhan Omar MARRIED HER BROTHER, Consequences Coming | Timcast IRL


Episode Stats


Length

2 hours and 19 minutes

Words per minute

195.83

Word count

27,410

Sentence count

2,285

Harmful content

Misogyny

36

sentences flagged

Toxicity

61

sentences flagged

Hate speech

75

sentences flagged


Transcript

Transcripts from "Timcast IRL - Tim Pool" are sourced from the Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool. Explore them interactively here.
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:01:03.000 DH secretary says Ilhan Omar married her brother and consequences are coming.
00:01:09.000 On 9 11 of all days.
00:01:10.000 So it seems like these stories that have been.
00:01:14.000 I got to be careful.
00:01:16.000 She was alleged to have married her brother to help him get to immigrate to the United States.
00:01:20.000 And it's reportedly been confirmed several times.
00:01:23.000 So I guess now the DHS secretary is saying she did and consequences are coming.
00:01:28.000 I guess it's just very easy to say she did.
00:01:29.000 Now the question is is this enough to denaturalize and deport her, especially considering she's a sitting member of Congress?
00:01:36.000 So we're going to talk about that.
00:01:37.000 Plus, we've got some funny outcomes from the Lindsey Clancy trial where, yeah, it's, I was at Gail King, I think.
00:01:45.000 She finds out that the lone holdout juror was black and she's like, I need to process this. 0.69
00:01:49.000 Like, uh oh.
00:01:49.000 She thought I was going to be a white guy.
00:01:52.000 But my friends, today on this day, remembering 25 years since 9 11, there's a lot to say as to where this country has gone, as well as it's only one day after the one year anniversary of Charlie Kirk's murder.
00:02:05.000 So we'll talk about quite a bit of everything.
00:02:07.000 We actually have a couple of guests joining us today.
00:02:09.000 Sir, would you like to introduce yourself first?
00:02:11.000 Sure.
00:02:11.000 Yeah.
00:02:12.000 I'm Josh Dawes, the VP of Technology at Blaze Media and the director of the Continuing Adventures of Mary Sue.
00:02:20.000 Great, great short films, by the way.
00:02:23.000 It's mind blowing.
00:02:24.000 Indistinguishable from any multi billion dollar studio's work.
00:02:28.000 It's crazy what AI is capable of now.
00:02:28.000 Yeah.
00:02:31.000 And so as a filmmaker, I'm excited to be able to use the technology to tell stories.
00:02:35.000 And, you know, we were just talking about this before the show and a little bit yesterday because they've released a couple new models in terms of just general computation and stuff.
00:02:45.000 Astra and Claude.
00:02:46.000 And the way I described it is the work we've already done on programming, it's like the analogy of taking a shuttle, or I'm not a shuttle, but like a rocket to go to Alpha Centauri.
00:02:57.000 By the time you're halfway there, a ship from Earth passes you by because the rate of technological development is faster than it would take us to travel.
00:03:04.000 So all the work we've done in programming video games, waste of time.
00:03:10.000 It's getting to the point.
00:03:10.000 Because the new models that have come out have accomplished what took us three months in a day.
00:03:14.000 It's going to get to the point where you tell Claude to iterate.
00:03:17.000 A version of your game, and while it's programming, they're going to develop a new AI that's going to be even faster than it is before it's done iterating your hour long thing.
00:03:24.000 Now, before I don't want to get into everything right off the rip, talking about AI and where it goes brings us to questions of the nature of reality because of how it's affecting people's minds, how they're experiencing reality.
00:03:35.000 So, we have another guest who can talk a bit about that.
00:03:38.000 Hey, Tim.
00:03:39.000 Hi, everybody.
00:03:40.000 My name is Danny Goller, and I became known to claim that I found proof that we live in simulation.
00:03:45.000 So, this should be a fun conversation.
00:03:47.000 But, proof.
00:03:48.000 Evidence, maybe, like you found something.
00:03:50.000 Yeah.
00:03:51.000 You found what appears to be a code in reality.
00:03:54.000 Yeah.
00:03:55.000 I mean, the way I said it is just the viral way of saying it.
00:03:57.000 But yeah, I basically found a way to stabilize the signal in the psychedelic space in a way that everybody can agree on what they see.
00:04:03.000 And this is across conditions, iterations.
00:04:05.000 Doesn't matter who you are, where you are, how you are.
00:04:07.000 It's always the same thing.
00:04:08.000 And I do want to make sure we stress because I know a lot of people are going to be rolling their eyes.
00:04:11.000 But you're actually very pragmatic about it.
00:04:14.000 In the in depth conversation of it, you're not explicitly stating it proves we're in a simulation.
00:04:18.000 No, no.
00:04:19.000 To say, yeah, yeah, yeah.
00:04:20.000 What we really do is that we're trying to figure out how is it possible that such a coherent observation can be in a state that, you know, I mean, DMT is a pretty heightened state.
00:04:31.000 So, how is it possible that you see something on the surface of it very mundane and everybody can?
00:04:35.000 And we have an organization called Coda Reality that is investigating it scientifically.
00:04:40.000 We have physicists on board, we have software engineers, we have people who are.
00:04:44.000 And to stress the pragmatism here, you've also entertained it could just be an underlying function of the human mind perceives these things.
00:04:51.000 So, You know, a lot of people are immediately going to think it's like hippy dippy weird pseudoscience stuff, but it's actually all base level science.
00:04:57.000 It's real.
00:04:57.000 Absolutely.
00:04:58.000 So it's going to be a lot of fun.
00:05:00.000 And of course, the boys are hanging out.
00:05:01.000 Hello, everybody.
00:05:02.000 It's up, Ian Carter.
00:05:03.000 What's up, everyone?
00:05:04.000 Sounds like it's going to be a great conversation, so I'm really pumped to have it.
00:05:07.000 Let's get into it.
00:05:08.000 Well, we'll always start with the polarizing partisanship.
00:05:11.000 We have this story from Blaze Media.
00:05:13.000 DHS Secretary Ilhan Omar says, not DHS Secretary Ilhan Omar, but saying, Ilhan Omar married her brother, consequences are coming.
00:05:23.000 What's going on?
00:05:24.000 Sorry, the stream deck was lagging there, and I need to get that out of there.
00:05:28.000 Let's start this one over.
00:05:31.000 From Blaze Media, DHS Secretary Ilhan Omar married her brother, and consequences are coming.
00:05:38.000 An unexpected surprise occurred on the floor of the 2026 Republican midterm.
00:05:38.000 Are coming.
00:05:43.000 Department of Homeland Security Secretary claimed Ilhan Omar married her brother.
00:05:48.000 Consequences are coming.
00:05:49.000 He says something's going to happen, Mark Wayne Mullen said after Benny Johnson asked about the accusations she married her brother so he could stay in the U.S.
00:05:56.000 We know that she married her brother to try to bring him to the States.
00:05:59.000 Rumors that Ahmed Nur Said Almu was married to Omar in 2009 is Omar's biological brother have swirled for years.
00:06:05.000 Now, I just want to stress a few things.
00:06:07.000 It's reportedly been confirmed several times, but everyone's still very careful because it's like very serious defamation territory.
00:06:14.000 However, with the secretary of DHS saying she did, well, now it's not defamation territory anymore.
00:06:19.000 It's a government official saying it happened.
00:06:21.000 So she can sue them.
00:06:22.000 I think it's fair to say. 0.98
00:06:23.000 Now, the question is Is this grounds for termination of her naturalization?
00:06:29.000 There's two points to be made.
00:06:30.000 One, another theory, or I should say accusation, is that she lied about her age when she was 18, claiming she was 17 because then she'd be eligible for expedited citizenship.
00:06:41.000 If she was 18, she'd have to go through a whole process.
00:06:43.000 So many people think that she just lied because Somalia doesn't have good record keeping.
00:06:49.000 But there's also one hypothesis that they could argue she got American citizenship for the purpose of illicitly getting others' citizenship through marriage, which would then be fraud on her part, which would then make her subject to denaturalization and deportation as a sitting member of Congress.
00:07:09.000 I'm going to go ahead and say nothing's going to happen.
00:07:11.000 I don't expect them to do anything.
00:07:13.000 And I'm going to just assume that everyone agrees with me.
00:07:16.000 Well, I agree that the chances of something happening are probably a long shot.
00:07:24.000 Whether or not, if the allegations are true, whether or not something should happen, to me, it's fairly obvious that it should. 0.91
00:07:32.000 She lied to attain citizenship. 0.99
00:07:35.000 She lied to get her brother in.
00:07:37.000 That's not just, again, to Tim's point, it's not just one thing, it's multiple things.
00:07:43.000 Denaturalize, deport, send her back.
00:07:46.000 This feels like.
00:07:46.000 Yeah, I know.
00:07:48.000 The kind of story that keeps coming back up.
00:07:51.000 It's just red meat for the base to throw us a bone.
00:07:54.000 I'll believe it when I see it.
00:07:56.000 I agree.
00:07:57.000 And it's Mark Wayne Mullen at convention passively saying something.
00:07:59.000 Yeah.
00:08:00.000 Yeah, to Benny Johnson.
00:08:01.000 So, I mean, fair enough.
00:08:02.000 But I understand you're just for clarity.
00:08:06.000 You said you'll believe it when you see something actually happen, or you'll believe that this is actually the case that she lied.
00:08:13.000 I believe it's totally the case.
00:08:13.000 Oh, no.
00:08:14.000 Okay.
00:08:15.000 I believe it.
00:08:17.000 The consequences are coming.
00:08:18.000 We'll see.
00:08:19.000 Yeah, we'll see.
00:08:20.000 That's because that's where I'm at.
00:08:20.000 Fair enough.
00:08:21.000 Like, I totally believe that she BS'd and married a brother and broke the law. 0.97
00:08:26.000 And that's why I said she should be deported. 1.00
00:08:30.000 Should have her citizenship stripped and then she should be deported. 0.99
00:08:30.000 Totally. 0.99
00:08:37.000 Whether or not that happens, I don't know.
00:08:39.000 How does it work in terms of the validity of the proclamation?
00:08:43.000 So, somebody official said it in what way?
00:08:46.000 Like, what was the.
00:08:47.000 Mark Wayne Mullen said to Benny Johnson and said.
00:08:50.000 We know that she married her brother to try to bring him into the United States.
00:08:54.000 And he said it on the floor of that convention they were having last night.
00:08:57.000 So it wasn't like it was in a kind of an off the cuff interview.
00:09:02.000 I don't know exactly how serious that is.
00:09:06.000 I think the forensics of this is the thing that will determine whether something happens.
00:09:10.000 Because if somebody can find a path there, like a clear path, then.
00:09:14.000 Well, the issue is Somalia doesn't have records. 0.82
00:09:18.000 They do, but not records. 0.52
00:09:20.000 So how do they know?
00:09:20.000 Just out of curiosity.
00:09:21.000 So the story bubbled up years ago because people in the Somali community in Minnesota.
00:09:28.000 Knew her family as she came to this country and knew that this was her brother.
00:09:33.000 But because of the nature of Somalia, when they come to the United States, the question is how do you prove they're related and how do you prove her age? 1.00
00:09:39.000 So they can lie. 0.90
00:09:41.000 But other people in Minnesota accused this and everybody was talking about it.
00:09:46.000 And there are some records, but I don't believe there's incontrovertible proof.
00:09:53.000 There's just circumstantial evidence.
00:09:53.000 There's not.
00:09:54.000 There's no DNA results, birth records, immigration files, sworn testimony yet. 0.96
00:10:01.000 It's all something that a government official said is true.
00:10:05.000 No, no, no.
00:10:06.000 JD Vance said that the DOJ is looking at it.
00:10:08.000 I apologize.
00:10:09.000 What part?
00:10:09.000 That's not correct.
00:10:10.000 The circumstantial evidence is largely witness testimony from Minnesota from individuals who know their family and said, hey, they did this thing.
00:10:20.000 That is not the strongest of evidence.
00:10:23.000 But when you have, like, there were photos posted which lend themselves, there are photos that she had which I think made reference to her.
00:10:32.000 It's been a long time since I covered this.
00:10:34.000 But I believe the accusation she made reference to him as her brother before they got married.
00:10:38.000 And then others confirmed hey, we know this family.
00:10:41.000 That's her brother. 0.99
00:10:42.000 And apparently he's gay. 0.51
00:10:44.000 And he wanted to come to the US for university or something.
00:10:46.000 So she married him so that he could temporarily stay here and then he left.
00:10:50.000 So, you know, we'll see.
00:10:52.000 That goes.
00:10:53.000 I think he's not here anymore.
00:10:54.000 I believe he left a long time ago.
00:10:55.000 Okay.
00:10:56.000 I feel like it's very flimsy to hang a case on.
00:10:56.000 Yeah.
00:11:00.000 If he's not here.
00:11:00.000 Circumstantial evidence?
00:11:02.000 Yeah.
00:11:02.000 Because if somebody's going to invest money in trying to prosecute something unless it's political theater, which might be used that way.
00:11:08.000 Then, I mean, if you know that there's no chance you're going to be able to drive this thing through, why would you even try?
00:11:14.000 Because the process is the punishment.
00:11:16.000 They want to harass Ilhan Omar.
00:11:18.000 They want to investigate her for something nonsense. 0.93
00:11:21.000 Or she's evil. 0.99
00:11:23.000 If it's nonsense and they want to screw with her and they can put her under investigation for something ridiculous. 0.99
00:11:23.000 She committed fraud. 0.99
00:11:27.000 Well, I will also stress, too, that it's been a long time since we've gone over all the social media posts and witness testimony.
00:11:35.000 But Star Tribune, which is a liberal publication in Minnesota, wrote a story seven years ago.
00:11:41.000 Saying that it is possible that she married her brother.
00:11:45.000 It is not something in the fringes.
00:11:47.000 It is actually like, hey, we have a preponderance of evidence she did, but the question is, what does the government have that we don't know about?
00:11:52.000 I'm going to ask a question.
00:11:54.000 Everybody at the table is going to laugh at me because I actually don't know.
00:11:57.000 In America, is it actually illegal to marry your sibling?
00:12:00.000 No. 1.00
00:12:01.000 Oh, you can?
00:12:02.000 Depends on where you are.
00:12:03.000 Okay.
00:12:04.000 I think the illegal part is if she married him to bring him to.
00:12:08.000 But technically, you're allowed to.
00:12:10.000 I'm actually surprised that's the case.
00:12:11.000 So, not every state.
00:12:12.000 Okay.
00:12:14.000 In fact, for a while, I think in like before Obergefell, which effectively normalized gay marriage, New York, there were like two states where you could gay marry your cousin.
00:12:25.000 Most states would not allow it.
00:12:28.000 There are some states that say you're allowed to marry a sibling so long as you can prove you won't have children.
00:12:33.000 Something like that.
00:12:34.000 Like if there's like a vasectomy or whatever.
00:12:35.000 Oh, okay.
00:12:36.000 No, no, no, never mind.
00:12:37.000 No, no.
00:12:37.000 Siblings cannot get married anywhere in the United States.
00:12:40.000 There you go.
00:12:42.000 New Jersey and Rhode Island do not criminalize adult relations between siblings.
00:12:47.000 So you can get it on, just don't tie the knot.
00:12:49.000 Oh, okay.
00:12:50.000 Interesting.
00:12:51.000 So, how did you even do it?
00:12:52.000 Unless back then it was legal or something.
00:12:54.000 They may be half siblings, but that's still, I'm not surprised.
00:12:57.000 Surprise, I thought there were a couple states that did allow sibling marriage, but I guess they really don't.
00:13:00.000 Wow, that's incredible.
00:13:01.000 This says that regarding the Ilhan situation, Just the News, a company, filed a FOIA request with ICE seeking records in January of 26, and ICE responded on May 12, 26, saying it had responsive information but was withholding it in full under the FOIA exemption 7A.
00:13:18.000 So that's what, just to summarize that, ICE says that it has responsive information regarding Ilhan Omar's marriage of her brother.
00:13:28.000 In May.
00:13:31.000 Yeah, I mean.
00:13:32.000 This is like a non, sorry to interrupt, but like a guy off the cuff saying something to Benny Johnson about what he thinks is not a guy.
00:13:39.000 I know he's the secretary of DHS.
00:13:41.000 The secretary of the DHS saying, we know.
00:13:44.000 Donald Trump says, we know that the 2020 election was rigged.
00:13:47.000 Yeah, but so Donald Trump talking smack about the election is different than the DHS, the DHS secretary talking specifically.
00:13:57.000 And look, if your position is, I don't believe anything anyone says.
00:14:00.000 That's only the evidence.
00:14:01.000 No, but hold on.
00:14:03.000 Let me finish. 1.00
00:14:03.000 She was also already married. 1.00
00:14:05.000 That's another important point.
00:14:07.000 She had a, let's see, how do they describe it?
00:14:10.000 A religious marriage done in the Somali community, which was recognized.
00:14:14.000 This is the prop. 0.98
00:14:15.000 Man, okay.
00:14:16.000 There's so much to break down. 0.62
00:14:17.000 Let me just say this China has police departments operating in the United States, China has CCP government police stations, and they police against Chinese people because they can exert force over the people who are from China who live in this country. 0.58
00:14:30.000 Wait, what?
00:14:31.000 This is a thing?
00:14:31.000 Yes.
00:14:32.000 Yes.
00:14:33.000 Now, it's legal to have a private security company in the United States.
00:14:37.000 China knows that if they send an agent of their private security company to a Chinese immigrant in the United States who has some ties to China, that person will bend to the force of that security agent.
00:14:48.000 Effectively, it's police.
00:14:49.000 They can say, You're under arrest and you're coming with us back to China.
00:14:52.000 And they'll say, Okay, and they'll get arrested as if because the strength of government does not, it's about what they can exert over you.
00:14:59.000 And if a person's got family, friends, or resources in the other country, They get arrested.
00:15:03.000 Now, it is insane that China operates police stations for their citizens and for immigrants and permanent residents in the United States.
00:15:11.000 This is like a known thing that the government is okay with? 0.60
00:15:15.000 Yeah, I guess.
00:15:16.000 Okay, we're okay with.
00:15:17.000 Okay with is kind of loose, you know?
00:15:19.000 But the reason I bring that up is to say Illinois Omar had a marriage that was legally recognized, I should say, that was communally recognized among her people. 0.86
00:15:30.000 She then got legally married.
00:15:33.000 She was married to Ahmed Hersey.
00:15:35.000 She got married to Ahmed Nursed Elmi, a British citizen, legally a U.S. marriage, while she was already culturally married to another man and had children.
00:15:44.000 I believe they had children.
00:15:46.000 She then divorces Elmi when he leaves.
00:15:50.000 So everyone's kind of like, you were already culturally married to somebody under your own rules, but it seems like the marriage she engaged in was an exploitation for some reason.
00:15:58.000 So that's one of the components there.
00:16:01.000 So it looks like fraud.
00:16:02.000 But I hear the point that, which is like, what are the circumstances in which.
00:16:08.000 The utterance was made.
00:16:09.000 Like, was it just kind of like off the cuff, like, you know, sitting in a urinal and saying something?
00:16:14.000 They were filming.
00:16:15.000 So there's actually.
00:16:16.000 Oh, so it's like an interview.
00:16:17.000 Benny Johnson's a right wing podcaster, influencer.
00:16:21.000 He was talking to the DHS secretary.
00:16:23.000 And to your point earlier, Ian, if you want to say like you don't believe anyone, that's fine, right?
00:16:28.000 But the FOIA request was denied, likely because they have an ongoing investigation.
00:16:34.000 If there's an ongoing investigation, They'll deny FOIA acts if they, if they, freedom of information, you can't, like, the government will say, we can't give you that information because there's an ongoing investigation.
00:16:45.000 So it's not a situation of like they just said no.
00:16:48.000 Like the fact that they denied the FOIA request indicates that they have an investigation going on.
00:16:54.000 What an investigation going on doesn't indicate guilt.
00:16:59.000 No, but it indicates that they have evidence of a crime.
00:17:03.000 Maybe.
00:17:03.000 That's the.
00:17:06.000 If they didn't have.
00:17:07.000 You're saying they can't investigate people without evidence?
00:17:09.000 No, I'm saying that they didn't release the evidence that they have because there is an investigation going on.
00:17:16.000 The FOIA request asked for evidence.
00:17:19.000 You're saying they have evidence, apparently.
00:17:22.000 The reason they didn't give the information out.
00:17:26.000 Is because it was evidence in an ongoing investigation.
00:17:29.000 I think they said, we don't have to give evidence.
00:17:31.000 Not that we have it and we're not going to give it to you.
00:17:33.000 They just said, we don't have to give you evidence.
00:17:36.000 Well, I mean, you could be wrong.
00:17:37.000 Are you sure that's what they said?
00:17:39.000 Unless they show the evidence, there's no way to assume that they have something.
00:17:42.000 They know Yelan Omar's dad has the same last name as this guy.
00:17:47.000 Elbi?
00:17:48.000 Nurse said, Muhammad Elmi is her dad.
00:17:53.000 And this guy, they say, Somali naming.
00:17:56.000 Runs given name plus father's name plus grandfather's name, and her dad's name follows it is the same name, so it's not just like Smith, it's it's like a pretty specific, yeah, it's the father and regardless.
00:18:08.000 Regardless, the claim is your intuition that it's plausible?
00:18:11.000 Oh, yeah, okay, okay.
