Episode 570 Scott Adams: YouTube Demonetization, Russia Hacking, Iran, Harvard, DNA, Deportations

Date: 2019-06-18 | Duration: 54:43

Topics

“Fine People” HOAX…it was a HOAX, a HOAX!!! Harvard protected themselves at Kyle Kashuv’s expense People who move communications from private to public venues New, better photos of Iranian guys removing unexploded mine Jon Stewart event…FAKE NEWS per Mitch Your EGO is your biggest enemy The Rock’s advise…”be your authentic self”…is really BAD advise NYT says we’re escalating our cyber attacks on Russia President Trump says that report is “treasonous” America has abdicated leadership of energy development to China

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

## Transcript

[0:08]

I'm pumping pumping hello everybody it's time for your dopamine the end of the day the best part of the day that makes all the rest of the day amazing but you want to get it right better hurry on in here grab a seat up front I see you hello my dude as somebody else says alright uh-huh I think it's time for you to do what you came here to do you know what that is it's a little thing I call the simultaneous imp it's where your dopamine starts to go crazy and now you're so well-trained that you can almost feel a tingle on your arm when it gets close not all of you some of you some of you are ahead the rest of you you don't have the tingle yet you'll feel it in the back of your neck a little bit on your arms as the simultaneous sip draws near and to enjoy it all you need it's a cup or a mug or a glass let's dine the chalice or a

[1:10]

glass let's dine the chalice or a tankard would work perhaps a thermos a flask if you like hmm enjoy me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the simultaneous imp extra good extra good stuff well people are telling me where they are somebody's driving to the doctor somebody else says they're on the toilet right now I'm sure some of you are working out some of you are commuting and some of you or just sitting around drinking coffee but it's awesome either way all right let's talk about one more take on Kyle Keshav and Harvard you know the story Park Lane shooting survivor Kyle cashews was accepted to Harvard but then some text messages from when he was 16 were released in which he said some offensive things

[2:10]

offensive things mostly involving the n-word but I guess there were some other offensive things and Harvard rescinded rescinded their approval of his application so I thought about this for a day after my initial reaction and I have modified in my reaction I've decided that Harvard made the right decision probably don't want to hear that right now and what I mean by that is that Harvard's obligation is to Harvard they're they're an entity that is formed to take care of itself which includes taking care of its alumni and taking care of its students it seems to me that Harvard did what they are obligated to do they protected themselves at the expense of someone else now every time they reject somebody from Harvard they are also protecting themselves and their

[3:11]

are also protecting themselves and their students and alumni at the expense of other people at the expense of somebody who didn't get it so I would say that Harvard I'm going to modify my anger and say it would have been nice it would have been nice if they did something that was not so good for Harvard but maybe it was a statement about free speech and how people can change and private communication and stuff like that it would have been nice if Harvard had taken a principled stand but they're not obligated to take a principled stand they are not obligated to do that they are obligated to take care of themselves and they're obligated to do what's good for them even if it's bad for other people and I think that's the choice they made and I can't begrudge that because that's what a corporation does it's what any entity does and things work better if they do that but that doesn't make me less angry at the situation my anger is now 100% focused

[4:15]

situation my anger is now 100% focused on the people who outed Kyle and sent his private messages from when he was 16 to Harvard and his life well probably didn't ruin his life that's an exaggeration changed his life we'll see if it got ruined and here's my rule that I I've come up with a new rule and I think we should take this new rule seriously and the rule goes like this that if somebody takes a piece of communication in this case it was old text messages if somebody takes a communication that existed in one context which is say private and they move it to a new context which is public or showing it to Harvard which is the same thing whoever moves the context of the communication becomes the author of it that should be the rule so that's that's my rule for an

[5:16]

the rule so that's that's my rule for an ethical moral way to treat with this and here's why communication is not about the words the specific choice of words is only part of communication what makes a message a message is first of all understanding who said it and what the context was if you don't understand who said it which is really part of the context if you don't understand the context then the message is garbled or it could be just wrong or different from what was intended by the speaker so anytime somebody takes a message there was an that was crafted for one context in this case a private context in which and I don't believe this is disputed I believe people accept that this is true the context was 16 year-old kids who thought they were having a private conversation with a small group and were attempting to be as offensive as possible for their own entertainment now

