Latest / truthunedited / Joe Rogan Experience _2394 - Palmer Luckey

Transcript

Joe Rogan Experience _2394 - Palmer Luckey · truthunedited

• 0:01
  Speaker 1: Joe Robin Podcast check it out.
• 0:03
  Speaker 2: But Joe Logan Experience Train by Day, Joe Rogan Podcast
• 0:08
  by Night all day.
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: I haven't done the ball, but I have done those
• 0:17
  knee chairs.
• 0:18
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: They're a little annoying and you're like, what.
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: A standing desks? You a standing desk fan? No? Yeah,
• 0:25
  when I use them, I usually have lower back gets
• 0:27
  gets kind of sore just standing there.
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: I feel like some part of you should be relaxed,
• 0:32
  and if you're standing, you're gonna want to lean on
• 0:34
  something to have a conversation, especially because I know some
• 0:37
  people do podcasts standing up, like a standing up table.
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: I'm like, that's crazy. I have a buddy of mine
• 0:43
  who's doing Have you ever seen the float tanks which
• 0:47
  you float in the salt water?
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: We have one here?
• 0:49
  Speaker 2: Oh no, no way.
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 0:50
  Speaker 2: So I know someone who is building a rig with
• 0:53
  a waterproof keyboard, waterproof mouse, and a VR headset so
• 0:57
  that they can have a float computing rig. And they
• 1:00
  want to just they want to, just they want to.
• 1:02
  They want to program while they're floating in space. And
• 1:05
  he hasn't he hasn't gotten all the way there yet
• 1:07
  the hardest part has actually been the mouse there's lots
• 1:08
  of waterproof keyboards for various industrial applications, like you know,
• 1:12
  so you don't get metal shavings in a sure and
• 1:14
  oil in them, but mice it's actually it's actually harder.
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: But that makes sense because there's a well, there's a laser.
• 1:19
  Now it used to be an actual ball that.
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: Would have been really Yeah, the opt at this point,
• 1:24
  I don't think it's that hard. I think he's been
• 1:26
  he's been screwing around with just taking a normal one
• 1:29
  and then wrapping it in in in suran wrap. But
• 1:32
  you know, that's kind of splash proof but not not
• 1:34
  immersion proof.
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: Is he actually underwater with the setup? Yeah?
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: So, because if you're taking your hands up out of
• 1:40
  the water, you know it's one it's uncomfortable.
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: So too they're unloading like this and the keyboard underwater.
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, so you're you're floating at neutral position basically.
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: And just to code. He wants a code like that.
• 1:52
  Speaker 2: He wants to code.
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: I need to get a super weirdo.
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: I want to do it for VR gaming. I think
• 1:58
  that's really interesting. It's kind of if you can't if
• 2:02
  you can't simulate the experience of your body being in
• 2:04
  the game. It needs to forget that your body exists
• 2:07
  and have the only thing you're viewing be you know,
• 2:10
  your your vision and the sound. I feel like would
• 2:12
  be very interesting experience. So I'm I'm begging off an
• 2:16
  hour in it from him when he gets it done,
• 2:18
  but I'm looking forward to that.
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: I would let you use ours to try it out,
• 2:22
  but we just had a problem with one of our
• 2:23
  pumps broke.
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: Oh that's a bum.
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: Yeah, flooded everything with salt water. It's it's weird. It's
• 2:30
  a weird. Have you done it?
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: I have actually never done it. I'm so fascinated by it,
• 2:35
  and I've actually booked a session at some of those
• 2:37
  like float tank companies several times, and then every single
• 2:40
  time my schedule is intervened and it turns out that
• 2:43
  I've not been able to do it.
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: So you should get one for your place.
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: Maybe I should. Yeah, I should probably try it first, Right,
• 2:51
  it's just so good I should happen.
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you'll love it. Yeah, it's very relaxing too, and
• 2:54
  it's really good for thinking. Like if you have a
• 2:56
  thought and you're just fucking around with it in your head,
• 2:58
  you're like, I don't know what do this. You're in there,
• 3:00
  you have zero distractions. It's like your your mind has
• 3:03
  more computational power that's available because even though you don't
• 3:08
  think about it, Like right now we're in these chairs,
• 3:11
  your butt's touching the chair, your feet are on the floor,
• 3:13
  your hands on the table, your clothes are on your body.
• 3:16
  There's all these different things that your body is recognizing
• 3:19
  as input. When you take those away, it's like if
• 3:23
  you're having a conversation there's a bunch of people right
• 3:25
  beside you with a jackhammer. You're like, this is too distracting.
• 3:28
  Let's go over here and you go to where in
• 3:30
  the park it's nice and peaceful. Now you can have
• 3:32
  a conversation. It's so much easier. Well, you don't realize that,
• 3:35
  like regular everyday life, just establishing the distance between the
• 3:40
  walls and thinking about all the data, all that stuff
• 3:43
  is your brain is computing this in the silence of
• 3:47
  the float tank. There's none of that. And you don't
• 3:50
  feel the water because it's the same temperature as your skin, right,
• 3:53
  so you just isotonic.
• 3:55
  Speaker 2: It's not exactly exactly.
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: You feel like you're flying.
• 3:59
  Speaker 2: That's so cool. I've done a lot of reading on it.
• 4:01
  And I'm super interested in the science of it, but
• 4:04
  I've never actually managed to get into a float tank,
• 4:06
  which is really embarrassing. I mean, you think that a
• 4:08
  billionaire would have the resources to get into a bucket
• 4:10
  of salt water.
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you should have somebody make you one, have some
• 4:15
  interesting build you one at your place.
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: Oh, that'd be cool. Maybe get one made out of
• 4:18
  wood instead of like the plastic.
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: Mine is almost like a giant meat locker. That's what
• 4:24
  it looks like. But the guy who made it for
• 4:27
  me was like a mad genius. He died. Unfortunately, he
• 4:30
  was a mad genius who also didn't believe in medicine.
• 4:33
  And I think, do you die a hepatitis? I think
• 4:37
  he died of hepatitis.
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: Well, you'll have to show it to me so that
• 4:39
  I can check it out.
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: It's dope, yeah, but it's It would definitely be at
• 4:46
  some point in time, the best way to disconnect from
• 4:49
  your natural environment if they do come up with some
• 4:51
  sort of haptic feedback that's like or whether it's some
• 4:54
  sort of a neural interface that completely changes you know,
• 4:58
  the environment, right, like yep, like you drop into it.
• 5:01
  That would be the perfect environment to do it in.
• 5:03
  Salt water.
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: Yep, Well, I mean that's been my That was always
• 5:05
  my dream in the in the old and you know,
• 5:07
  my first company was Oculus, and so like that was
• 5:10
  my dream was to just fully feel like you were
• 5:13
  inside of the video game completely forgetting.
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: How old were you when you started working there?
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: So I started building virtual reality headset prototypes when I
• 5:22
  was fourteen or fifteen, and then I built the first
• 5:25
  prototype of what I called the Oculus Rift at sixteen,
• 5:29
  and then I formally turned it into a company when
• 5:32
  I was eighteen, launched the product when I was nineteen, uh,
• 5:36
  and then sold the company a few years later to
• 5:39
  Facebook for a few billion dollars. So it was kind
• 5:40
  of it was kind of a crazy arc for me.
• 5:42
  I wow, did like that was?
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: Like you that?
• 5:44
  Speaker 2: That was I was putting myself through school.
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: Did you work with Carmack?
• 5:47
  Speaker 2: Yeah? So, well Carmack was so John Carmack was one
• 5:52
  of my heroes growing up.
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: Love that dude.
• 5:54
  Speaker 2: And it was one of these crazy things where the
• 5:56
  universe kind of brought us together. I was working on
• 5:59
  my VR technology and nobody was paying attention to VR
• 6:02
  back then. It was a kind of a crazy person thing.
