Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2: Arm Strong and Jetty and he.
Speaker 1: Armstrong and Getty. We're cooked as a country.
Speaker 3: When my first reaction to hearing the news about Trump's
Speaker 3: attempt was it was probably fake. Like immediately I was like, oh,
Speaker 3: that wasn't real, probably fake. And the second was they missed. Hmmm,
Speaker 3: so happy they missed.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's that's that's sad. That's uh, not just a
Speaker 1: one off. Unfortunately, there's just way too many of those
Speaker 1: out there.
Speaker 4: And as important as the actual statements are the perception
Speaker 4: by many, many, many people that it's okay to say that.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 4: In fact, not only will it not be condemned in
Speaker 4: a way that I care about, it will be celebrated.
Speaker 1: Right. Well, since you mentioned that, here's Eric Weinstein, love
Speaker 1: him or hate him, responding to this sort of stuff.
Speaker 1: These aren't deranged liberals, They are normalized revolutionaries. Speaking to
Speaker 1: what you just said, we normalized revolutionary thinking. These normalized
Speaker 1: revolutionaries have jobs, advanced degrees, teaching credentials, mortgages, and responsibilities.
Speaker 1: But we've normalized this online, so people now just accept
Speaker 1: the idea of assassinating business leaders and political leaders as
Speaker 1: you know, something we probably ought to consider. You've got
Speaker 1: this Wisconsin teacher who has put on leave.
Speaker 4: Looks like he's gonna say online and in the academy
Speaker 4: as they say, but go on, here's a Wisconsin high
Speaker 4: school teacher.
Speaker 1: It looks like he's about forty five years old, placed
Speaker 1: on leave after he posted we need to make America
Speaker 1: and we need to magah make Americans great assassins again,
Speaker 1: enlists how Booth and Oswald didn't miss. What are we
Speaker 1: doing wrong here? Again? The idea that no, I can
Speaker 1: go ahead and post that as a teacher and that'll
Speaker 1: be fine. Yeah, we've normalized these revolutionary postings where I
Speaker 1: guess if you get any pushback, like lose your job
Speaker 1: or somebody says you shouldn't say that, you're kind of surprised.
Speaker 1: What do you mean it's Trump, right? I guess it's nuts.
Speaker 1: I don't you know. Part of it is the whole
Speaker 1: we think they're crazy, they think we're evil thing because
Speaker 1: there is no bit of me at all, not even
Speaker 1: the tiniest shred of me. If Barack Obama had been
Speaker 1: assassinated or Joe Biden had been assassinated that I would
Speaker 1: have been happy about it, right, I'd have thought, oh
Speaker 1: my god, the country's falling apart.
Speaker 4: And I understand why you use the word crazy, but
Speaker 4: are not crazy. They are committed to a certain ideology,
Speaker 4: as Brett Weinstein.
Speaker 1: We think they're unwise, we think they're wrong, but they
Speaker 1: think we're evil, so that evil justifies all kinds of stuff.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah, I'm wrong. You think you can convince
Speaker 1: them that they're wrong and change their minds or win
Speaker 1: the argument, right? Right? Hansen?
Speaker 4: Do you have the Quillette audio that I asked for yet?
Speaker 4: We'll see it'll always be appropriate, So that's fine. Yeah,
Speaker 4: it's We've got so much to get to on this
Speaker 4: topic of this ideology and how popular it's become that
Speaker 4: I almost don't know where to start. So I'll start
Speaker 4: with some great stuff from Charles C. W.
Speaker 1: Cook.
Speaker 4: Actually, you know, I could start with the fact that
Speaker 4: Peter Savodnik, among others in the Free Press, wrote a
Speaker 4: great piece. There's a terrific piece in the Wall Street
Speaker 4: Journal when rationalization turns Deadly. I've got a few more
Speaker 4: from a few Douglas Murray's writing about this. Here's something
Speaker 4: from the Washington Free Beacon. All this all on the
Speaker 4: same theme that what was until recently obviously off limits
Speaker 4: is now a okay if the victim and perpetrator are
Speaker 4: the right sort of people. Charles Cook, for instance, writes,
Speaker 4: this country, we do not leave it up to each
Speaker 4: person to determine what extent each individual is murderable.
Speaker 1: We insist upon a blanket rule.
Speaker 4: To chip away at that dictum, even rhetorically is to
Speaker 4: play with ancient fire. That same goes for carjacking, shoplifting,
Speaker 4: and ip theft. It is entirely irrelevant whether we are discussing,
Speaker 4: and he gives a bunch of different examples. Stealing is
Speaker 4: for boten morality. Notwithstanding, this injunction provides us with the
Speaker 4: predictability that is necessary for our culture to flourish. He
Speaker 4: mentioned Hassan Piker, the execrable Maoist is lombist who's now
Speaker 4: the toast, the toast of the left. He set New
Speaker 4: York Times podcast hosting him and giggling and praising him
Speaker 4: and agreeing with him was disgusting. But Cook writes, Hassan
Speaker 4: Piker does not strike me as a particularly thoughtful person,
Speaker 4: so it is probably that like so many affluent would
Speaker 4: be revolutionaries. He has falsely assumed that the stability he
Speaker 4: enjoys every day is an intrinsic feature of the natural world.