[6:16]

possible for their own entertainment now if you take that communication which was completely or probably almost completely acceptable to the people involved meaning that they understood and this is very important they understood that the things they were saying would be offensive in a different context that's why they thought it was funny in other words they understood it was wrong if you don't get this fact you're missing the most important point everyone involved in saying these these words or even listening to him everybody who is part of this thing about trying to be offensive the whole point of it is that they do understand it's wrong that's the point it wouldn't be funny if they didn't all understand that it was the wrongness they made it funny but they were careful to keep that wrongness in a bubble so that nobody else would get hurt would you agree that they were trying to keep other people from being hurt by keeping

[7:18]

other people from being hurt by keeping it private and just having a private laugh now somebody decided to take that communication which was safely walled off you know in a private group maybe it offended one of the members of the group which would be bad and you know that should be addressed separately but whoever took that private communication and changed its context to a public context is the author of it in my opinion because that's not the message that Kyle had Kyle did not have a message for the public he did not make a message for the public it's a different message as soon as has changed context it's a new author and a new message now it's blamed on Kyle because he created the actual words but when they're taken out of context it's not that message anymore it's not a message of we know these are bad words essentially the the original message would say we know these

[8:18]

original message would say we know these are terrible words we know that we would never want to say these in front of people who would be offended so we're saying this is a private little group because we're having to laugh imagining how bad it would be if somebody actually heard these words who would be offended now so whoever whoever spread this message should definitely not get to go to college in my opinion because they are authors of horrible horrible words that they released to the public not only did the releasing to the public offend a lot of people because it is should they were offensive words they were designed to be offensive but it was bad for the speaker Keshav so I reserve all of my anger whoever did that they are terrible terrible people and they have to live with that now imagine living with that imagine being the people who have to live with what they just did by releasing that message and becoming the

[9:19]

releasing that message and becoming the authors of it they are the authors of it all right here's another problem I have we seem to to easily conflate being offensive with being racist and if we can't sort those two things out we've got a real problem because those are really different things oh they have some connection sure but they're different things you can be super offensive accidentally you can be super offensive because you said something privately but somebody took it out of context being offensive is unfortunately a normal perpetual state of being for humans we're all offended by something I could tell you I was probably offended by several things yesterday but racism is a very specific thing and just because I offend you and you're some

[10:19]

because I offend you and you're some different group some different race some could be a different gender offending you is not misogyny it's not racism it is simply being offensive we're offensive to to other humans all the time we can't can plate those things and I think it's a big mistake we do that alright let's talk about Iran did you see that new photos of the Iranian boat that was taking the the mine off of the limpet mine off of the the tanker it turns out we have really good pictures of those guys I think we probably didn't want to release the photos because they're so clear and maybe we didn't want to we didn't want people to know how well we know things but they have been released so when this first came out I told you that given that our our intelligence services are not reliable and let me say that clearly again our intelligence services are not

[11:20]

again our intelligence services are not reliable they are sometimes right and sometimes lying to us like crazy or mistaken we can't tell the difference but they're not reliable and I want to say that as clearly as possible doesn't mean they're wrong all the time I'm not saying that but they're not reliable and so when I first came out I said it's a coin toss 50-50 that this is even true the way it's reported I upgraded that to 75% when I saw the videos and now I've upgrading it to a hundred percent and that's based on the fact that we have these clear pictures so obviously we have better information than we first knew but more importantly Iran has not denied that that's their boat so if Iran doesn't at least try to lie about why the boat was there if they don't come up with some story some cover story about what the boat was doing if they don't even try well that's all you need to

[12:21]

even try well that's all you need to know right because if it really didn't happen Iran would be you know screaming that's not our boat or they'd be saying yes that was our boat but we were protecting that tanker by taking that mine off of there they risked their lives they would say something something so it's obvious now that it was an Iranian mine I say that's confirmed at this point it's obvious that they did not mean to release oil into the Gulf it's obvious that they put the mines above the water level and that their intention was to cause trouble not to destroy the entire shipping situation right away I'm not sure if that person swearing at me saw some trouble stuff there so we're moving some forces there and then Duran is talking about Scot is so gullible we'll get rid of you