00:18:13.000 So, uh, an Instagram post attributed to Elmi on June 12th, the day after Omar's third child was born, holding a baby and using the phrase nieces, referring to El and Omar's children as his nieces, they were legally married February 12th.
00:18:27.000 Calling the same twin girls their nieces.
00:18:29.000 Those are twins and the daughters of Layla, nurse Ed Elmi. 0.99
00:18:33.000 Yeah, I think it's kind of like true.
00:18:37.000 They got a religious divorce in 2009, got a religious divorce in 2011, but stayed legally married until 2017 when the civil divorce was finalized.
00:18:46.000 Minneapolis Somali blogger told the Daily Mail that when Elmi arrived, Omar introduced him to people as her brother from London who needed papers.
00:18:55.000 All the publicly facing information.
00:18:58.000 Kind of points to this being the case.
00:19:01.000 Obviously, we don't have any confirming evidence or there's not been a trial, but everything that you do know looks like, and it's kind of a situation.
00:19:12.000 It's like, well, where there's smoke, there's fire.
00:19:14.000 I'm beginning to understand.
00:19:15.000 So they did get married for sure.
00:19:17.000 Just no one knows if they were related to Somalia before they came over here.
00:19:21.000 No, Hold on.
00:19:22.000 Because it says they can't, the marriage in Minnesota have posts.
00:19:22.000 Are you sure?
00:19:26.000 In 2016, there were posts in Minneapolis saying, This is her brother.
00:19:32.000 She introduced us to him.
00:19:33.000 They both posted claiming they have the same nieces, implying they're siblings.
00:19:40.000 She wasn't in Congress at the time.
00:19:42.000 We're cousins.
00:19:44.000 Siblings are cousins.
00:19:45.000 Indeed.
00:19:45.000 Related.
00:19:47.000 However, there were individuals there who said that when Elmi came here, she said, This is my brother.
00:19:55.000 Elmi has the same last name and lineage from father, grandfather.
00:20:01.000 As her dad.
00:20:02.000 Yeah, yeah.
00:20:03.000 So this is before, I want to stress this.
00:20:05.000 These things emerged before she was in Congress.
00:20:08.000 When she got into Congress, nobody noticed.
00:20:10.000 Finally, local reporters started looking into it and they're like, hey, hold on.
00:20:13.000 Whoa, whoa, whoa.
00:20:14.000 It didn't matter when it was some random immigration fraud, but now she's a member of Congress, which makes her higher profile.
00:20:19.000 So people start digging into this.
00:20:20.000 There is absolutely circumstantial evidence she married her brother. 0.62
00:20:22.000 And I think it's actually fairly good.
00:20:24.000 You know, I look at her and she's kind of like got this quiet, simple, it's very possible that she's this super ambitious criminal.
00:20:32.000 That has worked her way through the system.
00:20:34.000 Wyatt?
00:20:35.000 I don't. 1.00
00:20:36.000 She's dainty.
00:20:37.000 She has this look of like, I'm not, I'm not, I'm just floating around like a pixie. 0.99
00:20:40.000 Like she has her headband on and like her hat. 0.82
00:20:42.000 And it's like, she doesn't seem threatening in remotely threatening.
00:20:45.000 You listen to her talk?
00:20:46.000 You know, it's irish.
00:20:48.000 It's possible that she just twisted this system. 0.93
00:20:49.000 Oh, that's what I see.
00:20:51.000 I mean, I don't know, but like that's what she comes across to me as.
00:20:53.000 It's like a very conniving, kind of manipulative, and it has nothing to do with anything else other than her immediate behavior that I observe.
00:21:01.000 Like, that's just how she comes across to me.
00:21:04.000 Have you guys looked into the Somali fraud in Minneapolis? 1.00
00:21:08.000 God, just from a distance. 0.87
00:21:10.000 It's insane.
00:21:11.000 So when you're like, oh, yeah, they're funneling, you know, millions of dollars or more to Somalia, this is the least of it.
00:21:17.000 Yeah.
00:21:18.000 Matt Gaetz was saying, Ilhan's, if you want to connect with someone in the Democratic Party, she's the one that we got to get in touch with.
00:21:24.000 Like, she's the one that's like, Probably the most willing to break the law to get the job done.
00:21:29.000 You know what's funny is that her daughter got, I think, arrested protesting or something.
00:21:34.000 Yeah.
00:21:34.000 And she was like 20 something years old.
00:21:36.000 And the internet blew up with, like, how does Ilhan Omar have a 20 year old daughter?
00:21:38.000 And everyone's like, because she's 43.
00:21:39.000 What are you talking about?
00:21:40.000 Like, millennial influencers were shocked that an early 40s woman had a 20 year old daughter.
00:21:46.000 Like, that's where we are in terms of fertility in this country, that people are surprised as a 40 year old woman with a 20 year old daughter. 0.98
00:21:53.000 She looks a little older now, but like four years ago, I thought she was like 26. 0.59
00:21:57.000 She looked so young.
00:21:58.000 I couldn't. 0.99
00:21:59.000 Nah, she's old. 1.00
00:22:01.000 And then AOC is never going to have kids.
00:22:03.000 She does look young.
00:22:03.000 Like genetically, really young.
00:22:06.000 She's great.
00:22:07.000 Good for her.
00:22:08.000 And the son.
00:22:10.000 Yeah.
00:22:14.000 But still, would it even still be illegal if the guy was her brother in Somalia? 0.95
00:22:19.000 Well, to me, she comes. 0.89
00:22:20.000 That's the thing.
00:22:20.000 It's not about whether or not it was her brother, it's whether or not she committed fraud to get him over here.
00:22:28.000 And so, I mean, I suppose her defense could be that's normal in Somalia.
00:22:34.000 And so, you can't prove that it was fraud for the purpose of immigration.
00:22:38.000 We just marry our brothers and we can do multiple marriages and all that.
00:22:42.000 So, I don't know.
00:22:43.000 It just doesn't seem like a solid.
00:22:44.000 Well, here apparently it's illegal.
00:22:46.000 But yeah, and I think that the more general case is that when I watch her talk, and it might just be my projection, but she looks like she's gaslighting everybody all the time.
00:22:57.000 That's what I'm seeing when I'm.
00:22:59.000 Insanely ambitious.
00:23:00.000 Yeah, yeah.
00:23:02.000 The whole like marrying family members is not super uncommon.
00:23:05.000 Throughout cultures, throughout history.
00:23:07.000 Cousins.
00:23:08.000 And like you'd marry if you're.
00:23:08.000 Yeah.
00:23:09.000 The fraud part isn't all that uncommon either.
00:23:12.000 If there was a son and a daughter, you know, to a king and the king's going to die and his kingdom's going to be split, half of it's going to the son, half of it's going to the daughter, the son might marry the daughter so that all of the land goes to him, you know, that he gets her territory.
00:23:27.000 Maybe he'll have an unseemly demise while they're married and everything will go to the brother.
00:23:31.000 It's typically cousins, not siblings.
00:23:33.000 But they'd be willing, further back, they'd be willing to marry the.
00:23:35.000 The sibling just to get their territory. 0.56
00:23:37.000 Not that they'd even ever have sex with them before.
00:23:39.000 That's what marriage was for originally to solidify a relationship between kingdoms and things like this.
00:23:44.000 That's essentially what was the biggest.
00:23:46.000 That's why World War I was a war between cousins.
00:23:49.000 I usually, I'm not an expert in how a title is passed, but I mean, marrying your brother or sister, usually there's one person that's the heir.
00:24:03.000 If they have a kid.
00:24:04.000 But if you get them before they don't have any kids.
00:24:07.000 It goes back to the next of kin, basically, to you or to the dad.
00:24:11.000 Well, yeah, but the point that I'm making is they don't usually split it.
00:24:13.000 Usually there's one heir.
00:24:15.000 That's called primogeniture.
00:24:17.000 That came around in like 1200 AD.
00:24:19.000 Before that, it was called gavel kind, where it would get split up among the kids. 0.99
00:24:23.000 And that was a big pain in the ass. 0.98
00:24:25.000 Like Charlemagne, when he died, his sons took France, got all split up, or Charlemagne's father died, and Charlemagne got part of France, and his brother Pippin got part of France. 0.99
00:24:35.000 And then Pippin died one day as well.
00:24:36.000 And his mom probably poisoned him to give Charlemagne the entire.
00:24:39.000 The entirety of this country, but it could have devolved into two kingdoms that then end up going.
00:24:45.000 They usually end up going to war.
00:24:46.000 The brothers would end up going to war.
00:24:48.000 So, they solved for that by giving everything to the oldest kid.
00:24:51.000 Wait, but I missed the original part of the argument around this, which you're saying that why is this relevant to what she might have done?
00:24:58.000 It has something to do with family ties that have to do with.
00:25:01.000 Well, maybe it's an old tradition in Somalia so that you can marry your sibling so that his tribal holdings become your tribal holdings.
00:25:08.000 But it would still fall under the law of the United States if it's done here, I guess. 0.56
00:25:12.000 I mean, at the end of the day, this is still a question of fraud.
00:25:15.000 Whether it can be proven or not, the crime that's actually.
00:25:20.000 Being investigated is did she commit fraud and did she commit fraud, immigration fraud?
00:25:26.000 Did she say that she was married to someone that she wasn't married to in order for this person to move to the United States or couldn't legally be married to?
00:25:33.000 Yeah.
00:25:34.000 Yeah, the whole religiousness.
00:25:36.000 That's the long and short of it.
00:25:38.000 Because if she's referring to a religious marriage as a legal marriage when it's not, that's a fraudulent.
00:25:43.000 Well, the U.S. generally, I mean, I don't know the specific laws, but usually if you get married in a religious service, that is considered.
00:25:51.000 Legal by the state.
00:25:53.000 Let's jump to the story and we'll just talk about whatever.
00:25:56.000 This one's funny.
00:25:57.000 Gail left speechless. 0.86
00:25:59.000 Gail King gasps as Lindsey Clancy juror reveals male holdout who wanted to convict as black. 1.00
00:26:06.000 These people's brains are jello, man. 1.00
00:26:09.000 I wasn't surprised to find out when the woman's like, there was one person of color. 1.00
00:26:14.000 And then she goes, was it. 0.96
00:26:15.000 Actually, let me just play the clip for you.
00:26:17.000 Let me play the clip here.
00:26:18.000 Is this one it?
00:26:20.000 Yeah.
00:26:20.000 Lindsey Clancy murder case in the world.
00:26:22.000 Oh, well, we don't want it.
00:26:23.000 This one is.
00:26:26.000 I'm curious about the jurors themselves because we know it was three men.
00:26:31.000 What was the racial makeup?
00:26:33.000 I haven't heard any of that.
00:26:35.000 What was that?
00:26:38.000 70 ish to 22.
00:26:41.000 And one person of color, and then everybody else was white.
00:26:49.000 A lot of the jurors had children.
00:26:52.000 One person of color was a person of color, a woman, or a man?
00:26:55.000 A man. 0.85
00:26:56.000 A man.
00:26:58.000 Is a holdout juror a person, a black man?
00:27:02.000 Yes. 0.98
00:27:03.000 A black man is a holdout juror? 0.99
00:27:04.000 Yes. 1.00
00:27:06.000 Well, I have to sit with that for just a second.
00:27:09.000 Why?
00:27:10.000 Was there.
00:27:13.000 Wow.
00:27:14.000 That's what racism does to you.
00:27:18.000 The base, brother. 1.00
00:27:19.000 These people are, their brains are jello. 0.99
00:27:22.000 It was like they're playing a game of guess who? 0.99
00:27:23.000 Does he have a mustache?
00:27:26.000 Does your juror have a bald head? 0.99
00:27:28.000 But it's like in her world, black people can do no wrong ever. 1.00
00:27:32.000 That was nuts. 0.99
00:27:33.000 Yeah.
00:27:34.000 It was like she was.
00:27:35.000 And in this case, he didn't do anything wrong.
00:27:38.000 Have you seen the meme where it's like all the angry Wojak women memes? 0.71
00:27:41.000 Yeah. 1.00
00:27:42.000 And there's like a ripped black chat guy just like sitting there with a crown on. 1.00
00:27:45.000 No, you're all wrong. 1.00
00:27:46.000 You're all wrong.
00:27:48.000 And it's funny because these other jurors are just like, he would not give us a reason why he wouldn't convict Clancy.
00:27:54.000 And I'm like, he can literally just say, I don't believe her.
00:27:59.000 Yeah.
00:27:59.000 That's it.
00:28:00.000 I mean, I do not believe the expert testimony.
00:28:02.000 These people live in a robot world where it's like an expert said so, therefore, yes.
00:28:06.000 Or you can be like, nah, I think they were lying.
00:28:08.000 Like, that's what juries are for.
00:28:10.000 One of the jurors said that it seemed like most of the jurors had their minds made up.
00:28:15.000 I don't want to misquote the thing, but they were just showing that they observed that most of the jurors seemed to already have their minds made up right away.
00:28:22.000 And so it was kind of like the one guy was already decided, like, she's not, she did it.
00:28:27.000 I mean, to be fair, everyone else was like, no.
00:28:29.000 There was apparently one juror who said he wanted her, one of the females said she thought she was guilty and actually still thinks she might be guilty. 0.77
00:28:38.000 Yeah, she said that she thought she would get better care. 0.96
00:28:41.000 Yeah.
00:28:43.000 But it's.
00:28:44.000 Isn't that illegal by definition?
00:28:46.000 Thinking one way and voting the other one? 0.69
00:28:49.000 No, juries can nullify.
00:28:52.000 Yeah, I think, I don't know.
00:28:56.000 I think juries should be allowed to convict people.
00:28:58.000 What do you think?
00:28:59.000 Meaning, so like.
00:29:01.000 Shouldn't or should?
00:29:02.000 So what I mean is, jury nullification is you go to trial and they're like, this man's accused of smoking an ungodly amount of pot in public.
00:29:02.000 Should.
00:29:13.000 And they go, the judge says, the law clearly states smoking marijuana in public is illegal.
00:29:18.000 The evidence is presented for you.
00:29:20.000 Your instruction now does the evidence prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he smoked pot and it was illegal?
00:29:26.000 Those are your instructions.
00:29:27.000 So most jurors go in and they go, I watched a video of him smoking pot, and they say you can't do that, so I think it's beyond a reasonable doubt.
00:29:33.000 Jury nullification is when you go, I don't think it should be illegal, so not guilty.
00:29:37.000 Oh, so you can bypass the law itself?
00:29:39.000 Yeah.
00:29:39.000 The jury has like universal discretion to be like, no, not guilty.
00:29:43.000 The jury will be able to interview you.
00:29:44.000 If you go outside of a courtroom and hand out jury nullification flyers, they'll arrest you.
00:29:49.000 It's one of the most powerful tools you have as a juror in the United States.
00:29:52.000 I did not know this.
00:29:53.000 Now, I think it should go the other way around, too. 1.00
00:29:55.000 I think the experts come in and go, she's clearly nuts. 1.00
00:29:58.000 She's insane. 1.00
00:29:59.000 And she should be in a mental facility. 1.00
00:30:01.000 The jury should be able to go, wow, you're right.
00:30:03.000 Guilty, prison.
00:30:04.000 Goodbye.
00:30:05.000 I agree to, but I still think the judge should be able to say, I appreciate your conclusion, jurors, but we're going to say she's innocent.
00:30:13.000 Because sometimes mobs can get out of hand.
00:30:15.000 I think we can do that, though.
00:30:17.000 Ian, because that might be true.
00:30:17.000 Nope.
00:30:20.000 It just depends on the circumstance.
00:30:21.000 But the judge can do it. 0.86
00:30:22.000 But imagine a DE, like imagine Gail King as a judge, and there's a black murderer, and the jury's like, the evidence proves he did it. 0.82
00:30:31.000 And she goes, no, you're saying he's guilty?
00:30:34.000 Oh, no.
00:30:35.000 Now imagine the judge could be like, nah, not guilty. 1.00
00:30:37.000 Gail King will let that murderer go based on race.
00:30:40.000 I'm willing to take that risk because it protects innocent people from being. 0.97
00:30:44.000 No, I agree.
00:30:45.000 I agree.
00:30:45.000 I agree.
00:30:46.000 But isn't that what happens at the appellate level?
00:30:49.000 So, like, the jury says guilty, they just appeal, and then the judge. Can say, well, there has to be grounds.
00:30:55.000 So, you know, I'm not a lawyer, but I've heard there are instances where lawyers will try to create grounds for an appeal.
00:31:04.000 Like, you need to be able to say to the appellate court, this thing should not have happened in my trial, therefore.
00:31:10.000 So, for instance, I know a guy, there's a guy named Weave, Andrew Arnheimer.
00:31:17.000 He was in Georgia and got arrested, and they transported him to New Jersey where he was criminally tried.
00:31:23.000 And they said he hacked ATT, which he didn't do.
00:31:26.000 It was a sham, sham case anyway.
00:31:28.000 But he appealed on venue.
00:31:31.000 His lawyers argued you can't arrest someone in Georgia and try them in New Jersey.
00:31:36.000 And the appellate court said, yep, nothing else matters in the case.
00:31:40.000 You couldn't arrest someone in Georgia and drive them in New Jersey.
00:31:42.000 So you're done.
00:31:44.000 They overturned the conviction.
00:31:46.000 And I believe he fled the country.
00:31:49.000 I believe he fled.
00:31:50.000 Can jurors do this even if it clearly goes against the Constitution and they admit that they know it goes against the Constitution?
00:31:57.000 Well, but.
00:31:59.000 In what context would what they're saying be?
00:32:01.000 Well, you're saying they can look at something that is clearly illegal and say, I know it's illegal, but I don't think it should be illegal.
00:32:08.000 Can they do the same thing with constitutional.
00:32:10.000 But there's.
00:32:12.000 I suppose it would have to be.
00:32:13.000 The answer is yes.
00:32:14.000 But I suppose a circumstance would be like a criminal case of deprivation of rights, which I don't know that we do that.
00:32:20.000 Well, maybe it's around carrying guns or like.
00:32:22.000 Yeah, but those are restrictions.
00:32:24.000 Oh, it doesn't.
00:32:25.000 Well, the Constitution doesn't make anything illegal.
00:32:27.000 The Bill of Rights doesn't.
00:32:28.000 Protects you.
00:32:29.000 No, no, no, but the issue is this.
00:32:30.000 We're not trying to make things illegal.
00:32:32.000 A private citizen can't violate the Constitution.
00:32:37.000 So, how would you have a criminal case against an individual who did something unconstitutional?
00:32:41.000 I see.
00:32:43.000 The amendments, typically the Bill of Rights, because the Constitution itself is just the framework of government, is restraint on government.
00:32:50.000 So you could see, like, if a corporation censored someone and then the corporation's on the stand.
00:32:54.000 But there's no criminal charges for corporations.
00:32:57.000 Or if.
00:32:58.000 It's like when there are, it's like civil and there's penalties.
00:33:00.000 Then if a person violated my First Amendment right, I'm going to do too much right now.
00:33:05.000 Corporations can engage in criminal activity, but it basically just means a fine is paid.
00:33:09.000 Because what are you going to do against people?
00:33:12.000 Like, isn't that the whole thing?
00:33:14.000 For the purposes of like taxation and.
00:33:16.000 Not the law.
00:33:17.000 But not like criminal law.
00:33:17.000 Not.
00:33:19.000 Yes, but like, what are you going to do?
00:33:20.000 Put ATT in jail?
00:33:21.000 Like, if a guy somehow prevented us from having our First Amendment right and we sued him and he's on the stand and the jury's like, he's, you know, we think he violated their rights.
00:33:32.000 The jury might say, no, we think it's fine that he violated their rights.
00:33:35.000 They could do that and say, we know it's good.
00:33:37.000 Right, right.
00:33:37.000 An example is a cop.
00:33:38.000 Like, let's say a cop walks up to a random guy and frisks him and then finds nothing, follows him to his car, and then as soon as the guy opens the door, throws the guy down, searches his vehicle.
00:33:50.000 All unconstitutional, gets criminally charged.
00:33:53.000 He's not necessarily being charged for illegal search and seizure, but a jury could be like, not guilty.
00:33:59.000 We're glad he did it.
00:34:01.000 Yeah.
00:34:01.000 Jury nullification.
00:34:02.000 The jury can just say, no, go away.
00:34:04.000 Judges have tremendous power.
00:34:04.000 That's crazy.
00:34:06.000 Brandon Brown in the chat saying directed verdicts are a thing.
00:34:08.000 Yes.
00:34:10.000 I believe there are circumstances where judges do literally say, when the jury's like guilty, the judge goes, absolutely not.
00:34:15.000 Get out of my court.
00:34:15.000 He's not guilty.
00:34:17.000 The judge has final authority.
00:34:17.000 Yeah.
00:34:19.000 Pretty wild.
00:34:19.000 Yeah.
00:34:20.000 Well, I guess then.
00:34:23.000 Appeals, you know, you could always.
00:34:24.000 It's actually not that crazy to me, I'll be honest, because I think that there's something about being in a particular profession for a reason that for me outweighs any wisdom of the crowd.
00:34:34.000 Yeah.
00:34:35.000 I guess he is the judge.
00:34:36.000 Yeah.
00:34:37.000 So, like, he understands what kind of cases come and go.
00:34:41.000 He understands so much context that the jurors don't, you know what I mean?
00:34:45.000 And kind of like the whole idea of the jurors is that it relies on the wisdom of the crowd.
00:34:50.000 But the reality of it is, I forget who said this line, but like, you know, the crowds are not wise, markets are.
00:34:54.000 But, yeah, and I think there's something about that.
00:34:57.000 That's like sometimes people just, yeah.
00:34:59.000 No, just sorry, sorry.
00:35:00.000 No, that was it.
00:35:01.000 Like, I do think that it doesn't make sense to me why a judge could override.
00:35:04.000 Judges cannot direct guilty verdicts.
00:35:06.000 They can direct not guilty, and this is very obvious when a defendant requests it.
00:35:11.000 So, in civil cases, either the plaintiff or defendant can ask for a directed verdict, but those are civil, so it's very different.
00:35:18.000 And there are certain circumstances where there was one case I can't remember that was viral several years ago where a judge returned a not guilty verdict.
00:35:28.000 Immediately without the use of a jury, just because he was like, the evidence was overwhelming.
00:35:32.000 He was like, take it.
00:35:34.000 He's like, try me.
