Speaker 1: Watch up and welcome back to another episode of No
Speaker 1: Sinners Podcast with your host Now, fuck that with your load, glasses, maloney, dog,
Speaker 1: what's the deal? Tell me?
Speaker 2: I don't know what what what the hell are we
Speaker 2: doing here today?
Speaker 1: You know what? Someone was on my mind. I saw
Speaker 1: this dope ass me and it was a really amazing me. Uh.
Speaker 1: It's a picture because of a candle, right, it's it's
Speaker 1: it's a it's a community of candles and they shaped
Speaker 1: like humans, right, but they're candles. That their head is candles,
Speaker 1: and they're headed to a podium where somebody is hanging.
Speaker 1: And the man that's actually taking it's a man that's
Speaker 1: his head is like a light bulb, and he's going
Speaker 1: to the place where people get hung at that the
Speaker 1: hangman is taking him over there, and and the hangman
Speaker 1: is taking him up there as everybody the candles look
Speaker 1: on sure sure and that that picture really resonated with me,
Speaker 1: like because I felt like this almost my whole life.
Speaker 1: I tweeted the picture on my Twitter at g Malone
Speaker 1: and somebody said, man, glasses, is that really what it is?
Speaker 1: Or do you just be going against the grain? And
Speaker 1: it goes back to some of you always joke with
Speaker 1: me and like man trolling, and it blows me away
Speaker 1: that people don't realize, like I don't believe in like
Speaker 1: going against the grain. Like every time I say something
Speaker 1: and people don't get what I'm saying, it's really frustrating
Speaker 1: and it's hella lonely. It's like I could have a
Speaker 1: conversation with somebody, right, like my top five favorite, excuse me,
Speaker 1: not the top my top five favorite. Like I look
Speaker 1: at professional sports, let's say basketball, by what you accomplished
Speaker 1: as a professional. What all of the things you accomplished
Speaker 1: as a professional basketball player in the league? Right, you know,
Speaker 1: how did you do as a rookie? Did you make
Speaker 1: the All Star? Did you lead in any league that
Speaker 1: you know categories? Did you make any all NBA teams?
Speaker 1: Did you win any league you know individual awards? Did
Speaker 1: you win a championship? Did you win any accomplishments extra
Speaker 1: because you guys won a championship like a finals MVP. Right,
Speaker 1: So I kind of go through these mathematical processes to
Speaker 1: really decide who's like how I would rank it, right,
Speaker 1: Like for example, Tim Duncan is the greatest power forward
Speaker 1: to me of all time. You had the greatest NBA
Speaker 1: career of all power forwards. The second one would be
Speaker 1: Dennis Rodman, the third one would be Gianni's Antetokunpo, the
Speaker 1: fourth one would be Kevin Garnett, and the fifth one
Speaker 1: would be Dirt Mayo. This is all not taking Bob
Speaker 1: Pettitt into thought, right, as you know. But people hear
Speaker 1: me say Rodman as the second best power forward right,
Speaker 1: which to me would make him a top ten all
Speaker 1: time NBA player, right. Because NBA is played in teams,
Speaker 1: it's five man there's no one on one. So I
Speaker 1: always look at the best five like the best five
Speaker 1: starting in a position, because nobody plays on one on one.
Speaker 1: If I try to make the league one on one
Speaker 1: who I thought was better, it wouldn't take into account
Speaker 1: anything but my ignorance in what could happen in a
Speaker 1: one on one basketball game because no body is playing
Speaker 1: each other in one on one. It's only a team sport.
Speaker 1: But this is Math saying this to me. Math said that.
Speaker 1: So when I say the best five NBA players of
Speaker 1: all time is Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, Lebron, James Tim Duncan,
Speaker 1: Bill Russell, is because those five guys accomplish the most
Speaker 1: as an NBA player from those positions. The second five
Speaker 1: would be Steph Curry, Kobe Bryant, Larry Bird, Dennis Robin,
Speaker 1: and Kareem Abdujabbor. But people hear the term, they hear
Speaker 1: Dennis Robman's name, and most people immediately disagree because he
Speaker 1: doesn't score a ton of points. And then you'll hear
Speaker 1: this traditional argument of oh, you know, well, you know
Speaker 1: his offense, and I'm like, well, he's the greatest offensive rebounder,
Speaker 1: you know, considered the greatest offensive rebounder in the modern era.
Speaker 1: Sure that's offense. Yeah, Like you would look at kreemab
Speaker 1: du Jabbar scoring thirty points a game, and you wouldn't
Speaker 1: care that he averaged three assists. Who the fuck cares
Speaker 1: he averages thirty points. Well, if a guy is averaging
Speaker 1: seven assists, I mean, excuse, excuse me seven offensive rebounds,
Speaker 1: that's like nobody fucking does that. Yeah, not not in
Speaker 1: the modern era of hoops. Nobody's averaging seven offensive rebounds
Speaker 1: a game. Like, if you go back into the nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety six finals, I think Dennis Rodman broke the offensive
Speaker 1: rebounding per game record two or three times.
Speaker 2: Sure, he also broke the underhand outlet pass record several times.
Speaker 1: Right, So I look at his defense, I think Defensive
Speaker 1: Player of the Year. Like I've done enough math to understand.
Speaker 1: Since the invention of the Defensive Player award, the MVP
Speaker 1: has gone to an offensive situation. If you understand, the
Speaker 1: NBA values offense, right, because that's what selles seats. Ninety
Speaker 1: five ninety eight percent of the time, they're going to
Speaker 1: pick the offensive player that has the greatest highlights in
Speaker 1: the NBA at the time for the most part. But
Speaker 1: there's no true way to pick it. But the math
Speaker 1: gives me the consistency to think. You know, I wager
Speaker 1: on the math that has already been proven, and that's
Speaker 1: how I come up with my thoughts. So I can
Speaker 1: look at a Dennis Ridman, who is a two time
Speaker 1: Defensive Player of the Year, mind you, on teams that
Speaker 1: are the number one defensive teams in the NBA, not
Speaker 1: not all the time the number one offensive teams, but
Speaker 1: pretty much ninety nine percent of the times, they're going
Speaker 1: to be the number one defensive Player of the year
Speaker 1: with one of the best defensive players of all time.