Speaker 1: It is not.
Speaker 4: Each time he receives a payment, or swipes his credit
Speaker 4: card or interacts with his accountant, he is mindlessly assuming
Speaker 4: that the rules about which he is so painfully glib
Speaker 4: will hold fast. If, as he insisted twice, it is
Speaker 4: acceptable to steal from whole foods, then there is no
Speaker 4: good reason that it is unacceptable to steal from Hassan Piker.
Speaker 4: Relative to most, both are rich. But thankfully that is
Speaker 4: not our standard. If it were, our society would become
Speaker 4: chaotic within a matter of weeks, and it would not
Speaker 4: be the privileged who paid the highest price for that.
Speaker 4: The central conservative insight I'm getting this tattooed on me
Speaker 4: today is that civilizations are fragile and that it takes
Speaker 4: constant effort to sustain them. Cretins such as Piker and
Speaker 4: the two ladies from the New York Times are free
Speaker 4: to omit their bilge without formal sanction, but they are
Speaker 4: not immune for the judgments of the sober. There are
Speaker 4: many words to describe figures whose worldview calls for the
Speaker 4: dismantling of the architecture that keeps us all secure. And
Speaker 4: for my money, enemy is as good as any other.
Speaker 4: If heated, Hassan Piker would walk us straight off the cliff.
Speaker 1: Yes, enemy it is.
Speaker 4: That is one of the more serious and sober thinkers
Speaker 4: writing today, Charles Cook. He is no you know, internet influencer,
Speaker 4: podcaster bomb chucker.
Speaker 1: He's a very very serious man. I know we are
Speaker 1: an agreement on the whole broken windows principle. Is that
Speaker 1: fit here? Do you think the fact that it became acceptable? Sure,
Speaker 1: I have to have somebody get a key to unlock
Speaker 1: the toothpaste. That's just the way things are fits in
Speaker 1: with Sure, it's okay people are squeezing off shots at presidents.
Speaker 1: It kind of cascades from one thing to another. You've
Speaker 1: got your activist Marxists who want to bring down the system.
Speaker 1: They want to steal, they want to bring down corporation,
Speaker 1: so they want to overwhelm the welfare system. They want
Speaker 1: to crush capitalism. Right.
Speaker 4: Then you've got the useful idiots, the college professors, and
Speaker 4: I've got some great audio about them in a second,
Speaker 4: who think that yes, that's right. I want to be
Speaker 4: a brave revolutionary. I'm going to help these people. And
Speaker 4: then you've got just the people in the streets who
Speaker 4: just kind of are living their lives and see crime
Speaker 4: and think everybody else is getting away with it, so
Speaker 4: I guess I can too. That's where the broken windows
Speaker 4: thing comes in. I think you know, uh, okay, yeah,
Speaker 4: A quick word from our friends of Trust and Will.
Speaker 4: Then one of the most important bits of audio that
Speaker 4: exists on earth in my opinion. But this is important. Indeed,
Speaker 4: Judy and I took care of this, and it is
Speaker 4: a wonderful feeling when you get her done. A trust
Speaker 4: which might be necessary, or just a will and they'll
Speaker 4: help you understand that, or trust and Will to make
Speaker 4: your wishes clear for when you're gone, because we're all
Speaker 4: going to go somewhere. Trust and Will, well, we're going
Speaker 4: to go some time. Where we go is kind up
Speaker 4: to you and your local clergyman. But Trust and Will
Speaker 4: offers affordable attorney designed to state plans online that you
Speaker 4: can create.
Speaker 1: In as little as thirty minutes. Off the top of
Speaker 1: my head, and I'm sure if I thought about how
Speaker 1: longer I could come up with more. Off the top
Speaker 1: of my head. I can picture four people that I
Speaker 1: know no longer speak to their brother or sister or
Speaker 1: mom or whoever because of the battle that happened when
Speaker 1: dad died or mom died or whatever, because there was
Speaker 1: no trust and will set up just tears families apart. Anyway,
Speaker 1: and as little as thirty minutes, you can create a
Speaker 1: will that lets you document your wishes for guardians, asset distribution,
Speaker 1: healthcare planning, all that sort of stuff. If you need
Speaker 1: an attorney, you can probably do it without an attorney,
Speaker 1: But if you need an attorney, attorney Sport is available
Speaker 1: as an add on to your plan.
Speaker 4: Go to trustinwill dot com slash armstrong to get twenty
Speaker 4: percent off do this.
Speaker 1: Look into this.
Speaker 4: It's easy to get started trusted will dot com slash armstrong.
Speaker 4: Some of you are familiar with this. It is absolutely invaluable.