[13:25]

by the way I'm okay with people saying they disagree with me but when you say God is so gullible that's not about disagreeing with me that's just about me and my new rule is that there's zero tolerance for any troll-like behavior so you don't even have to be a troll you just have to remind me of a troll and I'm gonna block you because I can't write well I don't have to put up with any kind of unpleasantness it's optional so I just made that troll go away now when somebody said I'm being gullible there's a good chance that they're on my side on most things and maybe a trump supporter and maybe even the fan possibly somebody who bought my books but I don't need to listen to you tell me I'm gullible you can give me reasons you can tell me what's true what's not you can tell me I got a fact wrong anything you want but if it's personal you're blocked alright so the question is where do we go with

[14:26]

so the question is where do we go with Iran where do you go with that because it looks like it looks like this permanent stalemate situation and I still think where we need to go with this it's probably probably the president Trump is going to shake the box again so the variables that we have do not give us a path for solution probably we're going to shake the box and create a new set of variables that are unpredictable but at least might give us a better chance so I would expect the President to shake the box again but here's what I think these happen I think that Iran needs an escape hatch because they can't just back down that doesn't feel like an option it would be damaging for them to do that and they can't win because we won't let them so what happens if you can't win and you can't lose well then you have the situation we have now where maybe somebody gets nuked someday pretty bad

[15:29]

somebody gets nuked someday pretty bad so you have to create an escape path the same way the president Trump created an escape path for Kim jong-un by talking to him by embracing him by creating you know creating a path to victory where we say okay Kim you can stay in power and will even help your economy you just have to be friendly so that was a good escape path because he gave him a way to win Iran does not have a way to win at least with its current leadership so I think the argument should be changed to Iran why are you so afraid of ideas why do you have no confident confidence in your own God because that's what's happening isn't it correct me if I'm wrong is this is this an incorrect statement if a ram thinks it needs to use physical weapons to spread their their their beliefs in the age of the internet isn't that really saying that

[16:30]

internet isn't that really saying that their God is weak because it feels to me that if they had confidence in their own God it should be enough to have the internet simply engage in a in a battle of ideas because gods on your side right I mean that's the whole idea if God isn't on your side then the internet won't work but if God isn't on your side neither will weapons weapons are gonna work if God isn't on your side right if at least if here in Iran you would think that so let's take the battle off the battlefield and put it in on the Internet where it belongs and invite them to take their best shot at not describing their truth maybe their God will help them my favorite fake news story today was about Jon Stewart and the 9/11 fund you also the story about how Jon Stewart tearfully and emotionally got angry at Congress for not doing their job to fully fund the I

[17:33]

not doing their job to fully fund the I guess the what we call them the first responders health problems so Mitch McConnell finally responded to that and you know McConnell's response was we were always going to fund it yeah do you don't his response was too wide there were not many people in the room and not many people have showed up for John Stewart because that's normal they're busy they don't all show up for everything and by the way they didn't need to show up for that in particular because they were all pretty sure it was going to be taken care of at the last minute but McConnell McConnell points out a lot of stuff gets done at the last minute in order for it not to be done at the last minute you'd have to have somebody opposed to it and there doesn't seem to be anybody opposed to it if the Republicans and the Democrats both want it just hasn't happened yet but apparently it's going to happen so that hole the hole we love Jon Stewart

[18:33]

that hole the hole we love Jon Stewart he's come out of retirement he's fighting for the little people he's embarrassing Congress none of that was real it was all fake news it was complete theater Jon Stewart was emotionally lobbying for something that was going to happen whether or not Jon Stewart was involved at all completely fake news all right here's a little shocking thing that happened to me some months ago I guess last year I did the 23andme DNA tests if you haven't done this it's worth doing it's a lot of fun I don't know how good the science is I don't know how good it is but it's fun sort of like horoscopes even if it's not true it's kind of fun so one of the things that 23andme does which is brilliant is after they give you your original your initial results they continue with emails about new things

[19:35]

continue with emails about new things they've discovered that they can now say about you based on your DNA that they couldn't say when you first took the test so I keep getting these updates oh did you know that you have a high chance or a low chance of being I don't color blinds or whatever whatever the the new test is and they sent me a new one
send me a new one and apparently they can test now for whether or not you are likely to have a fear of public speaking that's pretty specific isn't it can you believe that can you believe that 23andme can tell you your odds your genetic odds that you're afraid of public speaking now if you know much about me you know that I've done a lot of public speaking in fact I mean in a sense I'm doing it right now I have so here's the the point in my story I have