Speaker 1: For sure, He's been the best defensive player on every
Speaker 1: team he's been on, and every team he's been on
Speaker 1: has had a top two or three defense, if not
Speaker 1: number one, they may have a number eleven offense, like
Speaker 1: the Pistons, did you know what I mean? Or the
Speaker 1: Bulls where you know the second and third year, they
Speaker 1: might have had a number four offense, right, but they
Speaker 1: had the number one defense. So I can see his
Speaker 1: impact on the court. But it's not because I'm a
Speaker 1: fan of Dennis Robbin. It's because mathematically I value offense
Speaker 1: and defense the exact same. So I equate the defensive
Speaker 1: Player of the Year with the MVP. Right. I equate
Speaker 1: great defenders with great offensive players, especially if they're accomplishing
Speaker 1: things like all defensive first teams, rebounding records, you know,
Speaker 1: defensive player of the year, whether it's block shots, steals,
Speaker 1: I equate that. And then so even when I'm looking
Speaker 1: from the offensive side, for Dennis Robin, he's the greatest
Speaker 1: offensive rebounder in the modern era for the most part.
Speaker 1: You know, maybe more es Malone can argue that, but
Speaker 1: people can't average six and seven offense. This is incredible.
Speaker 1: That would be like the equivalent of somebody scoring thirty
Speaker 1: five points a game. That's how rare it is on
Speaker 1: the offensive side of the ball.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, there's the spurt was shorter. But didn't
Speaker 2: Ben Wallace have a little run where he stacked up
Speaker 2: a lot of rebounding numbers for sure?
Speaker 1: But he's not even the offensive rebounder, and nor did
Speaker 1: he rebound the ball nearly as well as Dennis Robin.
Speaker 1: But he was the defender Dennis Robin.
Speaker 2: Well, I thought somebody, who the hell was it? Somebody
Speaker 2: says Robin put up like fifteen or sixteen boards a
Speaker 2: game for a few years.
Speaker 1: I think Drummond did really well drumming. But so what
Speaker 1: I'm saying, like, that's what I'm saying. It's like, even
Speaker 1: even with Ben Wilace out the fact that Dennis Robin
Speaker 1: is such an incredible offensive rebounder, I can position him
Speaker 1: even as a two way player. And most got Magic Johnson,
Speaker 1: who does get a ton of credit for really good defense.
Speaker 1: He had the steals record multiple times. Like great players
Speaker 1: figure out how to make a difference even if it's
Speaker 1: not in the traditional sense. Even if Magic Johnson isn't
Speaker 1: the greatest one on one defender like you can put
Speaker 1: on the basketball court, he still was able to make
Speaker 1: NBA League leading defensive things happen like the Steels title
Speaker 1: two or three times, and since he was an NBA player,
Speaker 1: no sillers, gl my brother Peter just working some shit
Speaker 1: out like usual. So the mathematics of it all is
Speaker 1: how I come up with it. I don't come up
Speaker 1: with this shit to argue with people, like, I'm not
Speaker 1: trying to start a fucking argument with people. Rest is sure.
Speaker 1: If I said something, it's because I've done mathematical work
Speaker 1: to come up with the thought.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think you appreciated my analysis of your style,
Speaker 2: being like, you get pushed to a point where everybody
Speaker 2: else in the room is saying something so absurd that
Speaker 2: you have to then say the rational and people think
Speaker 2: that you're trolling the room because the room's consensus is
Speaker 2: North and you're like, no idiots South.
Speaker 1: Yes, And for the most part, I will let them
Speaker 1: just say it. I will let people just say ignorant shit,
Speaker 1: bro Like, I will not keep thinking about it until
Speaker 1: it starts being overwhelming and it's a room full of
Speaker 1: motherfuckers saying bullshit. Then I gotta say something, Hey, man,
Speaker 1: that is not true. That is not true. I don't
Speaker 1: go around finding motherfuckers to disagree with I hate man.
Speaker 1: Disagreeing with the masses is such a lonely road. Like
Speaker 1: I was on a podcast with these two ladies, you
Speaker 1: know you in New York, the Horrible Decisions Girl Mandy
Speaker 1: and Wheezy Right and the girl were asking me. The
Speaker 1: girls were asking me, They say, man, Glasses, how do
Speaker 1: we meet a quality guy, like without going through the
Speaker 1: rigm Monroe or the bullshit? And I'm like, so they start.
Speaker 1: I start asking them questions.
Speaker 2: How do I get a bunch of money without having
Speaker 2: to have a job.
Speaker 1: Well, my thing was, I start asking questions, and mathematically
Speaker 1: I came up with, well, you shouldn't put out until
Speaker 1: you get married. That's who you will see who somebody
Speaker 1: really is, if you really want to see. And I
Speaker 1: mean it was six seven hundred, eight hundred women in
Speaker 1: my comments. You go look on my Instagram at Glasses
Speaker 1: low it's women cussing me out because I'm telling them
Speaker 1: the greatest advice possible based off the mathematics. Like it's
Speaker 1: not like I went into a Bible and picked up
Speaker 1: the wisdom of thousands of years. The mathematics says the
Speaker 1: same shit right now, And that kind of in that
Speaker 1: becomes the story of my existence all the time. Cuz,
Speaker 1: like right now, like one of the most important things
Speaker 1: to me, right and it should be to anybody in
Speaker 1: pursuit of something great is to succeed at a level
Speaker 1: that very few succeed, right, or really to maximize who
Speaker 1: you are. Let's say that, right, I know I can
Speaker 1: have a gold album. That's my goal, a gold album
Speaker 1: because at that point, if you have a gold album,
Speaker 1: you have broken through the underground. It don't mean you
Speaker 1: a star, like let's say Drake or Kendrick Lamar or
Speaker 1: Kanye West, but you're not underground no more. At least
Speaker 1: you're on top of the sement. And I know I'm
Speaker 1: worthy of being there right now, wherever.
Speaker 2: Else I go.