Speaker 4: This is a short chunk of an interview a fellow
Speaker 4: by the name a. Yuri Besmanov did in the ades.
Speaker 4: Was a KGB guy, and he defected to the United
Speaker 4: States then did a handful of interviews explaining the way
Speaker 4: the KGB does what they do. There's a lot to
Speaker 4: be said on this topic, but the Timing's perfect clip.
Speaker 4: Elevan Michael, did you see that?
Speaker 1: Useful idiots?
Speaker 5: The leftists who are idealistically believing in the beauty of
Speaker 5: Soviet socialists or communists of their system, when they get
Speaker 5: disillusion they become the worst enemies. That's why my CAGB
Speaker 5: instructors specifically made the point, never bother the leftists. Forget
Speaker 5: about these political prostitutes aim higher but to eliminate the others,
Speaker 5: to execute the others.
Speaker 1: Don't they serve some purpose? When't they be not one?
Speaker 1: They realize they.
Speaker 5: Serve purpose only at the stage of destabilization of a nation.
Speaker 5: For example, your leftists in the United States, all these
Speaker 5: professors and all these beautiful civil rights defenders, they are
Speaker 5: instrumental in the process of the subversion, only to destabilize
Speaker 5: the nation. When their job is completely they are not
Speaker 5: They are not needed anymore. They know too much, some
Speaker 5: of them. When when they get disillusion when they see
Speaker 5: that Marxist Leninists come to power, obviously they get offended.
Speaker 5: They think that they will come to power. That will
Speaker 5: never happen. Of course, they will be lined up against
Speaker 5: the wall and shot. But they may turn into the
Speaker 5: most bigger enemies of Marxist Leninists when they come to power,
Speaker 5: and that's what happened in Nicaragua. You remember most of
Speaker 5: the former Marxist Leninists were either put to prison or
Speaker 5: one of them split. And now he's working against Sandinistas.
Speaker 5: It's the same pattern everywhere. The moment they serve their purpose,
Speaker 5: all the useful idiots are used, either the executed entirely,
Speaker 5: all the see the useful idiots, the leftists who are
Speaker 5: idealistically believing in the beauty of Soviet socialists or communists
Speaker 5: of what their system.
Speaker 1: That's interesting and it reminds me of the book I'm
Speaker 1: reading about Cuba and the Revolution and young Fidel when
Speaker 1: he was starting the revolution, before he became became a communist,
Speaker 1: the subject of communism came up. He said, I'm only
Speaker 1: interested in being a communist if I get to be Stalin.
Speaker 1: He understood what that meant. Wow wow, Yeah, And we
Speaker 1: quoted yesterday.
Speaker 4: I think it was late in the show ion Herssan
Speaker 4: Ali about the destabilization thing that Besimonov was talking about,
Speaker 4: and in the first stages of it, which is demoralization, schools, media, churches, courts,
Speaker 4: civic associations are compromised from within by people who adopt
Speaker 4: their language while inverting their purpose. And it it occurred
Speaker 4: to me while I was thinking about this before the
Speaker 4: show today, that they intentionally target the institutions that have
Speaker 4: the highest moral standing civil rights organizations, colleges, churches, that
Speaker 4: sort of thing, and then they start using the language
Speaker 4: of those institutions to push for Marxism, and people hear
Speaker 4: those stall warked institutions of good saying similar things that
Speaker 4: they've always said. But now they're telling me a little
Speaker 4: boy can turn into a little girl. That's weird, But
Speaker 4: this is an institution I've trusted that does good in society.
Speaker 4: And now they're telling me that it's okay to steal
Speaker 4: if it's from a company. That seems odd, But that's
Speaker 4: an institution of good that I've trusted for a long time.
Speaker 4: That's exactly how it works. This is not theoretical, friends,
Speaker 4: this is not fantasy. This is how political movements work.
Speaker 4: There's so much more to be said, and.
Speaker 1: We will say it if it's fascinating.
Speaker 4: Oh, you know, we didn't get to because I went
Speaker 4: on and on as the man on the street stuff
Speaker 4: about all the New Yorkers, explaining why Yeah, political violence
Speaker 4: is justified these days.
Speaker 1: Yep. We will definitely get to that later. We got
Speaker 1: lots today and a whole bunch of different stuff. And
Speaker 1: of course we got two full hours on the fact
Speaker 1: that King Charles is now in the country. And oh.
Speaker 4: I worked for two and a half fowers last night
Speaker 4: getting my report together on what Queen Camilla is wearing
Speaker 4: on her visit, why she loves Peach so much so
Speaker 4: something to look forward to again.
Speaker 1: All right, all that on the way, stay here, Armstrong.
Speaker 6: Andy Charles is here to mark two hundred and fifty
Speaker 6: years of American independence. But there are other issues that
Speaker 6: are looming large, namely the Epstein scandal and the war
Speaker 6: in Iran. On Epstein, we know that the King's brother
Speaker 6: Andrew has already faced scandal pushed out from public life,
Speaker 6: and also at the former British ambassador to the United States.
