Episode 532 Scott Adams: Heartbeat Bills, Trump’s Income, China Trade, Immigration

Date: 2019-05-17 | Duration: 56:11

Topics

President Trump’s 2018 income released Fake News CNN…reports it in a misleading way His 2018 income is less, but close to what he made last year Alabama abortion law The View says the law was made entirely by men The law is being delegitimized by The View Credible matters, the law needs to seen as credible Joel Pollack’s Breitbart article on China trade negotiations President Trump is educating the country on trade issues 100% of Democrats thought a trade war would crumble US 50% of the Republicans thought a trade war would crumble US Now we know we can go forever with tariffs if necessary President Trump wasn’t just right…he was OMG right about China trade Chuck Schumer is on President Trump’s side on this Immigration reform with a merit based system…LIKE CANADA Canada…our proposed reforms will be similar to CANADA’S What percentage of border experts support walls where appropriate? Words used, the feelings they evoke, and their influence “Deep Staters” turning on each other, accusations back and forth SAT “Adversity Score”: How abused you were in life Same concept of judging people…as merit based immigration Chinese social desirability scores are coming to the US Current world: We can cheat the world a little bit Future world: Social desirability score dictates, limits options What people click on…is what business models are driven to post Our news options are limited to whatever gets clicks Your opinions are determined by what gets the most clicks Cognitive blindness and climate change Nuclear energy development is the answer to climate change There’s NEVER been a Gen III nuclear event, Gen IV even safer

Please donate to support my YouTube channel:
https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays
I also fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a "boss" somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I'm trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.
See all of my Periscope videos here…
https://www.pscp.tv/ScottAdamsSays/1nAKERDOwylGL
Find my WhenHub Interface app here…
https://interface.whenhub.com

> [!note] Rough Transcript
> 
> This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

## Transcript

[0:10]

oh hey everybody come on in here it's time for coffee with Scott Evans that's me and you probably know who you are so that's enough for the introductions let's get on to the main event a little thing I call the simultaneous sip and it works like this you grab your copy mug your glass your a container your tanker to your Stein you're jealous if you will the thermos or a flask will do fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now off for the simultaneous scent oh
that's good that's good stuff I'm gonna check here to see who is asking to join as guess alright it's not working
so we got lots to talk about lots to talk about let's start with my favorite

[1:10]

talk about let's start with my favorite story of the day President Trump released information about his income in 2018 now that's big news because if the president didn't make money he would look like a big old frog and worse if he made more money as president than he had made when he wasn't president no that doesn't look good so he had two ways to lose one way is if he didn't make much money where he lost money and then he'd be a fraud and the other way is if he made money he would look like a criminal because well you're making money as president that doesn't look good so where does it come out he made four hundred and thirty four million dollars so it turns out he did make money in 2018 four hundred and thirty four million dollars in one year but here's the fun part it was just slightly less

[2:11]

the fun part it was just slightly less than he made the year before
nothing did they say revenue somebody says is corrected me and they're saying revenue I read it quickly and let me check to make sure make sure that that is correct oh that's interesting because the way see and then the way CNN reports it is very misleading so they report income of at least 434 million but they didn't it doesn't show expense anyway for our purposes here today it doesn't matter because regardless of what his expenses were the income is the part that people would be questioning so if the income was was terrible or the income was too high he

[3:12]

terrible or the income was too high he would be pilloried pilloried but not hillary and as luck would have it then the actual number is exactly the number that you can't criticize if had been even 1% higher than the year before people would have said oh I don't know that 1% I don't know if that would have been there if he hadn't been president but by being just a little bit under it's the only place you could be where you're unambiguously being a billionaire that part's true no doubt about it in fact his income last year his income in 2018 was roughly the amount you can inherit it isn't that true didn't even hair hat - something like 400 million now I think you'd have to multiply that up for the adjusting for time but that's a pretty good year pretty good here who knows what his net income was so yes it

[4:14]

knows what his net income was so yes it was reported as income but without knowing his expenses we don't know what that means exactly in terms of his net all right I'm just babbling today I just I slept late so I'm I'm barely awake right now let's talk about the Alabama Alabama abortion law and I would like to brag about myself for a little bit here can you believe it was hard to believe here's a picture from CNN and a lot of people should know this is from the view you probably saw this a similar thing it doesn't matter if you can see it well if you see the view they were talking about the ala beyond the law you can see behind jibei art is a picture of all the people who were involved in making the law what is interesting about every person involved in making the abortion law is they're all men every one of them is a man so the view is making the point that the law that they don't like on the view about abortion was made entirely by