Speaker 1: Once I get from the underground onto the no I
Speaker 1: break through. Fine, But that's the goal. And I just
Speaker 1: keep talking to people around me bro like I'm like, hey, man,
Speaker 1: like we really are misusing technology when it comes to
Speaker 1: hip hop, Like we're misusing everything about being alive and
Speaker 1: hip hop right now. You know, we're not using any
Speaker 1: of the tools. We're still playing by rules that were
Speaker 1: created forty years ago for completely different technology. Like we
Speaker 1: feel like the guys in the nineties like were way
Speaker 1: smarter or better, and it's like, no, man, it's like
Speaker 1: back then. If you like the singles, they forced you
Speaker 1: to buy the album. They would spend all of this
Speaker 1: ridiculous money to work a single because they knew if
Speaker 1: you liked that single and you went to the store
Speaker 1: to buy it to hear it again, they was gonna
Speaker 1: be able to get fifteen or twenty dollars out your
Speaker 1: ass for the album. They purposely undership the singles because
Speaker 1: they didn't want to make three or four dollars on
Speaker 1: those cassettes. No, they wanted to make fifteen or twenty
Speaker 1: dollars for the compact. This the whole album. And then
Speaker 1: at that time you were forced to digest the brand
Speaker 1: of the artist you were buying because you heard all
Speaker 1: of the songs and they were really nice musicians, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean. So obviously doctor Dre was able
Speaker 1: to do with the chronic is brilliant and he gave
Speaker 1: you He presented a brand of a person that we
Speaker 1: all came to know and love, which is you know,
Speaker 1: Doctor Dre or Snoop, right, But we were very much
Speaker 1: forced into it because rest is sure, if they printed
Speaker 1: up enough CDs of g Thing and Dreda and let
Speaker 1: me ride in little ghetto boy. More people than not
Speaker 1: would have bought the fucking single. It's cheaper and it's
Speaker 1: what I want, So it's simple business. So I'm telling
Speaker 1: people that in in a climate that people really felt
Speaker 1: like singles market albums and they don't singles market themselves.
Speaker 1: And when I say something like that, bro, it drives
Speaker 1: people crazy. And I'm like, because so long the room
Speaker 1: has been saying singles market albums, that was the thought
Speaker 1: exactly funny.
Speaker 2: I was thinking in the car yesterday about remember that
Speaker 2: pareto distribution thing I sent you with you a while back,
Speaker 2: like a week ago.
Speaker 1: To them, Sure.
Speaker 2: It was described. I've seen that concept illustrated with the
Speaker 2: way that the USSR, like when they toppled the Ukraine
Speaker 2: and they had the massive famine because all the really
Speaker 2: good farmers got killed and they took all their land
Speaker 2: and gave it to the peasants. Well, the peasants were
Speaker 2: not good farmers, that's why they were peasants. And the
Speaker 2: good farmers were running all the farms. They were good farmers,
Speaker 2: so they couldn't come with any more grain, and they
Speaker 2: all died, so like and so far aside that applies
Speaker 2: to some music. The distribution is pounds of grain. It's
Speaker 2: not plants of grain, you know. So like now, the
Speaker 2: distribution metric is streams. It's not how many songs you make,
Speaker 2: how good the song, how many albums, know, it's how
Speaker 2: many streams. That's pounds of grain. It doesn't matter how
Speaker 2: many grain plants you have if you only get in
Speaker 2: one kernel of plant, you know. And I was kind
Speaker 2: of like the you like like exactly, kind of like
Speaker 2: what you're saying, like that, it's a it's a new
Speaker 2: paradigm the light bulb by all the candles. Every time
Speaker 2: you have a paradigm disruptor, it's hanging the disruptor. No
Speaker 2: one wants to deal with the disruptor. It's uncertainty. It
Speaker 2: creates problems. That could have been a bunch of combustion
Speaker 2: vehicles and an electric car. It could have been Fiat
Speaker 2: currencies and bitcoin. It could have been any of a
Speaker 2: number it could it could have been copper and graphy.
Speaker 2: It could have been anything, you know, but they chose
Speaker 2: candles and light bulbs. And it's a perfect illustration. And
Speaker 2: I think as far as music, goes Yeah, but it
Speaker 2: needs to start to shift from that album mentality. I
Speaker 2: mean at the end of the day, really, I mean,
Speaker 2: unless you love to death an artist, it's it's kind
Speaker 2: of hard, like it's it's it's not it's not saying
Speaker 2: it's hard. It's harder for the artists to hold the
Speaker 2: attention of the listener in a digital environment that's cloud based.
Speaker 1: Man, you just gave me a crazy idea during that conversation, Like,
Speaker 1: once I figure out what the minimum per stream is,
Speaker 1: like the minimum time, Sure, if it's thirty seconds, Like
Speaker 1: what if I took thirty seconds? Right if I told
Speaker 1: a story that was six minutes long over the same beat,
Speaker 1: but I broke it up because you could have zero
Speaker 1: you know, you can have zero space.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you have to look at like YouTube ads. YouTube
Speaker 2: bads are giving fifteen seconds if you don't say the
Speaker 2: name of the company in the first fifteen seconds until
Speaker 2: that skip button hits. How many times do I not
Speaker 2: know who the fuck even the advertiser was because they
Speaker 2: didn't get to the name of the company in fifteen seconds.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm saying, let's say, if it's thirty seconds, yeah,
Speaker 1: then I just make it one track two track, three track,
Speaker 1: four track. That's pretty good. It could be the same song,
Speaker 1: but space, you know, the zero space as a choice.
Speaker 2: So you get credit for fors to the credit for
Speaker 2: one boom boom. There we are.
Speaker 1: Okay, back to your point, forgive me. No, I was done, no,
Speaker 1: but I wanted to respond to it. But I was
Speaker 1: writing that idea as you were. It was hitting me
Speaker 1: stream metrics. What was the last thing you said? Uh?
Speaker 2: I said, Like, Now, I think about how how confining
Speaker 2: the album was. You're in your car, you have to
Speaker 2: put it in. You hit next, You're still confined to
Speaker 2: the same disc. You can only go to the next song.
Speaker 2: Now you're hit next, You're in a whole other genre,
Speaker 2: with a whole other artist and a whole other album
Speaker 2: a song. There's no more confines.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, good point. But I don't think it's because
Speaker 1: the audience has a short attention span. I'm not saying
Speaker 1: it is no, no, Okay, okay, forgive me.