• 6:04
  Nobody was paying attention when I was doing but I
• 6:05
  was posting about it on this internet forum. And then
• 6:08
  John Carmack started posting on that same forum asking for
• 6:12
  help modifying his own Sony headmounted display that he had
• 6:16
  bought to reduce the latency, and so I gave him
• 6:18
  a bunch of input on why he couldn't do it,
• 6:21
  why it was a large impossible project, because I had
• 6:23
  been trying to do the same thing. And then he
• 6:25
  ended up seeing the work I was doing on the
• 6:27
  Oculus rift and he said, hey, Palmer, can I buy
• 6:29
  one of these from you? Said, well, I'm not really
• 6:30
  selling these yet, but I'd be happy to lend it
• 6:34
  to you for free, and so I sent it to him.
• 6:36
  He ended up writing a review and posting it on
• 6:39
  his blog and said it was the best VR experience
• 6:42
  the world has ever seen. He introduced me to Sony.
• 6:45
  They tried to hire me to run their VR research
• 6:47
  and development lab. I turned him down. They doubled the offer.
• 6:50
  I turned that down, and then so John was kind
• 6:53
  of the guy who got me, like really, He's kind
• 6:55
  of the first guy who got any public attention for me,
• 6:58
  where everyone was like, oh, John Carmack says this is important,
• 7:00
  then this must be important and then if you could
• 7:02
  believe it. Two years later, after I started Oculus and
• 7:05
  started selling these, he actually left in software and became
• 7:07
  the CTO of Oculus. So yeah, we got then. I
• 7:09
  then I had the incredible opportunity to work with one
• 7:13
  of my childhood heroes as my CTO. That year was
• 7:16
  that that was twenty twelve, although he.
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: Came on the podcast I think twenty sixteen. He brought one.
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: Yeah, so yeah, he joined in two thousand and thirteen,
• 7:27
  so I think it was June of twenty thirteen, so
• 7:29
  about a year after I started Oculus is when he
• 7:32
  joined his CTO.
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: Hmmm, Well he showed us and he was doing whatever
• 7:37
  the one is where I guess you have drumsticks? Is
• 7:39
  that what you have? And you're whacking stuff as it
• 7:41
  comes out of the sky. He showed us that and like.
• 7:43
  Speaker 2: What it worked. But we always probably with beat Saber, Yes, yeah,
• 7:47
  say he's a huge Beatsaber fan.
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: Oh he was going nuts and he was doing it
• 7:50
  really fast. Oh no, this is nuts.
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: It's actually like it is good fitness, ye, good coordination training. Yeah,
• 7:57
  it really like Beatsaber was great because it really busted
• 8:00
  this myth that VR was this like, you know, totally inactive,
• 8:05
  be a fat, lazy slob thing. VR gaming, at least
• 8:08
  as it exists today, takes a lot more caloric expenditure
• 8:11
  than any other type of gaming, I mean like Foreshore
• 8:14
  and like even more than like other motion games like
• 8:16
  remember we bowling and we sports, Like that's like one
• 8:19
  movement every once in a while, like beat Sabers a
• 8:21
  full body workout.
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: What's really impressive is the boxing games. The boxing games
• 8:26
  are really good work.
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: Did you play? I think one of them was creed
• 8:29
  by a company called Servios.
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: I don't remember what the name was. We had a
• 8:32
  couple different ones at the old studio in La and
• 8:36
  I'd work out with it. I'd put it on and
• 8:38
  you know, you do a round with these virtual boxers,
• 8:42
  you really get a workout in your feet hurt, Like
• 8:44
  you're like, wow, I'm utilizing a lot of movement here. Yep.
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: You know the company that did a few of those
• 8:50
  boxing games, it's this La studio called Servios, and the
• 8:53
  two co founders that were actually guys who worked with
• 8:56
  me in the Army research lab that I worked in
• 8:59
  before starting. So it's one of those teeny tiny worlds.
• 9:02
  There were so few of us that really believed in
• 9:05
  VR in those days.
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: Is there a VR that like a professional boxer could use, Like,
• 9:10
  could you get VR to the point where you could
• 9:12
  program it with AI so you could say, let the
• 9:16
  movement of like a sugar Ray Leonard or something like
• 9:18
  that and actually program it into the machine.
• 9:21
  Speaker 2: So I'd go first. It's not just something you could do,
• 9:23
  it's being done. There are boxers who are using this
• 9:26
  technology really, so like I I know, I know Logan
• 9:31
  Paul and Jake Paul, and I have talked with them
• 9:33
  a lot about using virtual reality and how they're using
• 9:36
  it to do their training. That's right.
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: Wow. Well, my thought was that you could actually emulate
• 9:42
  an opponent, So like say, if you were supposed to
• 9:45
  fight Canelo Alvarez, we have this database of all Canelo
• 9:49
  Alvarez's performances and training footage, so you could calculate what
• 9:54
  his normal exchanges are, what his opening moves are, how
• 9:59
  he sets the hook off.
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: The crazy Dajavu. Let me send you. Let me show
• 10:04
  you the text message that I was just doing with
• 10:06
  Logan Paul last night. I said, it's time to have
• 10:13
  robots fighting people. My dream is that you can have
• 10:16
  robots perfectly tuned to match your own current physical capability
• 10:20
  and progressively ramp up against yourself over time or against
• 10:23
  the greats, like we were talking through like now this
• 10:26
  was less VR. Well are even following some of the
• 10:28
  Robot Fighting League stuff the road, so that's controlled by VR.
• 10:32
  You put on a VR headset, you put on a
• 10:34
  motion capture suit, you tele operate a robot. One of
• 10:37
  the things I've been talking with Logan about is the
• 10:38
  idea of having where you have one teleoperated robot versus
• 10:42
  actual human. But then what we were talking about is
• 10:45
  this idea of having the robot learn from like you're saying,
• 10:48
  learning from footage of not just the greats, but even yourself,
• 10:52
  so that it can be basically you could fight against
• 10:54
  your style, your exact level of strength, and then of
• 10:57
  course you want to fight against the grates and see
• 10:59
  just how far you have to go and just get
• 11:00
  the shit kicked out of you.
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: The other thing I was thinking about what a robot
• 11:04
  could do if you programmed it correctly, it would have
• 11:07
  a really accurate sense of distance, so it would be
• 11:10
  able to touch you instead of hurt you.
• 11:12
  Speaker 2: It could pull its punches.
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: Yes, that's the best sparring partners.
• 11:16
  Speaker 2: Someone who can so. So the mechanics of it are
• 11:18
  all the same, but you don't have the follow through.
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: Well, it would have more control probably even than a person. Right,
• 11:25
  So you like you think of the precise movements that
• 11:27
  surgical robots are able to do.
• 11:29
  Speaker 2: Absolutely well, I mean you could do this. The main
• 11:35
  thing that robots have is they have just such fast
• 11:36
  reaction time and so you could put sensors in like
• 11:39
  a glove. You could have it where the moment that
• 11:41
  it hits, or even a ranging sensor. I mean it
• 11:43
  could stop a millimeter away from you. So yeah, yeah,
• 11:47
  you could. You could totally, you could, you could totally
• 11:50
  do that.
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: Is this something that someone's working out with ye again
• 11:55
  San Francisco.
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: Actually so actually this is this is a buddy of
• 11:58
  mine who's been working in VR for a really really
• 12:00
  long time. So it's again what a tiny, tiny world
• 12:03
  of weird wackos. But yeah, six Live has been working
• 12:06
  on which is his real name by the way. Uh,
• 12:10
  he's been working on VR stuff for the past fifteen years,
• 12:14
  and he recently got into doing this this this robot
• 12:17
  robot combat Sports league. So that's that they're doing a bit.
• 12:20
  They're doing a big Us versus China fight in December.
• 12:23
  If you want me to get you tickets, I can.
• 12:24
  I can make it happen. I can piss some strings.
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: Where is it?
• 12:27
  Speaker 2: Where I think it's gonna be in San Francisco.
