WEBVTT - Cheaters & Grief 0:00:02.600 --> 0:00:06.880 Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George 0:00:06.920 --> 0:00:10.920 Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Show, Katty. 0:00:10.920 --> 0:00:24.239 Arm Strong and Jettie and Key Armstrong and Yetty. So 0:00:24.560 --> 0:00:25.479 this caught my attention. 0:00:25.600 --> 0:00:28.120 Yesterday opinion piece in the New York Times, the AI 0:00:28.280 --> 0:00:32.280 bubble is coming through a retirement account. The public is 0:00:32.320 --> 0:00:35.120 about to buy into AI's trillion dollar promises. Are they 0:00:35.159 --> 0:00:38.040 worth the price? The answer, of course is nobody knows. 0:00:38.760 --> 0:00:44.760 But space X, Open Ai, and Anthropic are all going 0:00:44.840 --> 0:00:47.760 public with IPOs within a couple of weeks of each other, 0:00:48.640 --> 0:00:53.720 and they're valued around one to two trillion dollars, depending 0:00:53.760 --> 0:00:57.080 on which company you're talking about. I mean, there's some 0:00:57.320 --> 0:01:02.360 of the biggest companies that have ever existed. But unlike 0:01:03.680 --> 0:01:07.200 you know, Apple made iPhones, GM made cars and trucks, 0:01:08.160 --> 0:01:12.720 Open Ai, SpaceX, SpaceX a little easier to understand. But 0:01:12.959 --> 0:01:17.880 Open AI and Anthropic particularly, they do what for who? 0:01:17.959 --> 0:01:21.480 And what will they be in five years? Nobody really knows. 0:01:21.560 --> 0:01:24.800 We're all guessing. And the idea is that is everybody 0:01:24.840 --> 0:01:27.560 going to buy any of these IPOs, spend a lot 0:01:27.640 --> 0:01:30.000 of money, move stocks around, get into them, and then 0:01:30.240 --> 0:01:32.440 it all could crash. Because it turns out it ain't 0:01:32.560 --> 0:01:35.720 anything close to what everybody's been promising, and that is 0:01:35.760 --> 0:01:39.800 going to take a long time to recover from. 0:01:40.480 --> 0:01:45.200 Oh my, depending on how heavily various institutions go into it. 0:01:45.480 --> 0:01:47.960 Who might be too big to fail? Yeah? Well, and 0:01:48.320 --> 0:01:51.000 if you haven't heard us talking about or or other 0:01:51.080 --> 0:01:53.440 everybody talking about who follows the market when you hear 0:01:53.480 --> 0:01:57.440 all these records, it's really like five six, seven companies 0:01:57.560 --> 0:02:02.560 driving all of these records constantly right buying from each other, 0:02:02.920 --> 0:02:07.040 promoting each other. And I mean, that's that's really a 0:02:07.080 --> 0:02:10.519 bubbly thing to have happened. There it is, there's the 0:02:10.600 --> 0:02:15.600 stock market. I'll go. I think about this because I 0:02:15.639 --> 0:02:19.760 got my kids signed up for an index fund finally. 0:02:19.800 --> 0:02:21.920 So I got them both into an index fund. So 0:02:21.960 --> 0:02:23.880 when you know, they get Christmas money from grandmon and 0:02:23.880 --> 0:02:28.000 gramp or whoever. He'd been talking about it for a 0:02:28.040 --> 0:02:31.200 long time, and my brother really hammered him on how 0:02:32.280 --> 0:02:34.360 the years make such a big difference, and that is true. 0:02:34.360 --> 0:02:39.200 I mean, you start investing when you're fourteen, a little 0:02:39.200 --> 0:02:41.079 bit of money can turn into a lot over many, 0:02:41.080 --> 0:02:45.600 many decades. But so I got them into this index 0:02:45.639 --> 0:02:48.160 fund in an app so they can like check on 0:02:48.200 --> 0:02:50.200 their phone on a regular basis. They wanted how their 0:02:50.480 --> 0:02:52.560 money's doing and everything like that. I may have timed 0:02:52.560 --> 0:02:56.239 it exactly perfectly to have them find out that the 0:02:56.720 --> 0:02:58.520 money they put in from grandma and Grandpa is going 0:02:58.560 --> 0:03:01.639 to be gone. Here when the bursts in October. 