Speaker 2: I'm saying technologically speaking, the effort level, like the the
Speaker 2: physical actual barrier to leave the album now vers twenty
Speaker 2: five years ago, is totally diferent.
Speaker 1: Sure, you're definitely more convenient.
Speaker 2: At best, especially in a car. I mean like when
Speaker 2: they had the six discer and you had it on
Speaker 2: a shuffle. That's as much of a mix as you're
Speaker 2: gonna get. Fact now, Yeah, and you got cloud mixes
Speaker 2: now that people put together that have aggregated data that
Speaker 2: people now get spends and they get money because they
Speaker 2: just put together good mixes of other people's shit. They
Speaker 2: have a good.
Speaker 1: Channel, which is what a mixtape was. Yeah. Sure, so
Speaker 1: I think there is opportunity, right. I think there's actually
Speaker 1: more opportunity than ever before. But I just think you
Speaker 1: have to stop playing by old rules absolutely, and when
Speaker 1: either I bring these conversations to people because they make
Speaker 1: me feel like that fucking light bulb in a room
Speaker 1: full of candles, and niggas want me hung, because it's
Speaker 1: almost like everybody is my whole life, not just my
Speaker 1: music career, my whole life because everybody been forcing me
Speaker 1: to play ball. But the problem with the way most
Speaker 1: people are playing ball ninety percent of the time, ninety
Speaker 1: out of one hundred, there are the ten times, like
Speaker 1: my older homie Pluck, there is sometimes he tell me
Speaker 1: something that makes perfect sense, even because I'm not doing
Speaker 1: the math or I don't know the math in that arena, right,
Speaker 1: like gangbanging. He would tell me certain things because he
Speaker 1: understood the math better in that arena. But I'm having
Speaker 1: a conversation with people. It's not about that. Like nine
Speaker 1: times out of ten, they're just doing what they think
Speaker 1: they are supposed to do versus why it makes sense.
Speaker 1: And that shit is fucking frustrating, bro. And whenever you challenge,
Speaker 1: you know the room because the math. You're doing the
Speaker 1: math that everybody's saying, but you're coming up with a
Speaker 1: different solution. You're doing the equation, but the solution is different.
Speaker 1: You're doing the multiplication, but the product is different. You're
Speaker 1: doing the division, you're doing the adding, but the sum
Speaker 1: is different. You're doing the subtraction, but the difference is different. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know. I mean, I'm not getting what you're getting.
Speaker 1: And it's easy, and I get it because I've been
Speaker 1: on people's podcast. Fucking Big Court got me like that
Speaker 1: one time. I'm saying something and he acted like when
Speaker 1: the camera's on, he didn't get it. And when the
Speaker 1: camera went off, he was like, yeah, I was just
Speaker 1: fucking with you to make conversation, And I was like,
Speaker 1: am I the only person I'm dead serious about? What
Speaker 1: I'm saying all the time, Like I don't think people
Speaker 1: really believe all. I believe all the shit I am saying.
Speaker 1: If I'm talking about Dennis Raman being the second best part,
Speaker 1: I believe it. And it's only because I'm doing the mathematics.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying who I like better. If you ask
Speaker 1: me who I would like better, the list would probably
Speaker 1: be completely different. If it was the five power forwards
Speaker 1: I like better or I like watching It's completely different
Speaker 1: than the five greatest you know which. We have accomplishments
Speaker 1: to come up with that thing. But people will I
Speaker 1: separate what they like from accomplishments, or they will not separate,
Speaker 1: you know, offense being the centers piece of what they like.
Speaker 1: Even though every last professional great, all time great coach
Speaker 1: or sportsman in the history of the thing will tell
Speaker 1: you defense wins championships. And that's why we play sports
Speaker 1: in the first place, is to win.
Speaker 2: Sure, John, the simplest math in assessing a team sport
Speaker 2: is what is your impact footprint, so to speak, on
Speaker 2: a team and how much did the team win? If
Speaker 2: you're the eighth guy on the importance hierarchy of your roster,
Speaker 2: I don't care that you're like like Jack Haley winning
Speaker 2: four rings or whatever, hanging out with Robin to keep
Speaker 2: him in line. I don't care about you, Jack, Sorry, sure,
Speaker 2: But like if your top one, two, three on a
Speaker 2: team and you got five or you got six, you
Speaker 2: got to multiply six by point eight five importance index score,
Speaker 2: you know what I mean, and then you get five.
Speaker 2: If you're Robert ri and you got six, but you're
Speaker 2: a point two five index score, you only got like
Speaker 2: one and a half.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, But I think it just makes people feel
Speaker 1: better when they they can disregard me presenting a different
Speaker 1: solution to a problem that they never did the work
Speaker 1: on themselves. People, And I get why, bro, Like I
Speaker 1: think men hered me and you have talked about this.
Speaker 1: I don't think people are stupid or incapable of doing
Speaker 1: the work. I don't think they they don't have what
Speaker 1: it takes to do to work. I think they are
Speaker 1: Hella distracted in Hella lazy one or the other right
Speaker 1: to where people don't want to do the math on
Speaker 1: their own. They say, just give me the answer and
Speaker 1: then I'm a right to answer. It made me think
Speaker 1: like I took pride in taking tests. I'm starting to
Speaker 1: believe that that is not normal.
Speaker 2: It's not normal. I was the guy with the zero. Like,
Speaker 2: here's my high school life. I would get a low
Speaker 2: F on my homework score portion of the grade and
Speaker 2: a high A on my test score portion of grade
Speaker 2: because I don't want do any work. And then I
Speaker 2: would go before finals a week and negotiate with the teacher.
Speaker 2: If I get a ninety and eight or better on
Speaker 2: the final, will you give me a B minus and
Speaker 2: disregarded as assignments. I blew off because I have a
Speaker 2: ninety six percent test average, and the guy would think,
Speaker 2: you're never gonna get a ninety eight, so of course
Speaker 2: I'll offer you that deal. You're never gonna get it,
Speaker 2: And then I would get it, and I'd get my
Speaker 2: B minus and go home, and then I do every
Speaker 2: single fucking solitary class that they had to offer me.