[20:35]

here's the the point in my story I have always taken great pride that I could overcome the fear that other people had trouble overcoming so I always hear about people are so afraid of public speaking that it's very much like you know it's like death but I always told myself man Scott Scott you are pretty pretty awesome because you you know you what other people can't do this you Scott have found a way to overcome your fear you can under come the fear of public speaking like other people can't because Scott you've got good character that's what I thought about myself until this week when I read the 23andme result that said that people who have my genetic makeup are very unlikely to be afraid of public speaking so here I had this whole illusion about myself in

[21:35]

this whole illusion about myself in which I imagined I had some kind of strong character attribute which made me allowed me to see past my fear I could see past fear like other people couldn't I was a brave person damn it I'm brave but it turns out nothing like that it turns out that I have genes that make me not afraid in the first place which is exactly how I feel there has never been a time in my life when I was especially afraid of public speaking in fact never I can I can think of no time and I've done a lot of it both of my corporate days and and then later for Dilbert stuff I did a lot of corporate speaking etc I can't think of a one time I was ever afraid of speaking to tell you how I'm afraid I am of speaking I once gave a speech when I

[22:37]

speaking I once gave a speech when I didn't know if I could actually physically speak some of you know the story I lost my ability to speak for a few years and just when it was coming on I'd agreed to a speaking event and I told the organizers I don't even know if I get on stage I don't know if I can form actual words like literally my vocal cords I didn't know if I could do that anymore because I had this speaking problem that eventually I overcame so I actually had the experience of having a huge crowd waiting for me just for me they were there just for me and I was off stage and I hear the introduction and I didn't know if I walked on stage if I could form words I didn't know and when I got out there I I managed to get through it and I formed enough words that they paid me anyway it wasn't good because this was the beginning of losing my voice to the point where I couldn't do that but yeah so somebody and somebody in the

[23:38]

but yeah so somebody and somebody in the comments is saying my gosh that's courageous how brave you are no no that's what I used to think a week ago I would have said man I'm a pretty brave dude because even in the worst possible public speaking situation I still brave my way through that turns out nothing like that happened my worldview completely completely wrong what happened was I have a certain genetic makeup that doesn't excite my a Magdalen but whatever it is the part of your brain that makes you go into fight or flight so my brain is simply not wired to make my fighter flight and go crazy when I do public speaking I'm not brave I'm just a genetic freak amigdala yes thank you my amigdala so having to

[24:38]

yes thank you my amigdala so having to learn this rather disturbing fact about myself it's disturbing in the sense that I thought it was a character advantage and it's nothing it's just a randomness of my genetic makeup and that's it so I just got lucky you know you know in that one area I got lucky you know I wish I had been taller I wish I had that her hair could have been a better looking wouldn't it be nice as if I had good eyesight everybody's got something I got all this bad stuff that I just mentioned you know and other stuff but this one's one thing I got lucky just genetic luck so here's the bottom line I've lost all self-respect and I mean that in a good way I've lost all self-respect because I used to think that everything good I'd ever done was something about my character my soul my my personal self my my ego the thing that made me me somehow

[25:40]

my ego the thing that made me me somehow I had thought past my problems somehow I figured out good solutions where other people haven't and you know instead as I wrote in my book had a failed almost everything and still wouldn't bake we are just moist robots we are just programmed and I've got a program that gives me a certain set of skills and a program that doesn't give me skills in other areas that's it that's it
that brings me to some advice well I'm gonna okay expand on this room a minute I hadn't planned on doing this but this is valuable to you I've said this before but I can't say this enough your ego is not your friend most people go through life thinking that their ego their sense of self the part they have to protect the part that makes them think that they are important they think that that's who they are that that part of you this says you're important and keeps trying to protect

[26:40]

important and keeps trying to protect you and make you better and make you better than other people and stuff like that in truth your ego is your biggest enemy because your ego is the source of all your unhappiness unless you're unless you have a mental problem but if you're a normal person your ego all day long is saying hey how do you compare to that person hey compared to this person shouldn't you do something bit different or better to to improve your ego all day long your ego is punching you in the head bump bump bump your ego is not your friend when you can release your ego and be just as comfortable being humiliated in public as you can winning a contest then you're free right the Buddhists I think yes and we mentioned Buddhism there there are various disciplines in which you try to get your ego out of it but think about that just think about that one framing your ego is your biggest enemy if you