[5:16]

view about abortion was made entirely by men now do you remember some of you do my abortion stance my abortion stance is to recuse myself from the actual decision about what the laws are or should be I do that because of this the point of the the whole point is showing that it was all men who made the law is what is the point what was the point of showing that it's all men who made this law the point is to delegitimize the law think about how that matters this is literally a law about life and death and there's no real right answer and I say there's no right answer as someone who's looking at it from you know let's say a narrator's point of view obviously the people who have the strong opinions believe they have the right answer but when I say no right answer I mean people

[6:18]

when I say no right answer I mean people will not agree universally who is being harmed who is not being harmed what's a life what is in life when he had that situation when it's the it's the most important of all decisions literally it's a question about life and death of a baby you can't get more important than that in terms of our logical makeup in that situation the best you can do is to have a credible law even if people disagree with it so whatever you end up with whether it favors one side and the other in the abortion debate if where you end up is not credible it's your worst situation because that in society is as unrest as well as whatever problems you're having in that on the topic itself so part of the reason I recuse myself is in a very small way to not be a participant in making the law less

[7:20]

participant in making the law less credible because credible matters almost as much as getting it right because it's what holds society together Society has to agree yeah some of us don't like that law but I get how that law came about the people involved are the right people they looked at the right information darn it I wish they'd gone a different way
way but at least I'm in the system that ran the way I would like a system to run this is not the way anybody wants a system to run remember this is the goals versus systems versus goals question again this system isn't working a system where only men decide on abortion in some state that might be the worst system ever designed now many of you are saying yeah people are saying women voted those men into office women

[8:21]

voted those men into office women largely agree with what the men do we that's all true but that doesn't go to credibility those are true things which do better but they don't change how we think about it because in the end it was still a bunch of guys who had to vote so I don't encourage other people to change their minds on abortion I do not try to change minds in abortion um and I don't ask you to recuse yourself if you're male but I feel it's the most the most useful and honest thing that I can do is to not be part of that question because it gives women slightly was slightly more control if men recuse themselves so that's the smallest thing I can do but it's it's sort of the right thing to do in my personal opinion and I completely respect anybody who wants to have a different opinion all right I tweeted around this morning a great article by Joel Pollock and which he's

[9:22]

article by Joel Pollock and which he's in Breitbart in which he talks about how both the left and the right seemed to be agreeing on trade with China and he mentions Tom Friedman who most of you will recognize that name but he's he is far from being pro Trump but he's come out and said directly that Trump might be the exact right person for negotiating with China and that the country has been educated by Trump essentially you know by Trump's actions they the country has been educated on the situation with trade with China don't you think that early on in the process when Trump was running for office and he kept saying China China China China is giving us bad trade deals don't you think that the Democrats mostly said to themselves that's probably not that bad don't you think people thought he was exaggerating at

[10:24]

people thought he was exaggerating at least his critics don't you think that they thought yeah maybe you're being a little racist here why is it you're you know you want to go hard against China but you're not talking about England you know so everything about what he started I was saying sounded shady people didn't believe it they didn't think it was as big a problem now I do think that there were a number of working-class people in the Rust Belt who probably cared about this more than others but the country in general I'm not sure that people quite bought into it as being a as big a problem as he said and be something you could ever potentially make better with a trade war because what do they say about trade wars a hundred percent of people on the left and I think I'm right about that right a hundred percent something you could almost never say could you ever say that a hundred percent of anybody agrees about anything it's the rarest thing but I think a hundred percent of the Democrats and

[11:26]

hundred percent of the Democrats and maybe half of the Republicans thought that a trade war would immediately be the end of civilization then our economy would crumble etc and now we're right in the middle of a pitched battle I mean we're really in it right now we're deeply into a trade war right now and what's happening to our economy records records we're just hitting record after record of an insanely good achievement this is without anything good happening yet in China in fact it's all bad so far but Trump has also proven that we could live with effort forever with tariffs if we had to it would be unambiguously bad for certain populations some types of costs would probably go up and then over time the economy would adjust factories would go up in Guatemala that sort of thing so

[12:33]