Speaker 2: You know, I didn't learn the lesson of school, which
Speaker 2: is school is about learning a process and learning about time.
Speaker 2: All the things that school teaches you that they don't
Speaker 2: tell you that they're teaching you. I didn't learn those things.
Speaker 2: I would just learned the material that they were teaching me.
Speaker 1: You know, it's funny that term you use, negotiate. I
Speaker 1: think we don't negotiate enough. I think a lot of
Speaker 1: things we're doing we're just taking what everybody's telling us
Speaker 1: what it is. Yeah, I think we need to really
Speaker 1: push that term and really push the idea of negotiation,
Speaker 1: because that was important. There's all kind of deals to
Speaker 1: be made, Like it's driving me crazy, Like I'm like, yo,
Speaker 1: I need to get a gold album, Like I have
Speaker 1: a gold single, but I need a gold album. Like
Speaker 1: I need my brand to sell five hundred thousand copies
Speaker 1: in America, Like that is my goal when I didn't
Speaker 1: have one, that I figured out what it was, and
Speaker 1: now to achieve it independently, it's such a challenge, Like
Speaker 1: there's very few there's very few companies who've done it,
Speaker 1: like Delicious Vinyls. And maybe I need to do some
Speaker 1: homework because man if I did it as an independent bro,
Speaker 1: that would be like incredible.
Speaker 2: Let's just just hear me. This is a very badly illustrated,
Speaker 2: off the top of my head scenario of the hypothetical.
Speaker 2: Let's take what you were talking about with short song concepts,
Speaker 2: and let's suppose you did I'll say, for the sake
Speaker 2: of it, like TikTok songs, songs that are short enough
Speaker 2: to fit within whatever the framework of the real length is,
Speaker 2: you know what I mean, And you just do it
Speaker 2: like r Kelly trapped in the closet, where you got
Speaker 2: parts want to do? Provide seventy eight and nine and
Speaker 2: it's a five minute song, but it's broken up into
Speaker 2: ten parts that are all thirty seconds. They proliferate in
Speaker 2: total through every platform in the world. You get whatever
Speaker 2: the hell astronomical total downloads are. They just qualify you
Speaker 2: on their paradigm for being gold. But you're the most
Speaker 2: viral name in the industry because you put together these
Speaker 2: stories that are consumable in total on every single platform
Speaker 2: by every single person on every single platform. And now
Speaker 2: you're more listened to in the aggregate than the next
Speaker 2: guy who certified gold. But you're not certified gold because
Speaker 2: your paradigm doesn't match into the systems and play because
Speaker 2: they are cane.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, but I think they would still certify you.
Speaker 1: Go then they just wouldn't certify the next guy. Goal.
Speaker 2: Okay, then be the new the first guy on the
Speaker 2: new system.
Speaker 1: Yeah. But see that's what I did with Tupac mus
Speaker 1: Die like that. Was the problem, Like like I was
Speaker 1: able to shake everything, but they pretty much you know,
Speaker 1: banned me, shadow ban me. Like this nigga is pushing out,
Speaker 1: you know, like Gangster Rap was in the early eight
Speaker 1: in the late eighties, where it was like this is
Speaker 1: too much. I mean it was it was crazy is
Speaker 1: it was too much? The intellect the thought of that
Speaker 1: it was a fear, you know what I mean, for
Speaker 1: people to have where it's like, damn, somebody could have
Speaker 1: this kind of power.
Speaker 2: The New Top was a five part series facts. They
Speaker 2: had twenty five million TikTok down Loows because they that's
Speaker 2: the fun anything. I was listening to some people talk
Speaker 2: about it, and I've thought about this for a long
Speaker 2: time because I have a few friends of mine that
Speaker 2: are not famous, but very very very good at social
Speaker 2: media and have built like very sizable followerships for themselves.
Speaker 2: The government's going after TikTok, right, they're trying to shut
Speaker 2: it down into a four sale of TikTok, and they're
Speaker 2: suggesting that China's doing ABCDFG. I don't think that that's
Speaker 2: necessarily true. They point to Sartain, but he could be.
Speaker 2: It could be, but it has a very similar feel
Speaker 2: to the five G Huawei hardware conspiracy, which turned out
Speaker 2: to be disproven, and they say, oh, well, China's pushing
Speaker 2: this idea. No, they're not pushing it. They have the purest,
Speaker 2: most finely tuned and distilled algorithm for virality of all
Speaker 2: the platforms. So when you have a smaller and expanding
Speaker 2: base of users and you have that type of purity,
Speaker 2: whatever gets hot early goes wild. It's a brushfire. So
Speaker 2: they had a brushfire of you know, topic A, B, C,
Speaker 2: and D that didn't happen on a already very hefty
Speaker 2: followership of like Instagram that has walls built up around
Speaker 2: what can go viral and how. And I don't think
Speaker 2: they TikTok perfectly honest with you, is guilty of what
Speaker 2: they being accused of.
Speaker 1: M Yeah, it seemed like to me when you use
Speaker 1: your brain and you do the mathematics to come up
Speaker 1: with that, like there's a group of people that don't
Speaker 1: want to think, yeah.
Speaker 2: It's not a group, it's there's a there are there
Speaker 2: is a group of people who want to think.
Speaker 1: M. Yes, it's just hell of frustrating, And I feel bad.
Speaker 1: I feel like a lot of people who listen to
Speaker 1: no selings. They have to be people like that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean you have to be willing to do the work.
Speaker 2: Sure, I got a handful of like random like inboxes
Speaker 2: because of some and that was like that was a
Speaker 2: bit of a shots fired kind of like heat check
Speaker 2: post that I did about like with the Kendrick Kobe
Speaker 2: and and people got bent out of shape and I
Speaker 2: got inboxed about it by a handful of people, and
Speaker 2: only Mook was the only guy who knew exactly what
Speaker 2: I meant before I said it. So anybody who inboxed me,
Speaker 2: I just sent him like a forty five second voice
Speaker 2: message back. I was like I meant it in this
Speaker 2: context this way, and they're like, oh, I should just
Speaker 2: say so. So they got it, and they were all
Speaker 2: thoughtful people that took took, you know whatever. There was
Speaker 2: one guy who was the coolest guy and he's from
Speaker 2: Carolina and I got it. He didn't follow me, so
Speaker 2: it came up in one of those like hidden messages,
Speaker 2: and his profile picture is nip. I'm like, this is
Speaker 2: gonna be a death threat. I'm like, watch, I'm a clerless,
Speaker 2: It's gonna be I'm gonna dude was way cool.