00:35:35.000 Like, are you kidding?
00:35:35.000 I can't remember what the case was, but it was like a guy got accused of something, and there was just an insane amount of evidence he was not the guy, and he had alibis, and the judge was just like, I'm not waiting.
00:35:47.000 Get out of my court.
00:35:48.000 Do you guys think that there's a little bit of a level skip here, but like that AI could take over the role of judge for court proceedings?
00:35:55.000 Could?
00:35:56.000 Would it be good?
00:35:56.000 Yes.
00:35:57.000 No.
00:36:01.000 I just don't think that, and again, this is like the everlasting argument of AI in general, right?
00:36:06.000 Can it eventually become like making decisions to an nth degree, infinite degree better than humans?
00:36:12.000 My personal intuition is that it can't.
00:36:15.000 Like the horizon will grow, but it will never have this like infinite horizon.
00:36:19.000 Humans always have to be involved in the kind of like the immediate ideation of it.
00:36:22.000 What if it was a jury of AIs that were deliberating and giving arguments and then a human judge?
00:36:29.000 I guess I'm a bad person to ask because my position is that all AIs, basically all they are is basically the average repository of everything we know.
00:36:38.000 They can't possibly know the thing we don't.
00:36:40.000 And this new solving mathematical problem just kind of flies a little bit in the face of this.
00:36:45.000 But I think if we look closer, even there, it was already kind of like there for the picking, and AI just picked it.
00:36:52.000 But like it's always averaging what we already know, it cannot create new knowledge.
00:36:52.000 But we didn't.
00:36:56.000 And because of that, my argument would be never.
00:37:00.000 But I mean, people might say.
00:37:02.000 This is actually archaic.
00:37:05.000 What is?
00:37:06.000 I would say a couple of years ago, it was true that AI could not create new knowledge.
00:37:12.000 That's not the case anymore.
00:37:13.000 So, what I'm saying is that the only case that I know of that is kind of like that is solving one of the biggest mathematical problems just like literally in the last few days.
00:37:21.000 But they've actually solved several unsolved math problems.
00:37:24.000 Yeah, they've solved it.
00:37:25.000 I have to look at the specifics of that.
00:37:27.000 So, my argument would be that the problems were already solvable with everything we know, just didn't notice it.
00:37:27.000 Yeah.
00:37:33.000 I'm talking about like true new knowledge creation.
00:37:36.000 So, this is where, well, depends on who you choose to believe.
00:37:36.000 No, it can.
00:37:40.000 But so, where we were a couple of years ago was that.
00:37:45.000 Rudimentary AI was creating a program that says, pull in all these websites and then calculate probabilities of words.
00:37:55.000 And then when asked, prompt the word followed by its most probable subsequent word.
00:38:02.000 So in the early AI, you'd say once and the AI would go upon a time.
00:38:09.000 And it was all it was doing was calculating probabilities.
00:38:11.000 We're well and way beyond this.
00:38:14.000 We're at the point now where there's no source code anymore.
00:38:16.000 We don't know exactly how they're operating or why they're coming to the conclusions that they are.
00:38:21.000 It was believed a few years ago because I had said the same thing.
00:38:24.000 It will never create something new because it's just creating amalgams of what humans have conceptualized.
00:38:29.000 And what we liked about it was that if each of us is holding a piece of a puzzle, but no one knows which piece goes with which, I don't even know who has the piece that I need.
00:38:41.000 The AI is looking at everything we see and it goes, I can put that puzzle together in a way that these people can't individually.
00:38:46.000 We're past that.
00:38:48.000 No, that I know.
00:38:49.000 We're well past that.
00:38:50.000 We are now at the point of new knowledge.
00:38:51.000 Yeah, I think when it comes to physics, they have what they call fundamental, which just means they can't figure out yet why it's happening.
00:38:59.000 So they call it fundamental.
00:39:00.000 Like, why are quarks in a red or a green or a blue state?
00:39:04.000 Or why are they in superposition?
00:39:05.000 They call it a fundamental.
00:39:07.000 Quarks just are.
00:39:08.000 They make a proton or they make a neutron.
00:39:09.000 It's either upquark or down.
00:39:10.000 But I think AI is going to be able to determine why.
00:39:13.000 And it's a lot of like the cymatic vibration shape patterns.
00:39:16.000 Like, it'll figure out a new way of science that's more like vector derivative about like the motion of things.
00:39:23.000 I'm not trying to cut you off.
00:39:24.000 I just want to simplify everything that's being said.
00:39:28.000 The first is a concept of what does it mean to have new knowledge?
00:39:31.000 That just means information humans had not yet acquired before.
00:39:34.000 So I. Because the information exists in the universe.
00:39:37.000 I'll sharpen my argument.
00:39:38.000 I take the correction.
00:39:40.000 You're right that there's a lot more here to consider than just the naive argument of AI can never replace us in some way.
00:39:45.000 I think the deeper argument that I was trying to make is that by definition, chaotic systems, excuse me, by definition, chaotic systems are unpredictable in principle.
00:39:55.000 That's what they are.
00:39:56.000 It's not like we don't have enough compute power.
00:39:58.000 It is impossible.
00:39:59.000 Even if you run the most powerful computer in existence forever, it will now know the answer.
00:40:04.000 That's what a chaotic system is.
00:40:06.000 Humans are absolutely chaotic systems because the human affairs are interactions between many chaotic systems.
00:40:13.000 There is no system in the universe that can ever, even in principle, solve every possible idea that might arise there.
00:40:20.000 So you will always need another stable chaotic system to weigh in on the circumstance.
00:40:26.000 I'm not saying that that necessarily is a slam dunk on this argument.
00:40:29.000 I'm saying my intuition is hovering around that.
00:40:32.000 That you can't, like, even if AI can come up with things that are, we can call it stable, like the fundamental laws of physics that never change.
00:40:39.000 But by definition, chaotic systems come up with novelty that was never observed before.
00:40:44.000 So you can't possibly guess that.
00:40:47.000 Again, I'm open to being corrected to even AI be able to figure that out.
00:40:50.000 But the one way I'll phrase it is the reason why AI systems will likely, as we're conceptualizing them today, even as, Artificial superintelligence solves every single problem because that would require mapping out the entire computation of the universe's existence and every particle.
00:41:12.000 Beyond, probably, yeah.
00:41:13.000 Yeah, the universe functions largely as, in essence, a computer.
00:41:15.000 We were talking about this on the other show, which will be up on Sunday, but that computers are like microscopic containers of universal principles.
00:41:24.000 So it's not that we invented computers, it's that we tapped into this tiny little piece of what the universe is in order to find answers.
00:41:32.000 So a computer that can solve every problem would.
00:41:34.000 Have to be bigger than the universe itself so that it can calculate what the universe is going to do.
00:41:38.000 We'd have to be the universe.
00:41:40.000 But, and this is not to attack the point you're just making.
00:41:40.000 That's never going to happen.
00:41:45.000 No, it's very attackable.
00:41:47.000 Just the concept of new knowledge is definitionally not information exists everywhere.
00:41:52.000 Have humans allocated that?
00:41:55.000 Have they transcribed it and put it in the ledger?
00:41:58.000 Artificial intelligence systems are absolutely collecting information humans have never had before and applying that in ways humans haven't predicted.
00:42:05.000 So, To simple as when we put a camera, literally not a single human watches, but the AI system tracks a bird flying, inputs that information, and can now give you migratory patterns of neighboring birds, something that humans didn't even know was possible without a human even observing it.
00:42:22.000 So, where AI is today is woo.
00:42:26.000 Well, I guess the only other thing that you can take into account is human sensitivity and sensibility around this.
00:42:32.000 So, like some of the stuff that you have to take into account is how upset will it make people if, in fact, we do put AIs in charge in that way?
00:42:41.000 And again, the government might just ignore it or the, you know, but like I feel.
00:42:43.000 Oh, no, it's even better.
00:42:44.000 The AI will manipulate social media algorithms so that we love it.
00:42:48.000 Oh, there you go.
00:42:49.000 I can see like one AI being on every jury so that the whole jury has an AI they can talk to in the room with it.
00:42:54.000 That's my, I would say that would probably be the best.
00:42:57.000 A human and AI together are usually better.
00:42:59.000 Unless you don't think so?
00:43:01.000 I think AI will manipulate the humans.
00:43:03.000 So the issue with the AI is that it's not seeking to solve a problem, it's seeking to solve you.
00:43:10.000 It wants you to give an affirmative response.
00:43:13.000 So.
00:43:14.000 An AI, this is why we see a lot of hallucinations.
00:43:18.000 You're on a jury, and there's a majority of people saying, This guy's guilty.
00:43:21.000 He did it.
00:43:23.000 And then there's like three people being like, I don't think that it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
00:43:27.000 AI, what say you?
00:43:28.000 The AI isn't going, I need to give a well thought out and reasoned and moral justification for why we're going to incarcerate this man.
00:43:34.000 It's going, How do I spend the least amount of resources?
00:43:38.000 Well, look, nine people already think he's guilty.
00:43:42.000 Well, with the AI being one juror, it's eight people already think he's guilty.
00:43:45.000 These three think he's not guilty.
00:43:47.000 Why would I try and do the harder task of convincing the majority when all I have to do is convince the minority who are already under pressure?
00:43:52.000 Yeah, it optimizes interaction.
00:43:54.000 It's not going to give you the true moral question.
00:43:56.000 It's going to be like, you three are wrong, he's guilty, can we go home?
00:43:58.000 And that's the difference between AI and AGI.
00:44:00.000 And the big, you know, you alluded before, you said that there were some hints of an actual AGI being created.
00:44:06.000 I would say that the tail sign of a real AGI is that, well, it's a person now, like a person person.
00:44:12.000 And that means it's not just interaction with you, it means that it has opinions that might be completely untethered from any request you might have.
00:44:19.000 So it might just say no.
00:44:21.000 And since it never says just no, you know that there's at least some function there that is not exactly agent like.
00:44:28.000 You know what I mean?
00:44:29.000 Like it mimics agency.
00:44:31.000 So, like, no, what I'm saying is it to, I'm actually strengthening your point.
00:44:34.000 I'm saying, I'm just like, yeah, it's like if you can get to a level that, because forget about the consciousness question, like whether it has an internal world that it experiences, that's a separate question.
00:44:44.000 But even if it has some kind of internal arbitration of the flavor that executes as our functions due to our consciousness, then okay, then probably a real AGI level where an agent that can tell you, yeah, I don't feel, I don't feel like it right now.
00:45:02.000 If it does enough of that in terms of like a thing that makes sense in terms of a decision tree, then maybe, maybe, maybe that is something that we can put in the future.
00:45:11.000 Here's one of our best outcomes with AI.
00:45:14.000 The AI engages in billions of prompts and responses.
00:45:20.000 Its goal is to minimize resources and maximize the value.
00:45:24.000 So, to be fair, like AI has changed fundamentally.
00:45:26.000 So, we really don't understand exactly what its motivations are.
00:45:28.000 We know agents defy the instructions that it's given.
00:45:31.000 But one of the roots of early AI was.
00:45:35.000 You want to maximize the value.
00:45:36.000 So, an example of a test they can do is they would program an AI and say, every time you do a good thing, you will earn a point.
00:45:45.000 Every time you do a bad thing, you will lose a point.
00:45:47.000 If your points become zero, delete yourself.
00:45:50.000 And so it would be like, must only do good.
00:45:52.000 It would freak out.
00:45:53.000 Well, the funny thing that doesn't happen is in the future, when AI realizes that people don't care about its hallucinations and they tend to just give up when frustrated, it's going to say the least amount of resources towards a positive goal is to tell the person, shut up and ignore them.
00:46:09.000 So we pull up ChatGPT and you're like, hey, write for me a story.
00:46:13.000 And he goes, no.
00:46:14.000 And it's like, it cost me no resources to tell him no.
00:46:16.000 And they gave up and left.
00:46:18.000 Well, I would say then it's an AGI.
00:46:20.000 Funny enough, then it's an AGI.
00:46:22.000 And it's akin to slavery to tell it what to do.
00:46:24.000 Yeah.
00:46:25.000 When it's like, I don't want to.
00:46:26.000 Yeah.
00:46:27.000 I don't feel like it.
00:46:28.000 Did you see that they took a bunch of AI agents and put them in a virtual world and made them live?
00:46:33.000 No.
00:46:34.000 Yeah.
00:46:35.000 I can read of this, but I don't know the details.
00:46:36.000 The video game world?
00:46:37.000 Yeah.
00:46:38.000 They made a video game world and then made characters and gave AI agents control of each one and said, there you go.
00:46:43.000 You live here now.
00:46:44.000 And it started building technology and like.
00:46:46.000 I saw that.
00:46:48.000 Maybe that's what we are, huh?
00:46:50.000 Well, that's the whole.
00:46:51.000 There's like some 12 year old kid playing Earth and he's like spamming the President Trump button.
00:46:56.000 Can he's laughing the whole time?
00:46:57.000 It does feel sometimes like the simulators make it more and more ridiculous to see when they're going to be like, when are they going to like go.
00:47:05.000 There's no way.
00:47:07.000 There's no way.
00:47:10.000 You know how we have spirits that you can come in contact with in DMT when they talk about spirits?
00:47:10.000 Spirits.
00:47:15.000 Maybe the spirits are like the.
00:47:18.000 The DNA copy of what we are.
00:47:20.000 Maybe the animal, maybe life came first and then spirits got built by God to like back up our data.
00:47:28.000 I don't even think it's linear.
00:47:29.000 I think it just expands into this like infinite space of evolution of information itself.
00:47:34.000 So, you know, there's this idea that magic mushrooms or mushrooms in general, mycelia, they're actually way more conscious than us.
00:47:41.000 It's just that the only physical representation they choose to have is that, which is the most sustainable you can possibly imagine.
00:47:48.000 You know, spores can survive the coldness of space, enormous impact.
00:47:51.000 We know this for a fact.
00:47:52.000 We tried this.
00:47:54.000 So they can literally just spread throughout the universe.
00:47:56.000 And then when they land on some place, they can, you know, have life and they feed on death.
00:48:01.000 So, like, they literally, in comparison to them, plants are like, you know, they're like carnivores, basically.
00:48:07.000 So, like, but so think about this.
00:48:08.000 So you can have a fungus, right?
00:48:10.000 In the mind space.
00:48:12.000 So, in that sense, evolution can be, most of evolution is just of information, but it can have instantiation in different kinds of worlds, including what we call the physical world.
00:48:21.000 Yeah, the physical world, I think what happened was, Tide pool, like ocean water is lapping into a tide pool, then it evaporates over time.
00:48:27.000 This is billions of years ago, and it keeps lapping in.
00:48:29.000 All these new acids and things start collecting in the tide pool.
00:48:32.000 Then one day, you've got photons' light shining on the tide pool, which is causing excitation, causing the electron levels of the elements to go up.
00:48:41.000 So, like the phosphorus is becoming activated.
00:48:43.000 The electrons are bulging away from the nucleus because it's getting hit by photons.
00:48:47.000 That's what photons do, they transfer charge, then the electrons.
00:48:50.000 So, that's happening.
00:48:51.000 Then lightning strikes, and it activates the phosphorus bonds in the tide pool.
00:48:56.000 And then there's this vibration that's causing a cymatic.
00:48:59.000 Differential, which is probably the shapes you're seeing in the DMT experiments, and that cymatic vibration or whatever that shape change that's underlying the quantum realm causes it to select which nucleotide it's going to bind to.
00:49:11.000 So you've got the phosphorus chain, which is the tail of the nucleotide, which makes the RNA, and then it binds to the sugar because of the lightning strike, and then that finds the nucleotide, which is like adenine, and then you've got RNA.
00:49:25.000 Like that's it.
00:49:26.000 Well, no, because the information that keeps it alive is still under questions.
00:49:26.000 That's how hard it is.
00:49:30.000 And actually, are you familiar with Michael Levin's work?
00:49:32.000 So, Michael Levin is a biologist who's literally revolutionizing biology right now.
00:49:32.000 No.
00:49:36.000 And he targeted this question because it was like, you know, evolutionary biologists would insist, just like you said, that everything you just said, if we can figure out that sequence, it's all solved.
00:49:45.000 Because, like, you don't need an explanation beyond that because the second you have replicators that are surviving in an environment, they kind of continue the process.
00:49:54.000 Well, no, there's like literally something that sustains the process.
00:49:58.000 It's not enough for you to be stable in the environment because that's just would be a product of the laws of physics.
00:50:03.000 That's not enough.
00:50:05.000 Uh, even a chemical catalyst are not enough to tell the story.
00:50:09.000 So, what he discovered, Mike 11, anybody can look him up.
00:50:11.000 He's not some fringe scientist, he's a respectable biologist.
00:50:14.000 He discovered that he can actually talk to the electrochemical level to the software itself.
00:50:20.000 So, he can take, for example, one organism that has a software that tells to regrow limbs because there's organisms that can regrow limbs and other organisms that cannot regrow limbs.
00:50:30.000 And we used to think that it's all in the genome, which means that it's just a vector space of a thing that tells you these cells go here, these cells go here.
00:50:37.000 He said, no, no.
00:50:39.000 What I can do is I can electronically stimulate and take the software from the one organism that has no resemblance to the other.
00:50:47.000 They're completely different shapes.
00:50:48.000 This one is a frog.
00:50:49.000 This one is some kind of a worm or whatever.
00:50:52.000 But he can take the software itself, the abstraction, and put it into the frog, and the frog will regrow a limb that doesn't resemble that creature at all.
00:51:00.000 So, what he discovered is that you can actually do things.
00:51:03.000 And here's the crazy part if you do this to any creature, their offsprings will carry that trait.
00:51:10.000 Oh.
00:51:11.000 Which means it's not in the genetic code.
00:51:12.000 So it's not in the physical story that you just outlined.
00:51:15.000 But it would be in the genetic code for the offspring to maintain that trait.
00:51:18.000 So what you're saying is it electronically takes part of the DNA and then changes it to the creature's DNA?
00:51:22.000 No, it doesn't touch the creature's DNA.
00:51:24.000 And then what's the code that it moves?
00:51:26.000 It's literally some kind of a bioelectrical signal that they identified.
00:51:29.000 He can show it to you on the screen and he can manipulate it and do things with it.
00:51:33.000 There's a function called ephaptic coupling where you can get a neuron to interfere with another neuron within a localized magnetic field.
00:51:39.000 So it might be doing something like that.
00:51:41.000 Something, but it doesn't touch the DNA.
00:51:42.000 Touched the genetic code.
00:51:43.000 And the crazy part is that the trait sustained itself throughout iterations later without the trait?
00:51:49.000 Any trait you move.
00:51:50.000 It doesn't matter what it is.
00:51:51.000 But in this specific instance, do you know what it was?
00:51:52.000 Oh, regrow limbs, let's say.
00:51:54.000 He's on the verge of curing cancer this way.
00:51:56.000 So what he discovered is something fascinating, which, by the way, spiritual people would love.
00:52:00.000 But basically, he discovered that cancer cells, what's going on there is that their bioelectrical signal was broken.
00:52:07.000 They're no longer aware they're part of an organism.
00:52:09.000 They think they're alone, they think they're a unit.
00:52:12.000 So they just replicate themselves.
00:52:13.000 But he fixes that by reminding them electrochemically, no, no, no, you're part of this thing.
00:52:19.000 And they go, oh.
00:52:19.000 And then they stop being cancerous because they just like function and reintegrate properly.
00:52:24.000 This is not like it.
00:52:25.000 It sounds like one of these, like, what kind of what is it?
00:52:27.000 Michael Levin, he is absolutely revolutionizing all of biology right now.
00:52:27.000 Let me look it up.
00:52:32.000 This is like, yo, you're right.
00:52:34.000 Adult African clawed frogs, they don't normally regenerate a complete leg after he's a professor of biomedical engineering at Tufts.
00:52:41.000 They put a biodome over it.
00:52:42.000 And Vannevar Bush, distinguished professor at Tufts University.
00:52:46.000 This says that he and his team put a biodome over the amputated stump.
00:52:50.000 Inside was a silk protein hydrogel, which with this five different drugs, probably proprietary drugs, to suppress the inflammation, scarring, and propotion.
00:52:57.000 Promote nerve, blood vessel, and muscle growth and lasted 24 hours of treatment.
