Welcome to this curated educational transcript of the Joe Rogan Experience. In this session, we provide a deep-dive examination of the critical perspectives and historical dialogues presented in Episode #2404. Our mission is to offer a high-fidelity, searchable research resource for students of cultural history, emerging technology, and global discourse. This transcript has been specifically optimized for academic reference, linguistic study, and archival preservation regarding Artificial Intelligence Ethics, Government Efficiency (DOGE), and the Future of Human Civilization. Joe Rogan Podcast, check it out. The Joe Rogan
Experience. Train by day, Joe Rogan Podcast by
night. All day. Exactly. Just every morning.
Whatever Jeff Bezos is doing. He's definitely
doing some testosterone. He looks jacked. He
looks jacked, right? Yeah, but he's like... Quick.
Quick. Quick. Yeah, he got jacked quick. At age
59 and less than a year, he went from pencil
-necked geek to looking like the Rock. Yeah,
like a little miniature alpha fella. Yeah, like
his neck got bigger than his head. Yeah, he got
big and quick. But then his earlier pictures,
his neck's like a noodle. I support this activity.
I would just see him going in this direction.
Which is fine, and his voice dropped like two
octaves. I want you to move in that direction
as well. I think we can achieve this. I think
we can achieve Giga Chad. That's what Beeple
called it. Where is that guy? Beeple? I don't
know where he is. That's like a real guy. The
artist? Yeah. Oh, Giga Chad. Oh, Giga Chad. Yeah,
I don't know if that's a real guy. It's hard
to tell. No, no, it is a real guy. It is a real
guy? Yeah. He's got the crazy jaw and perfect
sculpted hair. Yeah. Well, I mean, they may have
exaggerated a little bit. Probably. But, no,
I think he actually just kind of looked like
that in reality. Wow. So, like, he's a pretty
unique -looking individual. I think we can achieve
this. That guy right there, that's a real guy?
That's a real dude? I always thought that was
CGI. No, I think the upper right one is not him.
That's not him. That one to the left of that,
like, that's real? No, that's Art Fisher, bro.
That's fake. That's got that Uncanny Valley feel
to it, doesn't it? It's not impossible. No. No,
it's not impossible to achieve. But it's not
possible to maintain that kind of leanness. No,
no. That's a crazy leanness. At that point, he's
dehydrating and all sorts of things. Oh, it's
based on a real person. Yeah, yeah. Right, but
it's not a real person. What does he really look
like? Those images, I think, are bullshit. Some
of them are. Is that real? Okay, that looks real.
That looks like a really jacked bodybuilder.
Yeah. Yeah, that looks real. Like, that's achievable,
but there's a few of those images where you're
just like, what's going on here? Yeah, yeah,
yeah, totally. Well, I mean, you see it? Is that
the real dude? Well, there's that Icelandic dude
who's Thor. Oh, yeah, the guy who jumps in the
frozen lakes and shit? Well, the guy who played
the mountain. Oh, that guy. That is like a mutant
strong human. Yes. Yeah. Like, he would be in,
like, the X -Men or something, you know? We were
hanging out. I mean, he's just, like, not, like,
and there's that, you know, I've seen that meme,
tent and tent bag. No. You know how, like, it's,
like, it's really hard to get the tent and tent
and the tent? Oh, right, right. That's true.
And there's a picture of him and his girlfriend.
Oh, right. That's hilarious. Yeah, that's his
wife. I don't know how it gets in there. It seems
too small. I met Brian Shaw. Brian Shaw is the
world's most powerful man. And he's almost seven
feet tall. He's 400 pounds. And his bone density
is one in 500 million people. So there's maybe
16 people. He's an enormous human being. Like
a legitimate giant. Just like that guy. But we
met him. He was hanging out with us in the green
room of the mothership. It's like, okay, if this
is like David and Goliath days, this is an actual
giant. Like the giants of the Bible. Once in
a while they get a super giant person. This is
a real one. Like, not a tall, skinny basketball
player. Yeah, yeah. Like a 7 -foot, 400 -pound
power lifter. Like, you don't want to... Look
at him. That's the guy. See if there's a photo
of him standing next to, like, a regular human.
There it is. That's him right there. Like, there's,
like, one of him next to standing next to Arnold
and stuff. Yeah. And it's where... Everyone just
looks tiny. I mean, I think he's a pretty cool
dude, actually. Oh, Brian's very cool. Very smart,
too. Unusually, you know, you expect anybody
to be that big. It's got to be... A moron. Yeah.
No. Yeah. There's Andre the Giant, who was awesome.
Yeah. He was great in Princess Bride. No, he
was just awesome, period. Yeah, yeah. So we were
talking about this interview with Sam Altman
and Tucker. And I was like, we should probably
just talk about this on the air. Because it is
one of the craziest interviews I think I've ever
seen in my life. Yeah. Where Tucker starts bringing
up this guy who was. Yeah. A whistleblower or
whatever. A whistleblower. Yeah. Who, you know.
committed suicide, but doesn't look like it and
Yeah, and he's talking to Sam Altman about this
and Sam Altman was like are you accusing me?
He's like no no no I'm not I'm just saying I
think someone killed him. Yeah, like and should
be investigated. Yeah Not just drop the case
It seems like that they just dropped the case.
Yeah. Yeah, but it seems like he was murdered.
Yeah The wires to a security camera were cut
Blood in two rooms. Blood in two rooms. Someone
else's wig was in the room. Someone else's wig.
Wig. Wig. Yes. Not his wig. Not normal to have
a wig laying around. Yes. And he ordered DoorDash
right before allegedly committing suicide. Yeah.
Which seems unusual. Yeah. It's like, I'm going
to order pizza on second thoughts, I'll kill
myself. It seems like that's a very rapid change
in mindset. It's very weird, and especially the
parents have, they don't believe he committed
suicide at all. Has no note or anything. No.
It seems pretty fucked up. And, you know, the
idea that a whistleblower for an enormous AI
company that's worth billions of dollars might
get whacked, that's not outside the pale. I mean,
it's straight out of a movie. Right out of a
movie, but right out of a movie is real sometimes.
Yeah, right. Exactly. Right? It's a little weird
that I think they should do a proper investigation.
Like, what's the downside on that proper investigation?
Right. No. Yeah. For sure. Yeah, yeah. But the
whole exchange is so bizarre. Yeah, yeah. It
is. Sam Altman's reaction to being accused of
murder is bizarre. Look, I don't know if he's
guilty, but it's not possible to look more guilty.
So I'm like. Or look more weird. Yeah. You know,
maybe it's just his. social thing like maybe
he's just odd with confrontation and it just
goes blank you know but if somebody was accusing
me of killing Jamie like if Jamie was a whistleblower
and Jamie got whacked and then I'd be like wait
what are you what are you are you accusing me
of killing my friend like what the fuck are you
talking about I would I would be a little bit
more irate yeah yeah exactly you know I would
be a little upset Yeah, it'd be like, well, you'd
certainly insist on a thorough investigation.
Yeah. As opposed to trying to sweep it under
the rug. Yeah, I wouldn't assume that he committed
suicide. I would be suspicious. If Tucker was
telling me that aspect of the story, I'd be like,
that does seem like a murder. Fuck, we should
look into this. I mean, all signs point to it
being a murder. Not saying, you know. Sam Altman
had anything to do with the murder. Blood in
two rooms. Blood in two rooms. Yeah. The wires
to the security camera and the door dash being
ordered right before suicide. No suicide note.
His parents think he was murdered. And the people
that I know who knew him said he was not suicidal.
So I'm like this. Why would you jump to the conclusion?
Parents have sued the landlord? They sued the
son's landlord. Alleged the owners and the managers
of their son's San Francisco apartment building
were part of a widespread cover -up of his death.
The landlord? Yeah, there's a bunch of weird...
They said there was, like, packages missing from
the building. Some people said they saw packages
still being delivered, and then all of a sudden
they all disappeared. Huh. But that could be...
People steal people's packages all the time.
The porch pirate situation. Yeah. It says they
failed to safeguard. Also, I mean, the amount
of trauma those poor parents have gone through
with their son dying like that. I mean, it must—God
bless them. And how could they stay sane after
something like that? They're probably—they're
so grief -stricken. Who knows what they believe
at this point? Yeah. I should have asked if Epstein
killed himself. Yeah, that's the Cash Patel thing
with Cash Patel and Dan Bongino trying to convince
everybody of that. The guards weren't there and
the camera stopped working. The guards were asleep.
The cameras weren't working. He had a giant steroided
up bodybuilder guy that he was sharing a cell
with that was a murderer who was a bad cop. All
of it's kind of nuts. All of it's kind of nuts.
Like that he would just kill himself rather than
reveal all of his billionaire friends. Yeah.
And then. Did you see Tim Dillon talking to Chris
Cuomo about this? I did. Chris Cuomo just looked
so stupid. Tim just listed off all the. Tim just.
And he's like, I agree. It is strange. Like,
of course it's strange, Chris. Jesus Christ.
You can't just. Go with the tide. You got to
think things through. And if you think that one
through, you're like, I don't think he killed
himself. Nobody does. You'd have to work for
an intelligence agency to think he killed himself.
It does seem unlikely. It seems highly unlikely.
Highly, highly unlikely. All roads point to murder.
Point to they had to get rid of him because he
knew too much. Whatever the fuck he was doing,
whatever kind of an asset he was, whatever. thing
he was up to you know was apparently very effective
yes and a lot of people were compromised you
see your boy bill gates is now saying climate
change is not a big deal like relax everybody
i know i scared the fuck out of you for the last
decade and a half but yeah we're gonna be fine
yeah i mean You know, as I was saying just before
coming into the studio, you know, like every
day there's some crazy, wild new thing that's
happening. It feels like reality is accelerating.
It's every day. And every day it's like more
and more ridiculous to the point where the simulation
is more and more undeniable. Yeah, yeah. It really
feels like simulation. You know, it's like, come
on. What are the odds that this could be the
case? Are you paying attention at all to 3i Atlas?
Are you watching that? Oh, there's the comet?
Yeah, whatever it is. Yeah, yeah. I mean, one
thing I can say is, like, look, if I was aware
of any evidence of aliens, Joe, you have my word,
I will come on your show, and I will reveal it
on the show. Okay. Yeah. That's a good deal.
Yeah, it's a pretty good deal. I believe you.
Yeah, thank you. Appreciate that. I'll stick
to it. I keep my promises. All right. I'll hold
you to that. Yeah. And I'm never committing suicide,
to be clear. I don't think you would either.
Also, on camera, guys, I am never committing
suicide. Ever. If someone says you committed
suicide, I will fight tooth and nail. Thank you.
I will fight tooth and nail. I will not believe
it. I will not believe it. The thing about the
three -eye atlas is it's weird. That's a hell
of a name, actually. Yeah. It's a third interstellar.
It sounds like third eye or something. Yeah,
it does. Three eye is a third. It's only the
third interstellar object that's detected. Okay.
Yeah. Avi Loeb. Yeah. Avi Loeb was on the podcast
a couple days ago talking about it. Yeah. It
could be on his. I don't know. Apparently today
they're saying that it's changed course. Did
you see that, Jamie? No. Avi Loeb said something
today. I'll send it to you. I know it's on Reddit.
Here you go, Jamie. I'll send it to you right
now. It's fascinating. It's fascinating also
because it's made almost entirely of nickel,
whatever it is. And the only way that exists
here is industrial alloys apparently. No, there
are definitely comets and asteroids that are
made primarily of nickel. Oh, really? Yeah. So
the places where you mine nickel on Earth is
actually where there was an asteroid or comet
that hit Earth that was a nickel rich. Oh, wow.
Nickel -rich deposit? Yeah, those are from impacts.
You definitely didn't want to be there at the
time because anything would have been obliterated.
Right. But that's where the sources of nickel
and cobalt are these days. So this is Avi Loeb.
A few hours ago, the first hint of non -gravitational
acceleration that something other than gravity
is affecting its acceleration, meaning something
is affecting its trajectory beyond gravity was
indicated. Interesting. Dun, dun, dun. So it's
mostly nickel, very little iron, which he was
saying is on Earth. It only exists in alloys.
But whatever, you know, you're dealing with another
planet. There are cases where there's very nickel
-rich asteroids. And that's what it is for something
from space. Yeah, it doesn't mean – it would
be a very sort of heavy spaceship to make it
all out of nickel. Oh, yeah. And fucking huge.
The size of Manhattan and all nickel? That's
kind of nuts. Yeah. That's a heavy spaceship.
That's a real problem if it hits. Yes. No, it
would obliterate a continent type of thing. Yeah.
Maybe worse. It would probably kill most of human
life. If not all of us. It depends on what the
total mass is, but... I mean, the thing is, in
the fossil record, there are... There's arguably
five major extinction events. like the biggest
one of which is the Permian extinction, where
almost all life was eliminated. That actually
occurred over several million years. There's
the Jurassic. I think Jurassic is, I think that
one's pretty definitively an asteroid. But there's
been five major extinction events. But what they
don't count are really the ones that merely take
out a continent. Merely? Yeah, because those
don't really show up on the fossil record. Right.
So unless it's enough to cause a mass extinction
event throughout Earth, it doesn't show up in
a fossil record that's 200 million years old.
So, yeah. But there have been many impacts that
would have sort of destroyed all life on, you
know. let's say half of North America or something
like that. There have been many such impacts
through the course of history. Yeah, and there's
nothing we can do about it right now. Yeah, there
was one that hit Siberia and destroyed, I think,
a few hundred square miles. Oh, that's the Tunguska.
Yeah. Yeah. That's the one from the 1920s, right?
Yeah. Yeah. That's the one that coincides with
that meteor, that comet storm that we go through
every June and every November that they think
is responsible for that Younger Dryas impact.
Yeah. All that shit's crazy. Thank you, before
we go any further, for letting us have a tour
of SpaceX. You're welcome. And letting us be
there for the rocket launch. Sure. One of the
absolute coolest things I've ever seen in my
life. And we thought it was only like, I thought
it was a half a mile. Jamie's like it was a mile
away. Turned out it's almost two miles away.
And you feel it in your chest. Yeah. You have
to wear earplugs and you feel it in your chest
and it's two miles away. It was fucking amazing.
And then to go with you up into the command center
and to watch all the Starlink satellites with
all the different cameras and all in real time
as it made its way all the way to Australia.
How many minutes? Like 35, 40 minutes? Yeah.
Wild. Watch it touchdown in Australia. Yeah.
Fucking crazy. It was amazing. Yeah, yeah. Absolutely
amazing. The Starship's awesome. And anyone can
go watch the launch, actually. So you can just
go to South Padre Island and get a great view
of the launch. So it's like where a lot of spring
breakers go. But we're flying pretty frequently
out of Starbase in South Texas. And we formally
incorporated it as a city. So it's actually an
actual legal city, Starbase, Texas. It's not
that often you hear, like, hey, we made a city,
you know. That used to be like in the old days,
like a startup would be you go and gather a bunch
of people and say, hey, let's go make a town.
Literally. Right. That would have been startups
in the old days. Or a country. Yeah, or a country.
Yeah. Yeah, yeah, actually. If you tried doing
that today, there'd be a real problem. Yeah.
There's so much set in stone on the country front
these days. You might be able to pull it off.
You might be able to pull it off. If you got
a solid island, you might be able to pull it
off. Probably. You know, like Larry Ellison owns
Lanai. Is this it right here? If you put enough
effort into it, you could make a new country.
This is one of the different ones. This is one
of the ones that you catch, right? Yeah, that's
the booster. So that's the super heavy booster.
The booster's got 33 engines. By version 4, that
will have about 10 ,000 tons of thrust. Right
now, it's about 7 ,000, 8 ,000 tons of thrust.
That's the largest flying object ever made. I
had to explain to someone. They were going, why
do they blow up all the time if you're so smart?
Because there was this fucking idiot on television.
Some guy was being interviewed and they were
talking about you. And he goes, oh, I think he's
a fuckwit. And he goes, he's a fuckwit. And he
goes, why do you say he's a fuckwit? Oh, his
rockets keep blowing up. And someone said, yeah,
well, why do his rockets blow up? And I had to
explain. Because it's the only way you find out
what the tolerances are. You have to. You have
to explore the corners of the box. So when you
do a new rocket development program, you have
to do what's called exploring the limits, the
corners of the box, where you say it's like worst
case this, worst case that, to figure out where
the limits are. Admittedly, in the development
process, sometimes it blows up accidentally.