Trump has been shown to be not just right but oh god right you know what I mean not just a little right not oh yeah now that now that we're in I said I see your point mr. president he's not slightly right he's not a little bit right he's as right as you can be and people on the Left who would call themselves his biggest critics have been largely silent wasn't it Chuck Schumer recently who basically decided to you know be solidly on Trump's side with the with the China negotiations now I would like to Pat myself on the back again and I would invite many of you if not most of you to Pat yourselves on the back - and it goes like this ready your arms get ready to pat yourself on the back how many of you knew from the jump that President Trump a president Trump should he become get

[13:34]

a president Trump should he become get your head ready okay your head ready should he become president back when I think most of the people watching this were supporters did you not know that he was a unique character who would bring us some things that nobody else could bring us some important things China China trained for one very important did you not know that he could bring important benefits but you knew he was gonna break some dishes right you knew he would break dishes you knew your fine china was not safe you knew your sensitive little ears were gonna get hurt you knew people would complain you knew there would be a little civil unrest you knew people would be tense and unhappy you knew people would call him racist you knew people would call you racist but you know what else he knew you knew that he was a unique character who could solve some problems that maybe other presidents just couldn't solve patch yourself in the

[14:34]

couldn't solve patch yourself in the back Oh feels good it feels good you knew that I knew that that is the only reason I have ever been supportive of this president it comes down to that it comes down to I am going to eat a mile of mud oh I'll keep this PG this is the PG version is I knew that I would eat a mile of mud and on the end I was confident that we would get to a good place we couldn't have got to gotten through without a eating a mile a lot so I ate a bottle of blood most of you did as well and so pat yourself on the back for that for for seeing things closer to the way they really are all right let's talk about immigration so the president announced his immigration plan at least they planned or some portion of immigrations move to a lottery system with points some kind

[15:36]

a lottery system with points some kind of a point system and I don't know about you but I have two completely opposite feelings about it see if you have the same thing on one hand when it's described and the president says yeah we're just going to have a merit-based system and it's going to be very similar to what Canada and most other countries use now when he says it that way they say Oh our system is going to be like Canada well the Canada Canadians are great people right is there anybody who has a better reputation for being nice people than Canada know if Canada is doing it it can't be cruel it can't be bad this is something frickin Canada is doing candidate is like our conscience you never have like you got a little conscience you know one of the things you can ask yourself if the United States is looking to do something bad and you say Oh United States I don't

[16:37]

and you say Oh United States I don't know it was that good that that might be a little bad what do you think ask your conscience and Canada is like your conscience on your shoulder and you go what do you think what do you think about this what you do it - all right we're safe it's okay Canada does it - so that's my first reaction my second reaction is I hear the details and we're scoring people by these various levels of quality like you're better if you're younger well I understand why because people will have more economic value if they're coming in when they're qualified and they're working age and all that so it's the best economic situation for the United States so it all makes sense but when you hear it it doesn't hit your ears right are you having this - you hear it and you say hmm that doesn't sound good that we're saying that educated people are somehow better than people who

[17:40]

are somehow better than people who didn't go to college people who are younger are better in some way and the answer is yes they are economically on average they would add more to an economy than someone who didn't have a certain set of qualities objectively speaking we all understand it and we know why Canada does it right candidate does it but when you hear it it doesn't really it doesn't hit the ears right are you right would you agree does everybody have the same same impression now I'm not saying we shouldn't do it and in fact I think we should do it I do like the merit-based system because it's good for the country that has the system Canada system is very good for Canada why shouldn't we have one so I get it and I support something like it but man it doesn't sound good and of course the Democrats who are very consistent on this point if

[18:41]

who are very consistent on this point if there's something that is good but doesn't sound good are they going to be in favor of it can you think of any example maybe there's some example of this but when you say I got a policy and it's a big important policy and I won't even tell you what the policy is you don't even know what the policy is I won't even tell you the topic will only tell you two things it's a good idea guaranteed everybody would say so Canada would agree it's a good idea you don't even need to know what it is but I'll also tell you that while it's unambiguously a good idea it doesn't sound good the words you use to describe it will remind you of things that are bad this isn't bad there's nothing about this as bad but it's going to remind you of things that are bad can the Democrats do that thing that's I've been big ewis lead but the way it's talked about will sound bad they can't they are they are