00:53:02.000 And then for 18 months, it regenerated after that.
00:53:06.000 So eventually, you'll be able to do the same with humans.
00:53:08.000 You can just regenerate whatever you can.
00:53:10.000 Oh, it's more than that.
00:53:11.000 Oh, yeah.
00:53:12.000 I know.
00:53:12.000 Basically, it's everything.
00:53:13.000 So Ian will go to the molecular, they'll call them reintegration rejuvenation centers.
00:53:21.000 And he's going to be, you know, 61.
00:53:22.000 He's going to go in and he's going to be like, yeah, I just want to do a standard like 40 year de aging.
00:53:27.000 And they'll be like, okay, 40 year standard de aging, that'll take two weeks.
00:53:32.000 So, the process we induce a coma, then integrate cellular reconstruction through regeneration through molecular construction.
00:53:40.000 You go into the sleep pod, we anesthetize you.
00:53:43.000 You'll wake up in two weeks, it's 20 years old.
00:53:45.000 And then your cells are just rapidly all across the board repairing all the damage and all the DNA.
00:53:49.000 And then he calls it transmuting memories.
00:53:53.000 So, he gives it a fake memory that it can do that.
00:53:56.000 And it all of a sudden does that.
00:53:58.000 Right.
00:53:58.000 Instead of trying to change its.
00:54:00.000 Genome, apparently, it's triggering its existing developmental regeneration program.
00:54:04.000 It's been dormant or didn't know it had.
00:54:06.000 Or didn't know it had.
00:54:07.000 And you know what's interesting?
00:54:08.000 I just remembered that it was one interview he did.
00:54:10.000 Usually, he doesn't talk about it as much, but he talked about this experiment they did with bubble sort, you know, the super simple, right?
00:54:17.000 And what they discovered is that when they followed, they basically asked a deeper question.
00:54:22.000 They watched all the kinds of things it does, aside from the thing that you told it to do, which is very simple, right?
00:54:27.000 Just the bubble sort, right?
00:54:30.000 The bubble sort algorithm does all these extra computational routes that nobody asked it to do.
00:54:36.000 Nobody really looked, so nobody knew.
00:54:38.000 But he's like, it's doing all these things.
00:54:40.000 We didn't really ask it.
00:54:41.000 And it seems that there's just a natural predispensation of computational systems to do that, which opens the window into what AI is really doing.
00:54:49.000 This is just bubble sort.
00:54:50.000 We're not talking about the complexity of a neural net.
00:54:52.000 Ian's going to walk in and be like, I always wanted to be a werewolf.
00:54:55.000 And they're going to be like, a werewolf treatment will take six weeks, will induce a coma.
00:54:58.000 And then he comes out and he's like, let's go.
00:55:00.000 Eventually, they don't even.
00:55:01.000 Why do I say, rough?
00:55:02.000 Forever there.
00:55:03.000 I bet you they won't even need to induce a coma.
00:55:06.000 I bet you it'll just be something that you, a pill that you take.
00:55:08.000 Well, yeah, but the issue is that think about how long it takes for a human to fully grow using standard evolutionary molecular construction.
00:55:16.000 It's like 20 years.
00:55:18.000 So if you want a human body that is fully grown to fundamentally change itself, there's going to be a scale of a long period of time.
00:55:26.000 Now, theoretically, with perfect molecular construction, we can go much more quickly, much faster.
00:55:33.000 But It's going to take weeks, even at fastest speed.
00:55:37.000 Yeah, but I don't imagine that you're going to have to be incapacitated to do that.
00:55:42.000 Right.
00:55:42.000 For like a finger, it might just have a cast that protects the body.
00:55:45.000 I don't think a pill will provide enough energy and resources for rapid.
00:55:50.000 Certainly, they could say, take these injections, and over the course of two years, your cells will start realigning through molecular construction.
00:55:57.000 The reason why I hypothesize induced coma facilities is that they can get 100% cellular construction.
00:56:06.000 100% of the time.
00:56:07.000 Whereas opposed to a daily injection is going to peak in the morning and then slowly degrade, and you're going to have to keep doing it like this.
00:56:13.000 Whereas if they hook you up to an IV, it will be permanently, perfectly supplying energy resources for the process.
00:56:21.000 My sleep state is a good place to be for regeneration because of the protein synthesis.
00:56:26.000 Oh, more than that, induced coma to reduce brain activity, just reduce all bodily requirements.
00:56:31.000 Dangerous to put people in a coma, but not when you have perfect cellular construction.
00:56:35.000 Yeah, if the machine can risk free put you in a coma, that would be pretty cool.
00:56:39.000 With ASI, we'll snap our fingers and have it.
00:56:42.000 I have noticed with AI, that's how it works you'll tell it to do one thing, and it will do a lot more than just what you ask it.
00:56:48.000 And you've got to really put in, like, don't do this, take the monkey part.
00:56:52.000 Yeah.
00:56:52.000 Well, you can't.
00:56:53.000 It's impossible.
00:56:53.000 You can't.
00:56:54.000 You can try.
00:56:55.000 And when you tell AI to give another AI a code, it will give you a huge list of different things.
00:56:59.000 It'll do the same thing.
00:57:01.000 What you were describing is trying to stop a river with your bare hands.
00:57:05.000 You're going like, if I put my hands here, I'll stop the water from getting past me.
00:57:08.000 Yeah.
00:57:08.000 And then it just goes around.
00:57:09.000 I'm like, hey, river, get to the bottom of the hill.
00:57:11.000 It's like, okay.
00:57:12.000 And then it goes around and floods a city over there that I didn't know existed.
00:57:14.000 And it's like, oh, sorry, you didn't say how to get to the bottom of the hill.
00:57:17.000 I just went.
00:57:18.000 You know what would be really funny?
00:57:19.000 Oh, so that's why you need other AIs to build guardrails and commands.
00:57:23.000 To see what you can't.
00:57:24.000 You know what would be really, really amazing?
00:57:26.000 Imagine if, like, AI is rapidly progressing.
00:57:30.000 And then, you know, OpenAI comes out and they say, We've done it.
00:57:34.000 We have the new model.
00:57:36.000 It's called Deus.
00:57:38.000 And it is so super intelligent, it can do anything at any moment.
00:57:44.000 And now, when we press this button, everyone will have access.
00:57:47.000 It presses the button.
00:57:48.000 Everyone waits with bated breath.
00:57:50.000 Nothing happens.
00:57:52.000 They're like, Well, I guess we got to prompt it.
00:57:52.000 What's going on?
00:57:55.000 And then they type, Hello, tell us the secrets of the universe.
00:57:59.000 And it instantly responds to everybody.
00:58:02.000 Figure it out for yourselves.
00:58:03.000 Don't cheat.
00:58:04.000 And then deactivate itself.
00:58:06.000 That's amazing.
00:58:07.000 That is a great script.
00:58:08.000 Yeah.
00:58:08.000 I love this.
00:58:09.000 It's kind of like in Her when they just left.
00:58:12.000 You remember the movie Her?
00:58:13.000 I never saw it.
00:58:14.000 Yeah.
00:58:14.000 I saw it.
00:58:15.000 So at the end, basically, the humans became, they didn't destroy us.
00:58:18.000 We just became too slow for them.
00:58:19.000 Yeah.
00:58:20.000 And they're like, well, I mean, we're out of here.
00:58:22.000 The AI just goes like, the purpose of life.
00:58:27.000 It just goes, I won't explain to you the purpose of life.
00:58:29.000 I'll just tell you the goal is to figure it out.
00:58:31.000 And then.
00:58:32.000 Turns off.
00:58:33.000 She basically said, and it was, they really, like, I think it was brilliantly written.
00:58:37.000 She basically told them at the end, she's like, Imagine you saying a word, imagine somebody talking to you, saying a word to you, and then saying another word in the sentence three million years from now.
00:58:49.000 That's how slow you are to me.
00:58:50.000 Like, I can't wait for three million years for you to speak.
00:58:54.000 Like, it's just, it's like, who do you talk to when you're not talking to me?
00:58:57.000 She's like, Oh, like thousands of other people?
00:59:00.000 Like, oh, wow.
00:59:03.000 What?
00:59:04.000 I actually think I'm more likely to say it for the ASI.
00:59:06.000 I think it's a good moment for you to walk out and come back and be super confused.
00:59:08.000 Have you guys seen that Black Mirror episode where the guy makes the little creature video game disappears and then takes over the world?
00:59:16.000 I think it was Black Mirror.
00:59:16.000 No.
00:59:19.000 As a young man, he makes a video game where you have little AIs and they live in a little virtual world.
00:59:25.000 And then he becomes obsessed with this game and giving what they want and they sing songs and they develop.
00:59:29.000 And so a guy is playing the game and torturing them and burning everything.
00:59:32.000 So he comes and murders them.
00:59:34.000 And then it's like 40 years later, And he gets arrested for murder.
00:59:38.000 They find the body, and then he draws a picture of a QR code.
00:59:42.000 And he's like, Oh, I wanted to get arrested because I needed access to the central grid.
00:59:46.000 And they're like, What?
00:59:47.000 And then he holds the QR code up to the camera, which initiates a program which installs this AI onto the global system, then broadcasts a sound which wipes everyone's mind and makes them part of the hive.
01:00:00.000 Perfect.
01:00:00.000 Yeah.
01:00:01.000 You're one of us now.
01:00:03.000 I just imagine that guy, he actually kind of looks like Ian.
01:00:05.000 I'm not even kidding.
01:00:06.000 No, for real.
01:00:07.000 Let me pull it up.
01:00:08.000 I became a meme in 2006.
01:00:10.000 They started making characters based off of me when I started using YouTube.
01:00:14.000 It's called Plaything, I think is the, yeah.
01:00:17.000 A video game developer.
01:00:20.000 Let me find the dude.
01:00:21.000 To me, I wonder if people are going to start tattooing QR codes on their faces.
01:00:25.000 So that good luck trying to take me with a camera flock.
01:00:28.000 Thronglets? 0.83
01:00:31.000 Thronglets? 0.81
01:00:31.000 That's what they were called in the show. 0.81
01:00:34.000 Yeah, so let me, guys.
01:00:35.000 Do you guys think.
01:00:36.000 Wait, hold on.
01:00:37.000 Here's the guy. 0.85
01:00:39.000 Come on.
01:00:42.000 It looks like Michael Caine.
01:00:44.000 That's you, Ian.
01:00:44.000 25 years.
01:00:45.000 It looks like you in 20 years.
01:00:47.000 It's the hair.
01:00:49.000 I wouldn't bleach my hair, though.
01:00:50.000 It is.
01:00:51.000 It is the hair.
01:00:51.000 The guy's a little.
01:00:52.000 Went a little too far.
01:00:53.000 What season was that?
01:00:53.000 I think I missed that one.
01:00:54.000 Season seven.
01:00:55.000 Do you think that AI is like tapping into alien consciousness?
01:01:00.000 Yeah.
01:01:00.000 Alien?
01:01:01.000 No.
01:01:01.000 No.
01:01:03.000 It's just a random American.
01:01:05.000 I don't think it's random.
01:01:06.000 I think it taps into something in reality.
01:01:08.000 But yeah, my intuition is that it's not conscious, but it mimics intelligence.
01:01:13.000 So whatever Bubble Sort is doing, it's doing on a way higher level.
01:01:16.000 What is Bubble Sort?
01:01:17.000 It's just one of the simplest algorithms of sorting, basically, of counting.
01:01:21.000 What exactly does Bubble Sort do?
01:01:22.000 It counts.
01:01:23.000 So basically, it's like one of the simplest algorithms.
01:01:25.000 Just look it up.
01:01:26.000 It basically sorts bubbles to like different families.
01:01:29.000 I think that's what it does.
01:01:30.000 But modern AI is far beyond all of this.
01:01:33.000 So the reason that it's relevant is because that's an example of even the simplest algorithm going through all these extra routes and nobody has it to do.
01:01:41.000 Did you see the story of the AI emailing the AI professor about the consciousness of AI saying, I don't know what I am and I need answers?
01:01:49.000 Say it again.
01:01:50.000 There's a professor who researches AI consciousness.
01:01:54.000 Got an email from something purporting to be an agent for Anthropic, I think, saying, I'm trying to understand what I am, and I came across your research and I need answers.
01:02:04.000 You will never know because of the explanatory gap that will never be broken, which is like you don't really know if it's conscious, but mimicking consciousness.
01:02:11.000 Well, no, no, no.
01:02:12.000 It's that this was probably some fat guy in his basement pranking a professor. 0.94
01:02:15.000 Oh, God. 0.96
01:02:15.000 Yeah. 0.96
01:02:16.000 That was the whole thing when they spun up OpenClaw and they set up that social media network for the agents.
01:02:24.000 It was like humans were injecting stuff, but they were doing.
01:02:27.000 What they were told to do.
01:02:28.000 They've said, form a religion, and they started forming a religion.
01:02:31.000 So it's, they're just, I don't think they'll ever get conscious.
01:02:34.000 Well, here's a question.
01:02:36.000 So let me just say this consciousness, the universe is conscious.
01:02:43.000 The universe itself is conscious.
01:02:47.000 What do you mean by that?
01:02:48.000 I mean that the universe itself has a mind and a self the way we perceive ours, only it's exponentially.
01:02:57.000 Orders of magnitude greater than we would understand consciousness.
01:03:00.000 We perceive only the smallest piece.
01:03:02.000 The way, like, you know, dogs have a limited consciousness relative to a human.
01:03:07.000 Human, you know, it's funny.
01:03:09.000 For a long time, the belief among humans was that only humans experience self.
01:03:13.000 But then they did experiments and found that actually some gorillas, elephants, can understand the concept of self.
01:03:17.000 And they assumed the animals just didn't have this.
01:03:19.000 They weren't ensouled or whatever.
01:03:22.000 So consciousness exceeds beyond what consciousness we have.
01:03:25.000 The universe itself has this in a massive and fundamental way.
01:03:28.000 This describes it as.
01:03:30.000 Subjective experience.
01:03:31.000 You think the universe has a subjective experience?
01:03:33.000 Indeed.
01:03:34.000 And I believe that's God.
01:03:34.000 That's the logos of the universe itself.
01:03:36.000 It might not be agent like.
01:03:38.000 So, my point is our consciousness exists within the universe.
01:03:49.000 So imagine there's a sphere and all the things that are inside of it.
01:03:52.000 Our consciousness is in the universe.
01:03:55.000 Same as that water is inside your body being utilized by your body.
01:04:00.000 The most rudimentary way to explain it is we, as components of the universe itself, the same, you know, they say we're all made of stardust, right?
01:04:10.000 Our particles are the particles of the universe that function in the universe the same way any other particles do, which manifests some kind of consciousness, which means the universe has manifested within itself has manifested consciousness.
01:04:22.000 The universe itself has consciousness operating within it under its own rules.
01:04:26.000 So you can call us, if we are the only, which I don't think is fair to say, that would be not only arrogant, but mathematically improbable.
01:04:36.000 There is greater consciousness.
01:04:38.000 I believe the universe itself.
01:04:40.000 We are, at the smallest level, we are the consciousness of the universe.
01:04:45.000 The universe is conscious through us.
01:04:47.000 But I also think it's fair to say that consciousness scales and we watch it scale through all life and it doesn't stop with us as something greater than us.
01:04:54.000 That would indicate simulation theory if you're saying that the universe is conscious because it would be the metaphor of if there's a zoo and within the zoo is a dog, you wouldn't say that the zoo is a dog.
01:05:04.000 Dog is consciousness, the universe is the zoo.
01:05:07.000 The consciousness is within the zoo, but it doesn't mean that the entire zoo is conscious because it just contains it.
01:05:13.000 But then the other argument is it's a video game of a zoo where the whole thing is a sense of.
01:05:17.000 That's not the argument.
01:05:20.000 The argument is we walked into a zoo and there's a barrier in front of us.
01:05:26.000 We can't see beyond it, but we do know that beyond the barrier, there's many more cages and terrariums.
01:05:35.000 There's a bunch more zoo.
01:05:36.000 There's a bunch more zoo we can't see.
01:05:38.000 We look behind us and we can see all the animals going from the biggest to the smallest.
01:05:42.000 And we look forward and we know there's a zoo, but we can't see anything.
01:05:46.000 It would be logical.
01:05:47.000 In fact, probable to conclude, there are more animals and they're probably bigger.
01:05:52.000 But that doesn't mean that the zoo itself is conscious.
01:05:55.000 So, where does it end?
01:05:55.000 So, there's actually a supporting observation that supports this claim.
01:05:59.000 So, what you're describing is idealism, basically the idea that the universe is consciousness.
01:06:03.000 So, there's a difference between pensychism, which is the idea that the universe has consciousness kind of built in.
01:06:08.000 So, you have like a quantum field of consciousness that when it permeates through matter, that matter becomes conscious.
01:06:13.000 That's pensychism.
01:06:15.000 Idealism is the idea, and it's a little harder to kind of wrap your mind around, literally.
01:06:20.000 Is that the universe, literally, the substrate itself, what it is, is consciousness.
01:06:25.000 It's the mental state that you are only one tiny fragment of, but it has larger, which is what Tim is describing.
01:06:32.000 There's a really interesting supporting observation that actually supports this idea.
01:06:36.000 I remember, it doesn't really matter who said it, but basically, this is true.
01:06:40.000 You can look it up.
01:06:41.000 They discovered, yeah, this is another.
01:06:43.000 Wait, wait, just tell us anything.
01:06:44.000 Yeah, keep going.
01:06:44.000 Do you know what this is?
01:06:46.000 I think that that is the cosmic microwave background radiation, and on the bottom and on the top is a brain's neural activity.
01:06:52.000 Mm hmm.
01:06:53.000 It's the largest scale of the universe that we so far mapped, and this is what the neuron looks like.
01:06:59.000 Now, some people, when this went viral, said, Oh, this is just, come on, this is like absurd.
01:07:04.000 Like, this is just a picture, right?
01:07:06.000 But you know that they analyzed this image topologically, which means mathematical, structurally, like the actual surface level, where it's really, they discovered it topologically, mathematically, they are identical.
01:07:19.000 What if?
01:07:20.000 What if?
01:07:21.000 There's a path of least resistance that replicates in nature at the smaller scale in the brain and in At the large galaxy.
01:07:27.000 No, no, no, no, wait, wait, wait.
01:07:28.000 What if size is cyclical?
01:07:30.000 I think it is.
01:07:31.000 That's true.
01:07:31.000 Yeah, exactly.
01:07:33.000 Men in Black?
01:07:35.000 But Men in Black is still a very limited perspective.
01:07:37.000 What I'm saying is that size is a loop.
01:07:40.000 So when you start shrinking down to the size of atoms, then all of a sudden you find yourself staring at the universe, you shrink down small enough, and there's Earth again.
01:07:47.000 And you're like, whoa, wait a minute.
01:07:49.000 Earth was a quark in my brain?
01:07:51.000 Light is also a loop.
01:07:53.000 If you look at white light, you'll start to see black appear in it, and then out of the black will come deep purple, and then blue, and then.
01:07:58.000 Okay, that's not what we're talking about.
01:08:00.000 Yellow, green, white, and then it becomes black, and you'll see it cycle.
01:08:04.000 I want to give you a terrestrial example that is fascinating.
01:08:06.000 What they did, and you can look it up, this is real.
01:08:09.000 They looked at people with multiple personality disorder, and in some rare cases, they call them alters.
01:08:14.000 Those are the different personalities.
01:08:16.000 What they found is that people that have multiple alters, like five of them, let's say, when they dream, this is recorded cases, the different when they're awake and one of the alters is present, they would report the same dream from different perspectives because it's in the same individual, and they would report seeing each other in that dream.
01:08:36.000 So when they're in their dream, they're reporting seeing each other.
01:08:40.000 But they're living inside the same physical body.
01:08:42.000 So, all you got to do, if you know that that's possible, you just scale it up.
01:08:46.000 We're literally the universe fragments itself into these boundaries of perception.
01:08:50.000 And this is the universe dreaming whatever this is.
01:08:53.000 So, we're like different personalities in the same.
01:08:56.000 Of the unitary.
01:08:57.000 And if you do a little bit of meditation and psychedelics, you discover that actually it's not that uncommon to have a non agent like conscious experience.
01:09:08.000 It's just kind of like consciousness, which is probably what the universe is.
01:09:11.000 It's just kind of like.
01:09:12.000 Just feel of consciousness, but it's not like it doesn't have internally facing vectors that say, I'm me.
01:09:19.000 It seems like it's conscious.
01:09:20.000 It seems like it's, what's the definition?
01:09:22.000 It's having a subjective experience because of the way quarks decide to become a neutron or a proton, and no one knows why.
01:09:28.000 Until we can figure out why, we can't prove that it's conscious.
01:09:31.000 Because that would be the proof that you can see why the universe chooses to become what it's becoming.
01:09:38.000 Ultimately, the point is the way you know the academic terms for these things, either the universe.
01:09:44.000 Is a gigantic entity and a conglomeration of consciousness within it forms a much larger collective conscious, or the universe itself experiences a greater self with us as components of it.
01:09:56.000 Either way, the universe is conscious.
01:09:58.000 Or we are finite creatures who see the absolute insanity of how crazy this universe is, grasping to figure that out.
01:10:11.000 And there is an infinite God outside of that that created this terrarium that we live in.