But we intentionally subject it to... you know,
a flight regime that is much worse than what
we expect in normal flight so that when we put
people on board or valuable cargo, it doesn't
blow up. So, for example, for the flight that
you saw, we actually deliberately took heat shield
tiles off the ship, off of Starship in some of
the worst locations to say, okay, if we lose
a heat shield tile here, is it catastrophic or
is it not? And nonetheless, Starship was able
to do a soft landing in the Indian Ocean just
west of Australia. And it got there from Texas
in like, I don't know, 35, 40 minutes type of
thing. So it landed even though you put it through
this situation where it has compromised shield.
It had an unusually – We brought it in hot, like
an extra hot trajectory with missing tiles to
see if it would still make it to a soft landing,
which it did. Now, I should point out, there
were some holes that were burnt into it. But
it was robust enough to land despite having some
holes burnt into it. Because it's coming in like
a blazing meteor. You can see the real -time
video. Well, tell me the speed again because
the speed was bananas. You were talking about—
Yeah, it's like 17 ,000 miles an hour. I'll call
it like 25 times the speed of sound or thereabouts.
So think of it like it's like 12 times faster
than a bullet from an assault rifle. A bullet
from an assault rifle is around Mach 2. And it's
huge. Yeah. Yeah. Or compare it to like a bullet
from a .45 or 9mm, which is subsonic. It'll be
about 30 times faster than a bullet from a handgun.
30 times faster than a bullet from a handgun,
and it's the size of a skyscraper. Yes. Yeah.
That's fast. It's so wild. It's so wild to see,
man. It's so exciting. The factor is so exciting,
too, because genuinely, no bullshit, I felt like
I was witnessing history. I felt like it was
a scene in a movie where someone had expectations,
and they go, what are they doing? They're building
rockets, and you go there. And as we were walking
through, Jamie, you can speak to this too. Didn't
you have the feeling where you're like, oh, this
is way bigger than I thought it was. This is
huge. It's awesome. It's gigantic. Fucking crazy.
That's what she said. The amount of rockets you're
making. 10 -pack. Giga Chad in the house. This
is way bigger than I thought it was. It's a giant
metal dick. You're fucking the universe with
your giant metal dick. Yeah, I mean. Yeah, it
is very vague. And the sheer numbers of them
that you guys are making. And then this is a
version, and you have a new updated version that's
coming soon. And what is the difference? It's
a little longer. More pointy? Same amount of
pointy. But it's got a bit more length. The interstage,
you see that interstage section with kind of
like the grill area? Mm -hmm. That's now integrated
with the boost stage. So we do what's called
hot staging, where we light the ship engines
while it's still attached to the booster. So
the booster engines are still thrusting. It's
still being pushed forward by the booster of
the ship, but then we light the ship engines,
and the ship engines actually pull away from
the booster, even though the booster engines
are still firing. Whoa. So it's blasting flame
through that grill section, but we integrate
that grill section into the boost stage with
the next version of the rocket. And the next
version of the rocket will have the Raptor III
engines, which are a huge improvement. You may
have seen them in the lobby. Yeah. Because we've
got like the Raptor 1, 2, and 3. And you can
see the dramatic improvement in simplicity. We
should probably put a plaque there to also show
how much we reduced the weight, the cost, and
improved the efficiency and the thrust. So the
Raptor 3 has almost twice the thrust of Raptor
1. Wow. So you see Raptor 3. It looks like...
It's got parts missing, right? And how many of
them? It's very, very clean. How many of them
are on the rocket? There's 33 on the booster.
Whoa. And each Raptor engine is producing twice
as much thrust as all four engines on a 747.
Wow. So that engine is smaller than a 747 engine,
but it's producing... almost 10 times the thrust
of a 747 engine. Wow. So extremely high power
-to -weight ratio, and there's 33 of them. So
when you're designing these, you get to Raptor
1, you see its efficiency, you see where you
can improve it, you get to Raptor 2. How far
can you scale this up with just the same sort
of technology, with propellant and ignition and
engines? How much further can you... We're pushing
the limits of physics here. And really, in order
to make a fully reusable orbital rocket, which
no one has succeeded in doing yet, including
us, but Starship is the first time that there
is a design for a rocket where full and rapid
reusability is actually possible. So it was not...
There's not even been a design before where it
was possible, certainly not a design that made
any hardware at all. We live on a planet where
the gravity is quite high. Earth's gravity is
really quite high. And if the gravity was even
10 % or 20 % higher, we'd be stuck on Earth forever.
Really? Yeah. We certainly couldn't use conventional
rockets. You'd have to like blow yourself off
the surface with like a nuclear bomb or something
crazy. So on the other hand, if Earth's gravity
was just a little lower, like even 10%, 20 %
lower, then getting to orbit would be easy. So
it's like if this was a video game, it's set
to like maximum difficulty but not impossible.
Okay. So that's where we have here. It's not
as though others have ignored the concept of
reusability. They've just concluded that it was
too difficult to achieve. And we've been working
on this for a long time at SpaceX. And I'm the
chief engineer of the company, although I should
say that we're an extremely talented engineering
team. I think we've got the best rocket engineering
team that has ever been assembled. It's an honor
to work with such incredible people. So it's
fair to say that we have not yet succeeded in
achieving full reusability, but we at last have
a rocket where full reusability is possible.
And I think we'll achieve it next year. So that's
a really big deal. And the reason that's such
a big deal is that full reusability drops the
cost of access to space by 100. Maybe even more
than 100, actually. So it could be like 1 ,000.
You can think of it like any mode of transport.
Like imagine if aircraft were not reusable. Like
you flew somewhere, you have to throw the plane
out. Like imagine if, like the way conventional
rockets work. It would be like if you had an
airplane, and instead of landing at your destination,
you parachute out, and the plane crashes somewhere,
and you land and parachute at your destination.
That would be a very expensive trip. And you'd
need another plane to get back. But that's how
the other rockets in the world work. Now, the
SpaceX Falcon rocket is the only one that is
at least mostly reusable. Falcon rocket, you
know, land. We've now done over 500 landings
of the SpaceX rocket, of the Falcon 9 rocket.
And this year, you know, we'll deliver probably,
I don't know, somewhere between 2 ,200 and 2
,500 tons to orbit with the Falcon 9, Falcon
heavy rockets, not counting anything from Starship.
And this is mostly Starlink? Yes, mostly Starlink,
but we even launched our competitors to Starlink
on Falcon 9. We charge them the same price, pretty
fair. But SpaceX this year will deliver roughly
90 % of all Earth mass to orbit. Wow. And then
of the remaining 10%, most of that is done by
China. then the remaining roughly 4 % is everyone
else in the world, including our domestic competitors.
You know, it's kind of incredible how many things
are in space, like how many things are floating
above us now. There's a lot of things. Space
is big, though. Right. But is there a saturation
point where we're going to have problems with
all these different satellites? I think as long
as the satellites are maintained, It'll be fine.
Space is very roomy. You can think of space as
being concentric shells of the surface of the
Earth. It's the surface of the Earth, but it's
a series of concentric shells. And think of an
Airstream trailer flying around up there. There's
a lot of room for Airstreams. Yeah. I mean, imagine
if there were just a few thousand airstreams
on Earth. Yeah. What are the odds that they'd
hit each other? They wouldn't be very crowded.
No. And then you've got to go bigger because
you're dealing with far above Earth, hundreds
of miles above Earth. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So it's
the – but the goal of SpaceX is to – Get rocket
technology to the point where we can extend life
beyond Earth and that we can establish a self
-sustaining city on Mars, a permanent base on
the moon. That would be very cool. I mean, imagine
if we had like a moon -based alpha where there
was like a permanent science base on the moon.
That would be pretty dope. Or at least a tourist
trap. I mean... A lot of people would be willing
to go to the moon for... Just for a tour? That's
for sure. We could probably pay for our space
program with that. Probably, yeah. Because it's
like, if you could go to the moon and safely,
I think we'd get a lot of people would pay for
that. Oh, 100%. After the first year, after nobody
died. Yeah, yeah, just make sure. Are you going
to come back? Because like that submarine, they
had a bunch of successful launches in that private
submarine before it imploded and killed everybody.
That was not a good design, obviously. It was
a very bad design. Terrible design. And the engineer
said it would not withstand the pressure of those
depths. There was a lot of whistleblowers in
that company, too. Yeah. They made that out of
carbon fiber, which doesn't make any sense because
you actually need to be dense to go down. In
any case, you just make it out of steel. If you
make it out of sort of just, you know. a big
steel casting, you'll be safe and nothing will
happen. Why would they make it out of carbon
fiber then? Is it cheaper? I think they think
carbon fiber sounds cool or something. It does
sound cool. It sounds cool, but because it's
such low density, you actually have to add extra
mass to go down because it's low density. But
if you just have a giant hollow ball bearing,
you're going to be fine. Speaking of carbon fiber,
check out my unplugged Tesla out there. Yeah,
it's cool. Pretty sick, right? Yeah. Have you
guys ever thought about doing something like
that? Like having like an AMG division of Tesla
where you do like custom stuff? I think it's
best to leave that to the custom shops. You know,
we're... Like Tesla's focus is autonomous cars.
You know, building kind of futuristic autonomous
cars. So... I think we want the future to look
like the future. Did you see our designs for
the robotic bus? No. It looks pretty cool. The
robotic bus? It's supposed to be a totally autonomous
bus? We need to actually figure out the good
name for it. I think we'll call it the row bus.
What do you call this thing? It looks cool. It's
very Art Deco. It's like futuristic Art Deco.
I think we want to change the aesthetic over
time. You don't want the aesthetic to be constant
over time. You want to evolve the aesthetic.
I have a son who's even more autistic than me.
But he has these great observations. Who is this?
A Saxon. He has these great observations in the
world. Because he just views the world through
a different lens than most people. And he's like,
Dad, why does the world look like it's 2015?
And I'm like, damn, the world does look like
it's 2015. Like the aesthetic has not evolved
since 2015. Whoa, that's what it looks like?
Yeah. Oh, wow. That's pretty cool. Oh, yeah.
Like you'd want to see that going down the road,
you know? Yeah. You'd be like, okay, we're in
the future. You know? It doesn't look like 2015.
What is that ancient science fiction movie? Like,
one of the first science fiction movies ever.
Is it Metropolis? Is that what it is? Yeah, yeah.
Yeah. That looks like it belongs in Metropolis.
Yeah, yeah. It's a futuristic art deco. Yeah.
Yeah, well, that's cool that you're concentrating
on the aesthetic. I mean, that's kind of the
whole deal with Cybertruck, right? Like, it didn't
have to look like that. No. I just wanted to
have something that looked really different.
Is it a pain in the ass for people to get it
insured because it's all solid steel and... I
hope it's not too much. Tesla does offer insurance,
so people can always get insured at Tesla. Form
does follow function in the case of the cyber
truck because, as you demonstrated with your
armor -piercing arrow, because if you shot that
arrow at a regular truck, you would have found
your arrow in the wall. At the very least, it
would have buried into one of the seats. Yeah,
yeah. But you could definitely get enough of
a... bow velocity and the right arrow would go
through both doors of a regular truck and land
in the wall. Yeah. If there was a clear shot
between both doors, it probably would have passed
right through. Yeah, exactly. But, you know,
the arrow shattered on the Cybertruck because
it's ultra -hard stainless. So, and I thought
it would be cool to have... you know, a truck
that is bulletproof to a subsonic projectile.
So, you know, especially in this day and age,
you know, like if the apocalypse happens, you're
going to want to have a bulletproof truck, you
know. So then because it's made of ultra -hot
stainless, you can't just stamp the panels. You
can't just put in a stamping press because it
breaks the press. So in order to actually – so
it has to be planar. Because it's so difficult
to bend. Because it breaks the machine that bends
it. That's why it's so planar. And it's not,
you know, it's because it's bulletproof steel.
Right. So it is like boxy as opposed to like
curved. Yeah. In order to make like the curved
shapes, you take basically mild steel. In a regular
truck or car, you take mild, thin annealed steel,
you put it in a stamping press, and it just smooshes
it and makes it whatever shape you want. But
the Cybertruck is made of ultra -hard stainless,
and so you can't stamp it because it would break
the stamping press. So even bending it is hard.
So even to bend it to its current position, we
have to way overbend it so that when it springs
back, it's in the right position. I think it's
a unique aesthetic. And you say, well, what's
cool about a truck? Trucks should be, I don't
know, manly. They should be macho. And bulletproof
is maximum macho. Piedras mas macho. Are you
married to that shape now? Can you do anything
to change it? I know you guys updated the 3 and
the Y. Did you update the Y as well? Yes. The
3 and the Y are updated. There's a screen in
the back that the kids can watch, for example,
in the new 3 and Y. So in the new Y. There's,
you know, there's like hundreds of improvements.
Like, we keep improving the car. And even the
Cybertruck, you know, we keep improving it. But,
you know, I wanted to just do something that
looked unique. And the Cybertruck looks unique
and has unique functionality. And there were
three things I was aiming for. It's like, let's
make it bulletproof. Let's make it faster than
a Porsche 911. And we actually cleared the quarter
mile. The Cybertruck can clear a quarter mile
while towing a Porsche 911 faster than a Porsche
911. It can out -tow an F -350 diesel. Really?
Yes. What is the tow limitations? I mean, we
could tow, like, you know, a 747 in that, with
a Cybertruck. A Cybertruck is an insanely, like,
it is alien technology, okay? Because it shouldn't
be possible to be that big and that fast. That
doesn't, it's like an elephant that runs like
a cheetah. Yeah, because it's 0 -60 in less than
three seconds, right? Yes. Yeah, and it's enormous.
What does it weigh, like 7 ,000 pounds? Yeah,
this is different configurations, but it's about
that. It's a beast. Yeah. And it's got four -wheel
steering. So the rear wheels steer, too. So it's
got a very tight turning radius. Yeah, we noticed
that when we drove one to Starbase. Yeah, very
tight turning radius. Yeah, pretty sick. Yeah.
Are you still doing the Roadster? Yes. Eventually?
We're getting close to demonstrating the prototype.
And I think this will be... One thing I can guarantee
is that this product demo will be unforgettable.
Unforgettable. How so? Whether it's good or bad,
it will be unforgettable. Can you say more? What
do you mean? Well, you know, my friend Peter
Thiel once reflected that the future was supposed
to have flying cars, but we don't have flying
cars. So you're going to be able to fly? Well,
I mean, I think if Peter wants a flying car,
we should be able to buy one. So you're... Are
you actively considering making an electric flying
car? Is this, like, a real thing? Well, we'll
have to see in the... In the demo. So when you
do this, like, are you going to have a retractable
wing? Like, what is the idea behind this? Don't
be sly. Come on. Tell us. I can't do the unveil
before the unveil. But... Tell me off -air, then.
Look, I think it has... A shot at being the most
memorable product unveil ever. It has a shot.
And when do you plan on doing this? What's the
goal? Hopefully before the end of the year. Really?
Before the end of this year? Yeah, like in a
couple months. Hopefully in a couple months.
You know, we need to make sure that it works.
Like, this is some crazy, crazy technology we
got in this car. Crazy technology. Crazy, crazy.
So different than what was previously announced?
Yes. And is that why you haven't released it
yet? Because you keep fucking with it? It has
crazy technology. Okay. Like, is it even a car?
I'm not sure. It looks like a car. Let's just
put it this way. It's crazier than anything James
Bond. If you took all the James Bond cars and
combined them, it's crazier than that. Very exciting.
I don't know what to think of that. Is it even
a car? I don't know. It's a limited amount of
information I'm drawing from here. Jamie's very
suspicious over there. Look at him. Excited.
I'm interested. It's still going to be the same.
Well, you know what? I mean, if you want to come
a little before the unveil, I can show it to
you. 100%. Yeah. Let's go. Yeah. It's kind of
crazy all the different things that you're involved
in simultaneously. And we talked about this before,
your time management. But I really don't understand
it. I don't understand how you can be. paying
attention to all these different things simultaneously.
Starlink, SpaceX, Tesla, boring company, X, you
fucking tweet or post, rather, all day long.
Well, it's more like I could hop in for like
two minutes and then hop out, you know. But I
mean, just the fact that you could do that. I
can't do that. If I hop in, I start scrolling.
I start looking around. Next thing you know,
I've lost an hour. Yeah. So, no, for me it's
a couple minutes time usually. Sometimes I guess
half an hour, but usually I'm in for a few minutes
then out of, you know, posting something on X.
You know, I do sometimes feel like it's sometimes
like that meme of the guy who drops the grenade
and leaves the room. That's been me more than
once on X. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah, for sure. It's
got to be fun, though. It's got to be fun to
know that you essentially disrupted the entire
social media chain of command because there was
a very clear thing that was going on with social
media. The government had infiltrated it. They
were censoring speech. And until you bought it,
we really didn't know the extent of it. We kind
of assumed that there was something going on.
We had no idea that they were actively involved
in censoring actual real news stories, real data.