[19:43]

sound bad they can't they are they are blocked from doing a good idea which can't be described in words that sound good nuclear energy somebody said Democrats cannot favor nuclear energy no matter how unambiguously smart that would be and it would be unambiguously smart because when you talk about it the words about it don't feel right because you say stuff like nuclear waste meltdown and you use the scary words and then you just don't feel right you know I'm sure Noble etc the wall yeah the wall is a perfect example the wall makes perfect sense according to probably a hundred percent of border security experts everywhere in Norrell I don't know if it's a hundred percent but probably something like a hundred percent of all experts would say of course you need import obviously you need a wall or a big fence or something

[20:43]

need a wall or a big fence or something but in some places it's obviously you knew that but can the Democrats support it even if a hundred percent or something like that of all border security experts would say duh of course you need some wall some places now because talking about a wall doesn't sound right doesn't hate your ears right you say well the wall those are our friends in Mexico which they are right it's a allied nation met the Mexican people amazing people I love the Mexican people why would you put a wall between yourself and people you love that doesn't make sense so that the Democrats are limited by the words that are used and the feelings that are evoked by any topic and you'll see this time and again all right let me let me see what Fox

[21:44]

all right let me let me see what Fox News is up to I like to do my CNN Fox News test where I looked at the headlines one and then the headlines or another and see if there's anything in common cuz you know you know it's two different movies your Fox News is different so yeah it's like a whole different world none of these stories were on CNN but none of them are terribly important either sort of uh no Newsday
say AG mocks contempt push as circus that was to uncover Russia probe origins okay so that's a headline on fox news is that even news that's like that's like barely viewers because doesn't feel like you already knew that news or it's the same news you've already heard this is this the Attorney General talking about bar mocks contempt push as the circus and house to uncover the Russia probe origins that's basically what we already knew we never thought that nobody ever

[22:46]

knew we never thought that nobody ever thought that bill Barr thought it was a good idea to to hold him in contempt I'm sure he's not in favor of that and of course we already knew he was gonna look into the origin story so the best part of the origins story or Bill barber looking into the origins of the Russian of collusion thing is is that the so-called deep Staters are turning on each other so watching Comey and Brennan and probably I guess clapper will get into it is that this gonna be kind of fun watching them go after each other after watching them go after the president for two years it's gonna be kind of fun now it shouldn't be fun it should not be a good thing we should not

[23:46]

should not be a good thing we should not be happy we should not be happy that there was ever any kind of thing that we could even construe as maybe sort of a plot against the president but it's gonna be sort of fun to watch them try to eat each other on the way down now I will maintain my original view or something close to it I think I've shifted a little bit so I'll acknowledge that when this whole deep state stuff first emerged as a let's say it was a conspiracy theory of first which has which has evolved from a conspiracy theory or so I thought about the Steve state too once we really get to the bottom of stuff it looks a lot like well maybe that was no conspiracy theory after all we still don't know my original statement our original thoughts and you can fact check me on this because maybe I've been less consistent

[24:48]

because maybe I've been less consistent than I'm going to present it but I think this is largely the evolution of my thought was that when I first heard there's a deep state and they're working against the president I thought to myself well you know there's always an embedded bunch of people who don't like whoever the incoming president is especially since the other party had been in power for eight years so I didn't think it was anything noteworthy sure sure sure there are people who are not gonna like a Republican president and yes yes yes maybe they don't like this particular Republican president more than they disliked others but I didn't think there was anything there sure there were individuals acting in individual ways but that's not a conspiracy so my original view is that it wasn't really a conspiracy in the sense that people were having meetings and Hillary Clinton was the ringmaster and they'd use secret apps to communicate and they'd say all right if

[25:49]

communicate and they'd say all right if you do the dossier I'll have I'll have my reporters you know report it and then we'll get McCadden here and Kobes on board we've got clapper we've got Brennan they're gonna they're gonna run cover for us on the media I don't know that was ever that does anybody think it was that because oh and let me say as clearly as possible I'm not ruling that out there was a time early on when people were saying deep state deep state when I completely rejected that and I just said no this is just so obviously not some big conspiracy or there's some ringleader you know Hillary's pulling the strings and
and but the more we learn the more an image starts to take shape of something that looked if not that may be jarring ly