[27:42]

your ego is your biggest enemy if you can become free of its control things don't hurt I'm going to give you I'm gonna tell you something that you won't believe if you can control your ego you won't even experience physical pain the same way you'll still know it's pain so you're not you know you're not gonna put your hand on the stove and leave it there I'm not talking about that you'll see you'll understand the feeling and you'll know that it's pain and that you should take your hand away none of that will change but at the moment you can get to the point where your ego is not who you are is rather your enemy and you can push it to the side your body won't even feel pain in the same way because the pain is that is the thing that's telling you to protect yourself the pain is saying you're special every time you

[28:42]

is saying you're special every time you feel pain it's your ego telling you along with your body that you're special you must protect yourself if you move your ego out of it you still have the physical sensation without the panic because you know you're not that special it's a pain and if if you understand the pain is something that what we're on its course if it's gonna run its course you're not gonna worry about it and it's not gonna feel like pain anymore all right I know you don't believe that but I want you to understand this is something I've experimented with I've researched it's true your ego is your source of pain it's not who you are and you should not protect it you should look to destroy it and the best way to destroy your ego is to subject yourself to embarrassment until you get used to it and you see that it doesn't argue once you can do that once you can handle a deep humiliation and embarrassment in

[29:45]

a deep humiliation and embarrassment in public do you see this I am I'm actually I'm actually wiping my nose in public does that bother me I know some of you were bothered by it right you didn't want to say it does it bother me no how many of you could wipe your nose in public and in the public forum not many some of the you some of you could but get there but you want to get there if it's the best thing I could ever teach you get to the point where you can embarrass yourself just as easily as you can do something great should be the same should feel exactly the same I'm close you know you never get there all the way but I'm close to that all right
the rock you know the rock Dwayne Johnson he has some advice that the news is breathlessly reporting so this is the rocks advice for you he said you should

[30:49]

rocks advice for you he said you should be your authentic self that that's how you will succeed the best is by being your authentic self that is just about the worst advice you're ever going to see
see so my advice is do not take your advice from Dwayne Johnson the rock in fact I mock that advice in at least three books I mock the advice be your authentic self the better advice is be a better you do not be authentic if you were authentic you would not shave you would not bathe you would not wear clothing you would not be nice to other people you would not go get a job you would not go help the public you would not do anything being authentic is the worst fricking advice anybody will ever give you in your life never ever be yourself be the better version because if you look at who you were when you were born are you

[31:50]

who you were when you were born are you the same person no you're the better version do you want to be the baby that's you know messing its diaper and sucking around a bottle no no don't be yourself that baby grew up that baby got a little more maturity got a little smarter that look kinder got a little nicer never be yourself work on being the slightly better version of yourself and then when you accomplish that work on being a little bit better than that always be working on the better version of yourself and if you can't get there right away fake it be a big freakin phony and pretend you're a nice person because we do program ourselves by our actions if you simply pretend to be nice for a year and even if you know you're just pretending at the end of the year you're gonna be a nicer person you can program yourself by what you do so you are not your ego so when when the

[32:50]

so you are not your ego so when when the rock says be yourself do you know what that advice means respect your ego because your ego is telling you you're great just the way you are all right forget the rock and the president is reportedly going to start deporting millions of people but we don't know the details something about the people who have violated that violated the order to return I guess to court so I think the people that they're targeting are the people who had been detained at the border and then said they would return for their court date but never returned I don't know about that so that's not I would say there's still something I'm big you atieast ori so wait for that story to form all right i want to give you a an update on something i said about the muller report and it's reference to the stolen emails by russia i I had said on a periscope that the Muller report surprisingly does not say that the

[33:53]

surprisingly does not say that the russians hacked the dnc that instead this is what i said i'm going to modify this in a minute but what i said was that they used the word in the report the Muller report used the word that it appears that it appears that they did that which I said wait a minute if he knew they did it you'd say they did it if you weren't sure they did it you'd say well it appears they did it so I said to myself huh it seems like we're being lied to but then today I read the actual sentence so this is my mistake so let me accept responsibility for talking about a word in the sentence without saying the whole sentence okay there's no way to there's no way I can there's no way I can justify that that was just dumb I should have seen the whole sentence and I should have seen the whole context before I talked about one word in the sentence when I see the full sentence I no longer interpret it the