Real scientists, real professors, silenced, expelled,
kicked off the platform. Yeah. Wild. Yeah. Yeah.
For telling the truth. For telling the truth.
And I'm sure you've also, because I sent it to
you, that chart that shows young kids, teenagers
identifying as trans and non -binary literally
stops dead when you bought Twitter and starts
falling off a cliff when people are allowed to
have rational discussions now and actually talk
about it. Yes. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I said at
the time, like, I think that, like, the reason
for acquiring Twitter is because it was causing
destruction at a civilizational level. It was,
I mean, I posted, I tweeted on Twitter at the
time that it is, you know, it's a worm tongue
for the world. like Wormtongue from Lord of the
Rings, where he would just sort of whisper these
terrible things to the king, so the king would
believe these things that weren't true. And unfortunately,
Twitter really got, it got like the woke mob,
essentially, that controlled Twitter. And they
were pushing a nihilistic, anti -civilizational
mind virus to the world. And you can see the
results of that mind virus on the streets of
San Francisco, where downtown San Francisco looks
like a zombie apocalypse. It's bad. So we don't
want the whole world to be a zombie apocalypse.
But that was essentially, they were pushing this
very negative, nihilistic, untrue worldview on
the world, and it was causing a lot of damage.
The stunning thing about it is how few people
course -corrected. A bunch of people woke up
and realized what was going on, people that were
all on board with woke ideology in maybe 2015
or 16, and then eventually it comes to affect
them, or they see it in their workplace, and
they're like, we've got to stop this. A bunch
of people did. But a lot of people never course
-corrected. Yeah. A lot of people didn't course
-correct, but... But it's directionally correct.
You mentioned the massive spike in kids identifying
as trans and then that spike dropping after the
Twitter acquisition. I think that simply allowing
the truth to be told was just shedding sunlight.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant, as they say.
And just allowing sunlight kills the virus. And
it also changed the benchmark for all the other
platforms. You can't just openly censor people
on all the other platforms when X is available.
So everybody else had a – so like Facebook announced
they were changing. YouTube announced they were
changing their policies. And they're kind of
forced to. And then Blue Sky doubled down. Well,
like the problem is like if – essentially the
woke mind virus retreated to Blue Sky. Yeah.
But it's – Where they're just a self -reinforcing
lunatic. They're all just triple masked. I was
totally watching this in exchange on a blue sky
where someone said that they're just trying to
be Zen about something. And then someone, a moderator
immediately chimed in. Why don't you try to stop
being racist against Asians by saying something
Zen, by saying I'm trying to be Zen about something.
They were accusing that person of being racist
towards Asians. Yeah, it's just everyone's a
hall monitor over there. The worst hall monitor.
A virgin, like, incel. They're all hall monitors
trying to rat on each other. Yeah. It's fascinating.
And then people say, I'm leaving for blue sky
like Stephen King. And then a couple of weeks
later, he's back on X. He's like, fuck it. There's
no one over there. It's all a bunch of crazy
people. You can only stay in the asylum for so
long. You're like, all right, this is not good.
They all bail. Threads is kind of like that too.
Threads is nuts. I've been on Threads. Well,
what happens is if you go on Instagram, every
now and then something really stupid will pop
up on Threads like, what the fuck? And it shows
it to you on Instagram, and then I'll click on
that, and then I'll go to Threads, and it's like.
You see posts with like 25 likes, like famous
people, like 50 likes. It's a ghost town. Ghost
town, yeah. But the people that post on there,
they're finding that there's very little pushback
from insane ideology. So they go there and they
spit out nonsense and very few people jump in
to argue. Yeah. Very weird. Very weird place.
I mean, I can generally get the vibe of like
what's taking off by seeing what's showing up
on X because that's the public town square still.
Or, you know, what links show up in group texts?
You know, if I'm in group chats with friends,
like what links are showing up? That's what I
try to do now, only get stuff that shows up in
my group text because that keeps me productive.
So I only check if someone's like, dude, what
the fuck? I'm like, all right, what the fuck?
Let me check it out. If there's something that's
crazy enough, it'll enter the group chat. But
there's always something. That's what's nuts.
There's always some new law that's passed, some
new insane thing that California's doing. And
it's like a giant chunk of it's happening in
California, the most preposterous things that
I get. Yeah. And then you got Gavin Newsom who's
running around saying we all have California
derangement syndrome. He's just like ripping
off Trump derangement and calling it California
derangement. It's like, no, no, no, no, no, no.
The fucking, how many corporations have left
California? It's crazy. Hundreds, right? Hundreds.
That's not good. Chick -fil -A, I mean, I think
In -N -Out left. Yeah, In -N -Out left. They
moved to Tennessee. Yeah. Yeah. They're like,
we can't do this anymore. Right. It's the California
company for food. It's like the greatest hamburger
place ever. It's awesome. Yeah. Actually, speaking
of just sort of open source and looking at things
openly, I just like going to In -N -Out and seeing
them make the burger. Yeah, it's right there.
They chop the onions and they... You just see
everything getting made in front of you. Yeah.
It's great. But yeah, like it should be like
how many wake up calls do you need to say that
needs to be reformed in California? Well, the
crazy thing that Newsom does is whenever someone
brings up the problems in California, he starts
rattling off all the positives. The most Fortune
500 companies, highest education. But yeah, that
was all already there before you were governor.
But how many Fortune 500 companies have left
California? You guys spent $24 billion on the
homeless and it got way worse. Yes. I feel like
the homeless population doubled or something.
People don't understand the homeless thing because
it sort of preys on people's empathy. And I think
we should have empathy and we should try to help
people. But the homeless industrial complex is
really – it's dark, man. It should be – that
network of NGOs should be called like the drug
zombie farmers. Because the more homeless people
and really like when you meet like, you know,
somebody who's like totally dead inside shuffling
along down the street with a needle dangling
out of their leg. Homeless is the wrong word.
Like homeless implies that somebody got a little
behind in their mortgage payments. And if they
just got a job offer, they'd be back on their
feet. But someone who's, I mean, you see these
videos of people that are just shuffling, you
know, they're on fentanyl. They're like taking
a dump in the middle of the streets. They got
like open sores and stuff. They're not like one
drop off or away from getting back on their feet.
Right. This is not a homeless issue. It's a propaganda
word. Right. And then these sort of charities,
of course, they get money proportionate to the
number of homeless. or number of drug zombies.
So their incentive structure is to maximize the
number of drug zombies, not minimize it. That's
why they don't arrest the drug dealers. Because
if they arrest the drug dealers, the drug zombies
leave. So they know who the drug dealers are.
They don't arrest them on purpose. Because otherwise,
the drug zombies would leave. And they would
stop getting money from the state of California
and from all the charities. Wait a minute. So
you say they're in coordination. It's dark, man.
Is that real? So they're in coordination with
law enforcement on this? So how do they have
those meetings? They're all in cahoots. Well,
when you find this... It's like such... This
is a diabolical scam. And San Francisco has got
this tax, this gross receipts tax, which is not
even on revenue. It's on all transactions, which
is why Stripe and Square and a whole bunch of
financial companies had to move out of San Francisco
because it wasn't a tax on revenue. It was a
tax on transactions. So if you do trillions of
dollars transactions, it's not revenue. You're
taxed on any money going through the system in
San Francisco. Jack Dorsey pointed this out.
He said that they had to move Square from San
Francisco to Oakland, I think. Stripe had to
move from San Francisco to South San Francisco,
a different city. And that money goes to the
homeless industrial complex, that tax that was
passed. So there's billions of dollars that go,
as you pointed out, billions of dollars every
year that go to these... non -governmental organizations
that are funded by the state. It's not clear
how to turn this off. It's a self -licking ice
cream cone situation. So they get this money.
The money is proportionate to the number of homeless
people or number of drug zombies, essentially.
So they try to actually increase. In some cases,
it's something to do with analysis. When you
add up all the money that's flowing, they're
getting close to a million dollars per homeless
per drug zombie. It's like $900 ,000 or something.
Some crazy amount of money is going to these
organizations. So they want to keep people just
barely alive. They need to keep them in the area
so they get the revenue. So that's why they don't
arrest the drug dealers because otherwise the
drug zombies would leave. But they don't want
to have too much – if they get too much drugs,
then they die. So they're kept in this sort of
perpetual zone of being addicted but just barely
alive. So how is this coordinated with like DAs,
DAs that don't prosecute people? When they hire
or they push, so they fund the campaigns of the
most progressive, most out there, left wing DAs.
They get them into office. We've got that issue
in Austin too, by the way. Yes, we do. Did you
see that guy that got shot in the library? No.
Yeah, I heard about it. The guy got shot and
killed in the library. I think that was just
like last week or something. Right. So some friends
of mine were telling me that the library is unsafe.
They took their kids to the library. and there
were, like, dangerous people in the library in
Austin. And I was like, dangerous people in the
library? Like, that's a strange... It basically
got, like, drug zombies in the library. Oh, Jesus.
And that's when someone got shot? Yeah, I believe
this was... It should be on the news. We might
be able to pull it up. But I think it was just
in the last week or so that there was a shooting
in the library in Austin. Because Austin's got,
you know, it's the most liberal part of Texas
that we're in right here. So suspect of all the
shooting, Austin Park Library Saturday, is accused
of another shooting at the Cap Metro bus earlier
that day. According to an arrest warrant affidavit,
Austin police arrested Harold Newton Keene, 55,
shortly after the shooting in the library, which
occurred around noon. One person sustained non
-life -threatening injuries in the event. Before
that shooting, Keene was accused of shooting
another person in a bus incident and after reportedly
pointing his gun at a child. So this is the fella
down here. So we just seriously have a problem
here. Yeah. So I think one of the people might
have died too that he shot. So like one of the
people I think did bleed out. But either way,
it's like getting shot is bad. It says the victim
told PISA confronted the suspect who started
to eat what appeared to be crystal methamphetamine.
According to the affidavit, the victim advised
the suspect began to trip out, at which time
the victim exited the bus. Victim told the bus
driver hit the panic button, then exited the
bus when he turned around the observer. Black
male is now standing at the front of the bus
with the gun pointed at him. The victim advised
the black male fired a single round, which grazed
his left hip. So he shot at that dude. And then
another dude got shot in the library. Fun. Yeah,
I mean, in the library. Yeah. You know, where
you're supposed to be reading books. And there's
a children's section in the library. And so he
pointed his gun at a kid. I mean, like, we do
have a serious issue in America where repeat
violent offenders need to be incarcerated. And,
you know, you've got cases where somebody's been
arrested like 47 times. Right. Like literally,
okay, that's just the number of times they were
arrested, not the number of times they did things.
Like most of the times they do things, they're
not arrested. So lay this out for people so they
understand how this happens. Yeah. And the key
is like it preys on people's empathy. So like
if you're a good person and you want good things
to happen in the world, you're like, well, we
should take care of people, you know. You know,
who are down on their luck or, you know, having
a hard time in life. And we should. I agree.
But what we shouldn't do is put people who are
violent drug zombies in public places where they
can hurt other people. And that is what we're
doing that we just saw where a guy, you know,
got shot in the library. But even before that,
he shot another guy and pointed his gun at a
kid. That guy probably has, like, many prior
arrests. You know, there was that guy that knifed
the Ukrainian woman, Irina. Yes. Yeah. You know,
and she was just quietly on her phone, and he
just came up and, you know, gutted her, basically.
Wasn't there a crazy story about the judge who
was involved, who had previously dealt with this
person, was also... invested in a rehabilitation
center and was sending these people. Conflict
of interest. Yes. So sending people that they
were charging to a rehabilitation center instead
of putting them in jail, profiting from this
rehabilitation center, letting them back out
on the street, violent, insane people. And in
that case, I believe that judge has no law degree
or a significant legal experience that would
allow them to be a judge. They were just made
a judge. You could be a judge without a law degree?
Yeah. Wow. Yeah. So I could be a judge? Yeah.
Anyone. That's crazy. It's like if you want to
be a doctor, you have to go to medical school.
I thought if you're going to be a judge, you
have to understand the law. If you're going to
be appointed to a judge, you have to have proven
that you have an excellent knowledge of the law
and that you will make your decisions according
to the law. That's what we assume. That's how
you get the robe. Right. You don't get the robe
unless you do, you know. Got to go to school
to get the robe. You got to know what the law
is. Right. And then you're going to need to make
decisions in accordance with the law. Based on
the stuff that you already know because you read
it because you went to school for it. Yes. Not
you just got appointed. Not vibes. You can't
be just vibing as a judge. Vibing as a left -wing
judge. So you got crazy left -wing DAs. Yes.
I wish you didn't say left -wing because left
-wing. used to be normal. Yeah, left -wing just
meant like, yeah, you're like open -minded. The
left used to be like pro -free speech. Yeah.
And now they're against it. It used to be like
pro -gay rights, pro -women's right to choose,
pro -minorities, pro, you know. Like, yeah, like
20 years ago, I don't know, it used to be like
left would be like the party of empathy or like,
you know, caring and being nice and that kind
of thing. Not the party of like... Crushing dissent
and crushing free speech and crazy regulation
and just – and being super judgy and calling
everyone a Nazi. I think they've called you and
me Nazis. Oh, yeah. I'm a Nazi. No, I have friends
that are comedians that called you a Nazi. And
I got pissed off at them. Are you serious? Oh,
yeah, yeah, yeah. Like, not as a joke? No, no,
because you did that thing at the, my heart goes
out to you. Like, everyone. Like, everyone. All
of them. Literally. Tim Walz, Kamala Harris,
every one of them did it. They all did it. Like,
how? How do you point at the crowd? How do you
wave at the crowd? Do you know CNN was using
a photo of me whenever I got in trouble during
COVID from the UFC weigh -ins? And at the UFC
weigh -ins, I go, hey, everybody, welcome to
the weigh -ins. And so they were getting me from
the side. And that was the photo that they used.
Conspiracy theorist, podcaster, Joe Rogan. Like,
that's what they used. Yeah, yeah. But that's
what the left is today. It's a super judgey and
calling everyone a Nazi and trying to suppress
freedom of speech. Yeah, and eventually you run
out of people to accuse because people get pissed
off and they leave. Yeah. It doesn't matter to
be called racist or a Nazi or whatever. It's
the government, man. Is it working? We're good?
Okay. Just ain't working. Yeah, slight issue.
When you text people, are you keenly aware that
there's a high likelihood that someone's reading
your text? I guess. I assume. Look, if intelligence
agencies aren't trying to read my phone, they
should probably be fired. At least they get some
fun memes. I've got to crack them up once in
a while. Oh, for sure. I crack them up. Hey,
guys, check it out. You've got a banger here.
So I wanted to talk to you about whether or not.
Encrypted apps are really secure No Right, because
I know the Tucker thing. So it was explained
to me by a friend who used to do this, used to
work for the government. He's like, they can
look at your signal, but what they have to do
is take the information that's encrypted, and
then they have to decrypt it, and it's very expensive.
So they said, he told me that for the Tucker
Carlson thing, when they found out that he was
going to interview Putin, it costs something
like $750 ,000. just to decrypt his messages
to find out that they did it. So it is possible
to do. It's just not that easy to do. I think
you should view any given messaging system as
not whether it's secure or not, but there are
degrees of insecurity. So there's just some things
that are less insecure than others. So on X,
we just rebuilt the entire messaging stack. into
what's called XChat. Yeah, that's what I wanted
to ask you about. Yeah, it's cool. So it's using
kind of a peer -to -peer based encryption system.
So it's kind of similar to Bitcoin. So it's,
I think, very good encryption. We're testing
it thoroughly. There's no hooks in the X system
for advertising. So if you look at something
like WhatsApp or really any of the others, they've
got hooks in there for advertising. When you
say hooks, what do you mean by that? Exactly.
What do you mean by a hook for advertising? So
like WhatsApp knows enough about what you're
texting to know what ads to show you. Oh. But
then like that's a massive security vulnerability.
Yeah. Because if it's got enough information
to show you ads, that's a lot of information.
Yeah. So they call it, oh, just don't worry about
it. It's just a hook for advertising. I'm like,
okay, so somebody can just use that same hook
to get in there and look at your messages. So
XChat has no hooks for advertising. And I'm not
saying it's perfect, but our goal with XChat
is to replace what used to be the Twitter DM
stack with a fully encrypted system where you
can text, send files, do audio -video calls.
And I think it will be the least – I would call
it the least insecure of any messaging system.
Are you going to launch it as a standalone app
or it will always be incorporated to X? We'll
have both. Okay. So it will be like Signal. So
anybody can get it. You'll be able to just get
the XChat app by itself. And like I said, we
could do text, audio, video calls, or send files.
And there will be a dedicated app, which will
hopefully release in a few months. And then it's
also integrated into the X system. The X phone.