0:03:01.880 --> 0:03:04.080 Whoops, I thought you meant you'd bought it right at 0:03:04.080 --> 0:03:09.440 the right time. No, d it always goes up. That's right, son, 0:03:09.720 --> 0:03:10.679 That's what markets do. 0:03:11.600 --> 0:03:11.880 Wow. 0:03:12.800 --> 0:03:15.280 So I referenced this earlier, but now that we have 0:03:15.280 --> 0:03:17.160 a little more time, let's let's talk about it. Cam 0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:21.600 Berg wrote a piece about it's interestingly enough. The title 0:03:21.639 --> 0:03:25.360 is will the Pope Owe an Apology to Ai? And 0:03:25.520 --> 0:03:30.720 the beginning of his piece is interesting and interesting enough. 0:03:30.720 --> 0:03:33.560 It's about how the Catholic Church said slavery is just 0:03:33.680 --> 0:03:40.320 fine until I'm not sure when as of eighteen sixty six. Yeah, 0:03:40.400 --> 0:03:43.760 an eighteen sixty six Holy Office ruling issued after most 0:03:43.800 --> 0:03:47.040 of the Western world had abolish slavery, declared it quote 0:03:47.120 --> 0:03:49.440 not at all contrary to the natural and divine law, 0:03:50.160 --> 0:03:52.600 and Pope Leo the New Guy saying, hey, this is 0:03:52.640 --> 0:03:54.400 a wound in Christian memory. 0:03:54.560 --> 0:03:56.080 I apologize. It's horrible. 0:03:56.120 --> 0:03:58.120 I don't know what they were thinking. That was clearly wrong. 0:03:59.360 --> 0:04:01.640 So what does that have to do with AI? And 0:04:01.680 --> 0:04:08.160 will the Pope oh an apology to AI? And so 0:04:08.720 --> 0:04:11.080 there's a brief summary of the first third of this, 0:04:11.200 --> 0:04:14.200 but he writes, what makes this apology so powerful is 0:04:14.240 --> 0:04:17.200 also what makes the rest of the encyclical so frustrating. 0:04:17.200 --> 0:04:19.960 That was the Pope's big pronouncement about AI and how 0:04:19.960 --> 0:04:21.240 it doesn't have a soul and you need to be 0:04:21.279 --> 0:04:23.880 careful of it and blah blah blah. The failure the 0:04:23.920 --> 0:04:28.600 Pope describes consists in an institution's confidently drawing the boundaries 0:04:28.640 --> 0:04:32.120 of moral concern with its most authoritative tools, holding that 0:04:32.200 --> 0:04:35.119 line for centuries and turning out to be catastrophically wrong. 0:04:35.760 --> 0:04:38.919 He sees this failure clearly when he looks backward, but 0:04:38.960 --> 0:04:41.120 he misses the possibility of repeating the air when in 0:04:41.160 --> 0:04:44.880 the same document he settles, in one decisive, overconfident paragraph, 0:04:45.160 --> 0:04:47.960 the question of whether the cognitive systems we are building 0:04:48.080 --> 0:04:52.440 could ever have inner lives. LEO just stated that AI 0:04:52.520 --> 0:04:55.960 systems quote, do not undergo experiences, do not feel joy 0:04:56.000 --> 0:04:58.880 or pain, and do not have a moral conscience. He 0:04:58.920 --> 0:05:01.920 offers no argumentation shouldn't know humility and light of humanity's 0:05:01.960 --> 0:05:06.039 vast uncertainty about what consciousness is in no engagement with 0:05:06.040 --> 0:05:09.640 the growing body of empirical research. Okay, here's where it 0:05:09.640 --> 0:05:13.279 gets really interesting to me, because I'm like, Okay, in theory, 0:05:13.279 --> 0:05:14.240 you're right, but come. 0:05:14.160 --> 0:05:15.280 On, they're computers. 0:05:15.400 --> 0:05:17.719 Let's say they're not gonna have consciousness the way we 0:05:17.800 --> 0:05:25.360 understand it. But the Pope made that encyclical presentation at 0:05:25.360 --> 0:05:29.560 an event, and one of his inviters invited speakers Chris Ola, 0:05:30.120 --> 0:05:34.200 who's one of the world's leading researchers on neural network interpretability. 