[26:52]

looked if not that may be jarring ly close to that I don't know how close it will be to that or if we'll ever know everything but it feels like a lot of people who understood what the other people wanted and would do and what their interests were it felt like a lot of people just sort of knowing what to do would you accept that framing there rather than a plot with a plan where they see all the way through that from the beginning to the end and some kind of a plan rather it was just a lot of people who knew exactly what to do so I don't know if that's a coup is it a coup if just a whole bunch of people independently maybe they've talked to one or two of each other but they all just sort of know what to do because whatever is bad for the president is good for them so I don't know how organized this is going to look probably no more organized than Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign BAM

[27:53]

campaign BAM goes the dynamite okay let's see what else we got here yeah Rush Limbaugh says the anti Trump conspirators are beginning to rat each other out oh that's just what I said many handed he says the deep state officials are running scared that they are now turning I swear to God I didn't read that before I went into that whole the whole monologue there I didn't realize that there were two two headlines on Fox they're smaller ones I didn't see it when I first looked in which that actually is the story so that's fun and exciting all right I want to see if we've got a caller on here say I was talking to a fellow that I want to bring on and I want to make sure that he's on there before I do this please standby talk among yourselves and make sure he's either out here or not oh

[28:55]

make sure he's either out here or not oh yeah yeah oh now it's a different Josh I'm looking for a different Josh is you had some device issues and well I guess we'll do that another day did too all right sorry for some reason somebody's not getting an option on their phone all right I need to go do something this morning so unless you have a question I'm gonna run away I'll give you a few seconds for questions I will look at your responses I have no idea why have 3,000 people watching this did something happen today that I don't know about can anybody explain why I have twice as many followers with absolutely nothing to say this morning

[29:57]

well I think we should have another simultaneous sip while in looking at your comments join me now oh yeah the new SAT rules so the SAT is going to have what do they call it a adversity score so it's in addition to your actual score of the test you will get to say how abused you are in your life and what your adversity is so I think part of it is where you grew up and I know your income of your family and some other things and I thought to myself what is the difference between the SAT rules on adversity and merit-based immigration now obviously on the surface there are completely different things and one is trying to rule people in and the other one is you know maybe a different kind of filter but they both have the same quality they

[30:59]

but they both have the same quality they have the same quality that we're judging people judging people based on a bunch of criteria which may not be within the control of the person necessarily so the more we can measure people let's say let's say China's so China has this big program I forget what it's called where they're they can they can do a permanent ongoing measurement of a person's social qualities so your your trustworthiness your reliability and all those things somehow they're all they're all going to be factored in and this is the beginning part of the machines taking over if you don't see this you're going to be very surprised and disappointed in about 10 years the one way that human beings have something

[32:01]

one way that human beings have something like the illusion of of free will is that you don't know what we're gonna do and we have a wide variety of things we can select from and nobody can predict where it's going to what we will predict for any individual so it gives us the feeling that we have control oh I have decisions I'm gonna make a decision here I'm gonna go over there etc but once once all of our systems from SATs - immigration - you know we're gonna have some version of the Chinese social credit score thing that's coming whether the government does it or whether there's just a website that doesn't you will definitely have websites that rate people as good there and lovers you know that's coming there will be a website where you can find out how good somebody is that making love before you get in all of them you know that's coming and we will eventually have ways to rank

[33:02]

we will eventually have ways to rank people so specifically that we will eliminate free will do you see it coming because right now I have freewill to go apply for a job anywhere that I think I can get hired largely by duping the person who is interviewing me into thinking I have maybe more experience and more qualifications than I do so in my current world that is not the world I'm about to describe in my current world I can cheat the system a little bit I can say yeah I'm not qualified for that job but I'm gonna try anyway and then maybe I get that job I can say yeah the person I want to date is way too good for me but I can not tell that person about some of the bad things about me until they're hooked I can I can cheat the system I can date somebody who's too good for me because I might you know draw them in and get them hooked before they find out about all

[34:03]

hooked before they find out about all the bad stuff oh sorry I'm an alcoholic I didn't mention that today now fast-forward to a point where everybody is ranked for everything you know that's coming you you will know exactly if somebody is qualified for something before they go walk in the door you won't even need to have an interview for a job in the future you will not need an interview for a job because your employer will already know who is the best a list look about and the system will just rank all the people they'll say this you're looking for somebody who has a high social score somebody who has been on time a lot somebody who's not been through a lot of let's say marriage problems somebody who's got a certain number of kids or doesn't have kids or it's going to have kids will be able to rank people so completely that they won't need to