Speaker 1: On Iran, we know.
Speaker 6: That the British Prime Minister has been the subject of
Speaker 6: multiple attacks by Donald Trump, angry that Britain has not
Speaker 6: joined the United States in its war there. So this
Speaker 6: is a delicate diplomatic mission for King Charles.
Speaker 1: King Charles at the White House, it says here and
Speaker 1: then it's going to he's going to address Congress. First
Speaker 1: time a royal has addressed Congress since his mom did
Speaker 1: it many many years ago. His mom did it. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's why the whole royalty thing is stupid. But anyway,
Speaker 1: expected to talk Epstein? What King Charles is going to
Speaker 1: be in the country talking about Epstein? Yeah, he's gonna
Speaker 1: bring that. Is he gonna bring that up in front
Speaker 1: of Congress? Seriously?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 3: What?
Speaker 2: So?
Speaker 1: Then you had this story break in the New York
Speaker 1: Post yesterday. I don't even know what it is. Here's
Speaker 1: the headline. Multiple young men allegedly drugged rape at Epstein's
Speaker 1: Zoro ranch where super predators roamed. That's his New Mexico
Speaker 1: ranch that you've heard about before.
Speaker 4: And they also alleged there's a female victim who was
Speaker 4: killed buried there and there were baby snatchings.
Speaker 1: Is that part of this story? Yes, the same sixty
Speaker 1: minutes piece. Wow, I didn't hear the same New York
Speaker 1: Post article. Okay, Well, this New York Post article that
Speaker 1: I'm reading came from a sixty minutes piece sixty minutes Australia.
Speaker 1: I have no idea if sixty minutes Australia is the
Speaker 1: same level of journalism in sixty minutes United States. Sixty
Speaker 1: minutes United States would not run with a wacky Epstein story.
Speaker 1: I don't think so. I don't know, Although.
Speaker 4: Somebody, one of our beloved listeners pointed out that Nora
Speaker 4: O'Donnell was absolutely instrumental in quashing the Hunter Biden's story
Speaker 4: and getting Catherine Herridge.
Speaker 1: Pushed out of CBS News.
Speaker 4: So anyway, ah, yeah, I saw that.
Speaker 1: And there's a lot of accusation and not a lot
Speaker 1: of evidence. No, well zero. It sounds it looks to
Speaker 1: me like and the New York Post doesn't mind leaving
Speaker 1: you wondering, Oh no, how accurate this sort of stuff.
Speaker 1: It looks to me like another example of Okay, a
Speaker 1: crazy person came forward and said this, we have to
Speaker 1: take their statement and put it in the file. We
Speaker 1: immediately decided to or crack pots with it, you know,
Speaker 1: made a couple of phone calls and realized, okay, this
Speaker 1: is a nut job and moved on. There's nothing to it.
Speaker 1: I I know, it's entertainment. Everything's clickbait and everyone's a grifter.
Speaker 1: If it wasn't being taken seriously by so many people,
Speaker 1: it was mentioned by hockeying Jeffrey's or somebody the other
Speaker 1: day about the Iran war covering up Epstein. So I
Speaker 1: did uh huh I need.
Speaker 4: Republic cannot survive the Internet? Yeah, do you still have
Speaker 4: speaking of the internet, do you still have that unbelievably
Speaker 4: accurate and uh and sharp screed against the Brits.
Speaker 1: By that L. H. Gray from Uh, I can find
Speaker 1: the person that calls themselves say it had this, it
Speaker 1: had a seaword, the sea word in it. Oh, she
Speaker 1: labels herself as a yes, alpha alpha c. That's what
Speaker 1: she calls her.
Speaker 4: So actually got his her its account femme fatale artist
Speaker 4: and writer, gay alpha c.
Speaker 1: Hell bitch atheist anyway, Uh, putting if you don't want
Speaker 1: that put in your profile, no alpha ces, yeah, in
Speaker 1: your dating profile.
Speaker 4: But a somewhat more restrained commentator a Gerard Baker in
Speaker 4: the New York in the Wall Street Journal saying essentially
Speaker 4: what she said that Britain the special relationship. I mean,
Speaker 4: putting aside the Epstein madness. But Britain's been in free
Speaker 4: fall for decades now. Uh, it's economy ravaged. And he's
Speaker 4: talking about when Queen Elizabeth came in nineteen seventy six.
Speaker 4: It's economy ravaged by stagflation, militant trade, union's fiscal incontinence.
Speaker 4: It's political leadership attired bickering rump, and now they've been
Speaker 4: overwhelmed decades of self loathing, multiculturalism, mass immigration, declining birth rates,
Speaker 4: the elite, systematic degradation of national pride.