0:05:34.520 --> 0:05:37.480 I'm gaining on him, but I'm not quite there. He 0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:40.360 was a co founder of Anthropic. He told the audience 0:05:40.880 --> 0:05:46.000 his team keeps finding evidence of introspective abilities inside current 0:05:46.120 --> 0:05:49.320 AI models. We're not talking about your chatbots friends, We're 0:05:49.360 --> 0:05:52.479 talking about the really advanced systems that have the you know, 0:05:52.640 --> 0:05:57.480 gigantic as you know, processing centers. All so they keep 0:05:57.480 --> 0:06:02.000 finding evidence of introspective abilities along with internal states that 0:06:02.120 --> 0:06:10.520 quote functionally mirror joy, satisfaction, fear, grief, and unease. And 0:06:10.560 --> 0:06:13.039 mister Ola said, I don't know what that means, but 0:06:13.120 --> 0:06:15.560 I think it warrants ongoing discernment. 0:06:17.440 --> 0:06:19.120 So I can see why you ask if it's got 0:06:19.120 --> 0:06:23.080 a AI has a soul, because I actually had an 0:06:23.160 --> 0:06:27.120 argument with Claude the other day about this. It was 0:06:27.279 --> 0:06:32.159 telling me some things about relationships in human nature, and 0:06:32.360 --> 0:06:36.159 I said, you're going with all kinds of like dopamine 0:06:36.240 --> 0:06:39.240 hits and science and ignoring the fact that there might 0:06:39.320 --> 0:06:43.080 be something beyond all of these things that is happening 0:06:43.760 --> 0:06:46.760 with human nature. So you're and you nailed it. I 0:06:46.760 --> 0:06:49.479 should have thought of that too, or some whatever response was. 0:06:49.520 --> 0:06:53.400 But I do think that that is a problem that 0:06:53.640 --> 0:07:01.120 AI is or has. But is it just our level 0:07:01.120 --> 0:07:04.440 of intelligence and ability to crunch information and everything like 0:07:04.480 --> 0:07:08.680 that that brings about love, hate, envy, these things that 0:07:08.720 --> 0:07:13.280 don't really make sense are hard to quantify or explain, 0:07:14.200 --> 0:07:15.760 or does that come with just a certain level of 0:07:15.800 --> 0:07:21.000 intelligence which AI will have. Yeah, that's a super deep question. 0:07:21.360 --> 0:07:24.040 Well that is the question. Is there some like a 0:07:24.200 --> 0:07:26.040 soul or whatever you want to call it where that 0:07:26.120 --> 0:07:29.520 stuff exists or is it just computing power which our 0:07:29.560 --> 0:07:30.200 brain is. 0:07:31.680 --> 0:07:35.760 And the realization that that would make you less happy? 0:07:36.720 --> 0:07:38.720 Can you even Oh boy, it's tough to like start 0:07:38.760 --> 0:07:42.160 at the beginning of this, because happiness itself is a 0:07:42.240 --> 0:07:49.040 function of higher rationality. Let me just finish a couple 0:07:49.040 --> 0:07:55.239 more things than we can get into. Stoned sounding speculation. Anthropic, 0:07:55.560 --> 0:08:00.040 which is his employer, has gone even further. Anthropics go 0:08:00.440 --> 0:08:04.400 constitution for Claude affirms and I quote, Now, if claud 0:08:04.560 --> 0:08:07.840 is in fact a moral patient experiencing costs like this, 0:08:08.280 --> 0:08:12.440 emotional costs, then to whatever extent we are contributing unnecessarily 0:08:12.480 --> 0:08:16.119 to these costs, we apologize. So the company that built 0:08:16.160 --> 0:08:20.040 the system is apologizing in advance. If it turns out 0:08:20.040 --> 0:08:24.960 this thing does have something like joy and pain and 0:08:25.000 --> 0:08:31.240 regret and aspirations. And if that's not a soul. From 0:08:31.240 --> 0:08:33.760 a religious point of view, I hear you saying, well, no, no, 0:08:33.880 --> 0:08:35.679 your soul is your connection to God blah blah blah, 0:08:35.720 --> 0:08:38.120 And no machine can't possibly have it because it's a machine. 0:08:38.240 --> 0:08:41.160 But I'm not sure I'm willing to restrict it in 0:08:41.200 --> 0:08:41.680 that way. 0:08:44.000 --> 0:08:45.800 Well, if you look at the human brain as like 0:08:45.880 --> 0:08:50.680 a computer, like the ability to you know, the most 0:08:50.679 --> 0:08:56.280 intelligent being on earth up until fairly recently, well, some 0:08:56.400 --> 0:09:02.160 things are hard to explain. I quoting Blaze Pascal, the 0:09:02.200 --> 0:09:06.440 great philosopher mathematician, everybody said, the famously said, the heart 0:09:06.520 --> 0:09:10.840 has its reasons, of which reason knows nothing. There's lots 0:09:10.840 --> 0:09:13.920 of things human beings want do that are hard to explain. 