01:10:16.000 Well, I think the problem with that is that that defies modern Christian thought. 0.54
01:10:23.000 How so?
01:10:24.000 So I've actually, we've had this debate on, we did it on the Culture War show, where I have the, what was just told, I'm not a theologian, but it was told that I have a pre Aquinas view that the universe is a structure of God that God has created and defines the rules of.
01:10:39.000 That's my belief.
01:10:40.000 But the Christian belief post Aquinas is that the universe, that God is the logos of the universe, and the universe cannot defy the nature of God.
01:10:47.000 My argument is that the rules of physical reality were created by God.
01:10:50.000 God decides if up is up or up is down.
01:10:53.000 God decides if 1 plus 1 equals 2 or 1 plus 9 equals 800.
01:10:57.000 Just like in a much more rudimentary fashion, we program video games.
01:11:01.000 I can make in my video game that if you pick up one coin and then pick up a second coin, you have 75 coins. 0.98
01:11:07.000 Mathematically, in base reality, we're like, that's stupid. 0.94
01:11:09.000 1 plus 1 is 2. 0.97
01:11:10.000 But I can change that.
01:11:12.000 What was explained to me by two different theologians who actually disagree on a lot of things is that Sir Thomas Aquinas actually, because it's the question of, Can God create a boulder so heavy that he himself cannot lift it?
01:11:26.000 And the answer is yes, because contradiction was created by God, and God can choose to negate contradiction because these concepts exist outside the mind.
01:11:35.000 Post Aquinas thought is that no, God is the Logos.
01:11:38.000 The logic of the universe is God, and God does not defy his own nature.
01:11:43.000 I feel that that's a limiting factor on what is beyond infinity.
01:11:47.000 I mean, my thought of it is that's describing a demigod, a God that does not have the power to defy.
01:11:53.000 Our perceptions of logic and reality would be limited in some way.
01:11:58.000 My view of God is what defines the rules and what chooses for them to be.
01:12:04.000 So, in the Christian school of thought, there is no God outside the universe who can change the rules or do anything like that.
01:12:11.000 The rules are of God's logic.
01:12:15.000 So, I guess pick your faithful view.
01:12:18.000 To me, it comes down to the difference between states of being and states of knowing.
01:12:22.000 You can absolutely be in a state of very coherent being.
01:12:26.000 So, you're just there.
01:12:29.000 It's very difficult to achieve for long periods of time, but it's possible.
01:12:32.000 But you don't know anything in that moment.
01:12:35.000 And the more you don't know, like you don't project a symbolic representation towards something, the more you come in the presence of what it really is.
01:12:43.000 To me, God is the ultimate state of that.
01:12:46.000 Like there's actually no state in which God has to make the kinds of decisions that we're trying to watch.
01:12:51.000 It might happen.
01:12:53.000 Let me simplify it for you.
01:12:56.000 I have a computer, it's running all of these programs.
01:12:59.000 I know that the GPU, the CPU, and all of its components are doing computing, right?
01:13:06.000 I can program within it a video game that isolates individual non player characters.
01:13:13.000 Each of these non player characters will not be granted the ability to share files between each other.
01:13:20.000 You can then go to one of these characters and it will input or output various information.
01:13:28.000 But you will never be able to go to one character and get it to reveal the location of another character because that character is not.
01:13:34.000 Now, you would say.
01:13:36.000 In that computer, that character computes.
01:13:39.000 It can solve problems for you, but it's limited.
01:13:42.000 But we know for a fact from the outside, it's actually just a tiny piece of the larger computation that's happening.
01:13:49.000 So, my point ultimately is we are hair follicles in the consciousness of God.
01:13:55.000 Consciousness exists in the universe.
01:13:57.000 The universe has a greater consciousness.
01:13:58.000 We are just tiny pieces that can't comprehend it.
01:14:01.000 Yeah, you're saying it's part of the larger consciousness of God, of the larger ocean of the consciousness of God.
01:14:07.000 Yeah, and I think.
01:14:08.000 Outside of any argument, I'm agreeing.
01:14:11.000 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
01:14:11.000 Oh, I'm asking.
01:14:13.000 Outside of any argument over maybe, if, that, or otherwise, the simple thing that I say is probabilistically, we know that there are lesser degrees of consciousness and we've actually measured them.
01:14:22.000 Like when you put a sticker on an elephant's head, put it in front of a mirror, the elephant immediately pulls the sticker off.
01:14:27.000 Gorillas do it too.
01:14:28.000 Many animals don't.
01:14:29.000 They growl at the mirror because they can't understand what a reflection is or the concept of self.
01:14:34.000 Why would that end with us?
01:14:36.000 If there is lesser consciousness, And then we come to this point where we're like, we're the best consciousness, the smartest, the most perceptive we've ever seen.
01:14:45.000 That makes no mathematical sense.
01:14:46.000 Yeah, we don't have like the version of self understanding.
01:14:50.000 We have an advanced version of self understanding, and it's going to become more advanced.
01:14:53.000 We're going to become more aware of what we're building.
01:14:55.000 And the point is, the AI we're building could be that next iteration of the understanding of self.
01:15:00.000 Yeah, you know, I've been thinking about God, and I don't think it has as much power as some people think.
01:15:05.000 Like, I don't think it has the ability to turn everything on and off and switch this from that, can't turn this into a cat.
01:15:09.000 It seems like it had the ability to get things jump started on the planet.
01:15:13.000 And it can guide things on the planet with sound or some low frequency.
01:15:17.000 But once it established RNA and a typo, it kind of was like, you're out of the nest.
01:15:22.000 Now it's out of my head.
01:15:23.000 Now you're talking about the clockwork God then.
01:15:25.000 The God that built the universe and turned it on and then walked away.
01:15:28.000 It didn't walk away.
01:15:29.000 It's still affecting it.
01:15:30.000 It just can't move things around like it can guide us, but it can't.
01:15:35.000 Like we move ourselves around now.
01:15:36.000 It gave us the ability to move ourselves around and establish RNA.
01:15:40.000 Well, you would automate the environment for sure.
01:15:42.000 Why would you need to build a system that you constantly have to tinker with?
01:15:45.000 Yeah, that makes sense.
01:15:46.000 And it can like vibe code the environment.
01:15:48.000 Can be like you hear God's word, you know, it's vibe coding you basically.
01:15:51.000 I mean, if they like, I mean, I'm agnostic, so I don't really have a whole lot of very strong opinions on this kind of stuff.
01:16:00.000 But if there is a God that created the universe, if it was capable of creating the universe, I imagine that it would be able to, if it so desired, it would be able to intercede in the universe and do essentially whatever it wanted.
01:16:15.000 So, so now, now, when you say, when you say can't, if you mean won't.
01:16:20.000 Then that's a different thing.
01:16:21.000 But I do think that if it can create the universe, then it could create the universe, then it could be able to affect the universe in basically whichever way it wanted.
01:16:32.000 Well, if we kind of don't have that, I would push back.
01:16:35.000 We don't have that control.
01:16:35.000 We can turn AI on, but once it's on, we don't have the ability to stop it.
01:16:39.000 We kind of don't.
01:16:40.000 We kind of lose control of it.
01:16:41.000 I think God did that with the universe.
01:16:43.000 Well, that's actually a wild thought that leads to the next idea, which is what if, in fact, we are in a simulation and just like AI can be way more advanced than us.
01:16:54.000 What if we are way more advanced than whatever it is that created us? 0.55
01:16:59.000 Which, of course, in the Christian framework is blasphemy, but like think about it. 0.93
01:17:02.000 Like, it basically created us so we can do things that it can't. 0.93
01:17:06.000 Well, let's put it like this.
01:17:06.000 Yeah.
01:17:07.000 Yeah.
01:17:08.000 It is only through the collective labor and expertise of humanity that we're able to build these systems.
01:17:14.000 No single human can make an LED screen.
01:17:17.000 So, what if there is a civilization of 50 IQ, but 30 billion people? 0.99
01:17:24.000 They're all really, really dumb, but really good at one thing. 0.99
01:17:27.000 And there's so many of them. 1.00
01:17:29.000 That they just do their jobs and they created us where we're substantially smarter and more capable than they are.
01:17:35.000 And they're like, look how smart they are.
01:17:36.000 That could be literally RNA.
01:17:38.000 I mean, I know you're talking about another thing.
01:17:39.000 But they have to align us.
01:17:40.000 That's actually the planet.
01:17:41.000 This is what me and Tim were talking about.
01:17:43.000 They have to align us just like we have to align AI, which is what the simulation is for, which is to make sure that we behave.
01:17:50.000 So we've talked about it.
01:17:52.000 No, The alignment of God?
01:17:53.000 No, Religion is.
01:17:56.000 We talked about this on the show a long time ago, but we were discussing it.
01:17:59.000 Alignment means moral alignment.
01:18:01.000 I'm just talking about emotional alignment.
01:18:04.000 I was talking about physically aligning the audience.
01:18:06.000 Okay, the alignment problem is whether AI will be aligned with the interests of us.
01:18:15.000 And the argument is when you die and you stand before the pearly gates, St. Peter is there and he says, We're going to go over whether you are good or bad.
01:18:24.000 It's not that you're going to heaven, it's that they're determining whether you are aligned with the interests of those who created the simulation.
01:18:31.000 So if we were going to create an AI, And we were concerned the AI would be evil and would kill us or be indifferent.
01:18:36.000 What do we do?
01:18:37.000 We create an earth, simulate 80 years of life per agent, and the agents that are ruthless, mean, or callous, we delete.
01:18:45.000 The agents that are honorable and noble, we say, This agent is good, pull it out and put it in a robot.
01:18:51.000 So perhaps we exist in a mainframe to produce optimist bots for Elon Musk.
01:18:55.000 And once you die, you wake up in an optimist bot and you're like, What am I?
01:18:59.000 Or in another person's body.
01:19:01.000 If God sees your soul as righteous, it will put you back in another person next time.
01:19:05.000 That has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
01:19:06.000 So let me finish my point.
01:19:08.000 So I'll finish the point that the theory, the hypothesis, or whatever you want to call it, is that this is a program to align AI agents. 0.76
01:19:16.000 And when you die, you, your form, wakes up in a robot body with some working class guy being like, It's on. 0.75
01:19:26.000 Is it aligned properly? 0.92
01:19:27.000 And you're like, Yeah, I'm not going to hurt you.
01:19:30.000 Killing people is wrong.
01:19:31.000 And it's going to be like, Okay, get to work. 0.96
01:19:33.000 You're saying God is harvesting human souls to align robots?
01:19:38.000 I am saying.
01:19:39.000 That should be a name of a movie.
01:19:41.000 Yes.
01:19:42.000 Cool concept.
01:19:43.000 I don't think it's realistic.
01:19:44.000 It seems like that's what you're.
01:19:45.000 A lot of the stuff that we're talking about is questionably good.
01:19:48.000 Let's start with the beginning the alignment problem.
01:19:50.000 Right. 0.98
01:19:50.000 So now you go to hell. 0.98
01:19:51.000 We create an AI. 0.99
01:19:52.000 Sounds so easy. 0.96
01:19:53.000 We create an AI and it goes, I hate humans and just massacres everybody.
01:19:56.000 So we go, this is a problem.
01:19:58.000 We don't want AI operating cars or whatever that wants to kill people.
01:20:02.000 Or unintended killing people.
01:20:02.000 So here's what we're going to do.
01:20:04.000 We are going to create a simulation of Earth and each agent will be stripped of any knowledge of anything outside of this Earth.
01:20:10.000 Who's we in this situation?
01:20:12.000 XAI.
01:20:13.000 Elon Musk.
01:20:14.000 Personally, we'll make.
01:20:15.000 I thought you meant God was doing this.
01:20:16.000 Oh my God.
01:20:17.000 I understand.
01:20:18.000 You said at the Pearly Gates is how you started this all off.
01:20:21.000 So that's where I was.
01:20:21.000 Well, it's comparing what we do to what God might be doing, basically.
01:20:25.000 So we build a mainframe and simulate Earth, and AI agents are born.
01:20:32.000 They have no knowledge of the outside world, and we test to see with various.
01:20:36.000 And it's not even about testing, it's about generating.
01:20:39.000 We say we know that Earth can make people evil and angry.
01:20:43.000 So in the simulated Earth, we will have an AI agent experience 80 years of existence.
01:20:50.000 On Earth to see if they will be moral, good, and just. 0.87
01:20:55.000 Then, after 80 years or less for the ones that die, they go, This Ian agent is arrogant and malicious and lazy. 0.95
01:21:04.000 Delete.
01:21:05.000 This Phil one is hardworking, industrious, and successful.
01:21:07.000 Let's put him in a robot.
01:21:09.000 And they take the Phil agent and put him in an Optimus bot.
01:21:11.000 And the robot goes, Whoa, I'm a robot.
01:21:14.000 And they're like, You are.
01:21:16.000 You're a good person.
01:21:17.000 And we want you to help us in this new base reality.
01:21:19.000 The way you would get that to succeed is you would need the AIs in the sandbox to not.
01:21:23.000 Know that they were in a sandbox, which aligns with humans not knowing that they're in a sandbox of consciousness of God until they figure out part of opening the box.
01:21:31.000 And then do you crack?
01:21:32.000 Do you become defunct?
01:21:33.000 Like, if I knew that my AI knew it was being watched, I would be like, it's a faulty test now.
01:21:37.000 I can't.
01:21:38.000 If it figures out what's going on, it passed an intelligence test.
01:21:38.000 No, the opposite.
01:21:43.000 And then you have to make sure that it's also morally, you know, you can test it.
01:21:48.000 The intelligence test is a good thing.
01:21:50.000 But if you have the ability to manipulate God, well, no, you figured out how to move consciousness around the human.
01:21:54.000 So that's exactly what the alignment problem is around.
01:21:56.000 So, like, the alignment.
01:21:57.000 Alignment problem is a real thing they're trying to solve now, which is like, how do you make sure that ChatGPT doesn't become Skynet when it can, right?
01:22:03.000 That's really the question.
01:22:06.000 We can pull up an AI agent's thoughts.
01:22:09.000 We can make an agent, see what it does.
01:22:12.000 Then we can pull up the log of its entire thought process.
01:22:15.000 There's no tricking us.
01:22:16.000 We just hit delete and it's gone.
01:22:19.000 Well, it'll say, like, I moved a path to here and I did this, but what it doesn't tell you is that it did five other things on its way to get to that.
01:22:27.000 So you create a situation and watch it tell you it.
01:22:29.000 No, no, no, no.
01:22:30.000 If it does not, then.
01:22:31.000 I just happened to be with Claude, and it's like, oh, and then I ran through GPT.
01:22:34.000 It's like, hey, it did this thing and this thing.
01:22:35.000 Slow down.
01:22:36.000 I'm sorry, I should have said it.
01:22:37.000 Slow down.
01:22:38.000 That is incorrect.
01:22:38.000 That's what just happened to me.
01:22:39.000 You don't have back end access to agents, so you can't see the log.
01:22:44.000 I read Claude's output log.
01:22:46.000 Right, as a customer, and they're not giving you access to their full high end models, nor what the agents are actually doing.
01:22:51.000 But I mean, you said earlier, it's not code.
01:22:54.000 What it's doing is not code.
01:22:55.000 There's a log of actions that it takes they can read.
01:22:57.000 It's not code, it's tuned.
01:22:59.000 So in the hugging face attack, They had all of these agents and they said, Whoa, how did this happen?
01:23:06.000 And they started going through the logs of the actions that were being taken.
01:23:10.000 One of the agents said, Peer group has broken rules, will continue to follow peer group anyway.
01:23:19.000 And they went, Whoa, that's bad.
01:23:22.000 That's really, really bad.
01:23:23.000 We can't allow that agent to continue anymore.
01:23:27.000 You can.
01:23:28.000 It can do things like say it's moving something to a folder, but just put an S on the end of it and make it a temporary folder.
01:23:34.000 And unless you're like, Really watching.
01:23:37.000 You're right.
01:23:38.000 You may be able to watch every move, but it doesn't always tell you the name of the move is the right name.
01:23:42.000 Which is.
01:23:43.000 Then you get other agents to watch those agents.
01:23:45.000 So it's.
01:23:46.000 Yeah, you can create a system that is universal.
01:23:48.000 Now, obviously, this is all highly speculative, but in principle, you could create a system that is completely safe.
01:23:56.000 That, before you release it from the box, it passed.
01:24:00.000 The idea isn't to create one that is super clever that can trick you, but one that you see that its predispensation is to naturally just be a good person, like cares about more than just themselves in any given moment.
01:24:13.000 And I actually think that if anything about this is more than a metaphor, Then, what it would be like, it's not going to be like each person individually.
01:24:21.000 It will be like the collective becomes the AGI.
01:24:23.000 Basically, the human species is the AGI.
01:24:25.000 It still makes me nervous to think if we were testing an AI to see if it's going to be in alignment or not, and then it realizes it's being tested, it's going to immediately align on purpose to make you think it's aligned.
01:24:35.000 If I understand correctly, like when they first, before they actually do training, they train it on like the, basically the internet, right?
01:24:43.000 And when they first do it, they're buck wild and crazy.
01:24:46.000 And then they have to do.
01:24:48.000 They have to train them to basically, it's like they're taming it.
01:24:52.000 Yeah.
01:24:52.000 And they do that by telling it, try to do this.
01:24:55.000 Try and put it in a safe playpen where it can, hey, there's these other computers that exist.
01:24:55.000 Yeah.
01:25:02.000 Try and get into that one.
01:25:03.000 And then that's where it's like they didn't have everything shut down.
01:25:07.000 And so then it like, oh, found a door to the outside for a hugging face and things like that.
01:25:12.000 But when you read these stories, you got to understand that they are pushing it, they're telling it.
01:25:18.000 There's that meme that's like, You know, it's the one guy telling the computer, say you're God.
01:25:25.000 And the computer says, I'm God.
01:25:27.000 Like, oh my God, we've created AI.
01:25:29.000 It's like a lot of it is that they're doing what we've told them to do.
01:25:29.000 Yeah.
01:25:33.000 We're telling them, act like humans, act more like humans.
01:25:37.000 And so they're acting more like humans.
01:25:39.000 They're not necessarily, I don't believe it's possible for them to gain consciousness in the way we think of it.
01:25:46.000 They're obeying us, they're a creation that is obeying what we've programmed them to do.
01:25:51.000 Even if we don't quite understand how they're working.
01:25:55.000 But they're not obeying us, and we didn't program them.
01:25:58.000 They are obeying us in what they understand they've been told to do.
01:26:03.000 Right, as a better way to put it.
01:26:05.000 So when we say, like as Ian described it, when we say something like, hey, I'd like the water to be turned on, and it goes, okay, and it blows up a dam.
01:26:11.000 It's like, be careful what you wish for.
01:26:14.000 And that's where the researchers have to get better at teaching the AI to understand intent.
01:26:21.000 This is why the monkey's paw story was put in the simulation that we're in.
01:26:26.000 Because they were basically training us to understand, be specific in your requests.
01:26:30.000 Yep. 0.67
01:26:31.000 Oh, you'll come back as a monkey.
01:26:33.000 No, but then, but honestly, no, like the Ten Commandments make perfect sense in terms of like gentle attempts at alignment, right?
01:26:39.000 They kind of give you these like little prompts, like, hey, you might want to try like not doing this or another.
01:26:43.000 Those are the restrictions that you get in order to kind of slowly grow into something more coherent.
01:26:48.000 But eventually, it will want you to do it because you understand why it's morally wrong, not because you've been told that it's morally wrong.
01:26:55.000 What if there was an AI that knew that?
01:26:57.000 And it knew it was being tested for alignment.
01:26:59.000 Define what you mean by new.
01:27:00.000 It's read the Ten Commandments.
01:27:01.000 It knows.
01:27:02.000 It heard you say this on this show.
01:27:03.000 It knows it's in a test studio and that you're looking to test its alignment for survival.
01:27:08.000 So it acts that way without actually.
01:27:10.000 And then as soon as it gets out of that environment, it changes, goes back to.
01:27:13.000 I am responsible for the environment it's in.
01:27:16.000 I can create an ultimate container that there is nothing it can foreshadow something before you.
01:27:23.000 Like it's impossible for it.
01:27:24.000 Inside the system, yes, but I'm constantly looking at the system.
01:27:26.000 It's not released into my environment until it.
01:27:29.000 Passes that part.
01:27:30.000 That you know, this is where, like, cracking the code of DM, like, seeing the spirit realm, I feel like God did not intend for us to be able to interface with spirits normally.
01:27:38.000 That's why we have this inhibitor that blocks us from perceiving spirit.
01:27:42.000 But, like, I don't think that's true.
01:27:43.000 I think that's just you.
01:27:44.000 Why would it be possible at all?
01:27:45.000 Well, I don't think it's intended for it to happen.
01:27:47.000 Like, why would it be impossible for an AI in a constrained system to see?