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: That's funny. I try to stay out of San Francisco.
• 12:32
  I also don't say really want to watch robots fight. No,
• 12:37
  I don't mind watching them on TV.
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: But did you ever you ever see you ever read
• 12:41
  manga or anime about fighting?
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: No?
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: One of so I'm I'm I'm I gonna beit I'm
• 12:47
  less of a fighting guy, more of an anime manga guy.
• 12:50
  But I love some of the just ridiculous inventions that
• 12:54
  then make you think if there might be something there.
• 12:56
  So like fist to the north Star. There's a move
• 12:59
  that a guy learns and uh, it's it's like a
• 13:02
  I forget, I forget the name of it. But it's
• 13:03
  like a double punch. So what you do is you
• 13:05
  fold your fingers and you punch the guy and then
• 13:08
  like his skin recoils, it delivers the full hit. And
• 13:12
  then you fold your fingers in so you hit fulling
• 13:15
  fingers and then punch again, and it's like one punch,
• 13:18
  but it's a double punch. And then one of the
• 13:20
  culmination of his training is where his master shows him
• 13:23
  that there's actually a final step. You can see where
• 13:24
  it's going. It's a triple punch. So you punch him
• 13:27
  like this and then like this, and then like this,
• 13:31
  and mostly that stuff is nonsense and never gonna work
• 13:33
  with a person, but it makes me wonder if a
• 13:35
  robot could do it.
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: Well, you would need momentum, right, I mean, if it's
• 13:39
  generating force, your force would be stopped with the first blow.
• 13:43
  To be able to generate additional momentum in a short
• 13:46
  distance to be very difficult.
• 13:48
  Speaker 2: For a person. See what I'm thinking is a robot
• 13:50
  would allow you to do this this.
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: Type of level muscles. It's using a different force.
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: Exactly, So your first one would carry all your inertia through.
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: And then you could you get a secular because you
• 14:01
  think it probably wants the most power in the first
• 14:03
  shot and concentrate only on that.
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: But what if you could do the most power in
• 14:06
  the first shot and then another followers shot anyway, Yeah,
• 14:10
  or like you hit him and it throws him back
• 14:12
  of it, and then the moment, you know, the distance
• 14:14
  it creates. I'm not a fighting expert. I'm a I'm
• 14:17
  a I'm a I'm a computer kid.
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: The thing what bothers me about it is the human
• 14:21
  body is inherently flawed. It's not a good design, and
• 14:24
  it's not a good design for fighting. So if I
• 14:25
  was gonna design something to fight something, I would never
• 14:28
  design it after a human. I would use an animal
• 14:31
  or something more destructive. I wouldn't use something so vulnerable
• 14:35
  or something with like shitty mechanics.
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: Well, it ends up looking like a battlebot probably, you know,
• 14:39
  something heavily shielded and armored and that's got a big
• 14:41
  spike on an arm.
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: It would be like that. That's what you would have
• 14:44
  for a robot to fight, because a human is just
• 14:46
  too goofy.
• 14:47
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean that's why the stuff that I make
• 14:49
  for the Department of Defense, or I guess now the
• 14:51
  Department of War, none of it looks like a human.
• 14:53
  I mean, we're making robots for fighting, and they all
• 14:56
  have very hyper specialized forms, and some of them look
• 14:59
  a bit like or a bit like birds. But generally, yeah,
• 15:02
  you're right, the human form is not the one that
• 15:04
  you would actually base a Terminator off.
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: No, it's terrible. It's a terrible form.
• 15:08
  Speaker 2: Although I would say one of my I don't I
• 15:10
  don't think James Cameron ever really explored this in Terminator.
• 15:13
  But my personal kind of like a like like a
• 15:17
  head cannon theory would be that the reason that Skynet
• 15:21
  made the Terminators into a humanoid form is because maybe
• 15:25
  there is really some hope in that there's something of
• 15:27
  humanity left in it, you know, we like, if it
• 15:30
  was truly a merciless killing machine with no affiliation with humanity,
• 15:36
  why would it make its agents, you know, so so
• 15:39
  uniformly human shaped. Uh, But that's just that's just something I.
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: Want from time to time, just for deception.
• 15:44
  Speaker 2: Well, the later ones truly were for deception. But if
• 15:48
  you look at a lot of the flashes into the Future,
• 15:50
  they don't have meat shielded Terminators. There's lots of like
• 15:53
  T series humanoid combat robots that are just walking around
• 15:58
  as bare metal skeletons, And so I feel like that
• 16:01
  it's some it's almost like an admission that the AI
• 16:04
  does see itself in the in the in the mind
• 16:07
  of it sees itself as a creation of man that
• 16:10
  sees itself in the in the eyes of man.
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: That's very creepy, right, because that's in the Bible. God
• 16:15
  created man in his image.
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: That's exactly what I was thinking. It's like it's it's
• 16:19
  very much like it realizes it was created in man's
• 16:21
  image and and derives some sort of satisfaction or value
• 16:24
  from that. I don't know if it's good or bad cycle.
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: And that's how life eventually does create artificial life.
• 16:32
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean you're familiar with all like you know that,
• 16:34
  like all the all the theories around uh, you know,
• 16:36
  like uh, humanity being like planted here by and like that.
• 16:41
  That that's that's always interesting because you know, you could
• 16:44
  imagine a world where, yeah, it is this cycle of
• 16:46
  things that look kind of like humans were on top
• 16:49
  of us, and maybe eventually there will be things look
• 16:51
  like humans being.
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: There's some weird discovery recent discovery of an asteroid where
• 16:58
  they picked apart, whether it's the the crucial amino acids
• 17:01
  for life or some sort of genetic material.
• 17:05
  Speaker 2: You're talking about. The NASA release that there were strong
• 17:08
  indicators like biosigns in a coat that are that are
• 17:11
  compatible with with what we would expect from life. Yes,
• 17:14
  there was, and then I think they right, it was recently,
• 17:17
  although they walked it back pretty quickly. There was kind
• 17:21
  of an initial release that said that we found that
• 17:24
  or that they're strongly aligned with being biological signals, and
• 17:28
  then they kind of reached back they said, well, maybe
• 17:30
  not do I haven't dug into that one as deep
• 17:33
  as others. I've just been too busy really lately, and
• 17:35
  that you're right, this is like very recent news.
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: I always wonder if someone got over enthusiastic, or if
• 17:41
  someone take a hey, yeah, why don't you shut the
• 17:43
  fuck up, you know, like we're trying to slow this
• 17:46
  whole release of alien technology, alien life. Slow it down, Well,
• 17:52
  you keep society together, so we have a stock market.
• 17:55
  Speaker 2: Well, the good news, the good news in this case
• 17:57
  is I think even even the most optimistic sense optimism mean,
• 18:00
  I hope they find life. I think it's going to
• 18:03
  end up being you know, some microbes. It's not whatever
• 18:05
  they saw was not consistent with you know, oh dude,
• 18:07
  it's a person in the rock, which of course what
• 18:10
  we all want. We want either people are you know,
• 18:12
  little green men or something like that.
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: That's probably going to be pretty far away.
• 18:17
  Speaker 2: It probably is and it seems. I mean, my experience
• 18:21
  on this front is largely from a military angle and
• 18:24
  looking at a lot of the footage that's coming out
• 18:26
  and and a lot of the sensor feeds that have
• 18:28
  come out, and the thing that we like, what we
• 18:31
  really need even more than discovering microbes like these flying objects.
• 18:36
  The problem is that most of them, most and I'm
• 18:38
  not saying all that most of them, they were only
• 18:41
  capturing on Let's say one sensor, like a camera is
• 18:43
  seeing it, or a radar is seeing It's very rare
• 18:46
  to get both of those totally different types of sensors
• 18:48
  looking at the same time. It's relatively easy to imagine
• 18:51
  a world where a sensor would have an error or
• 18:53
  an artifactor, even though it's being actively spoofed. Right people
• 18:56
  are actively trying to trick it. You can make radars
• 18:59
  see things that aren't there. You can make cameras see
• 19:01
  things that aren't there, if you're really smart about how
• 19:03
  you interact with them. It's very hard to make something
• 19:05
  that makes a radar and a camera see something that
• 19:08
  isn't there in a way that perfectly aligns with what
• 19:11
  is there.