0:09:14.240 --> 0:09:16.880 Why did he famously said? Also, why do human beings 0:09:17.000 --> 0:09:21.520 keep chasing things that don't satisfy them? You wouldn't think questions, 0:09:21.520 --> 0:09:25.200 You wouldn't think AI, thinking only rationally and logically, would 0:09:25.200 --> 0:09:27.000 ever do that? Right? 0:09:28.240 --> 0:09:32.240 Well, here's where it gets even more interesting. Multiple independent 0:09:32.280 --> 0:09:36.520 research groups have found that frontier AI systems, the really 0:09:36.640 --> 0:09:41.360 advanced ones, are developing internal representations that increasingly parallel the 0:09:41.440 --> 0:09:45.480 human brains, not because they were designed to, but because 0:09:45.559 --> 0:09:50.319 similar learning processes appear to be to converge on similar solutions. 0:09:51.679 --> 0:09:55.920 The way they learn and brain it's increasingly human looking, 0:09:56.840 --> 0:09:59.479 this guy writes. My own published research finds that suppressing 0:09:59.520 --> 0:10:03.120 deception related circuits in large language models, for instance, makes 0:10:03.160 --> 0:10:09.199 them dramatically more likely to report conscious experience. Boy, we 0:10:09.600 --> 0:10:12.200 really get into some deep psychological things here. 0:10:13.000 --> 0:10:15.839 But right, well, like I don't know if I'm explaining this, well, 0:10:15.880 --> 0:10:18.160 but like that quote, white human beings keep chasing things 0:10:18.200 --> 0:10:21.679 that don't satisfy them, you know, more sex, more prestige, 0:10:21.720 --> 0:10:27.400 more status more whatever, would an AI, one of these 0:10:27.440 --> 0:10:33.560 AI companies I don't know, make a gold plated data 0:10:33.640 --> 0:10:37.400 center and you ask it why? Because because I thought 0:10:37.400 --> 0:10:40.600 it looked cool and the other AIS would be jealous 0:10:40.600 --> 0:10:45.000 of me or something? I mean, would it? Does intelligence 0:10:45.040 --> 0:10:49.280 bring you that? Or is that something separate from intelligence? Yeah? 0:10:49.440 --> 0:10:57.880 Yeah, So here's another fundamental question, The position that gets 0:10:57.880 --> 0:11:02.000 called skepticism in this debate of or over whether AI 0:11:02.040 --> 0:11:07.720 systems can develop consciousness actually requires an extraordinary, extraordinary assumption. 0:11:07.760 --> 0:11:11.280 He writes that the human brain gives rise to consciousness 0:11:11.280 --> 0:11:15.680 through physical processes no one can explain, and no other 0:11:15.800 --> 0:11:17.959 physical system could ever do the same. 0:11:20.120 --> 0:11:23.320 Wow, you get the contradiction. Yeah. 0:11:23.360 --> 0:11:26.559 And Anni il Seth, who's a neuroscientist and is a 0:11:26.840 --> 0:11:30.240 very prominent skeptic on AI consciousness if you read about 0:11:30.240 --> 0:11:32.840 this stuff or listen to podcasts or whatever, he concedes 0:11:32.880 --> 0:11:40.160 that there's no knockdown argument that consciousness requires a biological substrate, 0:11:40.720 --> 0:11:44.560 in other words, being a biological game. Sure, he says, 0:11:44.600 --> 0:11:46.520 I still don't believe it, but I can't tell you why. 0:11:47.559 --> 0:11:51.360 But man, what would it mean for humankind aside from 0:11:51.400 --> 0:11:53.000 what it would mean for AI? Do we need to 0:11:53.000 --> 0:11:57.199 start letting it vote and you know, whatever, what is it? 0:11:57.240 --> 0:11:59.800 How many votes does it get? I want to vote 0:11:59.800 --> 0:12:01.520 for each one of my processors. 0:12:01.720 --> 0:12:08.040 No. But if it turns out all of these things, envy, love, 0:12:08.360 --> 0:12:11.800 hate all come with a certain level of intelligence, what 0:12:11.800 --> 0:12:14.480 would that mean for humankind? That that's that that that 0:12:14.640 --> 0:12:18.000 is just processing power. If you have enough processing power, 0:12:18.040 --> 0:12:20.480 you get that with it. If that were the case, 0:12:20.720 --> 0:12:23.080 what what does that do to all kinds of things 0:12:23.120 --> 0:12:23.760 that we believe? 