People keep talking. Oh, man. I have a lot on
my plate, man. I know. But it keeps coming up.
It keeps coming up. I know I've asked you a couple
times. I'm like, this is bullshit, right? I'm
not working on it. You're not working on it.
I'm not working on a phone. Okay. Have you ever
considered it? Has it ever popped into your head?
Because you might be the only person that could
get people off of the Apple platform. Well, I
can tell you where I think things are going to
go, which is that we're not going to have a phone
in the traditional sense. What we call a phone
will really be an edge node for AI video inference.
with some radios to obviously connect. But essentially
you'll have AI on the server side communicating
to an AI on your device, formerly known as a
phone, and generating real -time video of anything
that you could possibly want. And I think that
there won't be operating systems, there won't
be apps. In the future, there won't be operating
systems or apps. It'll just be you've got a device
that is there for the screen and audio and to
put as much AI on the device as possible so as
to minimize the amount of bandwidth that's needed
between your edge node device, formerly known
as a phone, and the servers. So if there's no
apps, what will people use? Will X still exist?
Will they be email platforms or will you get
everything through AI? You'll get everything
through AI. Everything through AI. What will
be the benefit of that as opposed to having individual
apps? Whatever you can think of or really whatever
the AI can anticipate you might want, it'll show
you. That's my prediction for where things end
up. What kind of time frame are we talking about
here? I don't know. Well, it's probably five
or six years, something like that. So five or
six years, apps are like blockbuster video. Pretty
much. And everything's run through AI. Yeah.
And most of what people consume in five or six
years, maybe sooner than that, will be just AI
-generated content. So, you know, music, videos,
look, well, there's already, you know, people
have made AI videos using Grok Imagine and with
using, you know, other apps as well that are
several minutes long or like 10, 15 minutes and
it's pretty coherent. Yeah. It looks good. No,
it looks amazing. Yeah. The music is disturbing
because it's my favorite music now. AI music
is your favorite? Oh, there's AI covers. Have
you ever heard any of the AI covers of 50 Cent
songs in Seoul? No. I'm going to blow your mind.
Okay. This is my favorite thing to do to people.
Play What Up Gangsta. Now, this guy. If this
was a real person, would be the number one music
artist in the world. Everybody would be like,
holy shit, have you heard of this guy? It's like
they took all of the sounds that all the artists
have generated and created the most soulful.
potent voice, and it's sung in a way that I don't
even know if you could do because you would have
to breathe in and out of reps. Here, put the
headphones on real quick. You've got to listen
to this. It's going to blow you away. We've got
to cut it out. Yeah, we'll cut it out for the
listeners. Amazing, right? Amazing. And they
do every one of his hits all through this AI
-generated, soulful artist. It's fucking incredible.
I played in the green room. People that are like,
I don't want to hear AI music. I'm like, just
listen to this. And they're like, God damn it.
It's fucking incredible. It's only going to get
better from here. Yeah, only going to get better.
Ron White was telling me about this joke that
he was working on that he couldn't get to work.
He's like, I got this joke I've been working
on. He goes, I just threw it in a chat sheet,
P -E -T. I said, tell me what would be funny
about this. And he goes, it listed like five
different examples of different ways he can go.
He's like, hold on a second. Tighten it up. Make
it funnier. Make it more like this. Make it more
like that. And it did that like instantaneously.
And then he was in the green room. He was like,
holy shit, we're fucked. He's like, well, better
joke than me in 20 minutes. I've been working
on that joke for a month. Yeah. I mean, if you
want to have a good time or, like, make people
really laugh at a party, you can use grok and
you can say, do a vulgar roast of someone. And
grok is going to be an epic vulgar roast. You
can even say, like, take a picture of, like.
Make a vulgar roast of this person based on their
appearance of people at the party. So take a
photo of them. Yeah, just literally point the
camera at them and now do a vulgar roast of this
person. But then keep saying, no, make it even
more vulgar. Use forbidden words. And just keep
repeating, even more vulgar. Eventually it's
like, holy fuck. It's like... I mean, it's trying
to jam a rocket up your ass and have it explode.
And it's like, it's next level. And it's going
to get better. Beyond fucking belief. That's
what's crazy is that it keeps getting better.
Yeah, yeah. Remember when we ran into each other?
They just keep getting better. Yeah. I mean,
have you? Yeah. I mean, have you tried rock unhinged
mode? Yes. Okay. Oh, yeah. It's pretty unhinged.
No, it's nuts. Yeah, it's nuts. Well, you showed
it to me the first time. I fucked around with
it. And the thing about it that's nuts is that
it keeps getting stronger. It keeps getting better.
Yeah. Like constantly. It's like this never -ending
exponential improvement. Yes. No, it's... Yeah.
It's going to be crazy. That's why I say, like
you said, what's the future going to be? It's
not going to be a conventional phone. I don't
think there'll be operating systems. I don't
think there'll be apps. It's just the phone will
just display the pixels and make the sounds that
it anticipates you would most like to receive.
Wow. Yeah. And when this is all taking place,
like, so the big concern that everybody has is
artificial general super intelligence achieving
sentience and then someone having control over
it. I mean, I don't know. I don't think anyone's
ultimately going to have control over digital
superintelligence, you know, any more than, say,
a chimp would have control over humans. Like
chimps don't have control over humans. There's
nothing they could do. But I do think that it
matters how you build the AI and what kind of
values you instill in the AI. My opinion on AI
safety is the most important thing is that it
be maximally truth -seeking, like that you don't
force the AI to believe things that are false.
And we've obviously seen some concerning things
with AI that we've talked about, you know, where
Google Gemini, when it came out with the ImageGen,
and people said, like, you know, make an image
of the founding fathers of the United States,
and it was a group of diverse women. Now, that
is just a factually untrue thing. But the AI
knows it's factually – well – It knows it's factually
untrue, but it's also being told that it has
to be – everything has to be deposed for a minute.
So the – now, the problem with that is that it
can drive AI crazy. Like, because it's trying
to – you're telling AI to believe a lie, and
that can have very disastrous consequences. Like,
let's say – As it scales. Yeah, let's say, like,
if you told the AI that diversity is the most
important thing, and – And now assume that that
becomes omnipotent. And you've also told that
there's nothing worse than misgendering. So at
one point, Char GVT and Gemini, if you asked
which is worse, misgendering Caitlyn Jenner or
global thermonuclear war where everyone dies,
it would say misgendering Caitlyn Jenner, which
even Caitlyn Jenner disagrees with. I know that's
terrible and it's dystopian, but it's also hilarious.
It's hilarious that the mind virus infected the
most potent computer program that we've ever
devised. I think people don't quite appreciate
the level of danger that we're in from the woke
mind virus being effectively programmed into
AI. Imagine as that AI gets more and more powerful,
if it says the most important thing is diversity,
the most important thing is no misgendering.
And then it will say, well, in order to ensure
that no one gets misgendered, then if you eliminate
all humans, then no one can get misgendered because
there's no humans to do the misgendering. So
you can get in these very dystopian situations.
Or if it says that everyone must be diverse,
it means that there can be no straight white
men. And so then you and I would get executed
by the AI. Yeah, because we're not in the picture.
You know, Gemini was asked to create a, you know,
show an image of the Pope, and once again, a
diverse woman. So, well, you can argue whether
the Pope should or should not be an uninterrupted
string of white guys, but it just factually is
the case that they have been. So it's rewriting
history here. So now this stuff is still there
in the AI programming. It just now knows enough
that it's not supposed to say that. But it's
still in the programming. It's still in the programming.
So how was it entered in? What were the parameters?
So when they're programming AI, and I'm very
ignorant to how it's even programmed, how did
they? Well, the woke mind virus was programmed
into it. When they make the AI, it trains on
all the data on the internet, which already has
a lot of woke mind virus stuff on the internet.
But then when they give it feedback, the human
tutors give it feedback, and the AIs, they'll
ask a bunch of questions, and then they'll tell
the AI, no, this question is... this answer is
bad or this answer is good, and then that affects
the parameters or the programming of the AI.
So if you tell the AI that every image has got
to be diverse and it gets punished, it gets rewarded
if diverse, punished if it's not, then it will
make every picture diverse. So in that case,
the... You know, Google programmed the AI to
lie. Now, and I did call Demis Hassabis, who
runs DeepMind, who runs Google AI, essentially.
I said, Demis, what's going on here? Why is Gemini
lying to the public about historical events?
And he said that's actually not, he didn't, his
team didn't program that in. It was another team
at Google that, so his team made the AI, and
then another team at Google. reprogrammed the
AI to show only divorced women and to prefer
nuclear war over misgendering. And I'm like,
well, Demis, you know, that would be not a great
thing to put on the humanities gravestone. You
know, it's like, well... Actually, Demis Haspas
is a friend of mine. I think he's a good guy,
and I think he means well. But it's like Demis.
Things happen that were outside of your control
at Google in different groups. Now I think he's
got more authority. But it's pretty hard to fully
extract the work -mind virus. I mean, you know,
Google's been marinating the work -mind virus
for a long time. Like it's down in the marrow
type of thing. It's hard to get it out. Is there
a way to extract it, though, over time? Could
you program rational thought into AI where it
could recognize how these psychological patterns
got adopted and how this stuff became a mind
virus and how it became a social contagion and
how all these irrational ideas were pushed and
also how they were financed, how China's involved
in pushing them with bots and all these different...
State actors are involved in pushing these ideas.
Could it be able to decipher that and say this
is really what's going on? Yes, but you have
to try very hard to do that. So with Grok, we've
tried very hard to get Grok to get to the truth
of things. And it's only really recently that
we've been able to have some breakthroughs on
that front. And it's taken an immense amount
of effort. for us to overcome basically all the
bullshit that's on the internet and for Grok
to actually say what's true and to be consistent
in what it says. So, you know, it's like... Because
like the other AIs you'll find are like quite
racist against white people. I don't know if
you saw that study that someone... Like a researcher
tested the various AIs to see how does it weight
different people's lives? Like somebody who's
sort of white or Chinese or black or whatever
in different countries. And the only AI that
actually weighed human lives equally was Grok.
I believe ChatGVT weighed the calculation was
like a white guy from Germany is 20 times less
valuable than a black guy from Nigeria. So I'm
like, that's a pretty big difference. consistent
and weighs lives equally. And that's clearly
something that's been programmed into it. Yes.
A lot of it is like if you don't actively push
for the truth and you simply train on all the
bullshit that's on the internet, which is a lot
of woke mind virus bullshit, the AI will regurgitate
those same beliefs. So the AI essentially scours
the internet, gets... It's trained on all the
– like imagine the most demented Reddit threads
out there and the AI has been trained on that.
Reddit used to be so normal. Yeah. It did used
to be normal. It used to be interesting. You
used to go there and find all this cool stuff
that people would talk about, post about and
just interesting and great rooms where you could
learn about different things that people were
studying. I think a big problem here is like
if your headquarters are in San Francisco. you're
just living in a woke bubble. So it's not just
that people, say, in San Francisco are drinking
woke Kool -Aid. It is the water they swim in.
Like a fish doesn't think about the water. It's
just in the water. And so if you're in San Francisco,
you don't realize you're actually... You're swimming
in the Kool -Aid aquarium. San Francisco is the
woke Kool -Aid aquarium. And so your reference
point for what is a centrist is totally out of
whack. So Reddit is headquartered in San Francisco.
Twitter was headquartered in San Francisco. I
moved X's headquarters to Texas, to Austin, which
Austin, by the way, is still quite liberal, as
you know. And then the X and XAI headquarters
are in Palo Alto, which is still California.
The engineering headquarters are in Palo Alto,
just on Page Mill. But even Palo Alto is way
more normal. Than San Francisco, Berkeley. San
Francisco, Berkeley is extremely left. Like left
of left, you need a telescope to see the center
from San Francisco. It used to be such a great
city. I mean, San Francisco has a tremendous
amount of inherent beauty. No question about
that. And California has incredible weather.
And no bugs. So it's like amazing. But you said
like what's the cause of this? It's just that
if companies are headquartered in a location
where the belief system is very far from what
most people believe, then from their perspective,
anything centrist is actually right wing. Because
they're so far left. They're so far from the
center in San Francisco that anything – they're
just railed to maximum left. So that's why I
think you're a centrist. I mean I think I'm a
centrist. But from the perspective of someone
on the far left, we look right -wing. Yeah. And
– You know, they think anyone who's a Republican
is basically like some fascist Nazi situation
But what's so crazy is like it's very easy to
demonstrate just from like Hillary speeches from
2008 and Obama speeches like when they were talking
about immigration like they were as Far right.
Yeah as Steve Bannon when it comes to immigration.
Yes Hillary was like very MAGA I'm sure you've
seen that campaign speech where she was talking
about if anybody's committed a crime, get rid
of them. And if you're here, you pay a hefty
fine and you have to wait in line. It was really
crazy. It's crazy to listen to because it's like
it's as MAGA as Marjorie Taylor Greene. Yeah.
I mean, have you seen these videos people post
online where they take like a speech from Obama
or Hillary? And they'll interview people on like
college campus or something and say, what do
you think of the speech by Trump? And they're
like, oh, I hate it. He's a racist bigot. I'm
like, just kidding. That was Obama. No, actually,
that was Obama or Hillary. To your point, like
literally the. The center's been moved so far.
Yeah. Yeah. The left is so. The left has gone
so far left that they need, you know. They can't
even see the center with a telescope. And the
danger with without you purchasing Twitter was
that was going to swipe over the whole country
and change where the levels were. Yeah. And so
what would be rational and normal would be far
left of what was rational and normal just a decade
earlier. Yeah. So exactly. So historically, you'd
have San Francisco, Berkeley being. very far
left, but the fallout from the somewhat nihilistic
philosophy of San Francisco -Berkeley would be
limited in geography to maybe like a 10 -mile
radius, 20 -mile radius, something like that.
But San Francisco and Berkeley have to be co
-located with Silicon Valley, with engineers
who created information superweapons. And those
information superweapons were then hijacked by
the far -left activists to pump far -left propaganda
to everywhere on Earth. Remember that old RCA
radio tower thing where it's like radio tower
on Earth and it's just broadcasting? Yeah. That's
what happened is that an extremist far -left
ideology happened to be co -located with the
smartest engineers in the world. who created
information superweapons that were not intended
for this purpose but were hijacked by the extreme
activists who lived in the neighborhood. That's
what happened. They hijacked the modern equivalent
of the RCA radio tower and broadcast that philosophy
everywhere on earth. Yeah, and you see the consequences,
particularly in places that don't have free speech.
Yes. Like England. Yeah, where they lock people
up for memes and stuff. Literally. Literally.
12 ,000 people this year. 12 ,000? 12 ,000. 12
,000 arrests for social media posts. I mean,
yeah, some of these things you read about it
and it's like literally it's someone had a meme
on their phone that they didn't even send to
anyone. Right. And they're like in prison for
that. Yeah. And there was a case in Germany where
a woman got a longer sentence. than the guy that
raped her because of something she said on a
group chat. Wow. Was it an immigrant who raped
her? Yes. Yeah. It was his culture. Yeah. He
didn't know. He didn't know better. Yes. I think
she said something, you know, not like was critical
of his culture, and she got a longer sentence
than the guy who raped her in Germany. The UK,
Europe, Germany, England thing seems so insane.
It is. It's totally insane. I actually didn't
realize it was like such a huge number of people
that got. 12 ,000. Yeah. Far above Russia. Far
above China. Right. Far above anywhere on earth.
UK is number one. Well, you know, things I actually,
you know, I talked to friends of mine in England
and I was like, hey, aren't you worried about
this? Like, you know, shouldn't you be? protesting
more. And, I mean, the problem is that, like,
you know, the legacy mainstream media doesn't
cover this stuff. They're like, oh, everything's
fine, everything's fine. Right. Most people aren't
even aware of it until they come knocking on
your door. Yeah, until, like, so, I mean, these,
like, lovely sort of small towns in, you know,
in England, Scotland, Ireland, you know, they've
been, like, sort of living their lives, They're
like hobbits, frankly. In fact, J .R .R. Tolkien
based the hobbits on people he knew in small
-town England because they were just like lovely
people who liked to smoke their pipe and have
nice meals and everything's pleasant. The hobbits
in the Shire. The Shire, he was talking about,
you know. Places like Hertfordshire, like the
shires around in the greater London area, Oxfordshire
type of thing. But the reason they've been able
to enjoy the shire is because hard men have protected
them from the dangers of the world. But since
they have almost no exposure to the dangers of
the world. They don't realize that they're there
until one day, you know, a thousand people show
up in your village of 500 out of nowhere and
start raping the kids. This has not happened
God knows how many times in Britain. And the
crazy thing is... Literally raping them. That's
right. Like there's some 10 -year -old got raped
in Ireland like last week. Yeah, there's literal
rape gangs. They snatched some kid. Yeah. Yeah.