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: Now.
• 19:11
  Speaker 2: You saw the recent one with the hell fire that
• 19:13
  was fired this and it appears to have broken broken
• 19:17
  up but then kept moving. That's interesting because now you
• 19:19
  have something that's on a camera and you sent another
• 19:22
  thing with a seeker and it got there and it
• 19:24
  blew up.
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: Is that definite real footage?
• 19:29
  Speaker 2: I mean, I believe it's been verified. I am probably
• 19:34
  not in a position where I should say if I
• 19:36
  know if it's been verified, but I'll tell you this,
• 19:38
  I believe the footage is real. Let's run and I can't.
• 19:40
  Speaker 1: I can't perplexity and ask what do you mean by verified?
• 19:43
  Speaker 2: Though?
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: Just ask if it has been verified that this is
• 19:46
  legitimate footage from the military of whatever they thought it
• 19:51
  was going to be and a hell fire missile hits it.
• 19:53
  Speaker 2: I do believe that one of the one of the
• 19:55
  members of the Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon committees in Congress introduce
• 20:00
  into a hearing. That's where it came from.
• 20:01
  Speaker 1: It came from a hearing. Yeah, so who released it?
• 20:03
  Didn't just show up on Twitter? Okay, which guy released it?
• 20:12
  Speaker 2: You saw the phenomenon? Yes, fantastic, that's really good. You
• 20:16
  know the guy who did it is doing a follow up.
• 20:18
  Have you heard about this?
• 20:18
  Speaker 1: What's he doing. This episode is brought to you by
• 20:20
  The Farmer's Dog. We all know ultra processed food isn't
• 20:23
  good for us as humans, why would it be any
• 20:26
  different for our dogs. The Farmer's Dog is real fresh
• 20:30
  food for dogs, and their recipe goes beyond just using
• 20:34
  good ingredients. It's all about how they use them. Unlike
• 20:37
  most pet food, they always use real meat and vegetables
• 20:40
  and gently cooked them to retain vital nutrients without any
• 20:44
  of the bad stuff that comes from ultraprocessing. Their food
• 20:47
  is developed by a team of on staff board certified
• 20:51
  vet nutritionists who make sure it's all complete and balanced,
• 20:54
  and it's backed by research and made to human grade
• 20:57
  safety standards. It's portioned for your dog, making it easy
• 21:01
  to manage their weight, and they label each pack with
• 21:03
  your dog's name that lets you know that this food
• 21:06
  is truly packed for them. Plus, they have twenty four
• 21:09
  to seven customer support, so you can chat with real
• 21:12
  dog people who care about your dog anytime. The Farmer's
• 21:16
  Dog says good ingredients matter, but the best recipes call
• 21:20
  for so much more. Head to the Farmersdog dot com
• 21:23
  slash rogan to get fifty percent off your first box
• 21:27
  plus free shipping. This offer is for new customers only.
• 21:31
  Speaker 2: You know, I probably shouldn't say too much more, but uh,
• 21:33
  there's there's there's there's a there's a follow up to
• 21:35
  it that's coming.
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: That's even wasn't the phenomenon James Fox? James Fox?
• 21:40
  Speaker 2: Was it? James Fox?
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: Was a phenomenon? James Fox? James Fox? Was that the phenomenon?
• 21:46
  He had moment of He had a moment of contact,
• 21:49
  He had the virgine, that's the Virginia one. And then
• 21:52
  didn't he have the phenomenon too? Somebody did it? I
• 21:58
  saw it? Why did I think it was Fox? It
• 22:00
  is Fox? Yeah, Fox have been on here a few times.
• 22:03
  He's got that crazy one about the Virginia Brazil sighting.
• 22:06
  Do you know about that one? That one's nuts, Like
• 22:08
  the whole town saw this thing crashed in the nineties
• 22:12
  and they have like a statue of this thing, like
• 22:14
  as you're entering into the city, and supposedly this is
• 22:17
  the crazy story. There was a wounded alien. One of
• 22:22
  the police officers carried this wounded alien in the back
• 22:25
  of a car. They brought it to a hospital. There's
• 22:27
  records of them bringing this to the hospital. The hospital said,
• 22:30
  we can't handle this, we have no take it to
• 22:33
  a different hospital. So they took it to another hospital. Yep.
• 22:36
  Then the guy who carried the thing gets a severe
• 22:40
  bacterial infection that's unresponsive to antibiotics and dies. WHOA yeah,
• 22:46
  young healthy, you know, fighting age man gets this weird
• 22:51
  infection after handling this creature. Multiple witnesses say they saw
• 22:55
  another one of them. There was like a couple of them.
• 22:58
  One of them was injured that they picked up, and
• 23:00
  there was another one that was there. And then many
• 23:03
  people in the town said that they saw another craft
• 23:06
  come by to retrieve those aliens. It's a really nud
• 23:10
  story because it's the same story is told independently by
• 23:15
  a bunch of people.
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: You know, I've kind of got my retirement figured out,
• 23:19
  and I have for a while.
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: Can you just retire right now if you wanted to.
• 23:22
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's just what I'm doing I think is important,
• 23:25
  you know, So I gotta I gotta see my mission through.
• 23:27
  Like I'm the government is. We've been spending way too
• 23:30
  much money on defense, not getting nearly enough for it.
• 23:33
  So I started androll with the goal of saving taxpayers
• 23:35
  hundreds of billions of dollars a year. I need to
• 23:37
  I need to see that through. But I get to someday.
• 23:41
  Is uh see, there's a handful of these government groups
• 23:43
  that are going around looking into things like what you're
• 23:46
  talking about, you know, like they look into the strange phenomenon.
• 23:50
  Those groups do exist, and I've tracked down a few
• 23:52
  of them. The problem is that they're not taken seriously.
• 23:56
  They're not well funded, and uh you know they they're
• 23:59
  they're there's somebjecy to all the same normal rules as
• 24:02
  an average government employee. Like their problems are not feel
• 24:05
  finding weird things. It's stuff like getting approval to buy
• 24:08
  plane tickets to go somewhere, and you know, getting approval
• 24:10
  to stay there for two nights versus one night. Oh look,
• 24:14
  it's just the It's the typical government bureaucracy where they
• 24:16
  have to make every penny count. They only have so
• 24:18
  much money. Anyway, one of my dreams is I'm gonna
• 24:20
  at some point when I'm retired, I'm gonna go get
• 24:22
  deputized by the government, go get my federal badge, and
• 24:26
  I'll be the I'll be the government's uh privately funded
• 24:29
  X files and I'll just fly around I'll fly around
• 24:31
  on my own plane. I'll have my own team. We'll
• 24:34
  bring our own censors, our own computers. Oh man, if
• 24:36
  only we could bring in this expert. But he's on
• 24:38
  the other side of the world to say, bring them in,
• 24:41
  bring them in, send send the planet. Yes, yes, sir,
• 24:45
  he'll be here in twelve hours. You know, like, I
• 24:48
  feel like there's enough, and not even just aliens in general.
• 24:51
  There's enough weird stuff going on that it doesn't seem
• 24:54
  like a stretch to have somebody or something that really
• 24:58
  stays on top of that stuff.
• 24:59
  Speaker 1: It seems like a very good idea. Did you see
• 25:02
  The Age of Disclosure?
• 25:02
  Speaker 2: Do you see the documentary?
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: It's a new one and it has a hypothesis, has
• 25:09
  a theory of why there hasn't been disclosure, and a
• 25:12
  lot of it has to do with the legal implications
• 25:16
  because too many people have been misappropriating funds. If this
• 25:20
  is real, sure, So, if this is real, like.