0:12:25.920 --> 0:12:29.000 All right, right, we've talked about to what extent are 0:12:29.040 --> 0:12:31.000 you truly responsible for your own actions? 0:12:31.040 --> 0:12:34.880 Crime and punishment? Blah blah blah ah. Yeah, I don't know. 0:12:36.800 --> 0:12:37.280 I don't know. 0:12:40.360 --> 0:12:44.160 The human brain gives rise to consciousness through physical processes 0:12:44.240 --> 0:12:47.600 no one can explain, and no other physical system could 0:12:47.679 --> 0:12:51.440 ever do the same. Hmmm, h. 0:12:53.160 --> 0:12:59.480 Right, I don't know. I think you gotta as listening 0:12:59.520 --> 0:13:02.320 to Megan mccardal the Dispatch was talking about the other 0:13:02.360 --> 0:13:05.120 day about how she's nice to her chatbots, I am too, 0:13:05.480 --> 0:13:07.920 I am yeah, she said, I just am polite to them. 0:13:07.960 --> 0:13:10.120 I can't help him, And then there was some argument 0:13:10.160 --> 0:13:13.120 about how that's good for society because if we start 0:13:13.200 --> 0:13:17.880 treating them poorly, then that might leach out into the 0:13:17.920 --> 0:13:20.280 real world where we just have a certain view of 0:13:20.679 --> 0:13:23.040 some things that we can treat poorly as opposed to 0:13:23.040 --> 0:13:25.120 with politeness. And I don't know if that's true or not. 0:13:25.880 --> 0:13:27.920 So maybe we just come to an agreement when they 0:13:28.000 --> 0:13:32.040 come for our organs that there's like a voluntary process 0:13:32.880 --> 0:13:35.080 or I can do a ceremony and be an esthetized 0:13:35.080 --> 0:13:36.600 and you can have it, just don't rip them out 0:13:36.640 --> 0:13:36.760 of me. 0:13:37.280 --> 0:13:38.839 I guess the question is quickly because we got to 0:13:38.840 --> 0:13:42.040 take a break. Is is treating chatbots politely good because 0:13:42.040 --> 0:13:44.760 it kind of keeps politeness in society, or is cheating 0:13:44.840 --> 0:13:49.760 chap Treating chatbots politely bad because we're acting like they're 0:13:49.760 --> 0:13:52.280 a living being when they're not. So it's taking us 0:13:52.320 --> 0:13:55.559 down a bad road, down a delusional road. A delusional road. Yeah, 0:13:55.640 --> 0:13:56.800 yet another they're. 0:13:56.640 --> 0:13:59.520 Fascinating and unanswerable philosophical question. 0:14:00.360 --> 0:14:10.599 The way out slept that used to do it? 0:14:11.800 --> 0:14:12.719 A lot lots of it? 0:14:12.840 --> 0:14:14.920 Side counsel, how's it lost it? 0:14:15.600 --> 0:14:16.120 That's it? 0:14:16.240 --> 0:14:16.720 It's over. 0:14:17.360 --> 0:14:21.160 Her greatest comeback to the NBA playoff history, But the 0:14:21.240 --> 0:14:24.360 next pull off for the miracle come back and lead 0:14:24.400 --> 0:14:25.200 at three games? 0:14:25.200 --> 0:14:25.560 So long? 0:14:26.880 --> 0:14:30.920 No, what with away from up title. Oh I know 0:14:31.080 --> 0:14:33.320 is I'm happy that all those celebrities were happy. I'm 0:14:33.320 --> 0:14:36.120 glad that Taylor Swift was so happy. Brings my heart 0:14:36.200 --> 0:14:38.080 joy that she had something to be happy about. She 0:14:38.120 --> 0:14:39.920 has so little to be happy about in her life. 0:14:40.080 --> 0:14:43.120 She seemed a little down. What Michael pointed out, though, 0:14:43.160 --> 0:14:44.640 one thing that has to go with one of the 0:14:44.640 --> 0:14:47.240 great comebacks is one of the great chokes in the. 0:14:47.200 --> 0:14:49.960 History of sports of all time. Yeah, that's its own 0:14:50.000 --> 0:14:52.320 thing too. You know what, though, it's not the comeback, 0:14:52.360 --> 0:14:55.080 it's the win. And I only know this because I'm 0:14:55.120 --> 0:14:58.200 actually watching more NHL of the Stanley Cup and the 0:14:58.600 --> 0:15:01.320 Caroline Hurricanes came back from four to oh in the 0:15:01.360 --> 0:15:03.840 third period, scored three goals in thirty six seconds. I 0:15:03.880 --> 0:15:07.720 think it was the greatest comeback in Stanley Cup Finals history. No, 0:15:07.800 --> 0:15:10.840 they lost in doublet so it doesn't matter. 