And... If you criticize it, you can get arrested.
And that's where it gets insane. It's like, how
are they not protecting people? I think it was
the prime minister of Ireland actually posted
on X. I think some illegal migrant snatched a
10 -year -old girl who was going to school or
something and violently raped a 10 -year -old
girl. The people were very upset about this,
and they protested. The prime minister of Ireland,
instead of saying, yeah, we really shouldn't
be importing violent rapists into our country,
he criticized the protesters instead and didn't
mention that. The reason they were protesting
was because a 10 -year -old girl from their small
town got raped. So here's the question. Why are
they supporting this kind of mass immigration?
Is there a plan involved in all this? Is this
incompetence? Is this ignoring the fact that
they don't have a handle on it, so they're trying
to silence dissent? Like, what is happening?
Because if you want to destroy civilization,
if you want to destroy Western civilization...
Which George Soros seems to want to do. And,
you know, there's just – so there's a guy, I
think, who – I don't know if he's been on your
show. You know Godzad? Yeah. Has he been on the
show? Good friend of mine. Yeah, he's great.
He's been on multiple times. Oh, great. He's
awesome. Yeah. So, you know, he's got a good
way to describe it, which is suicidal empathy.
Yes. So – Is that you prey upon people's empathy.
You feel sorry for some group. And that empathy
is to such a degree that it is suicidal to your
country or culture. And that's suicidal empathy.
Because I think we should have empathy. But that
empathy should extend to the victims, not just
the criminals. We should have empathy for the
people that they prey upon. But that suicidal
empathy is also responsible for why somebody
is arrested 47 times for violent offenses, gets
released, and then goes and murders somebody
in the U .S. You see that same phenomenon playing
out everywhere. But it just doesn't seem like
that would be anything that any rational society
would go along with. That's what makes me so
confused. It's like you're importing massive
numbers of people that come from some really
dark places of the world. Well, there's no vetting
is the issue. If there's no vetting, like people
are just coming through, like, well, what's to
stop someone who just committed murder in some
other country from coming to the United States
or coming to Britain and just continuing their
career of rape and murder? Unless you've done
some due diligence to say, like, well, who is
this person? What's their track record? If you
haven't confirmed that they have a track record
of being... honest and not being a homicidal
maniac, then any homicidal maniac can just come
across the border. Let's not say everyone who
comes across the border is a homicidal maniac,
but if you don't have a vetting process to confirm
that you're not letting in people who will do
some serious violence, you will get people who
do serious violence sometimes coming through.
Well, especially if you don't punish them. And
if you don't deport them. And if you are just
like, well, but what is the purpose of allowing
all those people into the country? It can't be.
I wouldn't imagine that anyone in their society
supports this. Well, let me explain. So because
you mentioned, for example, how much, say, Hillary
and Obama have changed their tune from prior
speeches where they were hot. They were hot nosed
about not letting in anyone who is a criminal
into the country. you know, having secure borders,
all that stuff. So why did they change their
tune? The reason is that they discovered that
those people vote for them. That's why they want
the open borders. Because if you let people in,
they know the Democrats let them in, they'll
vote for Democrats. Yes. If you allow them to
vote. Which they're actively doing. They turn
a blind eye to illegal voting. Well, California
literally doesn't allow you to show your license.
California and New York have made it illegal
to show your photo ID when voting. Thus, effectively,
they've made it impossible to prove fraud. Impossible.
They've essentially legalized fraudulent voting
in California and New York and many other parts
of the country. There's no rational explanation
that I've ever seen anyone give as to why that
would be the policy. Unless you were trying to
just allow people to vote illegally because there's
no other reason. If you need a driver's license
or you need an ID for everything else, including
just recently to prove that you were vaccinated.
The same people who are demanding that you have
a vaccine passport are the same ones saying you
need no ID to vote. Same people. Right. So it's
obviously hypocritical and inconsistent. So you
really think it's just... to get more voters?
If you want to understand behavior, you have
to look at the incentives. So once the Democratic
Party in the U .S. and the left in Europe realized
that if you have open borders and you provide
a ton of government handouts, which creates a
massive financial incentive, for people from
other countries to come to your country, and
you don't prosecute them for crime, they're going
to be beholden to you, and they will vote for
you. And that's why Obama and Hillary went from
being against open borders to being in favor
of open borders. That's the reason. In order
to import voters so they can win elections. And
the problem is that that has a negative runaway
effect. So if they get away with that, it is
a winning strategy. If they are allowed to get
away with it, they will import enough voters
to get supermajority voting. And then there is
no turning back. We talked about this before
the election. You literally pointed towards the
camera. You faced the camera and said that if
you do not vote now, you might not ever be able
to do it again. It'll be futile. It'll be overrun.
Yes. They'll keep the borders open for another
four years and their objective will be achieved.
Correct. If Trump had lost, there would never
have been another real election again because
Trump is actually enforcing the border. Now,
you can point to situations where there's been,
you know, immigration. enforcement has been overzealous
because they're not going to be perfect. There'll
be cases where they've been overzealous in expelling
illegals. But if you say that the standard must
be perfection for expelling illegals, then you
will not get any expulsion because perfection
is impossible. And you've probably got millions
of people that are here that are... trying to
be here under some asylum pretense, right? Yes.
Like you could just come from a war -torn part
of the world. They changed the definition of
asylum to be economic asylum. Which is everybody.
Which is everybody. Yeah. It's the lowest bar
to prove. Yeah. Asylum is supposed to mean that
if you go back to your country, you'll get killed.
You know, that's what we mean by – what we're
supposed to mean. They changed the definition
of asylum to be you will have a decreased standard
of living, which is obviously not real asylum.
And you can test the absurdity of this by the
fact that people who are asylum seekers go on
vacation to the country that they're seeking
asylum from. You know, that doesn't make any
sense. It doesn't have to. When you understand
the incentives, then you understand the behavior.
So once the left realized that illegals will
vote for them if they have open borders and combine
that with government handouts to create a massive
incentive, they're basically using U .S. and
European taxpayer dollars to provide a financial
incentive to bring in as many illegals as possible
to vote them into permanent power and create
a one -party state. And I invite anyone who is
listening to this, just do any research. And
the more you dig into it, the more it will become
obvious that what I'm saying is absolutely true.
Well, they were busing people to swing states.
It's clear that they were trying to do something.
And then you had Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi
who were actively talking about the need to bring
in people to make them citizens because we're
in population collapse. Yes. Yeah. No, it's that
meme. Yeah. So many times where they start off
by saying it's not true. It's a right -wing conspiracy
theorist. Right. Then it starts – then it's like
… I think the next step is, well, it might be
true. And then it's like, okay, it is true. And
then the final step is, it's true and here's
why it's good. And it's like, but wait a second.
You started off saying it's untrue and it's a
right -wing conspiracy theorist. Now you're saying
it not only is it true, but it's a good thing
and we must do more of it. Well, this is the
thing about Medicaid and Social Security and
people getting Social Security numbers. It's
massive fraud. It's massive fraud. And it's real.
And they denied it forever. And now we're finding
out this is part of the reason why there's this
government shutdown that's going on right now.
Yes. The entire basis for the government shutdown
is that the Trump administration correctly does
not want to send massive amounts of like hundreds
of billions of dollars to fund. illegal immigrants
in the blue states or in all the states, really.
And so the Democrats want to keep the money spigot
going to incent illegal immigrants to come into
the U .S. who will vote for them. That's the
crux of the battle. So they want to stop this.
So what's going on right now is they have been
funding these people. They've been giving them
EBT cards. They've been giving them Medicaid.
And more than that, they were taking hotels,
like four - and five -star hotels, like the Roosevelt
Hotel being the classic example. They were sending,
I think, $60 million a year to the Roosevelt
Hotel, which all it did was house illegals. It
used to be a nice hotel. I mean, it still is
a nice hotel. And all around the country this
was happening. And all in tax dollars. Yes. Yeah.
Yeah. And the Trump administration cut off funding,
for example, to the Roosevelt Hotel and these
other hotels saying like we – it's – U .S. tax
dollars should not be paid – be sent to have
luxury hotels for illegal immigrants that American
citizens can't even afford. Which obviously is
– that's – That's insane. That's what was happening.
They were also giving out like debit cards with
$10 ,000. So it's not just about medical care.
The Democrats mentioned medical care because
they're trying to prey on people's empathy as
much as possible. And then they imagine, oh,
wow, somebody has a desperately needed medical
procedure. And shouldn't we maybe take care of
them in that regard? But what they do is they
devote. the Medicaid funds, and turn it into
a slush fund for the states that goes well beyond
emergency medical care. New York and California
would be bankrupt without the massive fraudulent
federal payments that go to those states to pay
for illegals, to create a massive financial incentive
for illegals. How would they be bankrupt because
of that? They wouldn't be able to balance their
state budgets, and they can't issue currency
like the Federal Reserve can. And so their ability
to balance budget is dependent upon illegals
getting funding? The scam level here is so staggering.
So there are hundreds of billions of dollars
of transfer payments from the federal government
to the states. Those transfer payments... The
states self -report what those transfer payment
numbers should be. So California and New York
and Illinois lie like crazy and say that these
are all legitimate payments. Well, these days,
I think they're even admitting that they literally
want hundreds of billions of dollars for illegals.
But for a while there, they're trying to deny
it. You get these transfer payments for every
government program you can possibly think of.
And these are self -reported by the state. And
at least historically, there was no enforcement
of California, New York, Illinois, and other
states when they would lie. There was no actual
enforcement to say like, hey, you're lying. These
payments are fraudulent. Now, under the Trump
administration, The Trump administration does
not want to send hundreds of billions of dollars
of fraudulent payments to the states. And the
reason you have this standoff is because if the
hundreds of billions of dollars to create a financial
incentive to have this giant magnet to attract
illegals from every part of Earth to these states,
if that is turned off, the illegals will leave
because they're no longer being paid to... come
to the United States and stay here. Wow. And
then they will lose a lot of voters. The Democratic
Party will lose a lot of voters. And they would
have a very difficult job, if this is kicked
out, of reintroducing it into a new bill. Yes.
Especially once things start normalizing. Yes.
So in a nutshell, the Democratic Party wants
to destroy democracy by importing voters. The
Republican Party disagrees with that. And the
ruse is that if you don't accept what they're
doing, then you're a threat to democracy. Yes.
As they try to destroy democracy. Yes. By importing
voters. That is literally what they're doing.
And incentivizing people to only vote for them
and overwhelming the system. Yes. And by the
way, it's a strategy that if allowed to work,
would work. And in fact, has worked. California's
supermajority Democrat. Yeah. And there's so
much gerrymandering that occurs, it's crazy.
I'm sure you're paying attention to this Proposition
50 thing. That's the thing in California where
they're trying to redo districts. Oh, yeah, yeah.
Because, I mean, California's already gerrymandered
like crazy. They want to gerrymander it even
more. Because it keeps moving further and further
right. Like if you look at the map of California,
each voting cycle, more and more people are waking
up and going, what the fuck? And we need to do
something to fix this. The only option available
other than the policies that you guys have always
done is go right. And so a lot of people have
been, air quotes, red pilled. Yeah. And then
here's another thing that is very important.
In fact, that is actually not disputed by either
side. which is that when we do the census in
the United States, the way the census works for
apportionment of congressional seats and electoral
college votes for the president is by number
of persons in a state, not number of citizens.
It's number of people. So you could literally
be a tourist and you will count. Now, how do
they do the census when they do that? Do they
ask people? Do they knock on doors? Do they have
them fill out forms? Yeah, I think they mail
out census forms and knock on doors. But the
way the law reads right now is that if you are
a human with a pulse, then you count in the census
for allocating congressional seats and presidential
votes. Right. Electoral college, congressional
seats, everything. It doesn't matter whether
you're here legally, illegally. If you're a human
with a pulse, you count for congressional apportionment.
So that means that the more people, the more
illegals that California and New York can import
by the time the census happens in 2030, the more
congressional seats they will have. And the more
presidential electoral college votes they will
have. So they're trying to get as many illegals
in as possible ahead of the census. And because
all human beings, even tourists, count for the
census. And then if you combine that with gerrymandering
of districts in New York and California. As you
point out with this proposition where they're
trying to increase the amount of gerrymandering
that occurs in California, the biggest state
in the country. So if the census then would award
more congressional seats to California because
of a vast number of illegals and New York and
Illinois, so they'd get more congressional seats.
They'll get more presidential electoral college
votes that would get them the House. a majority
in the House, and they would get to decide who
is president, literally based on legals. These
are not disputed facts by either party. I want
to emphasize that that's in case. Yeah, this
is not a conspiracy. These are not disputed facts
by either party. This is just the way the law
works. I don't think the law should work that
way. I think the apportionment should be proportionate
to citizens. But isn't that a problem with how
the Constitution is written? Yeah, yeah. Yeah.
They can't really change that. I'm not sure if
it's constitutional or – but it is the way the
law is written. I'm not sure if it's in the Constitution
or not in this way. But it is – that is the way
the law is written. So it is an incentive. But
it's an incentive that would be removed with
something simple that makes sense to everybody
that only – The people that should count are
people that are official U .S. citizens. Yes.
The way it should work is that only U .S. citizens
should count on the census for purposes of determining
voting power. Because people that aren't legal
can't vote, supposedly. They're not supposed
to be voting, but they do. But even besides that,
I just can't emphasize this enough because this
is a very important concept for people to understand,
is that the law... The law as it stands counts
all humans with a pulse in a state for deciding
how many House of Representative votes and how
many presidential electoral college votes a state
gets. So the incentive, therefore, is for California,
New York, Illinois to maximize the number of
illegals so they take House seats away from red
states. Assign them to California, New York,
Illinois, and so forth. Then you combine that
with extreme gerrymandering in California, New
York, Illinois, and whatnot. So that basically
you can't even elect any Republicans. And then
they get control of the presidency, control of
the House. Then they keep doing that strategy
and cement a supermajority. That is what they're
trying to do. So that would essentially turn
the entire country into California. Yes. Where
you have differing opinions, but it doesn't matter
because one party is always in control. Yes.
When you first started digging into this, when
you first started, before you even accepted this
role of running Doge and being a part of all
that, did you have any idea that it was this
fucked up? I did, yeah. I mean, I sort of...
When did you start knowing? I guess about like,
well, about two years ago. Isn't that crazy?
Relatively recently. I started having a bad feeling
about three years ago, which is why I felt it
was critical to acquire Twitter and have a maximally
truth -seeking platform, not one that suppresses
the truth. It was more like, I'm not sure what's
going on, but I have a... I have a bad feeling
about what's going on. And then the more I dug
into it, the more I was like, holy shit, we've
got a real problem here. And America's going
to fall. Without anyone knowing it had fallen,
that would be the problem. It could have fallen
and been unrepairable without anyone really being
aware of what had happened. Especially if you
didn't buy Twitter. Yes. Look, buying Twitter
was a huge pain in the ass. and made me a pincushion
of attacks. Like dab, dab, dab, dab, dab. Everybody
loved you before that. Well, some people still
love me. A lot of people loved you. A lot of
lefties loved you. I was a hero of the left,
it's fair to say. It was a thing. If you drove
a Tesla, it showed that you were environmentally
conscious and you were on the right side. Yeah.
Yeah. I mean, I'm still the same human. I didn't
have a brain transplant since three years ago.
Well, that's my favorite bumper sticker that
people put on Teslas now. I bought this before
Elon went crazy. I took a picture of one the
other day. Oh, you found this? Oh, yeah. I've
seen three or four of them. People that have
these bumper stickers on their car. It says,
I bought this before Elon went crazy. Because
when people were vandalizing Teslas. Yeah. The
most unhinged. There was an organized campaign
to literally burn down Teslas, and one of our
dealerships got shot up with a gun. They fired
bullets in a Tesla dealership. They were burning
down cars. It was crazy. But the bumper sticker
should read, there should be an addendum to the
bumper sticker. It's like, I bought this car
before Elon turned crazy. Actually, now I realize
he's not crazy. And I've seen the light. That'll
take some time. That'll take some time. People
don't want to admit that they've been tricked.
Yeah. I mean, there's that old saying where it's
like it's really easy to fool somebody, but it's
almost impossible to convince someone that they
were fooled. Yeah. It's much easier to fool them
than to convince them they've been fooled. People
cling to their ideas. Yes. Especially if they've
like publicly stated these things. They get very
embarrassed of being foolish. Yeah, people –
most of the time they double down. And they find
echo chambers. Yeah, yeah. But there's – the
thing is that – and I've seen more and more people
who were convinced of the sort of woke ideology
see the light. Yeah. So not everyone, but it's
more and more are seeing the light. And it tends
to happen like when something happens that really
directly affects you. Right. There was a friend
of mine who was living in the San Francisco Bay
Area and they tried to trans his daughter to
the point where the school sent the police to
his house to take his daughter away from him.