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: If there's recovered alien crash objects, if those have been
• 25:25
  parceled out to private company.
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: Exactly, that's exactly the dilemma. So say, if let's say,
• 25:30
  just to make up a name, Lockheed Martin gets it, sure,
• 25:33
  and they have this back engineered craft that they're working on.
• 25:37
  But then Raytheon doesn't get it. Raytheon should be able
• 25:40
  to sue the government, like why'd you do that? Is
• 25:42
  an unfair competitive advantage. Also, the people that are in
• 25:46
  charge of the projects, there's all this money that they
• 25:50
  have to lie to Congress about. And so in this documentary,
• 25:54
  one of the things that they're proposing, guys like Loue
• 25:56
  Elizondo and like what is the path to sanity with
• 25:58
  all this stuff? Things that they're proposing is amnesty. Just
• 26:02
  give like blanket amnesty, tell us what the fuck you know,
• 26:05
  let's go.
• 26:06
  Speaker 2: But then then I still have limited time amnesty, we say,
• 26:09
  and and and the AMC only applies to what is
• 26:10
  disclosed in this amnesty. It doesn't apply beyond that.
• 26:14
  Speaker 1: But also if it's government, you know, there's a lot
• 26:16
  of fraud and waste. So even if if these guys
• 26:19
  are just monkeying around with billions of dollars, a little
• 26:22
  yacht here, a little vacation here, yep, little Cayman islands there, well,
• 26:25
  you know, like so stuff is probably it's probably real ugly, right,
• 26:30
  which is and they've been doing this for If it's
• 26:32
  real they've been doing this for decades yep, with no
• 26:35
  oversight yep, so they probably are. They're a little wild,
• 26:38
  They're a little feral by now.
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's just across the board. Our country has
• 26:41
  been spending so much money on what is supposed to
• 26:45
  be for national security, but in reality, it's a lot
• 26:48
  a lot of it has nothing to do with that.
• 26:50
  And so that was why I got into That was
• 26:52
  why I got into the defense base.
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: It's like if you posn't that with everything though, right,
• 26:55
  It's like that's how it is with charities as well.
• 26:57
  Speaker 2: It's with everything, but it's a question of of how
• 27:01
  you can apply targeted pressure as a private individual. Right,
• 27:04
  So yeah, like charities, there's a lot of a lot
• 27:06
  of graft going on, but what can I really do
• 27:09
  to stop that at each of these charities? Right, Like,
• 27:11
  there's no one charity that kind of dominates rights. It's
• 27:14
  a thousand, it's a thousand grains of rice, Whereas the
• 27:19
  Department of Defense is one giant entity with a trillion
• 27:23
  dollar a year budget, And so it's much easier, like
• 27:26
  if if you wanted to call it like save one
• 27:28
  hundred billion dollars a year for taxpayers you kind of
• 27:31
  have to go after the big concentrated chunks like you
• 27:34
  might be able to do that going after like healthcare problems,
• 27:37
  maybe education problems, definitely going after Department of Defense problems.
• 27:41
  And I know a lot more about how to build
• 27:43
  good technology than I do about healthcare. And so look,
• 27:47
  if the.
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: If these were all private companies, they would never survive
• 27:51
  the way they're running.
• 27:53
  Speaker 2: Correct. Well, I mean, yeah, these government agencies, when they
• 27:56
  make mistakes, they don't go out of business. And in fact,
• 27:58
  they can make bad mistakes over and over and over
• 28:01
  again and still remain in business. It's I do think
• 28:06
  I think we're turning a corner with some of this.
• 28:08
  Did you see the new Secretary of the Army, Dan
• 28:11
  Driscoll's AUSA talk yesterday, Oh man, it might be worth
• 28:16
  pulling it up. He pulls up this piece, this piece
• 28:20
  of hardware, and he's like, hey, like this little thing,
• 28:23
  like it costs this insane amount of money, and we
• 28:27
  were able to make it in our own lab just
• 28:29
  three D print it for like ten dollars, and so
• 28:32
  that's what we're going to be doing now. And he
• 28:34
  like he killed the joint like tactical vehicle program. He
• 28:38
  killed this new kind of boondoggle of a robotic camp
• 28:41
  robotic tank program where it was going to be millions
• 28:44
  of dollars for these robot tanks that we're gonna get
• 28:46
  blown upy three hundred dollar drones. And so, I mean
• 28:49
  there's just kind of been like no rules, just going
• 28:51
  and axing all of the dumb stuff that doesn't make sense,
• 28:54
  and then taking a knife to these companies that have
• 28:56
  been charging way too much money, which is very different
• 28:59
  from the past. It's very rare. It has been a
• 29:01
  long time since you saw a secretary level official being
• 29:06
  willing to publicly contraindicate defense companies and say you're screwing
• 29:10
  over taxpayers and it ends here. So I'm actually pretty
• 29:14
  optimistic about this across the services. I think like people
• 29:18
  are fed up there.
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: You think DOGE sort of started that ball moving and
• 29:22
  then I think it did that direction as sort of
• 29:25
  momentum is headed on its side.
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: Or I think the dose thing was interesting because it
• 29:30
  wasn't even the technique so much like the techniques where
• 29:33
  they kind of went into the data on like USAID
• 29:35
  and looked through all of this stuff and like basically
• 29:38
  where the data science of it is what allowed them
• 29:40
  to find the graft. That doesn't really apply to finding
• 29:44
  the problems in DD because it's just so much more
• 29:47
  deeply buried. But it kind of gave people permission to
• 29:50
  go look at these things, Like it gave people permission
• 29:53
  to even say, I believe there is billions of dollars
• 29:56
  in waste in my department. I'm going to do something
• 29:59
  about it. I don't think people felt like they had
• 30:02
  like psychic permission to do that five years ago.
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: Oh wow, that's interesting.
• 30:06
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean, let's go to like kind of like
• 30:08
  you just didn't want to rock the boat. I mean,
• 30:09
  let's go to like the height of and you're not
• 30:11
  even making it political, just timeline wise, go to the
• 30:13
  like the middle of the Biden administration. Could you imagine
• 30:16
  any official in that area, like secretary or chair or
• 30:20
  anybody coming out and saying, my department is wasting billions
• 30:24
  of dollars. We are taking money from taxpayers and using
• 30:28
  it on absurd nonsense that would never happen five years ago.
• 30:33
  And I think the dose stuff gave people permission to
• 30:35
  come out and say that, and and and and for
• 30:37
  them to be seen not as you know, crazy, but
• 30:41
  as just being honest about the truth. So when you
• 30:43
  see like the Secretary of the Army come out and say,
• 30:45
  we are wasting billions of dollars on total bullshit and
• 30:48
  we're getting we are getting screwed this that way and
• 30:51
  the other. Uh, I think that's a that's a really
• 30:54
  that's a really good development.
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: Well, it also seems like it's a really shitty way
• 30:58
  to compete with other countries that operate very efficiently, like
• 31:03
  they're they're private companies. Correct, other countries like China, the
• 31:07
  government fully embedded in private companies, and the private companies
• 31:10
  are competing in the civil military.
• 31:12
  Speaker 2: Fusion right well, and there's it's it goes even beyond that,
• 31:15
  where like you know, central planning has downsides, but it
• 31:17
  does have upsides. And one of the interesting things there
• 31:20
  is also like there are some people who are being
• 31:22
  accused of corruption because they just want to kill them
• 31:24
  and get them out of the way for political reasons.
• 31:26
  There's other people who are actually corrupt, and they're going
• 31:28
  in and when people are wasting money, they're not going
• 31:31
  and saying, oh, well you kind of wasted a few
• 31:33
  billion dollars, but you know, we're going to give you
• 31:35
  another shot and try this again. They just they just
• 31:38
  they just they just imprison them for treason and or
• 31:41
  kill them. I'm not saying that's what we should do exactly,
• 31:45
  but I think that there's a scale to all of
• 31:47
  these things, on scale of you know, give them another
• 31:49
  shot versus shoot them in the head for treason. We
• 31:52
  could probably move in that direction without going all of
• 31:55
  the way, and it would probably be healthy for our
• 31:57
  country as national security.