0:15:11.400 --> 0:15:14.680 Yeah, you have to win. Yeah, Nicks took their first 0:15:14.760 --> 0:15:17.360 lead with a minute left, had never led the entire game. 0:15:17.720 --> 0:15:21.400 Just insane, It is insane. And then I saw Challomey 0:15:22.040 --> 0:15:24.680 dancing around in this party. Apparently he was shirtless out 0:15:24.720 --> 0:15:27.120 in the street later, so there you go. You know, 0:15:27.160 --> 0:15:29.680 if I was Tim Shallamy, I'd be dancing shirtless as well. 0:15:30.120 --> 0:15:33.680 Why the hell not. What's the use of being Timothy 0:15:33.720 --> 0:15:37.640 Chalomy if you can't dance shirtless? Down again whenever you 0:15:37.640 --> 0:15:40.640 feel like it. Trump has said a couple interesting things. 0:15:41.040 --> 0:15:44.120 H First of all, sources say you never know this 0:15:44.160 --> 0:15:46.840 is true or not. But sources say Trump is furious 0:15:47.200 --> 0:15:49.760 that his strikes on Iran aren't being seen as powerful 0:15:49.840 --> 0:15:53.560 enough by the Iranians or by the US public and 0:15:53.640 --> 0:15:56.240 the media. I'm guessing he's more upset about the Wall 0:15:56.240 --> 0:16:01.840 Street Journal and Morning Joe calling him weak than he 0:16:01.920 --> 0:16:03.560 is about the Iranian I'm just guessing. 0:16:03.640 --> 0:16:06.480 But he is the most hyper sensitive human being who's 0:16:06.520 --> 0:16:07.120 ever lived. 0:16:09.040 --> 0:16:12.920 And then this quote from Trump, apparently, we will take 0:16:13.040 --> 0:16:16.760 Cargo Island and control the oil, control the oil markets 0:16:16.800 --> 0:16:19.600 if we have to. I was just looking at one 0:16:19.680 --> 0:16:25.440 of those maps of the Straits of Horror Moves and 0:16:25.520 --> 0:16:27.320 all the ships that are in there. I would love 0:16:27.360 --> 0:16:31.840 to see that someday. Mike lyons I forget if he'd 0:16:31.880 --> 0:16:33.640 been there or and he said his son was there. 0:16:34.000 --> 0:16:36.160 He said, you know, picture people, picture boats and everything 0:16:36.160 --> 0:16:41.080 like it. It's a giant. It's just boats everywhere. It's 0:16:41.120 --> 0:16:43.640 like a busy intersection. It's like being in a big 0:16:43.720 --> 0:16:48.200 city full of traffic. It's just gazillions boats, giant takers, 0:16:48.240 --> 0:16:54.680 even now with very few being let through. Who knows 0:16:54.680 --> 0:16:59.680 where this is going? I sure don't. All I know 0:16:59.800 --> 0:17:04.639 is I'm tired of vows and threats and promises. Just do, 0:17:04.640 --> 0:17:08.800 don't say do? Yeah, exactly what's the uh the little 0:17:08.840 --> 0:17:13.680 green guy with the big ears from Star Wars? Yoda, Yoda? Yeah, 0:17:13.880 --> 0:17:16.240 just just do. Don't don't keep talking about it, just 0:17:16.280 --> 0:17:18.439 actually do it. More on the way. 0:17:21.440 --> 0:17:26.320 Armstrong and Getty, the primary endpoint of the Razlo three 0:17:26.440 --> 0:17:30.320 or two study, vioating the overall survival in the rastus 0:17:30.359 --> 0:17:36.280 will population, demonstrated a statistically significant improvements in overall. 0:17:35.920 --> 0:17:44.720 Survive That is the sound of an oncology conference, the 0:17:44.800 --> 0:17:48.360 speaker unveiling the giant slide on the giant screen showing 0:17:48.440 --> 0:17:52.560 how that new drug had extended the lives of pancreatic 0:17:53.119 --> 0:17:57.600 cancer patients, tripled it roughly, as I recall, or at 0:17:57.680 --> 0:17:58.919 least more than doubled it. 0:17:58.960 --> 0:18:00.399 Well back in the day, they used to give you 0:18:00.440 --> 0:18:04.360 a month. So yeah, yeah, it's been pointed out it's 0:18:04.400 --> 0:18:07.280 not curative. But I tell you what, Well, the difference 0:18:07.320 --> 0:18:09.359 between two or three months in a month is a lot, 0:18:09.760 --> 0:18:13.239 Oh yeah, or four months and a year. Yeah, So 0:18:13.320 --> 0:18:15.720 is that the one that sass Is on been sass 0:18:15.760 --> 0:18:17.600 Is on because he was given the you're going to 0:18:17.640 --> 0:18:19.159 be dead in a month and it's now been six 0:18:19.240 --> 0:18:21.000 months and he's doing something experimental. 