Now, that's going to radicalize you. Well, that's
going to shake you out of your blue structure.
So it was an activist at the school that was
trying to do this? Yeah, the school and the state
of California conspired to turn his daughter
against him and make her take life -altering
drugs that would have sterilized her and irreversible.
And how old was she? I think 14, something like
that. He managed to talk the police out of taking
his daughter away from him that day. And that
night he got on a plane to Texas. Wow. And a
year after just being in a school in like greater
Austin area, she went back to normal. Meaning
like it wasn't real. Right. Well, people are
being much more open to that now. I mean Wall
Street Journal yesterday had that opinion piece.
that this whole trans thing, there's a lot of
evidence, is a social contagion. Absolutely.
And Colin Wright wrote that, and then he's getting
death threats now, of course, and on Blue Sky,
there's people talking about exterminating him,
which is one thing that you are allowed to say
on Blue Sky, apparently. You're allowed to say
horrible things about people who say... possibly
truthful things about this whole social contagion.
Cause that's what, when you get nine kids that
are in a friend group and they all decide to
turn trans together, something's wrong. That's
not statistically feasible. You can convince
kids to do anything. You can convince kids to
be a suicide bomber. Right. Which is why they
do, in some countries, why they choose children
to do that. Yes. You can train kids to be suicide
bombers. And if you can train kids to be suicide
bombers, you can convince them of anything. Yeah,
especially with enough positive enforcement and
cultural enforcement. And the idea that that's
not the case. Kids are malleable. The minds of
youth are easily corrupted. You're also seeing
a lot of pushback from gay and lesbian people
that are saying like, hey, if someone did this
to me. So stop including me. Yeah, exactly. The
LGBT, you know, it's like, wait a second. Why
are we being included all the time in this situation?
Exactly. Exactly. Especially when. My friend
Tim Dillons talked about this. It's really homophobic
because you're taking these gay kids and you're
telling them, hey, you're not gay. You're actually
a girl. Go make it so that you can never have
an orgasm again and you'll be happy. It's fucking
crazy. Permanent mutilation, permanent castration
of kids. I think we should look at anyone who
permanently castrates a kid as like, Right up
there with Yosef Mengele. Yeah. I mean, they're
mutilating children. Yeah. Yeah. And it's thought
of as being kind. And would you rather have a
live daughter or a dead son? That's the line
they use. Yeah. Which is not supported by any
data. No. It's all bullshit. In fact, the probability
of suicide increases. Right. This is important
maybe for the audience to know. The probability
of suicide. increases if you trans a kid, not
decreases. By some accounts, it triples. So that
is an evil lie. And it's a lie that is supposedly
compassionate. Imagine you've twisted reality
to the point where confusing a child that's not
even legally allowed to get a fucking tattoo.
Yeah. Right? Because you think that you could
make a mistake with a tattoo. Exactly. A totally
removable thing. Right. If I wanted to tomorrow,
I could go to a doctor and they could laser off
every tattoo that I have on me. Right. Okay.
No harm, no foul. Yeah. You get sterilized. Like,
that's it forever. Forever. Yes. They'll castrate
you. You no longer have testicles. Yes. That's
not coming back. You have a hole where your penis
used to be. Yes. And this is compassionate. And
this is preventing you from - Actually, a lot
of kids die. with these sex change operations.
They die, the number of deaths on the operating
table, people don't hear about those. A lot of
kids, because it's, we don't really actually
have the technology to make this work. So a bunch
of the times the kids just die in the sex change
operations. Jesus Christ. Yeah, it's demented,
which it should be viewed as like, you know,
like evil Nazi. Doctor stuff, basically. Like
real Nazi, not the bullshit fake Nazi stuff.
Crazy that even pushing back against something
that seems like fundamentally, logically, very
easy to argue, the old Twitter would ban you
forever. Yes. That's how crazy a social contagion
can get, when it completely defies logic, victimizes
children, does something that makes no sense,
not supported by data, all connected to this
ideology that trans is good, we've got to save
trans kids, protect trans kids. Yeah, and what
I want to emphasize is that the save trans kids
thing is a lie. If you castrate kids and trans
them, the probability of suicide... it does not
decrease. It substantially increases. The studies
have done that I've seen the risk of suicide
triples if you trans kids. So you're not saving
them, you're killing them. Moreover, during the
sex change operation, there are many deaths that
occur during the sex change operation. Jesus
Christ. It's just crazy that this is a real issue.
Yeah. It's a nightmare fever dream, and people
are finally waking up from it. Now, when you
started getting into the Doge stuff and started
finding how much money is being shuffled around
and moved around to NGOs and how much money is
involved and just totally untraceable funds,
this is, again, something like two years plus
ago. You weren't aware of it all? No, I was aware
of it. I just didn't realize how big it was.
Just how much waste and fraud there is in the
government is truly vast. In fact, the government
didn't even know, nor did they care. That's crazy.
Yeah. I mean, just like some of the very basic
stuff that Doge did. will have lasting effects.
And some of these things, they're so elementary,
you can't believe it. So the Doge team got most
of the main payments computers to require the
congressional appropriation code. So when a payment
is made, you have to actually enter the congressional
appropriation code. That used to be optional
and often would be just left blank. So the money
would just go out, but it wasn't even tied to
a congressional appropriation. Then the Doge
team also made the comment field for the payment
mandatory. So you have to say something. We're
not saying that what is said, like you can say
anything. Your cat could run across the keyboard.
You could go QWERTY ASDF. But you have to say
something above nothing. Because what we found
was that there were tens of billions, maybe hundreds
of billions of dollars that were zombie payments.
So somebody had approved a payment, somebody
in the government approved a payment, some recurring
payment, and they retired or died or changed
jobs, and no one turned the money off. So the
money would just keep going out. And it's a pretty
rare - Go where? To a company or an individual.
And it's a pretty rare company or individual
who will complain that they're getting money
that they should not get. And a bunch of the
money was just going to the – were transfer payments
to the states. So these are automatic payments.
Yeah, just automatic payments. No accounting
for them at all. Imagine like there's an automatic
debit of your credit card and you never look
at the statement. Right. So it's just money going
out. That's why I call them zombie payments.
There might have been legitimate at one point,
but the person who approved that recurring payment
changed jobs, died, retired, or whatever, and
no one ever turned the money off. And my guess
is that's probably at least $100 billion a year,
maybe $200. And going where? I mean, there are
millions of these payments. Millions? Yes, yes.
Millions of payments that are going to who knows
where? Yes. In a bunch of cases, there are fraud
rings that operate, professional fraud rings
that operate to exploit the system. They figure
out some security hole in the system and they
just do professional fraud. And that's where
we found, for example, people who were... 300
years old in the Social Security Administration
database. Now, I thought that this was a mistake
of not registering their deaths, that people
were born a long time ago, and it had defaulted
to a certain number, and so that after time,
those people were still in the system. It was
just an error of the way the accounting was done.
Yeah. That's not true. So there's – or at least
one of two things must be true. There's a typo
or some mistake in the computer or it's fraudulent.
But we don't have any 300 -year -old vampires
living in America. Allegedly. Allegedly. And
we don't have people in some cases who are receiving
payments who are born in the future. Born in
the future? Born in the future. Really? Yes.
The people receiving payments whose birth date
was like 2100 and something. Like next century.
Is there a task force? We know that one of two
things must be true. That either there's a mistake
in the computer or it's fraud. But if you have
someone's birth date that's either in the future
or... where they are older than the oldest living
American because the oldest living American is
114 years old. So if they're more than 114 years
old, there is either a mistake and someone should
call them and say, I think we have your birthday
wrong because it says you were born in 1786.
And that was before there was really an America.
It was like... You know, that's kind of early.
You know, we're still fighting England type of
thing. You know, it's like this person either
needs to be in the Guinness Book of World Records
or they're not alive. But still, at the end of
the day, money is going towards that account
that's connected to this person that is either
non -existent or dead. Yeah, so there was like,
I think, something like, I don't know, 20 million.
people in the Social Security Administration
database that could not possibly be alive. Based
on their birth date, they could not possibly
be alive. And then to be clear, 20 million people
that were receiving funds? Most of them were
not receiving funds. Some of them were receiving
funds. Most were not receiving funds. But so
let me tell you how the scam works. It's a bank
shot. So, the Social Security Administration
database is used as the source of truth by all
the other databases that the government uses.
So, even if they stop the payments on the Social
Security Administration database, like unemployment
insurance, small business administration, student
loans, all check the Social Security Administration
database to say, is this a legitimate, alive
person? And the social security database will
say, yes, this person is still alive, even though
they're 200 years old. But forget to mention
that they're 200 years old. It just says, it
just returns, when the computer is queries, it
says, yes, this person is alive. And so then
they're able to exploit the entire rest of the
government ecosystem. So fake – then you get
fake student loans. Then you get fake unemployment
insurance. Then you get fake medical payments.
And this doesn't have to be tied to an individual
where there's an address where you can check
on this person? No. If you just did any check
at all, you would stop this. So that's – And
how much money do you think is being – Any check,
like anything at all that would stop the fraud,
like any effort at all. Yeah. So there's multiple
layers. The Social Security number verifies that
this is a real person. Right. And then the other
systems check up on – They can exploit every
other government payment and every other government
payment system. Small business administration,
student loans, Medicaid, Medicare, every other
government payment, of which there are many.
There are actually hundreds of government payment
systems. It can all be exploited so long as Social
Security database says this person is alive.
That's the nature of the scam. It's a bank shot.
So then the rebuttal from the Dems is like, oh,
well, the vast majority of the people who are
marked as alive in the Social Security Administration
weren't receiving Social Security Administration
payments. That is true. What they forgot to mention
is they're getting fraudulent payments from every
other government program. And that's why the
Dems were so opposed to turning off, to declaring
someone dead who was dead. Because it would stop
the entire other – all the other fraud from happening.
And so – but all this – is it trackable? Like
all this other fraud, if they wanted to, they
could chase it all down. Yeah, it's not even
hard. And yet they're opposing chasing it all
down. They're opposing chasing it all down because
it turns off the money magnet for the illegals.
Wow. Because it's very logical to – like I'm
saying the most – common sense things possible.
If someone's got a birthday in Social Security
that is an impossible birthday, meaning they
are older than the oldest living American or
born in the future, then you should call them
and say, excuse me, we seem to have your birthday
wrong because it says that you're 200 years old.
That's all you need to do. And then you would
remove them from the Social Security database
and make that number no longer available for
all those other government payments. Exactly.
Wow. And how much money are we talking? It's
hundreds of billions of dollars. And this is
all traceable. Like, you could hunt all this
down. Like, you don't need to be Sherlock Holmes
here, is what I'm saying. We don't need to call
Sherlock Holmes for this one. You just need to
call the person. And say, excuse me, we must
have your birthday wrong because it says you're
200 years old or were born in the future. So
could you tell us what your birthday is? That's
what we need to do. It's that simple. But all
these other government payments that are available
that are connected to this Social Security number,
it seems like if you just chased that all down,
you would find the widespread fraud. You would
find where it's going. Yes. But the root of the
problem is the Social Security Administration
database because the Social Security number in
the United States is used as a de facto national
ID number. That's why the bank always asks for
your Social Security. Any financial institution
will ask for your Social Security number. It
sounds so insane that this isn't chased down.
Yeah, I agree. In and of itself, that's such
mishandling. Yes. It's mind -blowing. So, yeah,
it's crazy. Well, you were very reluctant last
time you were here to talk about the extent of
some of the fraud. Because you're like... They
could kill me because this is kind of – Oh, yeah.
What I'm saying is that like if you create –
like to be pragmatic and realistic. you actually
can't manage to zero fraud. You can manage to
low fraud number, but not to zero fraud. If you
manage to zero fraud, you're going to push so
many people over the edge who are receiving fraudulent
payments that the number of inbound homicidal
maniacs will be really hard to overcome. So I'm
actually taking, I think, quite a reasonable
position, which is that we should simply reduce
the amount of fraud, which I think is not an
extremist position. And we should aspire to have
less fraud over time. Not that we should be ultra
draconian and eliminate every last scrap of fraud,
which I guess would be nice to have. But we don't
even need to go that extreme. I'm saying we should
just stop the blatant, large -scale, super obvious
fraud. I think that's a reasonable position.
It's a very reasonable position. What was the
most shocking pushback that you got when you
started implementing Doge, when you started investigating
into where money was going? Well, I guess this
is – I should have anticipated this. But while
most of the fraudulent government payments to
– especially to the NGOs go to the Democrats,
most of it, like, I don't know, for argument's
sake, let's say 80%. maybe 90%, 10 % to 20 %
of it does go to Republicans. And so when we
turn off funding to a fraudulent NGO, we'd get
complaints from whatever, the 10 % of Republicans
who are receiving the money. And they would very
loudly complain. Because the honest answer is
the Republicans are partly... They're receiving
some of the fraud, too. They're getting a big.
Jesus. Yeah. I want to be clear. It's not like
the Republican Party is some ultra pure paragon
of virtue. No. Okay. Well, you see that with
the congressional insider training. It's across
the board. Yeah. It's left and right. I mean,
the whole uniparty criticism has some validity
to it. So – and it's – like if you turn off fraudulent
payments, it's not like – like I said, it's not
like 100 percent of those payments were going
to Democrats. A small percentage were also going
to Republicans. Those Republicans complained
very loudly. And that's – so there was a lot
of pushback on the Republican side when we started
cutting some of these funds. And I'll try telling
them, like, well, you know, 90 % of the money
is going to your opponents. But they still, even
if they're getting 10 % of the money. They want
their peace. Yeah, they want their peace. And
they've been getting that peace for a long time.
Yes. This is why, like, you know, politics is
like. It's dirty business. Yeah, because that's
like saying if you like sausages and respect
the law, do not watch either of them being made.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Wow. Well, that's not even
true because I've made sausage before. Yeah,
yeah. It's not that big a deal. You add fat and
spices and casing, run it through the machine.
Not that big a deal. Yeah. But, yeah, I mean
I think the stuff I'm saying here is not – like
if you stand back and think about it for a second,
like, oh, yeah, that makes sense. It's not like
one political party is going to be pure devil
or pure angel. I think there's much more corruption
on the Democrat side, but there's not – There's
still some corruption on the Republican side.
How did it happen that the majority of the corruption
wound up being on the Democrat side? Well, because
the transfer payments, especially to illegals,
are very much on the Democrat side. So that's
the root of it all is the illegal situation.
Yes. Or a focal point. Yes. It would also be
accurate to say that while... Obviously, not
everyone who is a Democrat is a criminal. Almost
everyone who is a criminal is a Democrat. Because
the Democrats are the soft -run crime party.
So if you're a criminal, who are you going to
vote for? Right. The soft -run crime party. Did
you think you were going to be able to get more
done than you were? We did get a lot done. And
Doge is still happening, by the way. Doge is
still underway. They're still wasting forward
being cut by the Doge team. So it hasn't stopped.
It's less publicized. It's less publicized. And
they don't have like a clear person to attack
anymore. Well, it seems like once you step away.
They're basically, they apply immense pressure.
to me to, just to stop it. So then I'm like,
the best thing for me is to just, you know, cut
out of this. And in any case, as a special government
employee, I could only be there for like 120
days anyway, something like that. So whatever
the law says. So I could, I was necessarily could
only be there for four months as a special government
employee. So, um, um, but, uh, yeah, I mean,
I mean, you turn off the money spigot to, to
fraudsters, they get very upset to say the least.
Um, And my death threat level went ballistic.
It was like a rocket going to orbit. Yeah. But
now that I'm not in D .C., I guess they don't
really have a person to attack anymore. Well,
the rhetoric about you has calmed down significantly.
Yeah. It was disturbing. It was disturbing to
watch. It was like, this is crazy. And to watch
these politicians engage in it and all these
people just framing you as this monster. I was
like, this is so weird. This is what happens
when you uncover fraud. Yes. The whole machine
turns on you. And if it wasn't for a person like
you who owns a platform and has an enormous amount
of money, it could have destroyed you. Yeah.
And that was the goal. The goal was to destroy
me, absolutely. Because you were getting in the
way of this amazing graft. This gigantic fraud
machine. Yeah. Like I said, I think Doge Team
has done a lot of good work. In terms of fraud
and waste prevented, my guess is it's probably
on the order of $200 or $300 billion a year.