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: Would that be the like if you ideally, would it
• 32:02
  be that all this national security stuff was handled by
• 32:04
  a private company? Would that be like ideal in terms
• 32:07
  of efficiency, in terms of technological innovation, implementing ideas.
• 32:13
  Speaker 2: I think that Look like.
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: I'm not suggesting that, I'm just saying, like, no, no, So
• 32:17
  look I've got there's problems with running a government.
• 32:20
  Speaker 2: I mean, look, I've got a strong I've got a
• 32:21
  strong opinion here. I think that what you want it's
• 32:24
  not a private company. It needs to be done by
• 32:26
  competing entities, right, and so if it's private, and at
• 32:30
  least one of them has to be private. So like,
• 32:32
  I don't even really mind the government doing something if
• 32:34
  they're not being favored. In other words, if there's some
• 32:37
  government office that is competing with multiple.
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: Private compost office versus ups.
• 32:42
  Speaker 2: Exactly, although that's a little unfair in that I don't
• 32:45
  know how deep by the way, I'm very deep on this, Like,
• 32:46
  I don't understand why we give the USPS a monopoly
• 32:50
  on normal mail. Uh, are you familiar with this whole bed?
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a little weird.
• 32:54
  Speaker 2: It's good, Like we were never the.
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: Only way you can get chicken ship too.
• 32:57
  Speaker 2: I didn't know that.
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah, if you have baby, they send them through the
• 33:01
  regular mail, but they won't send them ups.
• 33:03
  Speaker 2: That's so interesting. Well, it's the same thing with firearms.
• 33:06
  You can only send them USPS you can't send them.
• 33:08
  So like, I don't know why we've given a private
• 33:10
  company a monopoly. If there was a private company that
• 33:12
  had the same monopoly that the USPS does and they
• 33:15
  were using it to send, you know, one hundred pounds
• 33:18
  of junk mail to every American every year, there's no
• 33:21
  way they would survive, like, like they would be regulated
• 33:23
  out of existence. But you know, what you really want
• 33:26
  is competition. You want organizations, private or public that when
• 33:31
  they trip and fall, they skin their own knees instead
• 33:33
  of getting bailed out by taxpayers. You want them to
• 33:36
  you live in fear be highly competitive.
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: And by the way, this is they the way.
• 33:41
  Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, and and and they have to survive an
• 33:43
  auditing process. They have to be accountable to uh, you know,
• 33:46
  whether it's a board or to you know, some committee.
• 33:49
  And the problem is right now we don't have a
• 33:51
  lot of that. I will say, though you asked should
• 33:53
  should should these national security you know, programs be in
• 33:56
  the hands of private companies. I think that's true for
• 33:58
  the development of the technology. However, it can never ever
• 34:02
  be in the hands of private companies when it comes
• 34:04
  to the actual national security policy of what we are building,
• 34:08
  or who we are building it for, or where it
• 34:10
  should go. I get people all the time who come
• 34:13
  to me, usually people who are more skeptical of government.
• 34:18
  And yet they say, Palmer, aren't there countries you would
• 34:21
  commit to never building for, you know, like would you
• 34:24
  just build for whoever gives you money? And I say, well,
• 34:26
  I'll look, my job is to do what the government
• 34:28
  tells me. They're the you know, they're the ones who
• 34:31
  decide who are going to work or not. They say,
• 34:33
  how could you do that? How could you work with
• 34:35
  this country or that country? How could you build this
• 34:37
  type of system or that type of system. And my
• 34:38
  point to them is, do you want to live in
• 34:39
  a corporatocracy where big tech CEOs get to decide the
• 34:44
  de facto foreign policy and military policy in the United States?
• 34:47
  Like you should if I were in a position to
• 34:50
  make those decisions. Something's gone very wrong in this country
• 34:53
  because you can't vote me out, you can't elect my competitor,
• 34:57
  and so a lot of people who normally are skeptic
• 35:00
  the government and government power and overreach, suddenly they look
• 35:04
  to the private sector for you know, oh, like the
• 35:06
  private sector is going to regulize this. To me, that's
• 35:07
  the most like cyberpunk dystopian thing. Either. Imagine like me
• 35:10
  and a bunch of weapons executives sitting in a room
• 35:13
  like so, which countries are on the green list this year?
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: Hmm?
• 35:17
  Speaker 2: I don't know. I was thinking we could sell some
• 35:18
  missile defense to those guys, and I think we should
• 35:20
  sell some offensive wepis those guys like, no, that that
• 35:23
  has to be that has to be the government, unless
• 35:26
  you just don't believe in democracy at all. Right, Like,
• 35:28
  if you if you believe that them that we cannot
• 35:30
  elect officials that are accountable, then that's a different thing.
• 35:34
  But I'm not that black pilled.
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: I'm not that black pilled either, but I'm getting there.
• 35:38
  Speaker 2: I've look sometimes I see it too. I mean, I
• 35:41
  think that what it is is inevitably when you have
• 35:44
  a pendulum, sometimes it will swing too far and I
• 35:47
  but I think the good news it can correct. I mean, like,
• 35:49
  look at a lot of our misadventures in the Middle
• 35:51
  East is a really good example where there were a
• 35:53
  lot of things, like the government caused a lot of
• 35:56
  things to happen I think never would have happened, and
• 35:58
  people really known the truth behind a lot of the actions,
• 36:00
  but in the end we did have the ability to
• 36:02
  hold them accountable. Now, the real problem is that people
• 36:05
  didn't hold them accountable. Like there's a lot of people
• 36:07
  today where they don't. They're not really that worked up
• 36:10
  about some of these people in government who lied to us.
• 36:12
  But I would say that's a fault of the American people,
• 36:15
  not of the democratic process. It just means people don't
• 36:17
  care about that issue as much, which I think they
• 36:20
  should care more.
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: But I think they're really not that informed, like universally now.
• 36:24
  Speaker 2: Is that because they don't want to be or because
• 36:26
  they can't be.
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: It's difficult because most people don't have time. I think
• 36:30
  that's that's a big part of it.
• 36:32
  Speaker 2: That does make it hard. That does make it hard.
• 36:33
  But I mean, I think that you know not to
• 36:36
  butter you up. But this is one of the things
• 36:38
  where shows like yours have made a huge difference, where
• 36:41
  they've been able to take things that are pretty complex
• 36:43
  for a person to figure out from first principles, stories
• 36:46
  that they would never read about an establishment media like
• 36:49
  let's say the New York Times or Wall Street Journal,
• 36:50
  which by the way, is dependent on continued access to
• 36:52
  the US government. They can't just go out and burn
• 36:54
  everybody in the government or nobody will ever talk to them. Right.
• 36:57
  You've taken a lot of these stories and put them
• 36:58
  into a format, or the guy who's busy, you know,
• 37:00
  he's in his truck, he's on his way to the
• 37:02
  work site can actually become informed on these issues. And
• 37:05
  as someone who is a journalism major, I've been so
• 37:07
  happy to see that shift because I wanted to be
• 37:09
  a journalist because there were no good technology journalists and
• 37:12
  I was good at technology. Figured I was gonna beat
• 37:16
  all these guys and be a better technology journalist. He's
• 37:18
  In the end, I ended up dropping out of school
• 37:20
  and starting Oculus instead, but.
• 37:22
  Speaker 1: It worked out. This is an ad by Betterhelp. We
• 37:26
  have a lot of big holidays coming up, but before
• 37:28
  you start preparing for trick or treaters or make plans
• 37:31
  for travel for Thanksgiving, there's one other big day you
• 37:35
  should focus on. World Mental Health Day. It's October tenth,
• 37:40
  and if you don't know already, it's a great day
• 37:44
  to send some love to therapists. Maybe a therapist has
• 37:47
  made a positive impact on you or someone you love.