Speaker 1: We had a.
Speaker 2: Conversation back and forth. Very thoughtful guy, but like this
Speaker 2: audience is a very intellectually intellectually engaged thinking audience. That's
Speaker 2: that's kind of the lightning rod that you know you've
Speaker 2: put up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, facts, do you think it's something? Do you think
Speaker 1: it's disingenuous to use those kinds of things that you
Speaker 1: know people are going to have emotional outrage too to
Speaker 1: make points because you know they're going to have emotional
Speaker 1: outrage to him.
Speaker 2: In a state of in a in an integrity vacuum. Yes,
Speaker 2: in reality, No, for the following reason. I think people
Speaker 2: are stuck in such a rut that it takes a
Speaker 2: light bulb in a crowd of candles to like rattle
Speaker 2: them and get their attention and serve as a catalyst
Speaker 2: to critical thought. Critical thought is in scarce supply these days,
Speaker 2: and it needs to be you know, there needs to
Speaker 2: be a spark to a lot of dormant gasoline. And
Speaker 2: I think that sometimes that's necessary. I don't think that
Speaker 2: it's wrong. It just depends on why you're doing it.
Speaker 2: If you're doing it for manipulative, stupid reasons or if
Speaker 2: you're doing it for righteous reasons, is more so where
Speaker 2: I would draw the line.
Speaker 1: Mm, I guess that's what we're saying, and that's what
Speaker 1: we're talking about, that morality vacuum versus what's needed in
Speaker 1: real life.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and we live in the age of platitudes everything,
Speaker 2: like from a lot of artists, particularly in a highly
Speaker 2: it's been a highly politicized environment for over a decade now,
Speaker 2: and all of it is the better the vaguer, you know,
Speaker 2: like Barack Obama's the first guy hope and change. What
Speaker 2: does that even mean? You know? And now it's like
Speaker 2: I'm campaigning for equality and prosperity or just some nonsense.
Speaker 2: I mean, those are just words, but people like them
Speaker 2: and they Yeah, you know.
Speaker 1: There's things that bring joy or or excitement to people
Speaker 1: because those words hope and change are very much h
Speaker 1: viral words. There are very much things that create excitement,
Speaker 1: even if you're not specifically talking about what you're going
Speaker 1: to change or who you're bringing hope to or what
Speaker 1: you're for.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and and that's absolutely playing to the moment in
Speaker 2: history where people do not do the critical analysis, what
Speaker 2: is the hope you're providing and how is the change
Speaker 2: going to happen to meet said hope? Diagram the apparatus.
Speaker 2: No one's doing it. They it's easier and cheaper and
Speaker 2: funner to just say the thing, you know, And I
Speaker 2: think that that's not you know, that's not a long
Speaker 2: term proposition. M hm.
Speaker 1: What it caters to the Maybe maybe that's the problem. Maybe,
Speaker 1: you know, Yeah, I'm never just going against the grain.
Speaker 1: Well maybe you know, people keep saying that, like I'm
Speaker 1: not catering to people's emotions enough, sure, or the emotions
Speaker 1: that you cater to welleah, cater to the end to
Speaker 1: make more than their emotions.
Speaker 2: Well, like here's a hot take. People have no problem discussing,
Speaker 2: like any quality of athleticism. Let's say, no matter what
Speaker 2: the athleticism, anything physical. It could be black people are
Speaker 2: faster on ground, white people are faster on water, whatever
Speaker 2: it might be. People are totally fine with a sesseg athletic.
Speaker 2: You know, variabilities of outcome and how whatever form did
Speaker 2: they come m People get real touchy about intellectual variability
Speaker 2: of outcome.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying is right or wrong. I'm just saying, wow,
Speaker 2: I would to assume that that guy by association could
Speaker 2: jump higher, but that guy by association doesn't do math.
Speaker 1: Real.
Speaker 2: Well, you know, it's like.
Speaker 1: I think they do when they when they needed to
Speaker 1: use today benefit. I mean, my idea for why people
Speaker 1: don't think is I just think they're too consumed with
Speaker 1: everything else going on in life. I think people do
Speaker 1: drugs because they don't want to have to deal with
Speaker 1: real life. I think people get drunk because they don't
Speaker 1: want to have to deal with real life, almost as
Speaker 1: if they get to use it as a way. Like
Speaker 1: when I hear people say, well, I'm just trying to
Speaker 1: have some fun when they drinking, and I'm like, well,
Speaker 1: why not just have fun? Like, I don't get why
Speaker 1: do you need to do anything extra besides have fun?
Speaker 1: I'm confusing. It's a weird space where you, like, you know,
Speaker 1: people are going dates, women are let men take them
Speaker 1: on dates to places and drink alcohol, And why are
Speaker 1: you lowering your inhibition? And I don't want to think.
Speaker 1: Everybody who's ever that I know that's an honest person
Speaker 1: has told me alcohol is not really good. It's not
Speaker 1: a taste. It's not something you drink to taste, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean, Like, if you're going to drink,
Speaker 1: then they notice the taste, but compared to just beverages
Speaker 1: in general, it's not something that tastes good.
Speaker 2: So nobody puts alcohol flavor artificially on things. That was
Speaker 2: one of my early comedy bits was about, don't tell
Speaker 2: me your pussy tastes good. There's no pussy flavored ice cream.
Speaker 2: There's no pussy flavored sauce or condiments that you put
Speaker 2: on other things to make them taste better. And the
Speaker 2: same hole is true for alcohol. Nobody pours alcohol on
Speaker 2: a steak because it's a little tough.
Speaker 1: But I'm saying so so I'm saying it's like like
Speaker 1: people are making decisions. It's so many decisions being made
Speaker 1: on autopilot. And when you stand up in a room
Speaker 1: and say, hey, man, why are you doing that? If
Speaker 1: if this is not your goal, it's like they don't
Speaker 1: want to think. It's like you're pushing them to think,
Speaker 1: and it's fucking frustrate man, Like so many shit you
Speaker 1: shouldn't even have to be pushed to think about this generation.