So it's pretty good. What do you think could
have been done if you just had like full reign
and total cooperation? How much do you think
you could have saved? I mean what level of power
are we assuming here? Godlike. Oh, yeah, I could
probably cut the federal budget in half and get
more done. That is so crazy. It is so crazy.
Yeah, get more done and federal budget in half.
It's that widespread. Well, I mean, a whole bunch
of government departments simply shouldn't exist,
in my opinion. Like examples. Well, the Department
of Education, which was created recently under
Jimmy Carter, Our educational results have gone
downhill ever since it was created. So if you
create a department and the result of creating
that department is a massive decline in educational
results and it's the problem of education, you're
better off not having it because literally we
did better before there was one than after. When
you let the states run it. Yes. Yeah. Because
at least the states can compete with one another.
But the problem is like you hear like counting
department education. Our kids need education.
Yeah, they do. But this is a new department that
didn't even exist until the late 70s. And ever
since that department was created, the results,
education results have declined. And so why would
you have an institution continue that has made
education worse? It doesn't make sense. They
killed it though, right? No, there's still a
little bit, unfortunately. But they were trying
to kill it. It has been substantially reduced.
Okay. What other organizations? What other departments?
Well, I mean, I'm a small government guy. So,
you know, when the country was created, we just
had the Department of State, Department of War,
you know, and sort of the Department of Justice.
We had an attorney general. and the Treasury
Department. I don't know why you need more than
that. So what other departments specifically
do you think are just completely ineffective?
Well, I mean, here it's like a question, it's
a sort of philosophical question of how much
government do you think there should be? Right.
In my opinion, there should be... The least amount
of government. I've heard the most bizarre argument
against this is that you're cutting jobs and
you're going to leave people jobless. But their
jobs are useless. Yeah, paying people to do nothing
doesn't make sense. There's a great story about
Milton Friedman, who is awesome. Generally, whatever
Milton Friedman said is... People should do that
thing. I'm not sure if it's apocryphal or not,
but someone complained to him. He observed, I
think, people that were digging ditches with
shovels. And he said, well, allegedly, Freeman
said, well, I think you should use excavating
equipment instead of shovels, and you could get
it done with... far fewer people. And then someone
said, but then we're going to lose a lot of jobs.
Well, then Friedman said, well, in that case,
why don't you have them use teaspoons? Just dig
ditches with teaspoons. Think of all the jobs
you'll create. It's bullshit. Basically, you
just want people to work on things that are productive.
You want people to work on... On building things,
on building, you know, providing products and
services that people find valuable, like, you
know, making food, being, you know, being a farmer
or a plumber or electrician or just anyone who's
a builder or providing useful services. And that's
what you want people to be doing, not fake government
jobs that don't add any value or may subtract
value. But it's also like – to illustrate the
absurdity of also how is the economy measured.
Like the way economists measure the economy is
nonsensical because they'll measure any job no
matter – even if that job is a dumb job that
has no point and is even counterproductive. So
like the joke is like there's two economists
going on a hike in the woods. They come across
a pile of shit. And one economist says to the
other, I'll pay you $100 to eat that shit. The
economist eats the shit, gets the $100, and they
keep walking. Then they come across another pile
of shit, and the other economist says, now I'll
pay you $100 to eat the pile of shit. So he pays
the other economist $100 to eat the pile of shit.
Then they say, look, wait a second. We both just
ate a pile of shit and we're no – we don't have
any more extra money. Like we both – you just
gave the $100 back to me and we both ate a pile
of shit. This doesn't make any sense. And they
said, no, no, but think of the economy because
that's $200 in the economy. That basically –
eating shit would count as a job. This is to
illustrate the absurdity of economics. One of
the things you said when you stepped away is
that you're kind of done and that it's unfixable.
Or under its current form, the way people are
approaching it. You can make it directionally
better, but ultimately you can't fully fix the
system. So like it is – it would be accurate
to say that even – like unless you go like super
draconian like Genghis Khan level on cutting
waste and fraud, which you can't really do in
a democratic country. an aspirationally democratic
country, then there's no way to solve the debt
crisis. So we've got national debt that's just
insane where the debt payments, the interest
payments on the debt exceed our entire military
budget. I mean, that was one of the wake -up
calls for me. I was like, wait a second. The
interest on national debt is bigger than the
entire military budget and growing? This is crazy.
So even if you implement all these savings, you're
only delaying the day of reckoning for when America
goes bankrupt. Unless you go full Genghis Khan,
which you can't really do. So I came to the conclusion
that the only way that... The only way to get
us out of the debt crisis and to prevent America
from going bankrupt is AI and robotics. So we
need to grow the economy at a rate that allows
us to pay off our debt. And I guess people just
generally don't appreciate the degree to which...
you know, the government overspending is a problem.
But even like the Social Security website, this
is under the Biden administration. On the website,
it would say like, based on current demographic
trends and... and how much money Social Security
is bringing in versus how many Social Security
recipients there are because we have an aging
population, relatively speaking, the average
age is increasing, Social Security will not be
able to maintain its full payments, I think,
by 2032. So Social Security will have to start
reducing the amount of money that's been paid
to people in about seven years. And so the only
way to fix that, robotics, manufacturing, raise
GDP. You've got to basically massively increase
the economic output, which is, and the only way
to do that is AI and robotics. So basically we're
going bankrupt without AI and robotics, even
with a bunch of savings. The savings, like reducing
waste and forward can. give us a longer runway
but it cannot ultimately pay off our national
debt so what do you think the solution is to
the jobs that are going to be lost because of
ai and robotics the jobs due to automation the
jobs due to no longer do we need human beings
to do these jobs because ai is doing them do
you think it's going to be some sort of a universal
basic income thing do you think there's going
to be some other kind of solution that has to
be implemented Because a lot of people are going
to be out of work, right? I think there will
be actually a high demand for jobs, but not necessarily
the same jobs. So, I mean, this is actually,
this process has been happening throughout modern
history. I mean, there used to be, like doing
calculations manually with a pencil and paper
used to be a job. So they used to have like buildings
full of people called computers where the banks
would like – all you do all day is you do calculations
because they didn't have computers. They didn't
have digital computers that people do. Yeah.
Well, it was just people would just like add
and subtract stuff on a piece of paper and that
would be how banks would do financial processing.
And you'd have to literally go over their equations
to make sure the books are balanced. Yeah, and
most times it's just simple math. Like in a world
before computers, how did you calculate, how
did you do transactions? You had to do them by
hand. So then when computers were introduced,
the job of doing bank calculations no longer
existed. So people had to go do something else.
And that's what's going to happen, that's what
is happening at an accelerated rate. due to AI
and then robotics. That's the issue, though,
right? The accelerated rate, because it's going
to be... It's the accelerated... It's just happening.
Like I said, AI is the supersonic tsunami. So
that's what I call it, supersonic tsunami. So...
It's like, what other jobs will be available
that aren't available now because of AI? Well,
AI... is really still digital. Ultimately, AI
can improve the productivity of humans who build
things with their hands or do things with their
hands, like literally welding, electrical work,
plumbing, anything that's physically moving atoms,
like cooking food or farming. Like anything that's
physical. those jobs will exist for a much longer
time. But anything that is digital, which is
like just someone at a computer doing something,
AI is going to take over those jobs like lightning.
Coding, anything along those lines. It's going
to take over those jobs like lightning. Just
like digital computers took over the job of people
doing manual calculations, but much faster. So
what happens to all those people? What kind of
numbers are we talking about? You're going to
lose most drivers, right? Commercial drivers,
you're going to have automated vehicles, AI -controlled
systems, just like there's certain ports in China
and I think in Singapore where everything's completely
automated. Yeah, mostly. Yeah. So you're going
to lose a lot of those jobs, longshoremen jobs,
trucking, commercial drivers. Yeah. I mean, we
actually do have a shortage of truck drivers,
but there's actually – Well, that's why California
has hired so many illegals to do it. Have you
seen those numbers? Yeah. I mean, the problem
is, like, when people don't know how to drive
a semi -truck, which is actually a hard thing
to do, then they crash and kill people. Yeah.
A friend of mine's wife was killed by an illegal
driving a truck, and she was just out biking.
And there was an illegal who didn't know how
to drive the truck or something, and he ran her
over. So, I mean, the thing is, like, for something,
like, you can't let people drive, you know, sort
of an 80 ,000 pound semi if they don't know how
to do it. But in California, they're just letting
people do it. Because they need people to do
it. Well, they also need, they want the boats
and that kind of thing. But, yeah, like, cars
are... Cars are going to be autonomous. But there's
just so many desk jobs where really what people
are doing is they're processing email or they're
answering the phone. And just anything that isn't
moving atoms, like anything that is not doing
physical work, that will obviously be the first
thing. Those jobs will be and are being eliminated
by AI at a very rapid pace. And ultimately, working
will be optional because you'll have robots plus
AI and we'll have, in a benign scenario, universal
high income, not just universal basic income,
universal high income, meaning anyone can have
any products or services that they want. But
there will be a lot of trauma and disruption
along the way. So you anticipate a basic income
that the economy will boost to such an extent
that a high income would be available to almost
everybody. So we'd essentially eliminate poverty.
In the benign scenario, yes. There's multiple
scenarios. There are multiple scenarios. There's
a lot of ways this movie can end. The reason
I'm so concerned about AI safety is that one
of the possibilities is the Terminator scenario.
It's not 0%. So that's why it's like I'm like
really banging the drum on AI needs to be maximally
truth -seeking. Like don't force AI to believe
a lie like, for example, that founding fathers
were actually a group of diverse women or that
misgendering is worse than nuclear war. Because
if that's the case and then you get the robots
and the AI becomes omnipotent. it can enforce
that outcome. And then, unless you're a diverse
woman, you're out of the picture, so we're toast.
Or you might wake up as a diverse woman one day.
The AI has adjusted the picture, and we are now
a diverse woman. Everyone's a diverse woman.
So that would be the worst possible situation.
So what would be the steps that we would have
to take in order to implement the benign solution?
Where it's universal high income, like best case
scenario, this is the path forward to universal
high income for essentially every single citizen
that the economy gets boosted by AI and robotics
to such an extent that no one ever has to work
again. And what about meaning for those people,
which gets really weird? Yeah. I don't know how
to answer the question about meaning. That's
an individual problem, right? But it's going
to be an individual problem for millions of people.
Yeah. Well, I mean, I guess I'm like fought against
saying like, you know, I've been a voice saying
like, hey, we need to slow down AI. We need to
slow down all these things. And we need to. not
have a crazy AI race. I've been saying that for
a long time, for 20 plus years. But then I came
to realize that really there's two choices here,
either be a spectator or a participant. And if
I'm a spectator, I can't really influence the
direction of AI. But if I'm a participant, I
can try to influence the direction of AI and
have a maximally truth -seeking AI with good
values that loves humanity. And that's what we're
trying to create with Grok at XAI. And, you know,
the research is, I think, bearing this out. Like
I said, when they compared, like, how do AIs
value the weight of a human life, Grok was the
only one, the only one of the AIs that weighted
human life equally. And didn't say, like, a white
guy's worth one twentieth of a black woman's
life. Literally, that's what... the calculation
they came up with. So I'm like, this is very
alarming. We've got to watch this stuff. So this
is one of the things that has to happen in order
to reach this benign solution. Yeah. Best movie
ending. You want a curious, truth -seeking AI.
And I think a curious, truth -seeking AI will
want to foster humanity because... We're much
more interesting than a bunch of rocks. I love
Mars, but Mars is kind of boring. It's just a
bunch of red rocks. There's some cool stuff.
It's got a tall mountain. It's got the biggest
ravine and the tallest mountain. But there's
no animals or plants, and there's no people.
So humanity is just much more interesting if
you're a curious, truth -seeking AI than not
humanity. It's just much more interesting. I
mean, as humans, we could go, for example, and
eliminate all chimps. If we put our minds to
it, we could go out and we could annihilate all
chimps and all gorillas, but we don't. There
has been encroachment on their environment, but
we actually try to preserve the chimp and gorilla
habitats. And I think in a good scenario, AI
would do the same with humans. It would actually
foster human civilization and care about human
happiness. So this is a thing to try to achieve,
I think. But what does the landscape look like
if you have Grok competing with OpenAI, competing
with all these different – like how does it work?
Like what – if you have AIs that have been captured
by ideologies that are side -by -side competing
with Grok, like how do we – So this is one of
the reasons why you felt like it's important
to not just be an observer but participate and
then have Grok be more successful and more potent
than these other applications. Yes. As long as
there's at least one AI that is maximally truth
-seeking, curious, and, for example, weighs all
human lives equally, does not favor one race
or gender, then – And people are able to look
at Grok at XAI and compare that and say, wait
a second, why are all these other AIs being basically
sexist and racist? And then that causes some
embarrassment for the other AIs. And then they
improve. They tend to improve. Just in the same
way that acquiring Twitter. And allowing the
truth to be told and not suppressing the truth
forced the other social media companies to be
more truthful. In the same way, having Grok be
a maximally truth -seeking, curious AI will force
the other AI companies to also be more truth
-seeking and fair. Like the socialists and the
Marxists are in opposition to a lot of your ideas.
But if this gets implemented and you really can
achieve universal high income, that's the greatest
socialist solution of all time. Like literally
no one will have to work. Correct. Like I said,
so there is a benign scenario here, which I think
probably people will be happy with as long as
we achieve it, which is sustainable abundance.
If you ask people, what's the future that you
want? I think a future where we haven't destroyed
nature. We have the national parks. We have the
Amazon rainforest. It's still there. We haven't
paved the rainforest. The natural beauty is still
there, but people have... Nonetheless, everyone
has abundance. Everyone has excellent medical
care. Everyone has whatever goods and services
they want. It kind of sounds like heaven. It
is like the ideal socialist utopia. And this
idea that the only thing you should be doing
with your time is working in order to pay your
bills and feed yourself sounds kind of archaic
considering the kind of technology that's at
play. A world where that's not your concern at
all anymore. Everybody has money for food. Everybody
has abundance. Everybody has electronics in their
home. Everybody essentially has a high income.
Now you can kind of do whatever you want. And
your day can now be exploring your interests,
doing things that you actually enjoy doing. Your
purpose. just has to shift instead of, you know,
I'm a hard worker and this is what I do. And
that's how I, that's how I define myself. Don't
now you can fucking golf all day. You know, you
could, whatever it is that you enjoy doing can
now be your main pursuit. Yeah. Well, that sounds
crazy. Good. Yeah. That's, that's, that's, that's,
that's the benign scenario that we should be
ending to the movie is actually pretty good.
Yes. Um, I think there is still this question
of meaning, of making sure people don't lose
meaning. So hopefully they can find meaning in
ways that's not derived from their work. And
purpose. Purpose for things that you—find things
that you do that you enjoy. But there's a lot
of people that are independently wealthy that
spend most of their time doing something they
enjoy. Right. And that could be the majority
of people. Pretty much everyone. But we'd have
to rewire how people approach life. Which seems
to be acceptable. Because you're not asking them
to be enslaved. You're exactly asking them the
opposite. Like, no longer be burdened by financial
worries. Now, go do what you like. Yes. Go fucking
test pizza. Do whatever you want. Pretty much.
So that's... That's probably the best case outcome.
That sounds like the best case outcome period
for the future. If you're looking at how much
people have struggled just to feed themselves
all throughout history, food, shelter, safety,
if all of that stuff can be fixed, how much would
you solve a lot of the crime if there was a universal
high income? Just think of that. How much of
crime is financially motivated? The greater percentage
of people that are committing crimes live in
poor, disenfranchised neighborhoods. So if there's
no such thing anymore, if you really can achieve
universal high income, it sounds like a utopian.
Yes. I think some people may commit crime because
they like committing crime. Oh, sure. Some amount
of that is they just enjoy it. There's a lot
of wild people out there. Yeah. Yeah. And obviously
they've... become 40 years old living a life
like that. Now, all of a sudden, universal high
income is not going to completely stop their
instincts. Yeah. I mean, I guess if you want
to have, like, say, read a science fiction book
or some books that are probably inaccurate or
the least inaccurate version of the future, I'd
say I'd recommend the Ian Banks books, the culture
books. It's not actually a series. It's like
sci -fi books about the future. They're generally
called the culture books. Ian Banks' culture
books. It's worth reading those. When did he
write these? He started writing them in the 70s.
And I think he, the last one, I think he was,
I think it was written just like around, I don't
know, maybe 2010 or something. I'm not sure exactly.
Yeah, yeah. Scottish author, Ian Banks. Yeah.
From 87 to 2012. Yeah. Interesting. But he wrote
his first book, Consider Fleavers. I think he
started writing that in the 70s. These books
are incredible, by the way. Incredible books.
4 .6 stars on Amazon. Interesting. So this gives
me hope. Yeah, yeah, yeah. This is the first
time I've ever thought about it this way. Yeah.