• 37:51
  Therapists listen, ask the right questions, and help someone move forward.
• 37:56
  They can help you if there's something keeping you up
• 37:58
  at night looking for a safe space. Better Help is
• 38:02
  a good place to start. They've spent the past decade
• 38:06
  helping people connect with the right professional therapists, and based
• 38:10
  on the millions of highly rated reviews, it's safe to
• 38:14
  say they do a great job. Better Help does most
• 38:18
  of the work for you too. All you have to
• 38:20
  do is fill out a quick questionnaire. This World Mental
• 38:24
  Health Day, we're celebrating the therapists who've helped millions of
• 38:28
  people take a step forward. If you're ready to find
• 38:30
  the right therapist for you Better help can help you
• 38:33
  start that journey. Our listeners get ten percent off their
• 38:36
  first month at betterhelp dot com slash jr E. That's
• 38:41
  better h e LP dot com slash jr E.
• 38:46
  Speaker 2: But yeah, I think you would agree. It is getting
• 38:48
  easier to become educated on these things.
• 38:51
  Speaker 1: Like it is an embrasson what would you have done?
• 38:53
  It is in America. But it's a little disconcerting, like
• 38:55
  when you see the way they're handling things in Europe. Oh, sure,
• 38:58
  Like it's getting really weird the UK twelve thousand arrests
• 39:01
  this year for social media posts about immigration and now
• 39:04
  they want everybody to have for that meme.
• 39:07
  Speaker 2: Mate, Yeah, it's.
• 39:07
  Speaker 1: Getting really weird. And you know as the rests.
• 39:12
  Speaker 2: For posting a disturbing or offensive content, yes or annoying?
• 39:17
  Could I share a little story or this has been
• 39:21
  so funny watching watching this in the UK because so
• 39:25
  the first thing I ever did that anyone cared about
• 39:28
  was called mod retro. So it was this internet forum
• 39:31
  for people modifying game consoles, making portable versions of old
• 39:36
  game consoles, upgrading modern game consoles. Anyway, when we started
• 39:40
  the side, it was me and a few other people
• 39:42
  who were kind of running it. I was the founder
• 39:44
  and there were a few other co administrators, and one
• 39:46
  of them was this British guy who went by the
• 39:48
  online handle of bacteria. And I won't say his real
• 39:51
  name because it doesn't matter, but he was a British guy.
• 39:53
  He worked in he worked in a very very low
• 39:57
  level British government, so like not a higher up at
• 40:00
  but he worked in a government government to agency government office.
• 40:04
  And he was always I think of all the people
• 40:07
  on this forum, which was mostly like teenagers and college students,
• 40:10
  he was kind of like the older guy and he says, oh,
• 40:12
  we need to be kind about what we say, you know,
• 40:14
  that we shouldn't say anything that is bad. And he
• 40:16
  was always pushing that our rules should say it's that
• 40:18
  it was against our rules to offend anybody, and you
• 40:21
  shouldn't be able to say anything uh that was it
• 40:23
  was it was too offensive, And we mostly just made
• 40:25
  fun of him.
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: Aha.
• 40:26
  Speaker 2: He's an old British man, you know. And but what's
• 40:29
  interesting is he ended up eventually leaving the site because
• 40:31
  he thought people were being too mean to each other
• 40:33
  and he started his own competing website and the rule
• 40:36
  number one was no content that make that may make
• 40:39
  any member feel demean uncomfortable or insulted. We're like, well,
• 40:44
  I mean, and we're all making fun of that. We
• 40:47
  were making our own little you know, image macros and
• 40:49
  memes about it, Like we actually made some fake ads
• 40:51
  for his website and put them on Facebook and it
• 40:53
  said come join the you know, the bacteria's website. Nobody
• 40:58
  will say anything to you that might offend or displease you.
• 41:02
  But what's interesting is as all this UK's stuff has
• 41:05
  has come around, I remember these kind of like long
• 41:07
  forgotten childhood memories, like I was like thirteen or fourteen
• 41:09
  at the time, and I think it really is partly
• 41:12
  a cultural reflection for them, Like there are a lot
• 41:15
  of people in the UK who genuinely think it's good
• 41:18
  to police this stuff. They don't want people to be
• 41:20
  able to go out and just cause a ruckus, you know,
• 41:22
  to say things that are insulting in the streets, and
• 41:25
  of course you have people who are protesting against that.
• 41:27
  But I think that also there's surveillance state, you know,
• 41:30
  where there's cameras everywhere. It's actually our flection of different
• 41:32
  cultural norms. And so the one good thing about what's
• 41:35
  going on in the UK is I don't think it
• 41:37
  would ever come over to America very easily because culturally,
• 41:40
  you know, we're not walking around feeling like it's like,
• 41:43
  we don't feel like it's a crime to insult people.
• 41:45
  They feel like it should be.
• 41:47
  Speaker 1: Maybe perhaps some of some of them do, But I
• 41:50
  think it's so overwhelming towards tyranny.
• 41:53
  Speaker 2: I think it's the majority that's the crazy thing.
• 41:55
  Speaker 1: I think the majority of people want.
• 41:57
  Speaker 2: I think that the majority of people in the UK
• 42:00
  have no problem with people who post spicy memes getting
• 42:05
  a visit from the local constabulary. Wow. Really is that
• 42:08
  has been my experience. How there are people who disagree,
• 42:10
  of course, and like I would say, maybe it's a
• 42:12
  growing group there. They're a highly visible group. They're protesting.
• 42:16
  But if I had to bet there, most people don't care.
• 42:20
  Most people in the UK just don't care about it,
• 42:21
  one way or the other. And I think the group
• 42:23
  of people who are on the side of the control
• 42:25
  is larger than the people who are not on the side.
• 42:28
  By the way, similar thing in China. You people talk
• 42:30
  about Chinese censorship on things like you know, Kianumin Square,
• 42:33
  and that's actually the majority Chinese opinion too. If you
• 42:36
  talk to most Chinese people and you say, well, what
• 42:38
  do you think about the fact that they're censoring all
• 42:40
  this discussion? The typical and I know lots of people
• 42:43
  in China they say, that's an irrelevant issue from thirty
• 42:47
  or forty years ago. It doesn't matter. Anyone who's trying
• 42:50
  to make every discussion about Tianaumin Square is just a troublemaker.
• 42:53
  And I don't care if they're shut down. I'm glad
• 42:55
  that they're not clogging the comments, and I'm glad those
• 42:57
  people are being are being pushed out of of the
• 42:59
  common station. And like that's such a pretty normal opinion.
• 43:02
  Don't don't cause trouble needlessly. Now, these same people might say,
• 43:05
  I have strong opinions about the COVID lockdown, information lockdown
• 43:09
  in China. Like they might say, I don't like that
• 43:10
  the Chinese government is locking down on you know, locking
• 43:13
  us in our apartments. But when it comes to discussion
• 43:15
  of political issues China in general, they think that people
• 43:19
  who bring this up like you would just be a troublemaker.
• 43:22
  They just say, ah, that Joe Rogan, he's a troublemaker.
• 43:24
  Why is he bringing up all these problems for the
• 43:26
  past it's relevant. Why why are we why why are
• 43:29
  we allowing this guy to take up our public spaces?
• 43:31
  Like if you're public protesting in public space, they're not here.
• 43:33
  You would you've probably seen protesters you didn't agree with.
• 43:36
  And he said, you know, I'm glad they're I'm glad
• 43:38
  they're doing something they believe.
• 43:39
  Speaker 1: Glad George Soros is sending them check.
• 43:42
  Speaker 2: Maybe not those but true grassroots, you know, the guys
• 43:44
  who's scriminate.
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: Look, that's important, but that's not thement.
• 43:48
  Speaker 2: People are trying to see that and they say, look
• 43:50
  at those look at those troublemakers ruining my beautiful public space.