Speaker 1: And traditional values. What we've been talking about. Ugh, there's
Speaker 1: going to be a lot of dirt come out of
Speaker 1: the Musk versus Altman trial that starts today, among other things,
Speaker 1: to talk about Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 7: Elon Musk is suing Sam Altman, the head of open ai,
Speaker 7: for allegedly betraying the company's original non profit mission. Mus
Speaker 7: says he helped the found open ai to create safe
Speaker 7: artificial intelligence. He says open ai started chasing profits in
Speaker 7: twenty nineteen, a year after he parted ways with the company.
Speaker 7: Elon Musk is seeking more than one hundred and thirty
Speaker 7: billion dollars in damages from both open ai and Microsoft,
Speaker 7: they're accused of aiding open AI's alleged breach of trust.
Speaker 7: Musk and open ai president Greg Brockman are both expected
Speaker 7: to take the stand this week.
Speaker 1: They're calling it the AI trial of the century. It's
Speaker 1: really the first big AI trial of so but it
Speaker 1: will be for a while because of the personality's involved
Speaker 1: in the money at stake, and it's in Oakland starting
Speaker 1: today with opening statements, not far from where we're broadcasting
Speaker 1: right now. I wonder if you could go sit in
Speaker 1: on that they've selected the jury and everything like that.
Speaker 1: We have to get there early. But yeah, a heck
Speaker 1: of a thing to see. As it says here Musk alleges,
Speaker 1: as you just heard that all these people Altman and
Speaker 1: some of the other people portrayed the original nonprofit mission
Speaker 1: by turning it into a wealth machine. So it really
Speaker 1: sounds like Elon has the high ground. I would assume,
Speaker 1: like morally speaking and culturally speaking, and you know, for
Speaker 1: the drive by media speaking, it sounds like Elon's got
Speaker 1: the high ground. Oh no, oh, that'll be uncomfortable, and
Speaker 1: I would the media true, there's that. Wow, that's a
Speaker 1: good point, because I assume Altman and his very expensive
Speaker 1: lawyers are going to try to hack away at that
Speaker 1: and make Elon not seem like quite the high minded,
Speaker 1: worried about the world guy that he is. And I
Speaker 1: don't know to what extent he is or is not
Speaker 1: on AI. I think he probably is based on everything
Speaker 1: I've read. But they're going to try to hack away
Speaker 1: at that, and they'll have the help of the media,
Speaker 1: right because they helped they hate Elon. I hadn't even
Speaker 1: thought about that. I wanted to get to this part
Speaker 1: because I thought it was really really interesting location in Oakland.
Speaker 1: I mean that AI trial of the century due to
Speaker 1: the personalities stakes for AI AGI's future, Wow, the stakes
Speaker 1: for artificial general intelligence future. That is not a minor thing.
Speaker 1: Evidence includes emails, texts, diaries, and in internal documents revealing
Speaker 1: ego's power struggles and early AI ambitions. Yeah, emails, texts,
Speaker 1: and diaries. That's gonna get gusty. That's gonna get good. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and almost has to be embarrassing by everyone on all sides.
Speaker 4: I have no opinion about the legal merits of the
Speaker 4: case on either side.
Speaker 1: I don't even I haven't even thought about that.
Speaker 4: Actually, I just love the prospects of a much wider
Speaker 4: discussion about the topics that are involved in it. I
Speaker 4: think there's nothing but good that can come from that,
Speaker 4: except it'll terrify us.
Speaker 1: I think it's interesting that the first efforts to try
Speaker 1: to make AI sort of an open collaborative we all
Speaker 1: see what's going on, not for evil, not for profit,
Speaker 1: fell apart quite quickly. Yeah. Yeah, for the first and
Speaker 1: maybe only try that will ever happen in AI history,
Speaker 1: which might end up being in human history.
Speaker 4: Yeah. Yeah, that is a good point. So that goes
Speaker 4: deeper than what I was thinking about. But so I
Speaker 4: was thinking about this the other day. You know, we
Speaker 4: if you were to describe yourself like ten different characteristics.
Speaker 4: Ben Sass was talking about how in some wonderful clips
Speaker 4: we played. I guess it was yesterday, how you know
Speaker 4: your federal political identity. I'm for Trump, I'm against Trump,
Speaker 4: whatever that ought to be number nine or fifteen or
Speaker 4: twenty three on your life of who you are.
Speaker 1: And I think he's right. But I was trying to
Speaker 1: figure out definitely where for me that is not what
Speaker 1: defines my life or my thinking.
Speaker 4: Where does how much I despise communism fit into my list?
Speaker 1: It's pretty high, that's true.
Speaker 4: So I am fascinated by the question of what AI,
Speaker 4: what threat AI poses toward the communist Chinese in particular,
Speaker 4: and really regimes everywhere.
Speaker 1: North Korea would be another interesting case.
Speaker 4: But if you're into the business pages, you might have
Speaker 4: followed the fact that Meta Mark zuckerberdek Mark Zuckerberg aka
Speaker 4: Satan his company was trying to acquire this kind of
Speaker 4: Chinese AI company called Manus, which had actually decamped from
Speaker 4: China and was based in Singapore now. And Meta and
Speaker 4: Manus announced that, yeah, we're going to merge, and the
Speaker 4: Chinese Communist Party, I mean that I could tell you
Speaker 4: the name of the commission, but it doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: Quash the deal.