[35:04]

completely that they won't need to interview now once you don't need to interview your ability to say alright well maybe I'm not not quite qualified for that job but I think I'm gonna try to get it anyway someday I might become qualified it's all gone you will no longer have choices on who you date where you work or even maybe where you spend time because those things will your choices will become constrained because the system's collectively will know so much about you that they will prevent you from doing things that other people should be doing instead so so the the long term eventual impact of everything from the SATs adversity scores to immigration with you know scoring your merit to the Chinese system to social media in general and all of the other things we can measure people know exactly what you do what you love

[36:05]

exactly what you do what you love because of your online activity they can tell they know what your fetishes they know they know everything about you those things collectively will make the decisions for you what you're going to do who you can talk to who is willing to have a conversation with you we're not that far away from walking up to somebody at a party and you know and your little badge goes beep beep and the other person's badge goes beep beep and you realize there's no person there's no point in talking think about that you'll get to the point where you can meet a stranger you can look at your phone or you know your your ring will buzz or your watch or something and you'll say there's not even any point there is no point in the two of us even having a conversation because we know it's not going anywhere we know we're not going to be friends we know we have no information to exchange we know we have no potential use to each other whatsoever we know that one of you has a good sense of humor and the other doesn't no point in talking so in the same way

[37:10]

no point in talking so in the same way that the more we could measure here's an analogy but it's a bad analogy but it gets you get you close to the idea I've said for a long time that there the reason that the news is largely fake news and that the public is completely bamboozled about what's happening in the world is because we can measure the success of a headline or a story in the news once you know exactly what gets the most clicks and you have a business model that requires you to make money you're a public company you have to do the thing that gets you the most money as long as it's legal and it is legal to cover some stories and not others there's nothing illegal about saying we'll cover this story we won't give this story as much attention completely legal so it created these two worlds because we could measure things so well if you couldn't measure people would just be putting down stories and you just hear lots of stuff and you'd have to make up your own mind but now you're only gonna see on

[38:11]

mind but now you're only gonna see on fox news things that they know their customers are going to click on and you're only gonna see on MSNBC the types of stories that their customers are going to click on your free will has been eliminated when it comes to looking at the news and making decisions so we no longer are presented with news and then we use our reasoning such as it is and our illusion of free will and then we come up with something that feels like a decision we've left that time we're currently in a time where the news decides their audience and then within that audience they can make them think and adopt any position that they want they could make you adopt whatever political position they want how do I know this easy talk to anybody at a party about any political thing that's in that lines and you will find that

[39:12]

in that lines and you will find that their opinion matches exactly the consensus of the pundits on the side that they associate with nobody has their own opinion you won't find people who say yeah you know CNN says this Fox News says this but I have a whole different take on us and it's something they didn't hear from somebody else it's not even a thing or or if it is a thing it's so small now that you could you could get rid of it with a rounding we are mostly NPCs that have been programmed with the dominant point of view that the news organizations have determined we'll make you click the most your opinion is whatever is the most clickable it's not because you thought it was smart it's not because somebody else thought it was smart and told you it's not because you used your freewill it's not because you used your good judgment it's because somebody had decided that this is these stories get a

[40:12]

decided that this is these stories get a lot of clicks they they stimulate the part of your brain that makes you act and that became your opinion you think you have an opinion but you don't you don't we used to have something like opinions but that that time has has left anyway so where we're heading is that the illusion of free will will shrink and shrink and shrink as machines are better and better at measuring things relative to or a human experience the better the machines are the better than the Chinese systems better the SATs the better the immigration merit-based thing the more the better that we can do job interviews without somebody even coming in we know everything about them the more social media we have the more health records we have the more we know about people the smaller their world will get they won't you might not notice it for a decade but it's just gonna shrink and shrink until the only things you ever do

[41:15]

shrink until the only things you ever do are the things that the machines collectively all the machines all the systems all the software the only things you'll be doing in the future are the things that the machines decided will stimulate your dopamine and and get you to a better place the machines will decide what you do and if you don't believe me let me let me draw you a little word picture here you know obviously there are lots of health apps and and health monitoring apps and let more and more of them for your phone eventually you you will know exactly because your phone will tell you or or some technology that's personal technology it will tell you when you are dehydrated it will tell you when you need a drink of water because being human you sometimes forget that you're thirsty you can you can go a while before your your sense of thirst kicks it way beyond the point when you