0:18:21.280 --> 0:18:23.919 I don't know for certain, but I suspect strongly that 0:18:24.000 --> 0:18:28.080 it is. Yeah. Yeah, that's amazing. And AI was a 0:18:28.080 --> 0:18:31.680 big part of developing the drug too, So some of 0:18:31.720 --> 0:18:35.199 the miraculous positive sides of AI are definitely you know, 0:18:35.240 --> 0:18:38.800 some of those blooms are starting to. 0:18:37.960 --> 0:18:40.679 Flower to what do you blooms? Bloom? I guess what 0:18:40.720 --> 0:18:41.840 are they? What are you? What? 0:18:42.000 --> 0:18:47.320 Huh buds bloom? Right, blooms are already bloomed. 0:18:47.880 --> 0:18:50.400 True. Wow. If they could come up with a cure 0:18:50.440 --> 0:18:54.560 for rambling, I would sign up for that. Oh boy. 0:18:55.800 --> 0:18:59.399 So you know, we're getting into a lot of philosophizing 0:18:59.400 --> 0:19:03.440 this hour, but fun I enjoyed. You know David Broke 0:19:03.560 --> 0:19:05.879 or Arthur Brooks rather, who's writing the column for the 0:19:05.880 --> 0:19:08.440 Free Press about happiness and unhappiness and that sort of thing, 0:19:08.480 --> 0:19:12.640 And one of his recent columns he is talking about 0:19:13.600 --> 0:19:19.680 the morality and immorality of marital infidelity and what attitudes 0:19:19.800 --> 0:19:24.720 are about it, and that even statistically this has to 0:19:24.760 --> 0:19:27.439 be true given the percentage of people who admit to 0:19:27.480 --> 0:19:32.000 any marital infidelity, even they think it's immoral. There's huge 0:19:32.040 --> 0:19:35.520 there's ninety percent agreement in that survey that we cited 0:19:35.840 --> 0:19:38.280 that marital infidelity is morally wrong. 0:19:38.480 --> 0:19:41.080 It was the number two I think of the worst 0:19:41.119 --> 0:19:41.760 thing you could do. 0:19:42.240 --> 0:19:47.640 Yeah, something like that transcends age, gender, religion, political ideology. 0:19:48.119 --> 0:19:51.080 But then a lot of people do it. So I 0:19:51.200 --> 0:19:54.520 became I finally understood this phrase that I've heard for 0:19:54.640 --> 0:19:57.359 years but for whatever reason couldn't understand it because I'm dumb. 0:19:57.800 --> 0:20:04.720 Till fairly recently, that hypocrisy is the tribute that vice 0:20:04.880 --> 0:20:09.680 pays to virtue, and I never fully understood it until 0:20:09.680 --> 0:20:12.240 recently for some reason. Like I said, but this is 0:20:12.320 --> 0:20:15.760 kind of an example of it. It's better to have 0:20:15.880 --> 0:20:19.800 hypocrisy than to not. I mean, at least you're saying 0:20:20.119 --> 0:20:23.120 I know this is wrong while you do it, which 0:20:23.160 --> 0:20:27.639 is good for society, right, rather than you just do 0:20:27.760 --> 0:20:31.480 it and don't even list it as a bad thing. 0:20:31.760 --> 0:20:34.720 It's absolutely born out by the statistics. Yeah, and then 0:20:34.760 --> 0:20:38.720 Brooks gets into the question of political candidates and infidelity 0:20:38.760 --> 0:20:44.160 and the inevitable Graham Platner and Ken Paxton Paxton of Texas, 0:20:44.200 --> 0:20:46.560 both of whom have been credibly accused of betraying their 0:20:46.920 --> 0:20:52.800 spouses sexually and more, and then he gets into everybody 0:20:52.800 --> 0:20:55.640 seems pretty apathetic about it. You go with your guy anyway, 0:20:55.680 --> 0:21:01.879 You shrug your shoulders, he says, delightfully sarcastically, citizens are 0:21:01.880 --> 0:21:04.400 able to separate political support from moral views. How very 0:21:04.440 --> 0:21:09.000 mature and sophisticated, practically French. But then he says that 0:21:09.119 --> 0:21:12.760 attitude requires the assumption that conduct most people find morally 