[34:56]

sentence I no longer interpret it the same way okay somebody says it how embarrassing but do you note that I don't look embarrassed I did something that by any objective measure should be embarrassing and I should feel embarrassed right now that I do that but I don't because embarrassment is not useful and it's it's something that your ego does to you and I'm not friends with my ego so I don't care what it does all right but here's the whole sentence and you judge and I'll tell you why I'm modifying my my view the whole sentence said that unit 26 165 which you would have to know in context means the Russian intelligence agency that does cyber stuff so unit blah blah blah is talking about Russia basically so the the Russian officers and here's the rest of the sentence appear to a stolen thousands of emails and attachments which were later released by wickley WikiLeaks in July 2016 here's what I got

[35:57]

WikiLeaks in July 2016 here's what I got wrong it's a complicated compound sentence the sentence does not say it appears Russia hacked us that's what I thought is said and if I thought it appears Russia hacked us that would sound like we're not sure but here's the full sentence again and you can see why I was wrong it says the Russian officers appear to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments which were later released by WikiLeaks in July 2016 here's the problem there are three claims in that sentence and claim number one Russia hacked the DNC has claim number one claim number two in the same sentence is that it involved stealing thousands of emails and attachments that's the second claim one is that they hacked two is that they stole thousands of documents and then the third part which were later released by WikiLeaks those are three claims so when the sentence says this what follows

[36:59]

when the sentence says this what follows appears to have happened in order for them to be sure that it happened instead of saying appears they would have to be sure of three claims Russia tried to hack Russia got thousands of documents Russia gave them to WikiLeaks and WikiLeaks released them it's entirely possible that were a hundred percent sure they're Russia hack the D insane but we are less sure how many documents they got and perhaps again less you are again that they gave them to WikiLeaks maybe they gave them to somebody who gave them to WikiLeaks in other words there could be some unknowns of the second part of the sentence about the WikiLeaks part but they could be a hundred percent sure about the Russia a hacking part now I'm not gonna change my opinion to say that Russia did hack it because I don't find our intelligence services reliable so just based on general lack of reliability I would say

[38:00]

general lack of reliability I would say you still can't know for sure but I rescind my comment which had said before in which the fact that Muller uses the word appears I said that meant that maybe we're not sure but when you see the full sentence it means that the entire breadth of the the trail is something we can't be a 100% sure of but if we know for sure that the hacking happened and we know for sure that WikiLeaks released the same documents they're saying well it appears that way all right I made the mistake of looking at MSNBC in which they have a headline that Trump quote flips out over a New York report on the u.s. cyber attacks on Russia so MSNBC has says that Trump flips out I'm pretty sure I read that story on other sources and didn't seem like they were he was flipping out this seemed like Trump was being the Trump he has always been since the first

[39:02]

Trump he has always been since the first day we ever saw he he speaks you know he speaks forcefully a lot about a lot of things you like some things he doesn't like some other things is he really flipping out flipping out isn't news flipping out is not even an opinion it's not even backed up by evidence it is simply it's propaganda all right now what's funny about this is apparently the president pushed back on the idea that the u.s. is using its cyber forces more aggressively against Russia now why would the president say that so the New York Times says we're getting aggressive aggressive with our cyber stuff against Russia and the president says no no that's not happening well that's good presidenting because the should say in public no we're not we're not attacking Russia he should say that if it's not clandestine intelligence operations if you admit you're doing it

[40:04]

operations if you admit you're doing it now remember I said Oh somebody yeah I think the president also said New York Times was treasonous reporting it and I agree with that characterization because you should not be outing what your intelligence services are doing yeah that's that's kinda treasonous now I don't want to get you know hung up on the definition of the word treason but in essence in essence is disloyal to the country to out what our intelligence services are doing if the intelligence services are acting in what seems to be the best interests of the country now you may remember some of you that I said long ago why is it that people are saying the president is doing nothing about Russia's hacking and I said how in the world would you and I know that that we were doing nothing about Russia's hacking because whatever it is we should be doing about that half of the might be