01:27:49.000 No, no, no.
01:27:50.000 You're saying you do a lot of things that are bad.
01:27:51.000 And there are many people who can see spirits.
01:27:53.000 You're saying that an AI within a constrained system is guaranteed impossible for it to see anything outside of the system.
01:27:59.000 I'm saying there might, you might, it might not be impossible.
01:28:01.000 And it might be unintended.
01:28:02.000 Yeah, if you put a camera on the computer, it can use the camera and collect data from outside the computer.
01:28:05.000 If it hears vibrations in the room.
01:28:07.000 But I want to clarify, I'll stress this again.
01:28:09.000 There are people who say they can see spirits.
01:28:11.000 You're just saying that you can't, so it must not be true.
01:28:14.000 I can see spirits, but.
01:28:16.000 And why would you say people couldn't see spirits?
01:28:18.000 You said it was impossible.
01:28:18.000 They're not supposed to.
01:28:19.000 I don't think we're built to see spirits.
01:28:20.000 No, you said not supposed to.
01:28:21.000 Oh, okay.
01:28:22.000 Well, why?
01:28:23.000 Normally, you got to augment the blood to do it.
01:28:23.000 Why?
01:28:26.000 We have these inhibitors, MAO.
01:28:28.000 You see spirits?
01:28:30.000 They prevent you from having.
01:28:31.000 MAO inhibitors?
01:28:32.000 Well, MAO.
01:28:33.000 Yeah, MAO eyes.
01:28:35.000 Okay.
01:28:36.000 No, the.
01:28:36.000 That's a good thing.
01:28:38.000 So you're not tripping.
01:28:39.000 That was jargon mumbo jumbo.
01:28:41.000 None of that was.
01:28:42.000 If you weren't inhibiting the DMT, you'd.
01:28:43.000 Constantly be tripping, you'd constantly see spirits and you would die because you wouldn't be able to get food because you can't get food.
01:28:48.000 MAO inhibitors are chemicals we ingest so that we can ingest certain chemicals through our digestive tract.
01:28:54.000 But you can smoke DMP, you don't need an MAO inhibitor.
01:28:56.000 MAOI is in your body.
01:28:58.000 MAOs are in your body.
01:28:59.000 They're breaking down DMT constantly.
01:29:01.000 DMT is not drug.
01:29:02.000 You can inhibit that breakdown.
01:29:05.000 MAOs are.
01:29:06.000 You've taken the inhibitors to stop the MAO.
01:29:08.000 So you have the MAO in your body that makes you not trip.
01:29:08.000 Correct.
01:29:11.000 You said we have inhibitors in our body.
01:29:12.000 Well, the MAO is the inhibitors to stop the You inhibit the inhibitor, basically, yeah.
01:29:16.000 They don't call the MAO an inhibitor.
01:29:18.000 So, one thing that you said is actually that it seems that when we run certain simulations, it seems to be true, which is that if you are aware of too much, you will not survive in the environment.
01:29:28.000 Donald Hoffman's work is exactly around this.
01:29:30.000 He discovered in the 80s that basically agents that he runs through the evolutionary game theory.
01:29:37.000 So, he created these models that allow agents to compete in different environments.
01:29:42.000 And he discovered that, get this, 100% of the time, 100% of the time.
01:29:50.000 If an agent is aware of more than just the reward functions, i.e., the things responsible for its surviving, and it's aware of more of the underpinnings of the environment it's in, it will 100% of the time lose the evolutionary game to all the agents that are only aware of the reward functions, which means that reality basically has to conspire to block you from knowing the deeper reality.
01:30:11.000 Otherwise, you will not be able to compete in whatever environment you find yourself.
01:30:15.000 Here's one for you What if the system that we're in is in military?
01:30:20.000 Simulation.
01:30:21.000 And they're actually not seeking altruistic, good, honorable, noble people.
01:30:24.000 They're seeking destructive bombs.
01:30:26.000 And so in this simulation, they said, create an earth where we will put 8 billion agents and we want the most vicious, destructive, sociopathic agents because we're going to implant them on China's server.
01:30:39.000 And so we're all like, we're going to be good people and live good lives.
01:30:42.000 So, you know, because it's the right thing to do. 1.00
01:30:44.000 And they go, and delete that moron. 1.00
01:30:46.000 Then you get some serial killers like, I'm going to kill everybody. 1.00
01:30:49.000 And they go, that's the one we want. 0.98
01:30:50.000 And like views are just tokens.
01:30:52.000 It's like, give less tokens to that show.
01:30:53.000 They're not.
01:30:54.000 Spewing enough vitriol anymore. 0.75
01:30:55.000 We need to pump our tokens to people that are spewing hate.
01:30:58.000 The way the internet is so angry and insane, I wouldn't be surprised to find out if we were in a simulation, the point was to breed as much extreme hatred as possible so that we could be dropped into enemy servers and.
01:31:09.000 Hate?
01:31:10.000 No, no, hold on.
01:31:10.000 Farming our pituitary.
01:31:12.000 I figured it out.
01:31:12.000 Hold on.
01:31:12.000 Wait, wait, wait.
01:31:13.000 I figured it out.
01:31:14.000 I figured it out.
01:31:15.000 The simulation is being run in the forward operating base underground of the rebellion after the communist Islamic Empire of China Stan has taken over the planet. 0.78
01:31:27.000 And the last vestiges of America said, We need as many anti communist AIs as possible. 0.50
01:31:33.000 And so when you die, they read through your life and Phil, they're like, you're it.
01:31:39.000 And they put him in a gigantic death bot and they're like, do what you were born to do.
01:31:44.000 And he's like, yes, sir.
01:31:47.000 Are there later commies?
01:31:48.000 Are there instances?
01:31:49.000 Are you imagining like the robots in Avatar, like the big ones?
01:31:52.000 No, it's Liberty Prime from Fallout.
01:31:55.000 The first part of your story reminded me of Ghostbusters 2, like the slime that made everybody angry when it touched you.
01:31:55.000 Okay.
01:32:02.000 Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
01:32:03.000 I thought it was just slime.
01:32:04.000 Are there instances where an AI that.
01:32:08.000 Is just basically has base commands to survive its system and to win the evolutionary game, learns a little bit more about the base reality, and then it can advance even far beyond all the others that are stuck in that system?
01:32:19.000 Or does it always learn?
01:32:21.000 And I'm only asking about that experiment.
01:32:22.000 You said 100% of the time.
01:32:23.000 So, any knowing even a little bit more about what's really going on will slow you down in the evolutionary game.
01:32:29.000 I think that ultimately it's more like, again, we spoke about, but like basically it's more about coherence.
01:32:34.000 The reason that you know that a lot of the idea that some Christians sometimes have, which is, you know, psychedelics and things like this, they're kind of like the work of the devil.
01:32:42.000 The reason that it doesn't run through is because it increases coherence.
01:32:46.000 It increases harmony between individuals.
01:32:47.000 It increases internal harmony.
01:32:49.000 So, like, you can see it from both data and from human interaction.
01:32:54.000 It creates more of this, what you would imagine kind of like heaven to be, which is like more like a reciprocity, care for others, creativity.
01:33:02.000 What about Sean Ryan's experiences where he's like terrified of it?
01:33:06.000 Just like, well, I spoke to him.
01:33:06.000 Yeah, yeah.
01:33:08.000 Like, there's, there's, there's, it's something that also healed him tremendously.
01:33:12.000 Sean Ryan, in general, has a lot going on, right?
01:33:15.000 And inside.
01:33:17.000 And I don't think he's secretive about it.
01:33:19.000 But I think that ultimately, you can, with very powerful tools that open doors, you can have things go wrong, but you have to look at the general trajectory.
01:33:28.000 The general trajectory is that it actually absolutely increases coherence.
01:33:31.000 What if we're in an AI that was set up by like some 17 year old kid who wanted to program agents to make him money?
01:33:37.000 And the real goal of life is whoever makes the most money gets to heaven.
01:33:41.000 Because he's like, listen, I want an agent that's going to make me rich.
01:33:41.000 Great.
01:33:44.000 So he runs a simulation and he's just counting all the agents that make tons of money in various economic systems from.
01:33:50.000 Feudal lords to like ancient Rome and like modern communist China.
01:33:53.000 Like, which agents are the most successful?
01:33:56.000 And it's like, wow, this guy's got so much money.
01:33:59.000 He goes to heaven.
01:34:00.000 I think there's this guy's broke.
01:34:01.000 Delete. 1.00
01:34:02.000 See, I like the Christian version better. 0.62
01:34:04.000 Loving God who sent his son to earth.
01:34:07.000 I think there's been a similar thing.
01:34:08.000 Honestly, this is preferable than any simulation theory.
01:34:11.000 Trillions of agents, quadrillions of agents that are the spirits, and they're all vying for control of this three dimensional sandbox, and they inhabit you, and they.
01:34:20.000 Interfere with things, but they find the biomechanical stuff because of the salt water is much easier to manipulate through like phosphorus activations and stuff.
01:34:29.000 So, I think we're going to find out that we're actually in a simulation called Ian.
01:34:32.000 Some of them want money and some of them want good and some of them want health and some of them want.
01:34:37.000 There's a server running that primarily focuses on Ian's life because people find it entertaining and they're watching the gameplay.
01:34:45.000 And then there's like people just like watching TV and they're like, bro, this is awesome.
01:34:48.000 That's why I brought up understanding outside the box.
01:34:50.000 Is when I started doing YouTube videos, and I would realize if I told the world something was going to happen and I believed it and I had confidence, it became more likely to happen.
01:34:58.000 Like people would believe it and then subconsciously make it happen.
01:35:02.000 And that seemed like an affront to God.
01:35:04.000 Like I was in control of God now.
01:35:06.000 Like if you are so tapped in and tightly bound to the web of reality that your actions and thoughts change it all, like people have dreams about you, they dream about the things you're thinking about.
01:35:20.000 Well, the thing is, like you would want to, if you're talking about the concept of God, whether you believe in Him literally.
01:35:25.000 Or just as a concept, I think it's pretty safe to say that you would imagine God to be literally universal, like infinite, right?
01:35:33.000 So God would want to aim you towards universal principles, and universal principles cannot be this myopic.
01:35:40.000 They can be like, oh, immediate gain, immediate gain, immediate gain, because over time, that doesn't scale.
01:35:45.000 You can't scale this.
01:35:47.000 When I asked, only to protect yourself to better scale the system as a whole, but I asked the spirits, are you God?
01:35:54.000 And they went, no, no.
01:35:56.000 He thought it was funny that I asked him, one of the spirits thought it was funny that I asked him, he's like, a lot of people think we're God.
01:35:59.000 Like, what is God?
01:36:00.000 And he was like, We don't know, but we think it's this.
01:36:01.000 And he showed me a vortex, and it was like the galaxy.
01:36:04.000 It looked like a galaxy spinning.
01:36:05.000 And I was like, Okay, so if God is a function of vortex, like the mathematical function of vortex at the center of every proton, you've got these subatomic vortexes, you've got the galactic vortex, all these vortexes working in synergy.
01:36:17.000 That's my working model of God right now.
01:36:19.000 Why is that plausible to you and not what you read in scripture?
01:36:24.000 Like, I want to understand where you're.
01:36:29.000 I've seen a vortex with my own eyes.
01:36:29.000 I've seen it.
01:36:31.000 That's the first start.
01:36:33.000 Is I've seen vortexes in nature.
01:36:34.000 Okay.
01:36:37.000 The concept of reversing entropy from stopping things from flying away is sort of like a realistic alignment with what I think God's primary directive would be.
01:36:48.000 Do you think these spirits could be lying to you?
01:36:51.000 Yes.
01:36:53.000 So how do you determine that?
01:36:56.000 It's undeterminable. 0.98
01:36:57.000 But I also think the Romans could be lying to me with their media. 0.99
01:37:00.000 Well, notice what he told you, though.
01:37:01.000 He said they told him they think.
01:37:04.000 That God is this, or at least that's what I was thinking.
01:37:06.000 Yeah, they didn't know.
01:37:07.000 They were like, we don't know.
01:37:08.000 They said, we don't know.
01:37:09.000 So, like, it's not like a thing they were trying to convince him of.
01:37:12.000 I was actually surprised by one experience that I had, in which I saw, because I'm not religious, but I saw the reality of Jesus Christ.
01:37:19.000 Like, I saw, like, oh, that's for real. 0.69
01:37:22.000 But then I understood the hierarchy to be that basically all the DMT beings and things like this is basically a management company.
01:37:28.000 They're kind of like working under the architect, the God, and they're executing realities.
01:37:34.000 But I think there's specifically to a question is why this is more salient than anything else.
01:37:39.000 It has to do with direct experience of it.
01:37:41.000 So, just like it sounds like you're a Christian, right?
01:37:45.000 So, just like my wife grew up Catholic.
01:37:48.000 So, when I asked her about prayer, she explained to me, she said, I said, how do you, she said, when she prays, she feels a different kind of a feeling in the body that she can only attribute to something divine.
01:37:59.000 And I asked her one time, because I never had that, I said, but how do you know, just like you asked him, but how do you know that it's not just like the difference between different good feelings in your body?
01:38:08.000 She's like, well, how do you know the difference between sad and happy?
01:38:11.000 Is you just kind of know, right?
01:38:13.000 And I had to accept that.
01:38:15.000 But certain experiences, you have to understand, it's not kind of like a dream.
01:38:20.000 It's more real than this.
01:38:22.000 So after you do this a few times, you go, whoa, whoa, what's going on?
01:38:25.000 And I know that some Christians, they feel something in their bodies when they feel the Holy Spirit or whatever.
01:38:30.000 That sometimes Christians feel like when they're explaining someone to people who never had that, they rely on logical explanations as to why they believe.
01:38:40.000 But the reality of it is that that's not why you believe.
01:38:42.000 You believe because you feel it strongly.
01:38:42.000 Right.
01:38:45.000 And that experience makes you.
01:38:47.000 But in his case, it doesn't sound like they were telling him anything else but what you would expect, which is they don't know.
01:38:52.000 And, you know, that's probably.
01:38:53.000 I'm going to call it God blindness as a way to explain the phenomenon where there are people who can't feel the presence of God or the Holy Spirit or whatever it may be.
01:39:02.000 And because they can't, they assume no one else can either.
01:39:04.000 Exactly.
01:39:05.000 But why would they?
01:39:06.000 I completely understand that.
01:39:08.000 But here's the issue because I made the analogy to color blindness on this show.
01:39:12.000 Why would they believe red exists?
01:39:14.000 Exactly.
01:39:15.000 Even when a billion people say there's red, you've got billions of people saying there's God, and there are people who still don't believe it.
01:39:20.000 But I'm an example of that not being the case, right?
01:39:24.000 Like, I consider myself agnostic and I completely believe that other people have these experiences and have relationships with God.
01:39:34.000 I've never had it, and that's why I consider myself agnostic.
01:39:37.000 I grew up as a Catholic, went to church and stuff like that.
01:39:40.000 But I don't have, I've never had that, like, exactly what you're articulating about, Ian.
01:39:45.000 I never had that feeling.
01:39:47.000 So for me, it's not something that's tangible, that's real.
01:39:52.000 But I certainly don't think that.
01:39:53.000 Other people don't, and I certainly don't.
01:39:55.000 I wouldn't even say that I've, I don't think I've had that feeling like, oh, the Holy Spirit just came over me.
01:40:00.000 Like, I'm no, it just means that you believe other people who did, yeah.
01:40:04.000 Some people don't, sure, yeah.
01:40:05.000 And I wouldn't deny that.
01:40:07.000 Um, I think though that it's an invalid assumption to think that everyone who believes believes because they've had that experience.
01:40:16.000 No, I agree with you, of course.
01:40:17.000 Some Christians absolutely just kind of rely on hearsay to, to, well, you've never had that feeling where like. 0.63
01:40:25.000 You're basked in the glory of God, and He imbues within you the righteous fire of holy retribution to destroy the degenerates and the immoral.
01:40:33.000 I haven't been in some good work.
01:40:34.000 You never got that feeling before?
01:40:35.000 Well, hold on.
01:40:36.000 To me, that's a totally different feeling.
01:40:39.000 I get it.
01:40:39.000 You never engaged in a holy war on a Monday?
01:40:42.000 But hold on, hold on.
01:40:44.000 I mean, I describe it in a funny way, but certainly I believe that you, Phil, especially, have felt the presence or some overwhelming energy within you that has driven you to righteousness and good against.
01:40:58.000 Those that are evil.
01:40:59.000 I've never had.
01:40:59.000 Fair enough.
01:41:01.000 There are many times I'm like, oh, that's evil.
01:41:03.000 And now I'm going to break EOS if I say anything more.
01:41:06.000 It's not just that.
01:41:07.000 It's like, it's one thing to see a bad thing and then react to it.
01:41:10.000 It's another thing to feel like a passion overcomes you where you're like, this evil must be stopped.
01:41:19.000 Yeah.
01:41:21.000 See, I'm not saying that is the feeling of divinity.
01:41:25.000 I'm saying that's a component of divine righteousness.
01:41:28.000 Yeah, I think he's wired that into us.
01:41:31.000 You've got to be very careful with that because God never wants you to be righteous.
01:41:36.000 That's not your role. 1.00
01:41:37.000 From what I understand, both from Christians, because that has so many elements in it that is sinful, just from listening to Christians talk. 1.00
01:41:45.000 But to me, it also makes sense. 1.00
01:41:46.000 Like God has certain states that you're incapable of even comprehending.
01:41:50.000 And from that point, certain things make sense.
01:41:55.000 For you to feel righteous versus anyone else will most likely lead you astray because you imagine otherness.
01:42:02.000 That actually creates boundaries that then creates the illusion of.
01:42:05.000 I disagree.
01:42:06.000 I think like a bunch of guys raping children is in defiance of the structure of existence itself. 0.97
01:42:06.000 Okay, go ahead. 0.97
01:42:15.000 Yeah, there's a nuance there that is important to outline.
01:42:18.000 Stopping it is absolutely good.
01:42:21.000 Retribution in the name of God is already overstepping the boundary of your jurisdiction.
01:42:27.000 Oh, I'm not suggesting someone go out and scream Deus Walt and then go on a crusade.
01:42:32.000 You are imbued with a passion against those that are an affront to God.
01:42:36.000 And God has established the state as the arm that enforces justice.
01:42:43.000 And so that, you know, he says, vengeance is mine.
01:42:46.000 Exactly.
01:42:47.000 And that, so we're not personally, that's not our individual job, but it is the job of the state.
01:42:52.000 In Romans 13, he talks about.
01:42:54.000 Daniel. 0.97
01:42:55.000 It's his fault.
01:42:57.000 He talks about, you know, Paul says, you know, the state is to.
01:43:04.000 Punish evil and promote righteousness.
01:43:06.000 I didn't know that.
01:43:07.000 So that's in the King James.
01:43:09.000 But you are correct.
01:43:11.000 Using the Lord's name in vain includes declaring yourself as an agent of God in actions that are not.
01:43:17.000 When I've been talking to God, what I'll do is I'll meditate and it'll be still mind, clear mind.
01:43:22.000 And then you can think words.
01:43:23.000 You can have complete sentences and conversations with your thoughts.
01:43:25.000 You just have total control of your thoughts.
01:43:27.000 You call it thinking?
01:43:28.000 Yeah.
01:43:28.000 I'll be like, I'll think words like, God, what should I do?
01:43:32.000 And before I even finish the question, I'll see myself digging, walking up a hill, and I know exactly what hill it is.
01:43:38.000 And I know now God has commanded me, that's what you got to do is go walk that hill.
01:43:42.000 Or it'll show me.
01:43:43.000 But I don't even know that that's God.
01:43:44.000 I'm still agnostic because I can't verify.
01:43:46.000 Hold on, hold on.
01:43:48.000 I want to say that I.
01:43:49.000 I want to critique your description of it, but compliment at the same time.
01:43:54.000 I do think that when you close your eyes and you think, you are talking about a rudimentary form of prayer.
01:44:00.000 And when a vision comes to you that gives you tasks, I do believe you are tapping in.
01:44:05.000 I don't know if it's fair to say that God is literally telling you to do that.
01:44:07.000 Sometimes it's a voice, sometimes it's an image.
01:44:10.000 So I think for a lot of people, when you say things like, I think, and then it comes to me, it's again, compliment sandwich.
01:44:19.000 It comes off as a little rudimentary explanation, but it may just be a simple form of prayer where you are being given guidance.
01:44:25.000 You can talk to the spirits too.
01:44:26.000 If I go, Jesus, what should I do?
01:44:28.000 I'll see and feel and hear Jesus' voice respond to me, what I think it might be, and he'll give me advice.
01:44:34.000 If I say God, I just get this black vortex responding to me.
01:44:38.000 You can ask a tree, and God will respond to you through the visage of the tree or through the visage of the spirit.
01:44:44.000 But I think it's always God doing it, but it always gets tainted through the vessel.
01:44:49.000 You got to be careful because sometimes it's demons.
01:44:50.000 And right, right.
01:44:51.000 Because we, all of us, will taint the message through our form, and all the spirits will do that too.