[42:15]

kicks it way beyond the point when you should have had to drink water what will happen I made myself Thursday just I'm talking about what will happen when your phone knows before your brain does that you're thirsty well the first time it happens you're gonna say hahaha that's funny my phone says I'm thirsty but I don't even feel thirsty and then you say but just for the heck of it I think I'll take a drink of water very quickly you will you will find that the that the machine is so right so often or at least if you can't tell you're still gonna trust it because it's been right before you will start doing what your software tells you to do because it's so good at it we're not there yet but we're very close if your software could tell you hey Scott you're a little low on salt have a chip hey Scott have a drink of

[43:19]

have a chip hey Scott have a drink of water hey Scott if you don't exercise in the next eight hours you will start to lose muscle mass hey Scott you've gained a pound because you ate a little bit too much bread here are some suggestions to you things that you like just as much you like these things here they are can i order them from Amazon they'll show up on your doorstep very quickly and it's going to happen quickly within just a few years probably your phone or your software your systems will make decisions for you that are so much better than the decisions you could have made on your own that you will start to delegate your decision-making responsibility to the machines yeah it's going to tell you when your estrogen is high you ate too much soy it's going to tell you when you need a little shot of competition to bring your testosterone up it will know all of these things and it will know them before your brain knows them and you will very quickly learn to trust

[44:20]

and you will very quickly learn to trust the machines because they will be good they will know that if you do X you're giving it a hit of dopamine and you need it it will know that better than you know it and when you as soon as you see that it's true that everything every time you follow the machines advice you get an output that you say mmm I got a treat ooh feels good I feel like I did get that little bit of dopamine you will be quickly addicted to the advice of the machines in every illusion you ever had a free will will be out the door you will effectively have have merged with the machines into some kind of large social thing which is part organic you know that the sum of human beings and their muscles and the brains and stuff and part machines but the machines will be the free will part the machines will be effectively deciding what the humans do now can the humans ignore the machines yes they can but they won't get a lot

[45:20]

yes they can but they won't get a lot get away with it for very long for a variety of different reasons people can't ignore the machines but it won't feel good you know won't get you a job it won't make you money and won't get you a girlfriend or a boyfriend so people can ignore the Machine advice but doing so will so consistently give them a bad result that you'd have to call those people more like mentally ill than free spirits because they would just be continually doing things that weren't good for them and they weren't good for anybody else those people we call crazy we don't say well look at that person who has free will we don't say that we say this person is crazy they're doing all the wrong things alright
somebody said their phones just shot them I don't know if that was a joke or did continuous glucose monitor already

[46:22]

did continuous glucose monitor already doing correct correct your continuous glucose monitor is literally telling you when to eat and to some extent what to eat and if it knew what was in your refrigerator it could do the second part as well look at all the homeless people what about them but will it understand your changing climate so I like to keep saying this because it's so provocative that people can't hear it and when I say people I don't mean the people here people on the Left can't hear some things because they have cognitive blindness too even being able to hear a thought that's so contrary to their worldview that they can't incorporate it they just have to reject it and act like they couldn't hear it and that's the idea that whether or not climate change is a big problem or not a big problem it doesn't matter to the question of whether you do if you go hard on nuclear

[47:24]

whether you do if you go hard on nuclear energy because whether its climate is a problem or not you still should go as hard as you can on all of the energy sources go hard on solar go hard on wind go hard on nuclear energy which is way safer than it used to be to the point where it's ridiculously safe at this point you know so safe there's never been a problem for the new generation of nuclear plants and we think about that there's never been not even one problem in a generation three nuclear plant every problem that you know about was other generations of Technology which had known problems where at generation three was zero events and we're already developing generation four which would make him meltdown physically impossible like you couldn't even you couldn't even make it happen if you wanted to so when when you tell somebody who's against it was somebody who's a climate change will

[48:26]

was somebody who's a climate change will say what would be the right word I don't want to say alarmist because that that's a biased word but somebody who believes that climate change is is a existential problem for the world if you say to them well whether that's true or not I guess you would agree that we should go hard at all of the energy sources because even if you only needed them just for development even if you only used all these these new sources of energy for developing Africa for developing underdeveloped countries for example you'd still do it as aggressively as you possibly could because it's the smartest thing to do and people who were on the left just can't hear that because it's the thing they want more than anything climate change solutions and the solutions already here nobody wants to hear that their biggest problem in the world is effectively solved now when I say solved I mean that there