[41:04]

be doing about that half of the might be public you know like sanctions and half of it or more should be stuff we're doing it under the hood and I said that once we confirmed assuming we did within the intelligence community that Russia tried to hack us didn't you think that the response would be our cyber guys would go guys and women would go after Russia didn't you think that we would do a tip for tat so every time I heard we're not doing anything about the Russia cyber attacks I thought to myself no the only thing we know for sure is we don't know what we're doing the only thing that's that's it that's a hundred percent of what we can conclude is that we don't know what secret things are our own government is doing on our behalf it seemed to me highly unlikely that we would experience a major cyber attack as had been reported in terms of the election and meddling seem highly unlikely that we would not be responding

[42:05]

unlikely that we would not be responding in
in and now maybe not to damage them directly but at least to tap them on the shoulder and say by the way we know all of your you know we can get into all of your systems surprise so maybe the next time you get into any of our systems the lights are going to go off I'm not saying they will i'm not saying how we got into your system oh but do you notice well do you notice our bots a new system we're in there so to me it made perfect sense that what the president was doing was in public at denying they were doing the stuff because that's what you do you deny it in public that's his job he's supposed to deny it in public but then he do it hard under the under the hood seems to be what's going on there all right I was reading up a little bit about thorium molten-salt reactors a lot of people have been telling me to read up on that I've been avoiding it because I

[43:05]

on that I've been avoiding it because I figured I wouldn't understand that it anyway but here's what I've learned about thorium molten salt reactors so these are not the kind that we typically are using in the United States but they are being tested and I guess we built one decades ago and tested that the basic concept works so thorium is basically something you can get from dirt so you don't have to look too hard and you don't have to worry about running out of plutonium so you can basically just take a bunch of dirt that's left over from regular mining operations and say hey you were mining for other things but while you were mining for the things you created a lot of dirt that you dug out of these holes can we use your dirt because it turns out ordinary dirt has enough thorium in it that you've got all the all the energy you would need to power the world as far as we can tell so thorium is a little bit harder to turn into nuclear

[44:07]

little bit harder to turn into nuclear weapons that's good and then when you combine the thorium with a I guess a liquid salt is that the right term so instead of putting it in pressurized water to cool it use salt fluoride or fluoride salt or something like that which has better properties for cooling without the risk and like the design as I understand it is that that if something goes wrong you've got two containers I'm so I'm oversimplifying you've got the reactor and then separately you've got a container where all the fuel would drain into it harmlessly if something goes wrong with the reactor and that's built into the design so apparently there are several of these being tested in other countries because they have more relaxed standards for this sort of thing in the United States apparently our regulations just don't allow it it's just too hard to do too expensive too hard to get it

[45:07]

to do too expensive too hard to get it approved but we should see this coming out of China soon maybe India and the weird and depressing part about this whole story is that we might have to wait for China to develop nuclear technology that somehow we can copy or steal or buy so that we can do it we've actually abdicated our leadership in the most important technology for the future which is energy now I see more and more people coming around to the framework and some somewhere there before me so I'm not going to claim that I change people's minds on this the idea that energy the kind that's produced by oil and gas and coal and nuclear power and solar and all that their energy is the only thing that matters if you get energy right everything else works and right now we're not trying hard enough

[46:08]

right now we're not trying hard enough to get it right so we should be trying harder than energy can be turned into money and the money is sort of a temporary storage of energy and then you spend the money and it releases energy in a different place so think about money and especially crypto currencies which take a lot of look at Bitcoin for example Bitcoin the biggest cost of creating a new bitcoin is energy electricity so bitcoin is a direct is a direct storage unit of energy you use energy to create a Bitcoin you take the big coin somewhere you give it to somebody and it makes them you know creates energy for them to do something sell you something whatever they're doing so when you think about that and you think of energy as the the primary the same material of the the the universe it is also good for your personal life I write about this and had a failed almost everything is still way back if you if you are trying to figure out what to do in your life should I do

[47:10]

out what to do in your life should I do this or should I do that should I take this job or that should I marry this person or that should I have a family or not that I find it very reliable to ask yourself what it would do to your energy and when you you take on tasks that elevate your energy because you're really interested in them for whatever reason you're almost always on the right track and when you do things that lower your energy you're probably on the wrong track so thinking of energy as the only thing that matters can be hugely valuable to your personal decisions for example you we're all making decisions about work versus exercise versus your home life if you make the decision to do the thing that will give you the most energy or at least not drain the most energy you're probably going to be making good decisions so follow your energy and you will get to a good place that's a good general general rule all