Speaker 2: And it's true in the micro, and it expands in
Speaker 2: the macro. I don't really believe a lot personally in
Speaker 2: groups and group think. I think, I mean, like I know,
Speaker 2: it happens, happens but I think that it's reverse engineered
Speaker 2: in the way it's delivered. A group is just a
Speaker 2: group of individuals. You know, if you get the individuals
Speaker 2: to look at this thing in the same way, then
Speaker 2: it's now of a sudden you have a group think
Speaker 2: but you don't. But this our generation and the ones
Speaker 2: younger than us, there was a turning point. It's some
Speaker 2: somewhere where the priority shifted from opportunity to security. And
Speaker 2: I think it was when stuff got good enough to
Speaker 2: be good enough. Now people are like, look, just give
Speaker 2: me the bare minimum and the least amount of headache
Speaker 2: and that's okay, where seventy years ago the bare minimum
Speaker 2: wasn't good and that it wasn't okay. So people had
Speaker 2: to have they had to have ambition, they had to have,
Speaker 2: you know, a pathway to get to what was okay,
Speaker 2: because what was okay wasn't right in front of them.
Speaker 2: And I think that that's you know, manifested itself through
Speaker 2: every aspect of society. Now, that's kind of like, principally speaking,
Speaker 2: I don't care you smoke weed all day. I don't like,
Speaker 2: I don't It doesn't bother me. The legal weed doesn't
Speaker 2: bother me. But I can't sit back objectively and say
Speaker 2: I don't come to California and go this has become
Speaker 2: a problem. There's too many people to smoke too much
Speaker 2: weed too much of the time, and very few of
Speaker 2: them are not negatively impacted by doing so.
Speaker 1: Hmm. I'm just I'm thinking, where is the meeting ground? Right?
Speaker 1: Where is the meeting ground to? I don't know, like,
Speaker 1: because I could never just assimilate into people that like.
Speaker 1: I won't call it group thought because they're not thinking
Speaker 1: at all. But I could never assimilate into a space
Speaker 1: where I'm not doing the math, where I'm not doing
Speaker 1: the work, where you could just pass me the answer.
Speaker 1: I could never assimilate into that society. But somewhere along
Speaker 1: the line, for the sake of doing business, I have
Speaker 1: to connect to people.
Speaker 2: I think this is a big difference. I don't think
Speaker 2: you should ever assimilate to the lowest common denominator, or
Speaker 2: at least even to the most common denominator, if you
Speaker 2: don't understand why you're doing it. But if you understand
Speaker 2: why other people have assimilated to that common denominator, you
Speaker 2: can relate to that catalyst and you can provide an
Speaker 2: alternative spark, and I think that's kind of more So
Speaker 2: you have to be able to do if you're engaged
Speaker 2: and other people are not engaged, you have to understand
Speaker 2: why are they not engaged, what are they engaged in?
Speaker 2: And how can I get over there into that space
Speaker 2: to which they're engaged.
Speaker 1: What's funny is so I promise also to forgive me.
Speaker 1: I promise myself well when I do podcasts here and
Speaker 1: I will take notes to smart.
Speaker 2: I like that.
Speaker 1: I've noticed a lot of really dope artists, not a lot,
Speaker 1: but a decent amount have said they're going to dumb down, right.
Speaker 1: I've heard jay Z reference dumbing down, and it's like,
Speaker 1: I think you dumbed down to take advantage of people.
Speaker 2: I think that's true to a degree. It depends on
Speaker 2: your starting point.
Speaker 1: Well, I think you dumbed down to only take advantage
Speaker 1: of people. First off, if you reference people like their
Speaker 1: dumb because notice in this conversation, I've never referenced people
Speaker 1: as dumb or and able to think right or stupid.
Speaker 1: I think they are. There are people that are ignorant,
Speaker 1: they don't know. I think people are lazy because they've
Speaker 1: been conditioned, or I think people are distracted. Life throws
Speaker 1: so many different things that you bro that you are distracted,
Speaker 1: so you can't people are depressed. Well, I think the
Speaker 1: catch is to get smarter. Yeah, Like I think dumb
Speaker 1: and down may have access you into millions of people. Right. Like,
Speaker 1: let's say if you dumb down as a rapper, right,
Speaker 1: you you get to you know, millions of people, right,
Speaker 1: two million people, because if you're dumbing down, you're speaking
Speaker 1: their language. But what if you get smarter and then
Speaker 1: you appeal to five hundred thousand people that can move
Speaker 1: the world, Like instead of trying to pass a message
Speaker 1: to trillions of sheep, you pass or you five hundred
Speaker 1: shepherds to five hundred of shepherds, and then you still
Speaker 1: move the sheets either way.
Speaker 2: I get that, and and that's that to me, is
Speaker 2: is a concerning statement that jay Z, that's what you said.
Speaker 1: Right, he said dumb down double my dad.
Speaker 2: The dumb down his his content or river. I've heard
Speaker 2: numerous people on the complete other end of the spectrum
Speaker 2: of society quote what's guy's name, Rush Limbaugh mm hm,
Speaker 2: saying never disrespect your audience, Never assume your audience is
Speaker 2: not smart enough for what you want to say. Yeah,
Speaker 2: you know, and I think that that's violent valid. Uh
Speaker 2: It's like, I'm gonna nerd out for a second. It's
Speaker 2: gonna be way nerdy. I've been I invested in this
Speaker 2: company called Versus AI. They're different, They're a whole different
Speaker 2: system of artificial intelligence. Their cognition is defined by and
Speaker 2: they actually have like on their c level board, like
Speaker 2: one of the leading neuroscientists of the brain and how
Speaker 2: the human brain works, like in the world. So they're
Speaker 2: modeling their entire program model after how the human brain learns,
Speaker 2: not singularity they call that. They say, we're multiplicity in
Speaker 2: Navidia chat GPT is singularity. So singularity and the current
Speaker 2: paradigm of AI is what's the most common answer based
Speaker 2: off this massive metadata of whatever the fuck when you
Speaker 2: ask a question. All that means is you're taking everybody
Speaker 2: and stuffing them at the high part of the bell curve.