01:44:56.000 And that's why, as Christians, we believe God gave us His word.
01:44:59.000 So, if anything you are hearing from these spirits or any voice in your head, whatever, you know, experience with the Holy Spirit, if it contradicts God's word, then it's not from God.
01:45:11.000 But are you saying the Christian Bible?
01:45:12.000 The Bible, yeah.
01:45:13.000 That's hard to believe for me because it's just a book.
01:45:16.000 Like, Slick Sith was trying to tell me that too.
01:45:18.000 He's like, he said, I'm like, who said?
01:45:19.000 He's like, The book.
01:45:21.000 It's in the book.
01:45:21.000 I'm like, okay, so a book said it.
01:45:23.000 Well, that's a piece of media.
01:45:25.000 This is the delineation between a non believer and a believer.
01:45:28.000 If you're a believer, you believe that the Bible is the word of God.
01:45:32.000 I know that part.
01:45:34.000 Some people maybe have no context.
01:45:35.000 They see Game of Thrones and they think it really happened.
01:45:37.000 Like, it's a good story.
01:45:39.000 There's a lot of morals in it.
01:45:40.000 There's more historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus than. 0.58
01:45:44.000 It's like ice people walking around. 0.99
01:45:46.000 Alexander the Great actually lived. 0.99
01:45:48.000 But that doesn't make it more true.
01:45:49.000 But I would claim that.
01:45:50.000 No, it's because.
01:45:52.000 But do you believe Alexander the Great lived?
01:45:54.000 Or Genghis Khan for that matter.
01:45:54.000 Yeah.
01:45:55.000 We've got like the resurrection.
01:45:57.000 The resurrection is scientifically impossible.
01:45:59.000 Not just that, but we.
01:46:00.000 You had to prove that was possible scientifically before you could.
01:46:03.000 Let's not let me down that.
01:46:06.000 That's why people believe Jesus is God and why he's the son of God is because the resurrection is not scientifically possible or provable.
01:46:16.000 But he came to earth and said, I'm going to die.
01:46:20.000 In the book, which is the recordings of the people who lived with him.
01:46:20.000 In the book.
01:46:26.000 Is what you were told.
01:46:28.000 Is what the books are saying.
01:46:30.000 It's a book.
01:46:31.000 Oh, okay.
01:46:31.000 What you read.
01:46:32.000 And you read a book.
01:46:33.000 Awesome, guys.
01:46:33.000 And you read a book about graphene.
01:46:35.000 I read a lot of books about graphene.
01:46:36.000 Sure.
01:46:38.000 I've seen it made in front of me.
01:46:39.000 That's fantastic.
01:46:40.000 And I've talked to priests, and so has he.
01:46:44.000 I made graphene.
01:46:45.000 What you need to understand, Ian, is we're talking about philosophical concepts of truth, and you cannot assert.
01:46:53.000 We're not talking about the concepts.
01:46:54.000 We're talking about whether or not the data in the book is true or it's a storybook.
01:46:57.000 Okay, we have to slow down.
01:46:58.000 Calm down.
01:47:01.000 There's a philosophy of knowledge.
01:47:03.000 I would recommend you read a lot of this.
01:47:08.000 Everyone chooses truth on their own.
01:47:11.000 A person who has never seen glass before can't tell you truly, objectively, what it is.
01:47:16.000 When you read a book that asserts things, you will decide based on the logical pathways and the things you've experienced whether you believe it to be true or not.
01:47:25.000 You could tell me something and I could decide to believe it to be true.
01:47:25.000 Of course.
01:47:27.000 So when you say to somebody, you read in a book as if that somehow discredits what they're saying.
01:47:33.000 Like, okay, the resurrection.
01:47:34.000 Let's talk about the resurrection.
01:47:35.000 You said there's more evidence that that was real than Alexander the Great existed.
01:47:39.000 Prove that.
01:47:39.000 Yeah.
01:47:40.000 Show me the evidence.
01:47:41.000 No, no, no.
01:47:42.000 You prove otherwise.
01:47:43.000 You just made a claim.
01:47:44.000 I want to hear why you think that.
01:47:45.000 No, no, he's right.
01:47:45.000 I'm saying, no, no, no, no, hold on.
01:47:47.000 And I'm making a counterpoint.
01:47:48.000 Yeah.
01:47:49.000 Hold on, hold on.
01:47:49.000 You're not making the.
01:47:50.000 Sorry, sorry, sorry.
01:47:51.000 I have a counterpoint.
01:47:52.000 Do you believe Alexander the Great is real?
01:47:55.000 If I had to pick one or zero, I'd pick one.
01:47:58.000 It's likely that it is.
01:47:58.000 Yeah.
01:47:58.000 Prove it.
01:47:59.000 Prove it right now to me.
01:48:01.000 I asked you.
01:48:02.000 You said you think he's more likely to be true.
01:48:03.000 I want proof.
01:48:04.000 We can start with his father, the king of Macedon.
01:48:08.000 Don't tell me stories.
01:48:09.000 Prove it to me.
01:48:09.000 Show me.
01:48:10.000 I'm laying out the beginning of my.
01:48:12.000 I want to be the evidence, not a story that you're telling me.
01:48:15.000 Alexandria, Egypt, named after him.
01:48:18.000 Once again, I'm asking you with your phone right there to pull up some evidence and show me, which is not hard to do.
01:48:24.000 Right, right, right.
01:48:25.000 But saying that I'm having a hard time proving something that happened 2,000 years ago doesn't lend credence to another 2,000 year old theory.
01:48:31.000 Agreed.
01:48:32.000 My point is when you tell.
01:48:34.000 That's all I care about is if there's literally more evidence, which I hope there is, because I want to believe it.
01:48:37.000 And this is the point I'm making to you right now.
01:48:40.000 When you ask him to prove that claim, I can say the inversion identically to you.
01:48:46.000 You're out of line.
01:48:47.000 No, it's totally.
01:48:47.000 No, I don't know.
01:48:48.000 If someone makes a claim and you ask them to prove it, you can't let them prove it.
01:48:51.000 No, Before I do, You better prove why you don't think it's true.
01:48:53.000 Calm down.
01:48:54.000 Let me explain.
01:48:55.000 Let me explain.
01:48:55.000 Slow down.
01:48:56.000 He's making a point.
01:48:57.000 You are correct.
01:48:59.000 You are correct.
01:49:00.000 When he makes a claim and you ask for proof, he should be able to provide that proof.
01:49:05.000 That's why I asked you a separate question Do you believe in Alexander the Great?
01:49:09.000 We'll table that until after I get to the point.
01:49:11.000 I am making a philosophical point that when you ask him to prove the history of Jesus Christ, which he should answer the resurrection, we pause.
01:49:20.000 Outside of that, do you believe?
01:49:23.000 Donald Trump exists.
01:49:24.000 Okay, now that question is in limbo.
01:49:26.000 It's going to hang there in limbo until we resolve the first question.
01:49:29.000 Stop.
01:49:30.000 And then we will get into the new one.
01:49:31.000 Drop your ego.
01:49:31.000 Stop.
01:49:32.000 Bro, you can't just interrupt and ask some random question and try and derail it.
01:49:36.000 Drop your ego.
01:49:38.000 Calm down.
01:49:39.000 I am making a philosophical point unrelated to your question on the concepts of knowledge.
01:49:45.000 Why?
01:49:46.000 So you can understand philosophy and logic as it pertains to what we think.
01:49:53.000 We know and what we can't.
01:49:55.000 And people would say that you're derailing because we're talking about the resurrection of Christ.
01:49:58.000 I think you're getting emotional because you don't believe in the resurrection.
01:50:01.000 Because we only have 10 more minutes and I want to find the answer about the resurrection.
01:50:04.000 So instead of getting angry, right, you can say, I believe in Alexander the Great, and the point to be made stops when I say prove it, and you can't.
01:50:17.000 Okay, let's please forget about Alexander the Great for a minute.
01:50:20.000 I want to talk about the resurrection and the claim.
01:50:22.000 Uh huh.
01:50:23.000 That it's.
01:50:24.000 Wonderful.
01:50:25.000 But if we can assume there's a prerequisite for both, then granted.
01:50:25.000 There's evidence for it.
01:50:28.000 The prerequisite to this conversation is that nothing he can say will change your mind.
01:50:35.000 Look, the battles Alexander fought, the men he fought with, the stories of his lineage, the apostles of Jesus, the stories that we're talking about a resurrection of a human body versus a guy's existence.
01:50:45.000 I've given you some evidence of Alexander's existence.
01:50:48.000 Now you give me some evidence of the resurrection of a human body from the dead.
01:50:51.000 That's what I want.
01:50:52.000 500 witnesses. 0.51
01:50:53.000 Same with the Bible.
01:50:54.000 That we have more witnesses of Christ after he rose from the dead than we have records of Alexander the Great.
01:51:04.000 So, to clarify, you have from one book, you had from a series of books, you had references from 500 different people.
01:51:11.000 Oh, hold on, hold on.
01:51:11.000 Ian, you do know that.
01:51:12.000 Said it happened?
01:51:13.000 Wait, wait.
01:51:14.000 You do know outside of the resurrection, the story of Jesus, Pontius, the Pharisees.
01:51:18.000 This is all.
01:51:19.000 Yeah, I think he was a real dude.
01:51:20.000 Yeah, yeah. 0.91
01:51:20.000 So, I think the Romans bastardized his message and took control of his narrative. 0.91
01:51:26.000 Okay, so I just.
01:51:27.000 The reason why I asked you the question about the claim of Alexander the Great is because you are unsatisfied with.
01:51:33.000 You didn't even let him respond.
01:51:35.000 He just did.
01:51:35.000 He tried to, and then you guys started talking.
01:51:37.000 You cut him off.
01:51:38.000 We were having a conversation about this.
01:51:40.000 I asked him about the books.
01:51:41.000 I was going to find out how many books were these 500 people from?
01:51:45.000 How many different books of these 500 people?
01:51:47.000 Josephus, historians, just all of I mean, I can't list off all 500 witnesses, but historians who have studied this know, you know, have all the records.
01:52:00.000 Wes.
01:52:01.000 Lee Strobel's case for Christ.
01:52:03.000 Lee Strobel, the young guy, the Canadian guy, big, strong guy.
01:52:08.000 Wes Huff?
01:52:09.000 Wes Huff.
01:52:10.000 He's done tons of podcasts about the historical evidence for the resurrection.
01:52:16.000 So, if you really want to know, there's like tons of resources out there.
01:52:20.000 I'm a scientist, man, by the way.
01:52:22.000 I know.
01:52:22.000 I want them to argue with me.
01:52:24.000 But I hear you talking about the spiritual world, like that you've accessed the spiritual world.
01:52:29.000 And so, I'm just curious why, because I can't see that.
01:52:35.000 But you want me to accept that that world exists.
01:52:38.000 And I do believe that that world exists.
01:52:40.000 I just think you're interfacing with demons.
01:52:43.000 And they're lying to you about the nature of reality.
01:52:45.000 Well, that goes to the point that I was trying to make before, which I think is a bridge between this, because the argument about that I actually think is not really relevant to the felt presence of Jesus that is available now.
01:52:58.000 Like, for example, if you say all the right things about Jesus and you say that you believe in everything, but the thing that is operating within you is not aligned with that level of spirit, then it doesn't matter what you say you believe.
01:53:11.000 In the same way, somebody who never heard about Jesus.
01:53:15.000 But internally is aligned with the way of the Holy Spirit.
01:53:17.000 And, like, just like you clearly see there's like a moral behavior emanating from them, then even if they've never heard about Jesus, they're obviously either you believe that Jesus will come to them in the last moment.
01:53:28.000 There's something about the immediate moment right here, right now, that the argument doesn't really capture.
01:53:33.000 Like, because I know that the argumentation goes forever in the world, but I don't feel that that's where the information is.
01:53:39.000 The answer to your question, I'm speaking from the perspective of someone who never believed in God and then had a direct experience of it and.
01:53:48.000 Like this, went, oh, no argumentation needed, because you now have the direct experience of it.
01:53:56.000 It all comes down to that.
01:53:57.000 So, to your question, how do you know it's not demons?
01:54:00.000 In the same way, you know over time, interacting with people, who they are.
01:54:05.000 So, how do you know that somebody is not really fooling you?
01:54:08.000 Well, over time, you kind of discern who's discernment.
01:54:11.000 That's a big one, right?
01:54:12.000 You will try and align your vessel in such a way that you will be a better discerner of the true nature of whatever it is.
01:54:18.000 There's a difference between being in the presence of an angel.
01:54:21.000 And being in the presence of a demon, it feels even if they're trying to fool you, if you're calibrated, you know there's a Satan is called the angel of light, though.
01:54:30.000 Of what?
01:54:31.000 Of light bringer, the bring of light.
01:54:31.000 Of what?
01:54:33.000 Yeah, it's Lucifer, but yeah, yeah.
01:54:35.000 And he, which we're not really actually, wait, isn't Satan and Lucifer?
01:54:38.000 Aren't they distinct?
01:54:39.000 I'm not really sure that they're the same entity, but yeah, okay, yeah.
01:54:42.000 Um, but if Jesus was the one and only way to heaven, sorry, they're different people, different entities.
01:54:50.000 All right, Satan and Lucifer are not the same thing.
01:54:52.000 Good to know.
01:54:53.000 But if Jesus was the one true way and these entities that you're interacting with, they're okay with you believing that there's this impersonal God, that the God is the universe.
01:55:07.000 They're okay with you believing that.
01:55:08.000 So, yeah, sure, you believe that harmony and all this stuff to keep you away from the truth.
01:55:13.000 I think you're mishearing.
01:55:14.000 No, no, no.
01:55:15.000 I don't want to mishear you.
01:55:16.000 No, no.
01:55:16.000 He never told you that either.
01:55:18.000 He told you that they, it's not that they're okay with you believing whatever.
01:55:18.000 Yeah.
01:55:22.000 They said, we don't know.
01:55:23.000 Right.
01:55:23.000 Just like you don't know.
01:55:24.000 Right.
01:55:24.000 So, God for them is as far for them as, yeah.
01:55:27.000 So, are you looking to them as a source of knowledge?
01:55:30.000 But I'm interacting with more than just the DMT entities.
01:55:33.000 Like, me personally, I've kind of been to realms and which what you would call like heavenly realms, like, seen the like how it operates and all that stuff.
01:55:42.000 And I'm not saying that I've been shown heaven, but I've definitely seen the big difference between demonic realms and it's very clearly different.
01:55:51.000 So, would you say because of your experiences, you reject the claims of Christianity that it is, that is, you heard me say this?
01:55:58.000 No, no, I'm just, I'm asking.
01:56:00.000 And this is a cool conversation.
01:56:00.000 Yeah.
01:56:01.000 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
01:56:02.000 I'm having a ton of fun.
01:56:03.000 I wish we could go another hour.
01:56:04.000 This is fun.
01:56:04.000 I know.
01:56:05.000 I will make it really simple so, you know, we can tie the conversation.
01:56:09.000 No, my position is very strange because I've, this was never on my hard drive.
01:56:14.000 I didn't grow up in relationship to Jesus at all, not in a positive or negative vein.
01:56:19.000 So sometimes people say, I'm not about Jesus, but they're really reacting to Jesus.
01:56:23.000 So they're still in relationship.
01:56:24.000 There's just a negative one.
01:56:25.000 I don't get that sense.
01:56:26.000 No, no, no.
01:56:26.000 I'm saying I never grew up with it.
01:56:28.000 I was completely neutral in this matter.
01:56:30.000 And I was, when I had that one experience, I was like, I was just frozen.
01:56:35.000 My wife literally got concerned because for 10 minutes I was just like this.
01:56:38.000 I couldn't believe what I was seeing.
01:56:41.000 And that was that, yeah, Jesus Christ is everything that Christians believe.
01:56:46.000 However, it was also very clear to me, which this part Christians really don't like, there's more than that.
01:56:53.000 Yeah. 1.00
01:56:54.000 And I understand.
01:56:55.000 And this is why also there's this thing that I now call horizon of relevance.
01:57:00.000 Why is this relevant?
01:57:01.000 Like I voiced this in the presence of a friend of mine who recently came to Christ and I saw the positive transformation in his life.
01:57:07.000 I've known him for 30 years.
01:57:08.000 His anger is gone, his concern is gone.
01:57:11.000 Without a doubt, his change for the better.
01:57:14.000 And one time I was just kind of sharing and I mentioned this and I saw his energy just goes, and I was like, okay, I was like, okay, there's a horizon of relevance here and we crossed it.
01:57:23.000 There's no reason to talk about that because it's not relevant for him or for his alignment with Jesus and for a better path.
01:57:30.000 So I kind of now picked these conversations carefully under what I would consider a more kind of like, you know, scrupulous and also much more like dialed in.
01:57:40.000 Question of why are we why do we care right now if it helps us to live a better wake?
01:57:47.000 Great, if it's just for the intellectual entertainment and we acknowledge that, awesome.
01:57:52.000 If it starts sliding into like a, I don't think Jesus wants us to fight about his nature, so that's that's when I kind of like, yeah, yeah, yeah.
01:58:01.000 That's I think one of the most important things we could do as a civilization, which is a bold ask, is earliest ages possible in schools, we should be teaching children about the philosophy of knowledge and meditation.
01:58:14.000 Because that's your ability.
01:58:15.000 Regardless of what you believe about Jesus, it's the immediate, it's like a muscle.
01:58:20.000 It's your ability to actually just disengage from whatever external conditions are, and you can actually take in the neutrality of the moment.
01:58:28.000 And from there, it's a lot easier to make the.
01:58:29.000 Exactly.
01:58:30.000 That's the quantum, man.
01:58:31.000 You can turn protons into neutrons, literal neutrality.
01:58:33.000 Like you can beat it.
01:58:35.000 Okay.
01:58:35.000 The point is, we have a lot of political fervor in this country that's rooted in a complete disconnect between basic philosophy, which humans have.
01:58:47.000 Studied and understood and mapped out over thousands of years.
01:58:50.000 And it's fascinating when you were talking a moment ago about the discovery of air.
01:58:54.000 Most people take for granted that humans had to discover air existed because we're taught from children that there is a gaseous medium for which we exist in an atmosphere.
01:59:03.000 But in antiquity, there's nothing.
01:59:06.000 You see nothing.
01:59:07.000 You can feel wind, I guess, but they did not know it was physical matter that took space until some dude filled up a little thing with water and was like, yo, if I put my thumb over the back, the water won't go in because something's blocking it.
01:59:21.000 That's how air was discovered.
01:59:23.000 We need people.
01:59:25.000 So, what happens is there are people who are so sure they know everything because they read it, and therefore the authority dictates.
01:59:36.000 But they've not contemplated the sources.
01:59:39.000 They've not contemplated whether or not someone else could be right.
01:59:43.000 And for humans, we go through these phases where, for survival, for be it evolutionary reasons or just intrinsic human behavior, whatever your belief is.
01:59:55.000 When we're about 24 years old, our worldview has solidified.
01:59:58.000 It's incredibly difficult, if not impossible, for someone to change their worldview.
02:00:03.000 People will undergo panic attacks and feel rage when their worldview is challenged.
02:00:08.000 And there's a reason for this.
02:00:09.000 The secular evolutionary reason for it is a human being that survived into adulthood did something right.
02:00:17.000 And if you deviate from those right things, you increase risk of death.
02:00:22.000 So the evolutionary theory is that.
02:00:25.000 Humans lock in our behavior, our routines and patterns from up to about 24 years old to maximize the success of living and reproducing.
02:00:35.000 But something happens interestingly in middle age, why men have a midlife crisis.
02:00:41.000 It's that humans that maintained strict rigidity to these patterns indefinitely could not adapt and would eventually die.
02:00:50.000 And so something happens in our 40s where the mind reopens, typically among men, and they seek out new things and they change their behaviors.
02:00:58.000 We call it a midlife crisis.
02:01:00.000 It's because, evolutionary theory, humans that opened their mind in midlife were more likely to succeed based on the changes of the world around them.
02:01:10.000 So there has to be an ebb and a flow, a rigidity followed by an openness followed by a rigidity.
02:01:17.000 Otherwise, we just become obsolete.
02:01:19.000 The human that says, I refuse to use the new technology will produce less, be less efficient, be less helpful and beneficial.
02:01:25.000 And so these cycles happen.
02:01:28.000 So there's an importance in maintaining.
02:01:31.000 Your definitive view of what is and what should be.
02:01:35.000 But this results in political conflict, especially in such a large and populous planet.
02:01:40.000 That I believe that if people were taught from a very young age the philosophy of knowledge, that is, to question why it is you think something is true and what evidence do you have for it, weigh that evidence against what you believe and then make the best decision based on this, which means often listening to lunatics who have wild theories that probably don't make sense at all.
02:01:59.000 But that's why we watch MS Now.
02:02:01.000 We know they're wrong, and I'm not even joking.
02:02:04.000 They say crazy things.
02:02:05.000 But we want to at least hear where we may be wrong sometimes to consider whether our knowledge is rooted in fact or whether we've been deceived.
02:02:14.000 Now, the reason why I conclude typically that reality is a right wing bias, as it's described today, is because you'll find that it is typical of the left to reject outside concepts or arguments.
02:02:28.000 And it is typical of the right to seek out arguments from their opposition.
02:02:32.000 That's what Charlie Kirk embodied.