[49:26]

now when I say solved I mean that there are all the usual obstacles the the public the all the the long approval times everything for getting nuclear built but those are those are all easily solvable problems you just have to have enough of emergency the problem with paperwork and in public public pushback for where you put in nuclear site and even where you put your nuclear waste those are big problems that have kept nuclear from succeeding in the past but they're all easy to solve it's not like we ran out of land it's not it's not like people couldn't accept nuclear if it became a big enough emergency we could put them anywhere we wanted if it became a big enough emergency suddenly we'd have enough places to store store stuff which it turns out is not a big problem the storage of nuclear waste in our minds we think it's a big problem but turns out it's not it's actually closer you're closer to a minor problem so

[50:29]

you're closer to a minor problem so we're in the world where I don't know why I started that but the I'm sure I had some kind of a clever point I was working toward but most of you won't even notice so the point is there's some cognitive deafness and blindness on nuclear energy because we our biggest problem in the world is kind of already solved now things might need to get worse before they get better in other words people need to become more frightened by climate disasters so that suddenly they get a little bit flexible about where you put that nuclear plant but that's gonna happen it seems like that's inevitable now how quickly can we build these nuclear plants is it quickly enough to get ahead of this problem where it seems like the next 10 or 12 years are going to be important important to get going strong I'm not saying 12 years the world ends I'm not using the aoc thing I'm saying that in the next 10 or 12 years you better be going pretty quick quickly at whatever

[51:31]

going pretty quick quickly at whatever you think your solution is nuclear it's kind of tough to get up and running in 10 or 12 years because everything takes so long but we could probably get it done if we if we wanted to if we wanted to we could get some nukes up and going and some plants under development and I'm guessing that if we get nuclear going like crazy within the next 20 to 30 years probably five you know there will be could be big expenses from climate change but we'll have the big economy we'll be able to adjust the number of people who will die from climate disasters we'll probably continue to go down it goes down every every decade because we get richer and smarter or we can predict things we can recover we can build stronger buildings and all that stuff so probably even if the climate gets worse life on Earth will continue getting better probably so we probably have 30 years of

[52:33]

probably so we probably have 30 years of maybe the climate degrading in ways we really really wish it wouldn't but probably not so badly that once we have enough energy up and running through nuclear and other means we'll probably be able to weather that pretty well all right I actually was going to sign off a lot earlier but I was greatly influenced by this little number might be opposite from you so where I'm pointing at least on my screen my screen might be reversed but down there there's a little number this is three point three that three point three is roughly double what my normal traffic is and you watched in real-time as my ability to measure who comes in and who doesn't completely changed my behavior did you notice that because I was gonna sign off and I said well there's twice as many people watching this for reasons that I don't quite understand maybe because of the immigration thing I don't know and so the Harkey back to my earlier

[53:38]

and so the Harkey back to my earlier point the fact that this can be measured and I get a dopamine hit for having a bigger audience and I can feel that like that that the feeling I get when I see the number go up it's very noticeable it's it's not it's now some vague like subtle thing I can feel it so did I decide to stay and to do this periscope longer was that my decision was that free well it looks like it right it looked like I made a decision and I had some data but not really not really because when this little number went to three point three I can promise you it eliminated the option that I was gonna stop it eliminated it suddenly it went from I think I'm probably going to stop and nothing changed except this little number just this little tiny number in the corner of my screen and that was enough to completely alter my

[54:40]

that was enough to completely alter my behavior that's the world that you're entering where you're gonna feel for a while as though you still have free will and very rapidly you will learn wait every time that little number goes up my behavior is similar so did I decide to act that way I know I could have decided to do something else but I always decide to do the same thing am I in charge or is that little number in the corner in charge am I only doing this now instead of having discontinued earlier is it because there's some blue cheque person who just tweeted out this periscope is that what happened did somebody somewhere else decide that I will continue doing this because they tweeted it and that made that made my decision for me yeah I think at this point maybe other people are just noticing that the number is big and so

[55:42]

noticing that the number is big and so they're coming to see what's happening and then they definitely find out nothing's happening all right see what time it is oh it is time for me to go I've got a good run so alright that's all for now thank you for joining me in larger numbers and usual I have no idea why but I will talk to you later