Speaker 2: You're giving everybody a one hundred IQ for better or worse.
Speaker 2: The other apparatus is we're going to take our program
Speaker 2: and it's going to operate that the human brain is
Speaker 2: going to learn by trial and error, the same way
Speaker 2: that you know an adolescent eagle learns how to catch
Speaker 2: a fish, the same where a human being learns how
Speaker 2: to not crash a car all those other things. So
Speaker 2: it's outcome oriented. And I think that dumbing down is
Speaker 2: just a cheap way to try to hit the high
Speaker 2: part of the bell curve, you know, whether you're in
Speaker 2: it or not in it. And that's kind of the
Speaker 2: general gist in opposed to trying to figure out, all right,
Speaker 2: the high part of the bell curves here, they're focused
Speaker 2: on this, how can I get the high part of
Speaker 2: the bell curve by adjacents. It's like a you know,
Speaker 2: like a bright light if you ever. If I'm looking
Speaker 2: here and there's a bright light over here, I'm going
Speaker 2: to see it thirty degrees away, one hundred and seventy degrees.
Speaker 1: Away, I'm not going to see it.
Speaker 2: How can I get my bright light thirty degrees away
Speaker 2: so that they all see it? Kind of thing?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I like that. Well, yeah, I just have to
Speaker 1: get smarter. I have to get wittier. Smart is all
Speaker 1: about wit. I have to get wittier, sure and not.
Speaker 1: I don't have to dumb down. I need to get wittier,
Speaker 1: Like fuck, if people you know it bothers people like
Speaker 1: I know I'm doing the math, but I just need
Speaker 1: to get wittier. I need to get I need to
Speaker 1: apply more with I don't need to dumb down. I
Speaker 1: need to get smarter. I need to really you know,
Speaker 1: like I said, is if I get smarter, it works out.
Speaker 2: Sure, maybe you need to get I don't want to
Speaker 2: say more casual. But one thing I thought was very
Speaker 2: very interesting you were talking about with regard to the
Speaker 2: Kendrick Lamar Drake thing, was how and like, I'll be
Speaker 2: very frank, this recent stuff is the first Kendrick stuff
Speaker 2: that I really liked. Sure you know, I'm not knocking
Speaker 2: the guy I met him.
Speaker 1: Understand that God has that has definitely God has done
Speaker 1: a fantastic job. God has done a fantastic job of
Speaker 1: making his music really overly sophisticated at times. And he's
Speaker 1: a really intelligent dude, you know, real smart, no music.
Speaker 1: But he also knew how to do the same damn
Speaker 1: thing without it being that way. But I think, you know,
Speaker 1: he probably has a really great reason. One thing I
Speaker 1: can tell you about everybody at TDE, whatever they're doing,
Speaker 1: they doing it on purpose. Whether that's cute, whether that's die,
Speaker 1: whether that's so, whether that's Jay Rock, or at least
Speaker 1: that batch of people. They're doing it on purpose. This
Speaker 1: particular situation he didn't like because it needed to be
Speaker 1: kind of instant, like he didn't have enough time to
Speaker 1: me to over complicate things.
Speaker 2: That's my point. You had said that this recent release
Speaker 2: was the closest thing you have observe to actually knowing
Speaker 2: him in person. Sure, if you were to walk open
Speaker 2: the door and there was five hundred people outside, what's
Speaker 2: the voice on two seconds? Notice that you would use
Speaker 2: to talk to five hundred people one at a time
Speaker 2: as they were just kind of all you know, in
Speaker 2: your face and shit like that. And that needs to
Speaker 2: be how you You need to take that moment and
Speaker 2: not overthink it because you're likable to the masses at
Speaker 2: the drop of a hat, you know, take that experience
Speaker 2: into the studio because it's gonna be you wouldn't oh
Speaker 2: my god, as far for people outside. Let it come
Speaker 2: with the most sophisticated way to not relate to them.
Speaker 2: But I'm gonna be really really highly intellectual in the process,
Speaker 2: and I'm gonna walk outside and make a statement and
Speaker 2: they're all gonna be like, what the fuck was that?
Speaker 2: And I'm gonna go back and side, you know, roll out,
Speaker 2: do exactly how you would naturally do, where everybody likes
Speaker 2: you of all scale, shape, size, and whatever. And that's
Speaker 2: the voice you got to bring to the studio because
Speaker 2: it's the most natural, it's the most and it's the
Speaker 2: most socially developed into being you know you and why
Speaker 2: you're likable as a person.
Speaker 1: Okay, here's a good question. Appeal to two million sheeps
Speaker 1: or five hundred thousand shepherds. Excuse the dame million sheep
Speaker 1: or five hundred thousand shepherd. I keep forgetting those words
Speaker 1: of plural.
Speaker 2: Sure, sure, it depends on the endgame. If the end
Speaker 2: game is if the metric of grain is streams, you
Speaker 2: probably want to go straight to the sheep. If the
Speaker 2: metric of grain is social impact, you might want to
Speaker 2: go to the shepherds. It depends on how you want
Speaker 2: to value your grain.
Speaker 1: But you don't think the shepherd drive the sheep.
Speaker 2: I don't get the sense. I don't know the metrics.
Speaker 2: That's sort of kind of like tantamount to marketing directly
Speaker 2: to DJs or mixed guys digitally, assuming that if they
Speaker 2: put your shit high on their mix via some sort
Speaker 2: of payola apparatus that you're gonna get bang for your buck,
Speaker 2: whereas that may or may not be true. If you
Speaker 2: put content out that just plane hits to the masses,
Speaker 2: they're gonna put you on their mix. So, I don't know,
Speaker 2: it's a little bit different in that regard, and I
Speaker 2: don't know the nuance is enough personally.
Speaker 1: And looking out for tuning into the No Sellers podcast.
Speaker 1: Please do us a favorite, subscribe, rate, comment, and share.
Speaker 1: This episode was recorded right here on the West coast
Speaker 1: of the USA and produced by the Black Effect Podcast
Speaker 1: Network and now Hard Radio. Yeah