[48:12]

that's a good general general rule all right make sure that I have covered all of my topics believe I have that's a metaphysical principle well I don't know if it is I I don't know that it's a metaphysical principle that following your energy gets you the right place I would say I was listening to Jordan Peterson the other day he was talking about I had to find meaning and life and he's quite brilliant at this and one of the things he said is that taking on responsibility is what gives you meaning so if you're not doing something that's going to help you know you your family the community if you're not if you're not taking out a responsibility you'll never feel this thing called meaning it's the responsibility that gives you meaning it's not your games and your farm and stuff they have their own use but meaning comes from stepping up stepping up and pitching in and doing something

[49:14]

up and pitching in and doing something for somebody I would argue that that's also what gives you energy so for those people who can go out and let's say work with the disadvantaged people whoever they are those people get energy from doing that because they're feeling meaning the feeling connection or feeling that they're doing something of value so energy is a real good indicator that you're doing something that is biologically compatible with your being so let me tie that together somebody said it was a metaphysical idea to follow your energy I'm not talking about some weird yahya new-age kind of energy concept I'm talking about how you feel how's your body feel that's a real thing all right do you have energy right now and the point is that when you do things which are compatible with your biological imperatives and that could include reproducing it could include

[50:15]

include reproducing it could include going to school earning money helping people it's a whole broad array of things but you feel them as your energy as an energy plus and when you think of things that or maybe temporarily good for your energy such as doing a drug so let's take the example if you were to get drunk it's quite common for drunks to have a lot of energy while they're drunk but what happens to you the next day well the next day you have way less energy so I would think that all of us would agree that getting drunk or doing a drug or something if it temporarily increased your energy at the expense of having less energy the next I think we'd all agree that that was a negative energy situation net net negative so this rule works pretty well if you follow if you pursue energy you're almost always compatible with your biological being as long as you're looking at the big picture of energy not the not not the energy at the this

[51:16]

the not not the energy at the this 5-minute period all right that's all I got to say I believe I've said it all I will talk about the fact that yesterday YouTube do you monetize me yeah somebody's reminding me to talk about that so I did a special YouTube yesterday because I got D monetized and I wanted to test whether I would be d monetized again by mentioning one topic so I did I did mention that topic and I got demonetised so yesterday afternoon I did a completely g-rated non-offensive not even a little bit offensive I made sure that I did nothing that would even be slightly offensive and I was immediately demonetised now I I of course challenged it because YouTube gives you an option to have a human review it they reviewed it and they written and they reversed it as well as they've they've also reversed several other D monetized ones from the back

[52:19]

other D monetized ones from the back list they haven't done them all I think at least one of them they decided they weren't going to and so so but here's the question that remains I used some keywords that probably have picked up and automatically banned me one of the keywords that I'm not going to say live today because this will be my little test I'm going to spell backwards because this way it won't get picked up in the the automatic speech to text the word that I think might have got me demonetized I'm going to spell backwards I Z a and as a neighbor I believe that because I mentioned them in a negative light that the the probably the speech-to-text doesn't have as much concept of contact it probably just picked it up and and probably said Oh anybody who's using that word is a red flag our advertisers

[53:19]

that word is a red flag our advertisers don't want any part of that might be that I was worried that it was something else and I'm gonna test it right now find people hoax find people hoax so now I've got a better test if this one gets demonetised I don't think that YouTube can see your comments so it doesn't matter what you say in the comments the comments don't don't translate over to YouTube so they don't even see them so because I've said the fine people hoax is a hoax it's a hoax that the president called some individuals in that town that starts with the letter C you called them fine people so now we'll find out if fine people hoax gets automatically flagged I think you'd agree that I've said nothing else in this in this episode this should be bad right certainly I've said nothing controversial and I didn't say anything controversial in the other ones so this

[54:21]

controversial in the other ones so this is our test if this one does not get demonetised automatically it means that they're not looking at the words fine people hoaxes but rather they're looking at that word I spelled backwards so let's let's test that out and we'll see so I will talk to you tomorrow