Speaker 4: They said, no, no, no, it cannot happen, in a
Speaker 4: one sentence notice that did not explain Beijing's rationale. The
Speaker 4: reason this is so interesting a couple of things. Number
Speaker 4: one is, Beijing is very concerned about companies like Manus
Speaker 4: that left China for Singapore so they could recruit talent,
Speaker 4: so they could recruit money, et cetera, et cetera. And
Speaker 4: it's also interesting that China's or Hijian Ping's tentacles reached
Speaker 4: over to Singapore and clamped down Darth Vader like on
Speaker 4: the throat of Manus when they.
Speaker 1: Said, yeah, we're going to merge with Meta, okay.
Speaker 4: And Xijing Ping said no, no freaking way, You're still
Speaker 4: Chinese and we still have a grip on your you know,
Speaker 4: your short hairs, as they say, So that is interesting.
Speaker 1: I think it's the hairs at the nape of your neck.
Speaker 1: What are you doing? Much more interesting?
Speaker 4: Well, not more interesting, but in that same vein Cameron
Speaker 4: Berg's the writer he writes about tech and stuff, and
Speaker 4: he wrote a super great piece about how AI is
Speaker 4: bound to subvert communism and that the dirty Khamis are
Speaker 4: trying to somehow regulate AI. And I've got some of
Speaker 4: the verbiage here about how authorities recently announced they had
Speaker 4: removed almost a million pieces of illegal or harmful AI
Speaker 4: generated content just in the last three months because their
Speaker 4: regulation specify thirty one different risks that AI poses, with
Speaker 4: incitement to subvert state power and overthrow the socialist system
Speaker 4: listed first, and the government the Chinese government has officially
Speaker 4: classified AI, along with earthquakes and epidemics, as major potential
Speaker 4: threats to the Communist Party.
Speaker 1: So I've read about this, and I don't know which
Speaker 1: makes more sense those that you know a lot of
Speaker 1: the argument for why we need to pursue AI, because
Speaker 1: if we don't, China will, and if they get it first,
Speaker 1: we're all doomed versus dictators like Putin and Sheet don't
Speaker 1: want AI because they can't They know they can't control it,
Speaker 1: and that's the whole dictator thing, and so they they're
Speaker 1: not rushing toward AI. I don't know which one makes
Speaker 1: more sense.
Speaker 4: Well, they kind of are, but they have this in
Speaker 4: my mind fantasy that they can embrace this unbelievably mushrooming
Speaker 4: technology that nobody knows where it's going, but they can
Speaker 4: constrain it and serve the Communist Party.
Speaker 1: I don't think there's any stopping this train, but I
Speaker 1: was listening to one to doomer like me talk about
Speaker 1: what we should do with AI is give it specific
Speaker 1: functions and tasks and let it be brilliant at that
Speaker 1: things that human beings can do. But only those things.
Speaker 1: Let's not pursue artificial general intelligence or super super intelligence.
Speaker 1: Give it the task of cure and act answer or
Speaker 1: whatever uh my checkbook, water, desalinization around the world, or
Speaker 1: whatever the task is, but not just you know, super intelligence.
Speaker 1: Go do your thingI and take over the world.
Speaker 4: Let us know if we can help, right right, or
Speaker 4: if you'd like to consume our vital organs for some reason.
Speaker 4: So a couple of more tidbits from this article that
Speaker 4: I found amusing in a way because I despise communism.
Speaker 4: The regulations that they have now are following years of failures.
Speaker 4: A few years ago, ten Cent deployed a chatbot called
Speaker 4: baby Q on a big giant, eight hundred million user
Speaker 4: messaging service in China. Asked whether it loved the Communist Party,
Speaker 4: baby Q replied no, I don't. Microsoft's Joi bungcom chatbot
Speaker 4: running on the same platform was asked about the China Dream,
Speaker 4: which is hijin Ping's signature slogan It's dream, the chatbot said,
Speaker 4: was moving to the US.
Speaker 1: Both were quietly pulled from circulation. Oh Wow.
Speaker 4: More recently, Chat Yuan, China's first chat GPT style chatbot,
Speaker 4: was suspended within seventy two hours of launch after calling
Speaker 4: Russia's invasion of Ukraine a war of aggression and describing
Speaker 4: the Chinese economy is plagued by housing bubbles and environmental pollution.
Speaker 1: The company blamed er technical errors. Well right, if AI
Speaker 1: is going to think clearly, it's not gonna like dictatorships
Speaker 1: in communism, you know, well done, Jack with your simple
Speaker 1: prairie wisdom. The practically.
Speaker 4: The next sentence in the article uses fancier words, but
Speaker 4: it's talking about how lms are trained on the sum
Speaker 4: of human knowledge philosophy, history, science, political theory. These texts
Speaker 4: make arguments way evidence follow logical change, and to your point,
Speaker 4: to predict them accurately, the system has to internalize what
Speaker 4: coherent thinking looks like, which is exactly what you said.