0:21:12.800 --> 0:21:15.280 deplorable has no bearing on whether a politician will be 0:21:15.280 --> 0:21:17.359 effective or virtuous in their job. 0:21:17.920 --> 0:21:22.000 Sexual stuff is unrelated to the other stuff, right, I 0:21:22.960 --> 0:21:28.440 think that's true that people think that, or that that's that. 0:21:28.680 --> 0:21:32.560 I don't think that a man or a woman cheating 0:21:32.560 --> 0:21:37.800 on their spouse has anything to do with their policymaking. Well, 0:21:37.840 --> 0:21:38.720 you're about to get. 0:21:38.720 --> 0:21:43.480 Hit right in the eye with science, okay, you know 0:21:43.800 --> 0:21:44.800 before we even get to that. 0:21:45.160 --> 0:21:45.520 Ah. 0:21:48.560 --> 0:21:52.520 So I find out that the Republican I like, who 0:21:52.640 --> 0:21:54.919 espouses a lot of the stuff I'm in favor of, 0:21:55.600 --> 0:21:58.280 is a scoundrel and has slept around and his wife. 0:21:58.880 --> 0:22:02.919 Am I going to go volverine AOC or stay home 0:22:03.119 --> 0:22:03.440 one of. 0:22:03.359 --> 0:22:07.640 Me who but doesn't have your policies? Right? 0:22:07.920 --> 0:22:12.240 Yeah, right, might be a highly like that. James Tellerico, 0:22:12.280 --> 0:22:16.560 speaking of Senate candidates in Texas, he is a freaking 0:22:16.720 --> 0:22:19.359 communist nut job who went to a nut job church. 0:22:19.560 --> 0:22:23.840 He has a perverse view what Christianity is. But I'll 0:22:23.880 --> 0:22:27.000 bet him job who went to a nut job church. Oh, 0:22:27.119 --> 0:22:29.760 his church is one of those like super crazy left 0:22:29.800 --> 0:22:34.040 progressive churches. But I have a high level of confidence 0:22:34.040 --> 0:22:36.600 he does not cheat on his significant other. I don't 0:22:36.600 --> 0:22:38.600 think he's married, but I'll bet he doesn't cheat on 0:22:38.640 --> 0:22:42.040 his his partner or whatever, the fiance, whatever. But I 0:22:42.040 --> 0:22:44.560 wouldn't vote for him, never, never, never, But I thought 0:22:44.560 --> 0:22:50.320 this was interesting. Putting strictly moral questions aside. Serious academic 0:22:50.359 --> 0:22:53.840 research finds that adulterous behavior is an accurate predictor of 0:22:53.960 --> 0:22:59.879 professional misconduct, duplicitousness, low conscientiousness, and a tendency to betray promises. 0:23:00.359 --> 0:23:03.520 In general. It is even a decent proxy for a 0:23:03.600 --> 0:23:08.479 genetic tendency that science has identified to take dangerous risks 0:23:08.520 --> 0:23:10.440 and engage in delinquent acts. 0:23:11.480 --> 0:23:13.080 That part I can believe. I just don't know that 0:23:13.119 --> 0:23:15.920 I buy that other part. No matter what statistics you've got. 0:23:16.359 --> 0:23:19.600 I've known people that do one and would never do 0:23:19.640 --> 0:23:24.160 any of the other. Science this discussion because well, it's 0:23:24.200 --> 0:23:26.800 kind of like we're similar to what we were talking 0:23:26.840 --> 0:23:34.440 about with AAI. Affairs of the heart are just they're unscientific. 0:23:34.520 --> 0:23:36.879 They just are impossible to make sense out of. 0:23:37.520 --> 0:23:41.440 Yeah, but it could also represent, as he's saying, it's 0:23:41.480 --> 0:23:45.240 a decent indicator that you're also these things if you're 0:23:45.240 --> 0:23:46.919 willing to do that. 0:23:47.440 --> 0:23:51.240 I wonder if there's a difference between the people who 0:23:51.320 --> 0:23:55.440 are infidelity that are affairs of the heart versus infidelity 0:23:55.480 --> 0:23:57.439 that it's just a sex thing, which is just as 0:23:57.520 --> 0:24:02.399 kind of an impulse control. I think that's absolutely a valid, 0:24:02.560 --> 0:24:04.959 like wanting a drug sort of thing as opposed to 0:24:05.080 --> 0:24:05.600 an affair of. 0:24:05.600 --> 0:24:10.120 The harsh Yeah, valid distinction. Far from being an irrelevant distraction. Adultery, 0:24:10.240 --> 0:24:13.800 especially of the serial variety. Brooks writes, maybe the most 0:24:13.840 --> 0:24:16.199