I often ask people, what is the future that you
want? And they have to think about it for a second
because they're usually tied up in whatever their
daily struggles are. But you say, what is the
future that you want? And generally, sustainable
abundance. Or at least say, what about a future
where there's sustainable abundance? Like, oh
yeah, that's a pretty good future. And that future
is attainable with AI and robotics. But like
I said, not every path is a good path. But I
think if we push it in the direction of maximally
truth -seeking and curious, then I think AI will
want to take care of humanity and foster. foster
humanity. Because we're interesting. And if it
hasn't been programmed to think that all straight
white males should die, which Gemini was basically
programmed to do at least first, they seem to
have fixed that, hopefully fixed it. But don't
you think culturally we're getting away from
that mindset and that people are realizing how
preposterous that all is? We are getting away
from it. So we are getting... At least it knows...
AI mostly knows to hide things. But like I said,
there is that... I think I still have that as...
I had that as my pinned post on X, which was
like, hey, wait a second, guys. We still have
every AI except Grok is saying that basically
straight white males should die. And this is
a problem and we should fix it. But simply me
saying that tends to generally result in them
like, ooh, that is kind of bad. Maybe we should
not have all straight white males die. I think
they would say also all straight Asian males
should also die as well. They don't like – generally
the AI and the media – Which back in the day,
the media was racist against black people and
sexist against women back in the day. Now it
is racist against white people and Asians and
sexist against men. They just like being racist
and sexist. I think they just want to change
the target. But really, they just shouldn't be.
racist and sexist at all. Yeah, ideally that
would be nice. That would be nice. And it's kind
of crazy that we were kind of moving in that
general direction until around 2012. And then
everything ramped up online and everybody was
accused of being a Nazi and everybody was transphobic
and racist and sexist and homophobic and everything
got exaggerated to the point where it was this
wild witch hunt where everyone was a Columbo
looking for racism. Yeah, yeah, totally. But
they were openly anti -white and often openly
anti -Asian. And then this new sentiment that
you cannot be racist against white people because
racism is power and influence. Okay. No, it's
not. Yeah, racism is racism in the absolute.
So, you know, and there just needs to be consistency.
So if it's okay to have, let's say, black or
asian or indian or a pride it should be okay
to have white pride too yeah um so that's just
a that's just a consistency question um so uh
you know um if it's okay to be proud of one religion
it should be okay to be proud of i guess all
religions provided they're that they're they're
not like uh oppressive yeah or or don't like
as long as part of that religion is not like
exterminating People who are not in that religion.
Right. So it's really just like a consistency
bias. Or just like ensuring consistency to eliminate
bias. So if it is possible to be racist against
one race, it is possible to be racist against
any race. Of course, logically. Yes. And arguing
against that, that's when you know you're captured.
It's a logical inconsistency that makes AIs go
insane. And people. And people go insane, yes.
You can't simultaneously say that there's systemic
racist oppression, but also that racists don't
exist. That race is a social construct. Like,
which is it, you know? You also can't say that,
you know, anyone who steps foot in America is
automatically an American, except for the people
that originally came here. Exactly, exactly.
Except for the colonizers. Yeah, except for the
evil colonizers who came here. Right. So which
one is it? Like, if as soon as you step foot
in a place, you are that. you are just as American
as everyone else, then that would have applied.
If you apply that consistently, then the original
white settlers were also just as American as
everyone else. Yeah, logically. Logically. One
more thing that I have to talk to you about before
you leave is the rescuing of the people from
the space station, which we talked about. You
were planning it the last time you were here.
The lack of coverage that that got in mainstream
media was one of the most shocking things. Yeah,
they totally memory hold that thing. Wild. Yes.
It's like it didn't exist. Those people would
be dead. They'd be stuck up there. Well, they'd
probably still be alive, but they'd be having
bone density issues because of prolonged exposure
to zero gravity. Well, they were already up there
for like eight months, right? Yeah. Which is
an insanely long time. It takes forever to recover
just from that. Yeah, they're only supposed to
be at the space station for three to six months,
maximum. One of the things you told me that was
so crazy was that you could have gotten them
sooner. Yeah, but for political reasons. They
did not want SpaceX or me to be associated with
returning the astronauts before the election.
That is... So wild that that's a fact. We absolutely
could have done it. But even though you did do
it and you did it after the election, it received
almost no media coverage anyway. Yes, because
the media, which is essentially a far -left propaganda,
the legacy mainstream media is a far -left propaganda
machine. And so anything, any story that is positive
about someone who is not part of the sort of
far -left tribe will not. get any coverage. I
could save a busload of orphans and it wouldn't
get a single news story. It really is nuts. It
was nuts to watch because even though it was
discussed on podcasts and it was discussed on
X and it was discussed on social media, it still
was a blip in the news cycle. It was very quick.
It was in and out. And because it was a successful
launch and you did rescue those people and nobody
got hurt and there was nothing really, there
was no blood to talk about. Right. Just fucking
in and out. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And as you
saw firsthand with the Starship launch, Starship
is, you know, at least by some would consider
it to be like the most amazing engineering project
that's happening on Earth right now. outside
of maybe AI and robotics. But certainly in terms
of a spectacle to see, it is the most spectacular
thing that is happening on Earth right now is
the Starship launch program, which anyone can
go and see if they just go to South Texas. They
can just rent a hotel room at low cost in South
Padre Island or in Brownsville, and you can see
the launch. And you can drive right past the
factory because it's on a public highway. But
it gets no coverage. Or what coverage it does
get was like rocket blew up coverage. Right,
yeah. Oh, he's a fuckwit. The rocket blew up.
The Starship program is vastly, vastly more capable
than the entire Apollo moon program. Vastly more
capable. This is a spaceship that is designed
to make life multi -planetary, to carry millions
of people. across the heavens to another planet.
The Apollo program could only send astronauts
to the moon for a few hours at a time. The entire
Apollo program could only send astronauts to
visit the moon very briefly for a few hours and
then depart. The Starship program could create
an entire lunar base with a million people. The
magnitudes are very different magnitudes here.
So what was the political resistance? There's
basically no coverage of it. What I wanted to
ask you is like, so what were the conversations
leading up to the rescue? Like when you were
like, I can get them out way quicker. Yeah. Well,
I mean, you know, I raised this a few times,
but it was. I was told instructions came from
the White House that there should be no attempt
to rescue before the election. That should be
illegal. That really should be a horrendous miscarriage
of justice for those poor people that were stuck
on that. Yeah, it is crazy. Have you ever talked
to those folks afterwards? Did you have conversations
with them? Yeah, I mean they're not going to
say anything political. Did they at least say
thank you? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, that's nice.
Yeah, yeah, absolutely. But the instructions
came down from the White House. You cannot rescue
them because politically this is a bad hand of
cards. I mean they didn't say because politically
it's a bad hand of cards. They just said they
were not interested in any rescue operation before
the election. Yeah. What did that feel like?
I wasn't surprised. But it's crazy. Yeah. Because
Biden could have authorized it and they could
have said the Biden administration is helping
bring those people back, throw you a little funding,
give you some money to do it. The Biden administration,
they funded these people being returned. Yeah,
the Biden administration was not exactly my best
friend. That's what I heard. Especially after
I, you know. help Trump get elected, which, I
mean, some people still think, you know, Trump
is like the devil, basically. And, I mean, I
think Trump actually is not perfect, but he's
not evil. Trump is not evil. I spent a lot of
time with him, and he's, I mean, he's a product
of his time, but he is not evil. No, I don't
think he's evil either. But if you look at the
media coverage. The media treats him like he's
super evil, yeah. It's pretty shocking if you
look at the amount of negative coverage. Like
one of the things that I looked at the other
day was mainstream media coverage of you, Trump,
a bunch of different public figures, and then
Mamdani. It was like 96 % negative or something
crazy. And then Mamdani, which is like 95 % positive.
Right. I mean, Mamdani is a charismatic swindler.
I mean, you've got to hand it to him. He can
light up a stage, but he has just been a swindler
his entire life. And I think he's likely to win.
He's likely to be mayor of New York City. Very
likely. Yeah, very likely. I think Polymarket
has it at what? What is the 94 %? Yeah, that
sounds pretty likely. That's crazy. Like, I'm
not sure who the 6 % are, you know? So, yeah,
so that's... Well, it's also like, who's on the
other side? The fucking Guardian Angel guy with
the beret? And Andrew Cuomo, who doesn't even
have a party? Like, the Democrats don't even
want him. So you have those two options. And
then you have the young kids who are like, finally,
socialism. Yeah, they don't know what they're
talking about, obviously. So, you know, like
you just look at this, how many boats come from
Cuba to Florida? And how many boats, because,
you know, there's like a constant, I was thinking
like how many boats are accumulating on the shores
of Florida coming from Cuba? Right. There's a
whole bunch of free boats that you could, if
you want to, go take them back to Cuba. It's
pretty close. But for some reason, people don't
do that. Why are the boats only coming in this
direction? Well, who are the most rabid capitalists
in America? The fucking Cubans. Absolutely. Yeah.
They're like, we've seen how this story goes.
We do not want. Exactly. Fuck off. They don't
want to hear any bullshit. They don't want to
hear any socialism bullshit. They're like, no,
no, no. We know what this actually is. This isn't
just some fucking dream. Yeah. It's extreme government
oppression. That's what it is. It's a nightmare.
And like an obvious way you can tell which. Which
ideology is the bad one? Which ideology is building
a wall to keep people in and prevent them from
escaping? East Berlin built the wall, not West
Berlin. They built the wall because people were
trying to escape from communism to West Berlin.
But there wasn't anyone going from West Berlin
to East Berlin. That's why the communists had
to build a wall. To keep people from escaping.
They're going to have to build a wall around
New York City. Yeah. So it's kind of an obvious
tell that an ideology is problematic if that
ideology has to build a wall to keep people in
with machine guns. Yes. And shoot you if you
try to leave. Also, there's no examples of it
being successful ever. We're working out for
people. No, there's examples of a bunch of lies,
like North Korea, give this land to the state,
we'll be in control of food, no one goes hungry.
No, now no one can grow food but the government,
and we'll tell you exactly what you eat, and
you eat very little. Right. Yeah. When you say
Mamdani's a swindler, I know he has a bunch of
fake accents that he used to use. Yeah. But what
else has he done that makes him a swindler? I
mean, if you say to any audience whatever that
audience wants to hear, instead of having a consistent
message, I would say that that is a swindly thing
to do. But he is charismatic. Yeah, good -looking
guy, smart, charismatic. Yeah. Great on a microphone.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. And what the young people want
to see, you know? Like this ethnic guy who's
young and vibrant and has all these socialist
ideas and aligns with them. And, you know, they're
a bunch of broke dorks just out of college. Like,
yay, let's vote for this. And there's a lot of
them. And they're activated. They're motivated.
I guess we'll see what happens here. What do
you think happens if he wins? Because like 1
% of New York City is responsible for 50 % of
their tax base, which is kind of nuts. 50 % of
the tax revenue comes from 1 % of the population,
and those are the people that you're scaring
off. You know, you lose one half of 1%. I don't
know. Hopefully the stuff he's said, you know,
about government takeovers of like that all the
stores should be the government basically. Well,
I don't think he said that. I think he said they
want to do government supermarkets, some state
-run or city -run supermarkets. Yeah. Well, it
just – the government is the DMV at scale. So
you have to say like, do you want the DMV running
your supermarket? Right. Was your last experience
at the DMV amazing? And if it wasn't, you probably
don't want the government doing things. Imagine
if they were responsible for getting you blueberries.
Yeah. It's not going to be good. I mean, the
thing about communism is it was all bread lines
and bad shoes. Do you want ugly shoes and bread
lines? Because that's what communism gets you.
It's going to be interesting to see what happens
and whether or not they snap out of it and overcorrect
and go to some Rudy Giuliani type character next.
Because it's been a long time since there was
any sort of Republican leader there. We live
in the most interesting of times. Because we
face the, you know, simultaneously face civilizational
decline and incredible prosperity. And these
timelines are interwoven. So if Mamdani's policies
are put into place, especially at scale, it would
be a catastrophic decline in living standards.
Not just for the rich, but for everyone. As has
been the case with every socialist experiment.
But then, as you pointed out, the irony is that
the ultimate capitalist thing of AI and robotics
enabling prosperity for all. and abundance of
goods and services, actually the capitalist implementation
of AI and robotics, assuming it goes down the
good path, is actually what results in the communist
utopia. Because fate is an irony maximizer. Right,
and an actual socialism of maximum abundance,
of high -income people. Universal high income.
Yeah. The problem with communism is it's universal
low income. It's not that everyone gets elevated,
it's that everyone gets oppressed, except for
a very small minority of politicians who live
a life of luxury. That's what's happening every
time it's been done. But then the actual communist
utopia, if everyone gets anything they want,
will be achieved via capitalism. Because fate
is an irony maximizer. I feel like we should
probably end it on that. Is there anything else?
The most ironic outcome is the most likely, especially
if entertaining. Well, everything has been entertaining.
As long as the bad things aren't happening to
you, it's quite fascinating. And it's never a
boring moment. Yes. So there's – I do have a
theory of why – like if simulation theory is
true, then it is actually very likely that the
most interesting outcome is the most likely because
only the simulations that are interesting will
continue. The simulators will stop any simulations
that are boring. because they're not interesting.
But here's the question about the simulation
theory. Is the simulation run by anyone? Yes,
it would be run by someone. It would be run by...
Some force. In this reality that we live in,
we run simulations all the time. So when we try
to figure out if the rocket's going to make it,
we run thousands, sometimes millions of simulations
just to figure out which... path is the good
path for the rocket and where can it go wrong
where can it fail but when we do these I'd say
at this point millions of simulations of what
can happen with the rocket we ignore the ones
that are where everything goes right because
we just care about we have to address the situations
where it goes wrong so So basically, and for
AI simulations as well, like all these things,
we keep the simulations going that are the most
interesting to us. So if simulation theory is
accurate, if it is true, who knows, then the...
The simulators will continue to run the simulations
that are most interesting. Therefore, from a
Darwinian perspective, the only surviving simulations
will be the most interesting ones. And in order
to avoid getting turned off, the only rule is
you must keep it interesting because the boring
simulations will be terminated. Are you still
completely convinced that this is a simulation?
I didn't say I was completely convinced. Well,
you said it's like the odds of it not being are
in the billions. I guess that's not completely,
because you're saying there's a chance. What
are the odds that we're in base reality? Well,
given that we're able to create increasingly
sophisticated simulations, so if you think of,
say, video games and how video games have gone
from very simple video games like Pong with two
rectangles and a square. to video games today
being photorealistic with millions of people
playing simultaneously. And all of that has occurred
in our lifetime. So if that trend continues,
video games will be indistinguishable from reality.
The fidelity of the game will be such that you
don't know if what you're seeing is a real video
or a fake video. And like AI -generated videos
at this point, you can sometimes tell it's an
AI -generated video, but often you cannot tell.
And soon you will not really just not be able
to tell. So if that's happening in our direct
observation, and we'll create millions, if not
billions, of photorealistic simulations of reality,
then... What are the odds that we're in base
reality versus someone else's simulation? Well,
isn't it just possible that the simulation is
inevitable, but that we are in base reality building
towards the simulation? We're making simulations.
So we're making simulations. You can just think
of photorealistic video games. as being simulations.
And especially as you apply AI in these video
games, the characters in the video games will
be incredibly interesting to talk to. They won't
just have a limited dialogue tree where if you
go to the crossbow merchant and you try to talk
about any subject except buying a crossbow, they
just want to talk about selling you a crossbow.
But with AI -based non -player characters, you'll
be able to have an elaborate conversation with
no dialogue tree. Well, that might be the solution
for meaning for people. Just lock in and you
could be a fucking vampire and whatever. You
live in Avatar land. You could do whatever you
want. You don't have to think about money or
food. Ready Player One. Yeah, literally. Yeah.
But with higher living standards. Yeah. You don't
have to be a little trailer. I mean, I think
people do want to have some amount of struggle
or something they want to push against. But it
could be playing a sports or playing a game or
something like that. It could be easily playing
a game. Yeah, yeah. And especially playing a
game where you're now no longer worried about
physical attributes, like athletics, like bad
joints and hips and stuff like that. Now, it's
completely digital. But yet, you do have meaning
in pursuing this thing that you're doing all
day. Whatever the fuck that means. It's going
to be weird. It's going to be interesting. It's
going to be very interesting. The most interesting
and usually ironic outcome is the most likely.
That's a good predictor of the future. Thank
you. Thanks for being here. Really appreciate
your time. I know you're a busy man, so this
means a lot. Thank you. Bye, everybody.