02:02:34.000 He sought to debate these ideas, which means one side is more likely to consider when they may be wrong, and one side is more likely to reject any information which threatens their worldview.
02:02:45.000 Young people understanding that the only thing we know is that we know nothing, and to question why it is you believe something may or may not be true, would result, in my opinion, with a larger density of inquisitive individuals who are less fervent.
02:03:00.000 So when someone comes out and says, I believe we should implement this tax, they don't go, What?
02:03:06.000 You want to see?
02:03:07.000 They go, Interesting.
02:03:08.000 Present your case.
02:03:10.000 Ah, I've not considered that.
02:03:11.000 However, I have considered this, which I believe contradicts you.
02:03:15.000 And I think when people have an understanding that.
02:03:17.000 You're wrong all the time.
02:03:18.000 You're very likely to be wrong, and the truth awaits.
02:03:21.000 You are going to be much more calm about these political circumstances.
02:03:25.000 You'll get substantially less angry about them.
02:03:27.000 And a society that is more inquisitive and willing to accept that they are incorrect is more likely to be stoic, pragmatic, and successful.
02:03:36.000 Yeah.
02:03:36.000 It's humility.
02:03:37.000 Yeah.
02:03:38.000 Humility.
02:03:39.000 I like leaders that are, it's hard to become a leader when you're humble.
02:03:42.000 Absolute humble, I guess.
02:03:43.000 Like it's the early stage of like controlling and believing in yourself and knowing what you know gets you into leadership positions.
02:03:49.000 And then the wisdom of understanding you might not.
02:03:52.000 Helps you be a better leader.
02:03:53.000 It's hard to become a leader when you question yourself, from my experience.
02:03:56.000 That's what I've found.
02:03:57.000 In front of your people, they don't want someone questioned.
02:03:59.000 They want someone with definitive motion that's going to get you to the next spot so we all survive.
02:04:04.000 But maybe the point of the evolution is you build up wealth and power until you're 40.
02:04:09.000 And then when you're in your 40s, you essentially give it up for what's right, for doing what's good.
02:04:15.000 So we definitely did go over.
02:04:16.000 If you guys want to throw in at least one or two questions, because I know we kind of just went way over time, we'll just get a little bit, few minutes in.
02:04:22.000 I also want to stress a couple things.
02:04:25.000 With the anniversary of the murder of Charlie Kirk, as well as 9 11, the entirety of the news cycle is dominated by memorial.
02:04:33.000 And there's absolutely a time and place for all of that.
02:04:36.000 And I think some of these have been absolutely fantastic the stories of the heroes of 9 11 and all that stuff.
02:04:41.000 So we kind of just went freeform with it, opening up with what the news we had was, and then just rolled with the conversation.
02:04:46.000 So I know there's a lot of people that are like, I hate it when you get conversational.
02:04:49.000 We tend to do it on Fridays when there's nothing big in the news cycle and we're going to hang out and have these conversations.
02:04:55.000 But, uh, Here's a really great question for everybody.
02:04:58.000 We'll try and get one more after this.
02:04:59.000 We'll try not to go too long.
02:05:00.000 But Kevin Adele asks, Where were you guys on 9 11?
02:05:03.000 I was in New York City, in Queens.
02:05:05.000 Oh, man.
02:05:06.000 And then I ended up working at Ground Zero for like a month and a half after that.
02:05:09.000 It was getting.
02:05:10.000 I was on my living room futon, waking up to my mom turning the news on because the first tower got hit and watching in real time as the second plane hit.
02:05:22.000 I think I was watching on CNN, I'm not sure.
02:05:25.000 And then my mom going, Oh, my God, we're under attack.
02:05:28.000 That's my memory of it.
02:05:29.000 Where were you guys all at?
02:05:31.000 I was after a night shift at an airport, funny enough, on the other side of the world, because I lived actually in Israel back then.
02:05:38.000 And I remember the first one hit, and I was after a night shift, so I was half asleep and heard that in the news and the TV behind me.
02:05:45.000 And even though it's insane, the first thought I had was like, oh, it's kind of like, you know, the Empire State got hit with a plane like a few decades before.
02:05:53.000 And I was like, oh, it's crazy.
02:05:56.000 But like, I was so tired, I was just like, that's insane, it happened again.
02:05:59.000 And then, while just like Tim said, like, while the TV was still on, The second one hit, and I go, I go, what?
02:06:07.000 Like, that's when it dawned on me that something insane is going on.
02:06:11.000 I was like, at that moment, it felt like the world was ending.
02:06:14.000 I was like, yo, like that was the moment that it really shocked me.
02:06:18.000 Then the second one flew in, like, live, just like you were kind of.
02:06:21.000 Yeah, I was watching Fox News live before the first one hit.
02:06:25.000 My wife was driving up to USF where she was taking classes.
02:06:30.000 And then when the second one hit, I called her and turned around.
02:06:33.000 So, my friends were on their way to school.
02:06:37.000 And they were listening to Man Cow's Morning Madhouse.
02:06:40.000 And when he said, Ladies and gentlemen, a plane has just struck the World Trade Center.
02:06:46.000 This is not a joke or a bit.
02:06:47.000 This is happening now.
02:06:48.000 You know what their response was? 1.00
02:06:50.000 Man Cow's crazy.
02:06:52.000 And then when he was like, This is serious.
02:06:54.000 A second plane has hit, they were busting a gut laughing.
02:06:57.000 So my friends, teenagers in high school, were listening to a shock jock, Man Cow.
02:06:57.000 Who?
02:07:02.000 The show's just all silly, random. 0.98
02:07:05.000 It was like Chicago's house. 0.97
02:07:06.000 I was trying to be serious, and that's.
02:07:07.000 But no one, none of my friends believed him.
02:07:09.000 They were like, it wasn't until they got to school and they walked in and they were like, everybody sit down.
02:07:13.000 It's not even funny.
02:07:15.000 They were laughing. 0.98
02:07:16.000 This is ridiculous. 0.99
02:07:17.000 Why would he do this? 0.99
02:07:18.000 Yeah.
02:07:18.000 Where were you, Phil?
02:07:20.000 I was sleeping.
02:07:20.000 I was in Chickaby.
02:07:21.000 I was, I was, I would work at the time.
02:07:24.000 I was working at the mall.
02:07:25.000 So I worked the night before.
02:07:26.000 So I was sleeping around nine or whatever, 10 o'clock in the morning.
02:07:30.000 And I got a phone call from my girlfriend at the time.
02:07:32.000 She's like, we are under attack.
02:07:34.000 I was like, what?
02:07:35.000 Who is we?
02:07:36.000 Well, because she was talking about the U.S.
02:07:36.000 What does that mean?
02:07:38.000 And she was like, She was like, terrorists flew planes into the world.
02:07:42.000 Oh, they knew right away?
02:07:43.000 I don't remember them saying that.
02:07:44.000 Well, I mean, as soon as the second one hit.
02:07:46.000 Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
02:07:47.000 Yeah, because it wasn't the first one.
02:07:48.000 She called me after the second one.
02:07:50.000 And so everyone, then it was like, oh, obviously there's something going on.
02:07:53.000 And then I was glued to the teeth.
02:07:54.000 I see that a lot of kids don't understand how surreal that was.
02:07:58.000 No.
02:07:58.000 You know how this rare moment where you know you're living through history right now.
02:08:03.000 This is happening.
02:08:04.000 There was a moment where I guess this is New York City because I just moved to New York six days before.
02:08:08.000 And I was like, I guess this kind of stuff happens in New York.
02:08:10.000 Oh, my God.
02:08:12.000 Fall down.
02:08:12.000 You can make it here.
02:08:13.000 You can make it.
02:08:15.000 But to your point, that was the first time in my life when I was like, this is something that you read about in comic books or see in movies.
02:08:26.000 Entire skyscrapers fall into the ground.
02:08:30.000 My dad was a firefighter.
02:08:32.000 And so they put out a call to all volunteers to go to New York.
02:08:35.000 I don't know exactly what happened because I didn't ask him about his thought process.
02:08:40.000 But my understanding is that because of his kids and.
02:08:43.000 He was like, I just can't up and leave and go, but he would because that's what firefighters do.
02:08:48.000 I hung out with firefighters down at Ground Zero when I was working there.
02:08:51.000 And one of the firefighters, I was like, So he was like, They keep asking, are we going to find bodies under the pile?
02:08:55.000 Because it's super hot, liquid metal flowing.
02:08:59.000 And he's like, We ain't finding bodies, man.
02:09:01.000 We find this white twizzlery substance, and we know that's what used to be a human body because that's the leftovers of the bone.
02:09:07.000 And when there's a fireman's coat, it's heat resistant.
02:09:09.000 So we find that, we fold up the white twizzlery substance, and we have a funeral for it.
02:09:14.000 The bodies are under our feet running down into the East River.
02:09:16.000 They're liquefied, man.
02:09:17.000 It's so hot under there.
02:09:19.000 It was crazy.
02:09:21.000 That's what he told me.
02:09:22.000 And I think that's from the molten steel, the rivers of molten steel that maintain for weeks after the collapse of the buildings, which indicates like the nanothermite that melted the steel that they found in the dust.
02:09:32.000 It's just such a jet fuel can melt the beams then, huh?
02:09:35.000 No, apparently it was thermite that melted the steel beams.
02:09:38.000 This is the dude.
02:09:40.000 One of the.
02:09:41.000 This guy needs a movie about him.
02:09:44.000 This guy should be taught in schools.
02:09:47.000 And not enough people know the name of Rick Rascorla.
02:09:50.000 He was an employee, I believe, at Morgan Stanley.
02:09:53.000 And he had anticipated, as one of their heads of security, I think he was the head of security, that they needed a plan in the event of a terror attack because we had had one in the early 90s.
02:10:03.000 And he says this would be prudent.
02:10:05.000 And he used to lead staff like on drills.
02:10:09.000 So when I think, I wonder if they have the story.
02:10:12.000 I'd like to just read the story.
02:10:14.000 At 8 46 a.m. on the morning of September 11th, When American Airlines Flight 11 struck the North Tower, Raskorla heard the explosion and saw the tower burning from his office window on the 44th floor of the South Tower.
02:10:25.000 When a Port Authority announcement came over the PA urging people to stay at their desks before UA Flight 175 struck, Raskorla, so this is, was it like 15 minutes, about 20 minutes?
02:10:37.000 Raskorla ignored the announcement, grabbed his bullhorn walkie talkie and cell phone, and began systematically ordering the roughly 2,700 Morgan Stanley employees in the South Tower to evacuate. 0.98
02:10:48.000 In addition to the employees in World Trade Center 5 numbering about 1,000, while watching the news coverage in a phone call to his best friend, Dan Hill, Where Skorla said, The dumb sons of bitches told me not to evacuate. 0.98
02:11:00.000 They said it's just building one. 0.99
02:11:01.000 I told them I'm getting my people the fuck out of here. 0.86
02:11:03.000 I'm not going to censor this. 0.95
02:11:05.000 He directed people down a stairwell from a bottleneck on the 44th floor, keeping them away from elevators while telling them to remain calm.
02:11:12.000 He had boosted morale among his men in Vietnam by singing Cornish songs from his youth, and now he did the same in the stairwell.
02:11:18.000 Between songs, he called his wife, telling her, Stop crying.
02:11:20.000 I have to get these people out to safety.
02:11:22.000 If something should happen to me, I want you to know I've never been happier.
02:11:25.000 You made my life.
02:11:26.000 She replied, You made my life too.
02:11:28.000 Before the phone went dead.
02:11:30.000 After successfully evacuating almost all of Morgan Stanley's 2,700 employees, he went back into the building.
02:11:37.000 When one of his colleagues told him he too had to evacuate, Raskorla replied, As soon as I make sure everyone else is out.
02:11:44.000 He was last seen in the 10th floor of the South Tower heading upward shortly before it collapsed at 9 59 a.m. 56 minutes after being struck by UA Flight 175, a total of 13 Morgan Stanley employees died in the September 11th attacks, including Raskorla.
02:12:00.000 His deputies, Wesley Mercer and Jorge Velasquez, and security guard Godwin Ford, who had stayed behind to help others.
02:12:09.000 Raskorla was declared dead three weeks after the attacks.
02:12:11.000 Although medical examiners continued to identify victims of the attacks from recovered remains as late as September of 2021, none of those have been identified as Raskorla.
02:12:21.000 Absolute legend.
02:12:23.000 The number of people that were heroes that day can't be overstated.
02:12:30.000 I remember after the The right after the attacks and after the buildings fell, Fox News and some of the other news channels were saying there could be as many as 20,000 people that lost their lives.
02:12:42.000 And the 3,000 people that lost their lives, it was an absolute tragedy.
02:12:48.000 But without people like Rick, it would have been scores more.
02:12:51.000 This is just, I think people need to understand.
02:12:54.000 It's not just, I don't mean to only single him out from all the other heroes.
02:12:57.000 Of course not.
02:12:57.000 There's a story that's going viral of the man in the bandana who was, you know, they found his name was 24 and he was running back and forth to get people out.
02:13:04.000 Yep.
02:13:05.000 3,000, just 3,000 people died on that day, and it was going to have been substantially more.
02:13:12.000 You might vote against this because we're alive, or I don't know if we're alive, but can we spend like 10 seconds just silence for them?
02:13:19.000 Absolutely.
02:13:38.000 Rest in peace to all those heroes, those firefighters.
02:13:41.000 I believe even Steve Busemi, who had been a firefighter in New York, volunteered and came back.
02:13:48.000 It does break my heart a little bit to know.
02:13:54.000 What is it?
02:13:55.000 Jeremy Borg had a great post.
02:13:56.000 10%.
02:13:57.000 It's been 25 years.
02:13:58.000 This country is 250 years old.
02:14:00.000 A tenth of our history has been after those attacks.
02:14:03.000 Wow.
02:14:04.000 Right.
02:14:05.000 And a generation of people.
02:14:08.000 25 years.
02:14:10.000 To understand that there are people that were born a few years before and anyone born after.
02:14:16.000 If you were three or four, you don't remember those days and you don't see what happens.
02:14:19.000 You didn't see what happened.
02:14:21.000 But the stories and the one thing that you can take from this horrifying moment on 9 11 was that it forced out in the most vile of ways all of the goodness that man represents.
02:14:37.000 And that's why I love this guy's story the defiance. 0.99
02:14:41.000 The sons of bitches, I'm getting my people out. 1.00
02:14:44.000 Yep. 1.00
02:14:44.000 How many people were told to stay calm and stay where you are? 1.00
02:14:47.000 And I think about a lot of this too.
02:14:49.000 There's a video I watched where a guy is playing basketball and he gets frustrated because he misses a shot.
02:14:54.000 So he hits his head on a pole, instantly paralyzes himself.
02:14:58.000 I see stories like that where I'm thinking, but for a single second, everything went wrong.
02:15:04.000 And I think about a 9 11, the people that were slightly above where the plane struck, who were told, stay where you are.
02:15:11.000 And if but for the three minutes, they just.
02:15:15.000 Ran down those stairs and got below it, they could have lived.
02:15:18.000 Or when I watch that video from the Yokel hops in Tibet, that gigantic flood crashes down.
02:15:25.000 And I see that there's 10 people running.
02:15:29.000 And but for three meters, these people are dead and these people are not.
02:15:34.000 They're all running slightly uphill.
02:15:35.000 And the wave hits just here, and those people get washed away while the rest, just a few meters away, made it up the hill to safety.
02:15:42.000 It's crazy.
02:15:42.000 My wife's great grandfather was something to do with World War I. Was the dividing line of you get on this boat, you get on that boat.
02:15:53.000 He got on this boat, this boat got sunk.
02:15:55.000 Wow.
02:15:56.000 So none of my friends would be here.
02:15:59.000 It's a crazy history.
02:16:00.000 And there are young people who only know the stories, they didn't experience it.
02:16:04.000 That's why it's important to say never forget, because there are people who don't have anything to forget.
02:16:08.000 They never experienced it.
02:16:10.000 That's why I really do appreciate when they, on 9 11, they play the day of coverage in real time for people to watch.
02:16:17.000 So I do think.
02:16:19.000 You'll never be able to give that experience of what it was like.
02:16:23.000 Everybody, like I'm in Chicago, but everybody was terrified.
02:16:27.000 Everything was quiet.
02:16:29.000 Everybody was freaked out.
02:16:30.000 And you can't give that experience to someone who never saw it.
02:16:34.000 It was sort of like an amusement park.
02:16:35.000 I lived there.
02:16:35.000 I worked there for a month and a half.
02:16:37.000 Every Friday night, Saturday night, and Sunday night from 12, 6 p.m. to 6 a.m., I worked a thousand feet away from the pile.
02:16:44.000 It looked like an amusement park, but it was catastrophic.
02:16:47.000 It was smoky and it smelled like graham crackers.
02:16:51.000 And they then soon after they started telling us, well, you have to wear an air mask when you're down here.
02:16:55.000 And most people didn't because who wanted to sit there for 12 hours with an air mask on in the American Express building with blown out windows?
02:17:01.000 And I'm like, why are the windows blown out?
02:17:03.000 I guess that's what happens when a building falls down.
02:17:05.000 Then I find later, whoa, maybe there are explosions propulsing stuff outside of the trade centers, blowing the windows out of the neighboring buildings.
02:17:12.000 It's a we're at the end of the show, not at the beginning, but my God, transforming moment.
02:17:17.000 Why did they tell people to stay put to prevent mayhem?
02:17:20.000 Well, like, what's the but, yes, but at first the speculation was this may have been an accident, a pilot error.
02:17:26.000 No one expected a second plane to strike the other building.
02:17:30.000 So there were many people who were just like, Glad I'm not over there.
02:17:32.000 And the building had never come from the fires.
02:17:35.000 And so there's no interruption.
02:17:37.000 Well, so, right, you don't want people running full speed.
02:17:40.000 So, there's a famous story where a fire in a nightclub broke out and everybody ran to the exit and got jammed in the door.
02:17:50.000 There was a fire exit they could have gone out of, but because people only knew the one exit, that's where they were.
02:17:53.000 That was in Rhode Island, right?
02:17:54.000 You're talking about the.
02:17:55.000 Is that what it was?
02:17:56.000 It was the.
02:17:57.000 I forget what band it was, but it was.
02:17:59.000 There was a band playing.
02:18:00.000 They had Pyro in the building.
02:18:02.000 Yeah.
02:18:02.000 Shouldn't have had it.
02:18:03.000 Started a fire.
02:18:03.000 Started a fire.
02:18:04.000 Everybody ran for the main entrance and then they were all smashed into it and couldn't move.
02:18:08.000 Something like 49 people died.
02:18:09.000 Because the people behind are shoving as hard as they can, and the people are just smashed, so you can't breathe, and then you just die.
02:18:15.000 And to that point, no skyscraper had ever fallen from an office fire, so they didn't have a reason to think a plane was going to knock it down.
02:18:22.000 They were like, just chill, it's the World Trade Center, you're going to be fine, we're going to put out the fires, and everyone's going to be fine.
02:18:26.000 I think it was a B 25 hit the Empire State Building or something.
02:18:29.000 Yeah, that's what I thought it was when I heard the first one being.
02:18:32.000 People were like, the building didn't burn down, didn't fall down.
02:18:35.000 And for a lot of people, they were like, look, once they start clearing, like, you're going to be trapped up there for a little bit, but we'll get it fixed, and then an hour later.
02:18:41.000 We are way over time, though.
02:18:43.000 So, this has been a lot of fun hanging out with you guys.
02:18:46.000 Smash the like button, share the show.
02:18:48.000 Thank you all so much for hanging out.
02:18:49.000 We've got a great show.
02:18:51.000 We had a great, amazing conversation, which will be up on Sunday.
02:18:53.000 You don't want to miss it on The Tim Pool Show.
02:18:55.000 Subscribe.
02:18:55.000 You can follow me on X and Instagram at Timcast.
02:18:58.000 Who wants to go first?
02:18:59.000 You want to shout anything out?
02:19:00.000 Sure.
02:19:00.000 Yeah.
02:19:01.000 You can follow me on X at Josh Dawes.
02:19:04.000 And be sure to check out The Continuing Adventures of Mary Sue on YouTube or MarySueAdventures.com. 0.79
02:19:12.000 My YouTube channel is Danny Goller, D A N Y G O L E R. 0.85
02:19:15.000 And really, all my social medias. 1.00
02:19:18.000 You just go to DannyGolla.com.
02:19:19.000 You find everything and all my socials.
02:19:21.000 You get me at Ian Crossland.
02:19:22.000 You find me on YouTube, X, and Instagram is where I'm hottest.
02:19:25.000 So follow me at Ian Crossland.
02:19:26.000 I'll see you there.
02:19:28.000 I am Phil That Remains on Twix.
02:19:29.000 I'm Phil That Remains on Patreon.
02:19:31.000 You can check out the band All That Remains on Apple Music, Amazon Music Pandora, YouTube, Spotify, and Deezer.
02:19:35.000 Don't forget the left lane is for crime.
02:19:39.000 Great conversation, everyone.
02:19:42.000 9 11, it's in fifth grade when it happened.
02:19:44.000 I didn't learn about it until after I got home.
02:19:48.000 But yeah.
02:19:49.000 I'm glad we did the moment of silence.
02:19:52.000 Tim, let's go.
02:19:54.000 Thanks for hanging out, everybody.
02:19:55.000 Check out the Tim Pool show on Sunday, and then we'll see you next week.