Speaker 4: And communism is built on wild incoherences that end up
Speaker 4: with million, hundreds of millions of people dead or starved
Speaker 4: there in gulags. So China can't take Ai, which excites me.
Speaker 4: I just I'm afraid this country will be subverted from
Speaker 4: within before I get these satisfaction of seeing China fall.
Speaker 1: But wouldn't that be ironic? Yeah? Yeah.
Speaker 4: Even China's heavily censored chatbots have proved difficult to contain
Speaker 4: within the party's ideological boundaries. American Frontier models running without
Speaker 4: those constraints and deployed inside China would be more potent
Speaker 4: still a personal tutor in open inquiry for every user,
Speaker 4: engaging any question, exploring any line of reasoning without third
Speaker 4: party mediation. Millions of parallel socratic dialogues, each unique, each
Speaker 4: responsive to individual curiosity right at them, and if you
Speaker 4: try to clamp down on it, AI probably has the way,
Speaker 4: a way to hack through it and get information from
Speaker 4: the outside world.
Speaker 1: I wonder that's cool.
Speaker 4: One of our ongoing themes today has been how in
Speaker 4: the radical left now which has become mainstream, they explain
Speaker 4: away why it's okay to steal things and hurt.
Speaker 1: People through ideology.
Speaker 4: Uh, maybe you've noticed a crime on the rise and
Speaker 4: prosecutors not prosecuting. More important than ever to have simply
Speaker 4: save home security, which is not just a camera, it's
Speaker 4: a comprehensive ecosystem of sensors, cameras for inside and out,
Speaker 4: twenty four to seven professional monitoring. So if there is
Speaker 4: a break in or a fire or flood, simply Safest
Speaker 4: agents are ready to take action for you.
Speaker 1: I have it. I love it. I love having simply Safe.
Speaker 1: There the sensors, the cameras, all the different sort of stuff,
Speaker 1: and you can customize a system for your house. You
Speaker 1: know the number of doors and windows and square footage
Speaker 1: and all that sort of stuff on the website and
Speaker 1: minutes arrives at your doorstep just like it did it mine.
Speaker 1: App guided setup that is so easy. I did it,
Speaker 1: no drilling, no stress, no waiting around for a service appointment.
Speaker 1: If you need help, want help, it's available.
Speaker 4: Also, and the cost a fraction of the crappy old
Speaker 4: systems none of us ever used after we got them installed.
Speaker 1: It's really amazing. Right now you can.
Speaker 4: Get fifty percent off your new simply safe system. It's
Speaker 4: simply safe dot com slash armstrong. That's simply safetot com
Speaker 4: slash armstrong. There's no safe like simply safe.
Speaker 1: Didn't Facebook Zuckerberg announce a whole bunch of layoffs the
Speaker 1: other day? Oh yeah, enormous.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and they're just they are embracing AI agents tools
Speaker 4: of the sort you're discussing like crazy.
Speaker 1: You have to or they'll fire you.
Speaker 2: Top of Ay, What d F type of AI s E.
Speaker 1: That's the question we're all asking, including she's in Paing.
Speaker 4: He just said that the other day at the Bullet
Speaker 4: Buro meeting.
Speaker 2: Top of Ayah, that's right.
Speaker 1: Wow. I gotta work on that and get that down
Speaker 1: so I can say it just like her, because I
Speaker 1: said I did it the other day and my son said,
Speaker 1: you're terrible that, so I need to to work on it.
Speaker 8: It's the type of ah, there's hardly even a A
Speaker 8: A a break between the E.
Speaker 1: Indeed, is this it is? It did?
Speaker 2: What type of ah?
Speaker 1: It did it is?
Speaker 4: That's yeah, it did? I mean, you go any further
Speaker 4: down that dialect and it's just gonna be. I guess
Speaker 4: if anybody can understand it. It's a language, but.
Speaker 2: Type of a.
Speaker 1: Well, she's busy, she doesn't have time pronounce the entire
Speaker 1: word just Katie, No, I just want what either of
Speaker 1: you are drinking right now? If it's drinking In reality, sister,
Speaker 1: the young people that don't have time for the entire word,
Speaker 1: they don't last time for comp here, they can't text
Speaker 1: the entire words. It's all just letters. Somebody hit me
Speaker 1: a babysitter hit me with the I'm supposed to say
Speaker 1: sitter my kids do not like me saying babies, Oh
Speaker 1: not baby, practically yeah, sitter, housewatcher or something signated caregiver.
Speaker 1: She hit me with some letters and I had to
Speaker 1: go to groc Okay, what did What did this person
Speaker 1: just say to me? Because they don't have time for
Speaker 1: the words, but everybody got time for day the talking
Speaker 1: inded it is it is?
Speaker 2: This? Did one type of a yah?
Speaker 1: Yeah came more.
Speaker 5: He yet.
Speaker 1: Finally, a passenger on a Delta Airlines flight last week
Speaker 1: from Atlanta to Portland went into labor and delivered her
Speaker 1: baby about thirty minutes before landing. The crew congratulated her
Speaker 1: and then charged her for having an extra carrier. That's
Speaker 1: pretty funny, man. I flew Southwest for the first time
Speaker 1: under the new rules, and I know Joe didn't like
Speaker 1: the ID. I liked the old system. Loved the old system.
Speaker 1: It's the wild, wild West. It was uncivilized, guest sign seats.
Speaker 1: That's the way you did adults behavior. And now each
Speaker 1: seat has a different price in all the bag and
Speaker 1: then it's like United or the other airlines. It's a
Speaker 1: pretty clever way to trick you into little by little
Speaker 1: buying your ticket, as opposed to the just the price.
Speaker 1: Because you start at whatever the price is, oh, three
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty dollars for the first leg of it,
Speaker 1: that's not that bad, except for you need to have
Speaker 1: a seat, you see, and the seat adds something to
Speaker 1: and you're probably carrying something with you and you have
Speaker 1: to add that end. And obviously you want to eat
Speaker 1: or drink anything on United, and you remember before you
Speaker 1: know it it's a lot different than the initial price. Uh,
Speaker 1: this might be true too with IPOs. Did you know
Speaker 1: a handful of super IPOs they're calling are coming this
Speaker 1: summer never been anything like this ever before. The first
Speaker 1: one is likely to be space X, which is gonna
Speaker 1: hit probably in June, with an evaluation starting somewhere around
Speaker 1: two trillion dollars. I'm sorry, it sounded like you said
Speaker 1: two trillion, I know, which would absolutely dwarf anything previously. Ever,
Speaker 1: nothing's ever even come close to this. Finally, Elon will
Speaker 1: have a little walking around money and then open Ai
Speaker 1: and Anthropic are both going to go on the market,
Speaker 1: and open Ai is there. Each gonna be about a
Speaker 1: trillion dollars each. So it's a handful of mega, super
Speaker 1: ultra whatever you want to call them IPOs that are
Speaker 1: going to hit the next couple of months nobody's ever
Speaker 1: seen before. And it just it. It has a feeling
Speaker 1: of something. The whole AI bubble all investing in each other,
Speaker 1: the the whole stock market is built on what seven
Speaker 1: companies pretty much.
Speaker 4: Oh yeah, and well in the super giants of tech
Speaker 4: and finance will be the only ones allowed into the
Speaker 4: early rounds of the IPO so right, it will have
Speaker 4: that incestuous thing you're talking about.
Speaker 1: Just off the top of your head.
Speaker 4: And I probably shouldn't even offer an opinion on this,
Speaker 4: but SpaceX seems like a company that will almost surely
Speaker 4: be a great company open AI And what was the
Speaker 4: other one, nthropic bossing could be the biggest thing in
Speaker 4: the history of mankind or gone by the end of
Speaker 4: the twenty twenties.
Speaker 1: Agree, Yeah, yeah, I would. I don't know anything about this.
Speaker 1: I haven't looked into it at all, but if I
Speaker 1: had money to invest and could invest in these these companies,
Speaker 1: happily invest in SpaceX. The other two just seem like
Speaker 1: there are two of many AI companies out there, and
Speaker 1: we're as likely to end up being the big thing
Speaker 1: as not. Yeah, that's just my personal guess. That's why
Speaker 1: you invest other people's money and take a percentage. Yeah. Although,
Speaker 1: I was looking into a legal problem yesterday and our
Speaker 1: buddy Craig, who's really good at using AI for what
Speaker 1: it's supposed to be used for, came up with a
Speaker 1: whole bunch of information to me on a very particular question,
Speaker 1: and it was just stunning the way it wrote it out,
Speaker 1: and specifically laid it out for me, you know, prioritize.
Speaker 4: Continue to work with Joe Getty with a restraining order
Speaker 4: against it.
Speaker 1: It's always the same question. There's just the logistics of it.
Speaker 1: I mean, boy, and what kind of a restraining order
Speaker 1: is fifteen feet? I mean you could get somebody with.
Speaker 4: A throwing arm too, even as for an old guy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, AnyWho, that's all. Yeah, It's an incredibly useful tool.
Speaker 4: Unbelievable. I'm using it to rehab an injury. It's like,
Speaker 4: you know, having a trainer and advisor and a doctor
Speaker 4: on call. I think, I hope. I think I'm smart
Speaker 4: enough to know how to use it. But who knows.
Speaker 2: Well.
Speaker 1: As we know, there's a certain segment of society that
Speaker 1: has no problem with political violence. In fact, they think
Speaker 1: it's perfectly justified. Not only will we hear from some
Speaker 1: people themselves, there's some new pulling out around that that
Speaker 1: is highly troubling Armstrong and Getty