• 43:52
  So it's a very interesting cultural value difference.
• 43:54
  Speaker 1: Well, they also don't have any perception of the ability
• 43:57
  to change the government.
• 43:58
  Speaker 2: That's right, that's right.
• 44:00
  Speaker 1: Is no, there's one part I think we can do this.
• 44:02
  I think we can push them out. I think nope, yep,
• 44:05
  you ain't. You ain't fixing ship, So put your nose down,
• 44:07
  get to work.
• 44:08
  Speaker 2: I wonder if that really is the difference.
• 44:10
  Speaker 1: I mean, in Europe has to be they kind of
• 44:13
  resigned themselves to the fact that they're not participating. Yep,
• 44:16
  you know, it's a lot.
• 44:17
  Speaker 2: Easier to be a political when it's a feudal exercise.
• 44:20
  Speaker 1: It's like, what are you gonna do? Stop being a
• 44:21
  trouble maker?
• 44:22
  Speaker 2: Of course, it comes down to an acting. I mean,
• 44:24
  you're probably familiar with the numbers in the American Revolution.
• 44:27
  Only about three percent of America supported the revolution. It
• 44:29
  was it was a really niche movement of very dedicated,
• 44:34
  motivated people. And so the best way to probably stop
• 44:38
  that three percent from existing in China is to convince
• 44:41
  them that it's futile and to kind of fuel that cynicism.
• 44:44
  Almost Well, you see this Russia too, i mean military dictatorships,
• 44:48
  So what same deal. One of the conclusions I've come to,
• 44:51
  you know, i work in the weapons industry, and I've
• 44:54
  seen a lot of cool stuff. I've seen stuff that
• 44:57
  the US is making that I'm making. I'm familiar with
• 45:00
  a lot of the weapons systems that Russia and China
• 45:04
  have in fielding or in progress. Some of the stuff
• 45:07
  that China and Russia are doing, I mean it's as
• 45:09
  sci fi as what the United States is doing. But
• 45:11
  I've come to the conclusion that their most powerful weapon
• 45:14
  is not any bomb or missile or drone. It's their
• 45:16
  ability to control people's minds through the media, through propaganda,
• 45:21
  through kind of state pressure. They convince them to believe
• 45:25
  things about the world that weren't true, that aren't true,
• 45:28
  and then they're they're basically making people willing to fight
• 45:31
  for causes that don't really exist. Like good example, this
• 45:33
  is Ukraine. A lot of the Russians who went to
• 45:36
  fight in Ukraine in the early days, I think the
• 45:38
  truth is out now, but when they were first invading,
• 45:40
  they were told that the people of Ukraine want to
• 45:43
  be liberated. You're going to be a hero, You're going
• 45:45
  to go over there, like they desperately want Russia to
• 45:48
  save them and reunify them. And it's just this you
• 45:51
  know Kiev led you know cabal funded by the West.
• 45:54
  With that that's barely holding on to the country and
• 45:57
  keeping and staying in power. And people in Russia really
• 46:02
  believed that, like the guys who were fighting on the
• 46:04
  front lines, the guys who were flying tanks and helicopters,
• 46:06
  they believed it. When I went to when I went
• 46:08
  to Ukraine during the war, one of the things that
• 46:12
  I got to see was there was this helicopter wreck.
• 46:14
  It was an attack helicopter that was trying to seize
• 46:16
  an airfield of a private aerospace company. And the guys
• 46:20
  actually shot it down themselves, Like they showed me videos
• 46:22
  of them wearing polo shirts shooting down the helicopter in
• 46:26
  their parking lot. I mean, it's like crazy shit. So
• 46:30
  the pilots, the pilots kind of go bag. You know,
• 46:33
  this bag with all of his emergency and survival gear
• 46:35
  in it. It had three or four days of water,
• 46:39
  three or four days of food, another flight uniform, his
• 46:42
  dress uniform with dress shoes. Because they were told they
• 46:45
  were gonna be They said, this is gonna be a
• 46:46
  five day military operation. There's gonna be parades, so dress
• 46:51
  uniform and then fifty condoms. This guy thought that he
• 46:54
  was going to be He thought the women were going
• 46:56
  to be all over him. They were gonna he was
• 46:58
  gonna need fifty condoms for the post war celebration. And
• 47:02
  to me, that speaks to how brainwashed this guy is.
• 47:05
  And remember, helicopter pilots aren't like the dumb grunt dragon.
• 47:08
  I mean, he's probably one of the more highly educated people.
• 47:11
  And they convinced him that the people of Ukraine wanted
• 47:14
  him to liberate them and that they were going to
• 47:16
  be so happy to see him that he was getting
• 47:17
  get his dress uniform in fifty condoms. Wow, And there
• 47:21
  were similar at fifty is a lot of a storm.
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: That's crazy.
• 47:25
  Speaker 2: I will give him a little. Fifty condoms doesn't take
• 47:28
  up that much space in your bag, but it's a lot.
• 47:31
  It's a lot. Yeah, and the this was agonistic. Well,
• 47:34
  this wasn't the only guy like this was actually pretty common.
• 47:37
  Speaker 1: They had fifty condoms.
• 47:38
  Speaker 2: I don't know if everybody had fifty, but a lot
• 47:39
  of condoms. Well, a lot of guys had condoms, and
• 47:42
  a lot of people brought their dress uniforms. They thought
• 47:45
  that they were going to roll in the Kiev take over,
• 47:47
  that people wanted them to be in power, and that
• 47:49
  they were going to be marching around town. People say, look,
• 47:52
  it's our liberators, our saviors. Now, of course that's totally
• 47:56
  divorced from reality. Like whatever you however you feel about
• 47:59
  the politics of Ukraine and Russia and the in America,
• 48:02
  because they're all tightly intermingled, that's clearly not reality. And
• 48:06
  so what I worry about is, like the easy one is,
• 48:08
  if China invades Taiwan, they're gonna come up with a
• 48:11
  similar story. They're gonna trick their people into thinking, oh,
• 48:14
  Taiwan wants to be reunified, you're fighting for the better cause.
• 48:17
  But then you really spooky thing is what happens when
• 48:19
  our media pulls the same stunt. I would argue that
• 48:22
  what we did in the Middle East was driven by
• 48:25
  really not that different, right, I mean a lot of
• 48:27
  the justification for going over there and doing this nation building.
• 48:31
  I mean we were told all these stories, Oh, they
• 48:33
  want they don't want they want to get out from
• 48:36
  under the Taliban, they don't want to have these tribal rules,
• 48:40
  they do want democracy, And in reality, we were kind
• 48:43
  of sold a bill of goods just wasn't true. So
• 48:44
  it's easy to make fun of the Russian with his
• 48:46
  fifty condoms, but we're not really that much better.
• 48:50
  Speaker 1: Well, we also had a very distorted sense of what
• 48:52
  war is in the twentieth century and in the twenty
• 48:55
  first century because of Desert Storm. Yes, so Desert Storm.
• 48:58
  We were like, where the fuck, We're just going to
• 49:00
  roll in and kick everybody's ass, And it happened so
• 49:03
  quickly with so minimal casualties.
• 49:05
  Speaker 2: And my grandpa he wasn't military, but he was a
• 49:08
  United Airlines pilot for forty five years, and he was
• 49:10
  part of the civilian support element for Desert Storm. So
• 49:13
  he actually has a letter from the Secretary of the
• 49:15
  Air Force that they sent to all of the commercial
• 49:17
  pilots who were bringing troops and equipment back and forth
• 49:20
  for a few days. I mean they were they were
• 49:22
  flying like, you know, crazy twenty four hour shifts getting
• 49:25
  people in and out. But I mean, like I remember
• 49:29
  my grandpa, you know, he came out of that saying, man,
• 49:32
  nobody can stop us. I mean, we are just we
• 49:35
  are unstoppable. If we want to go in and do something,
• 49:38
  we just go get it done. And I mean he
• 49:40
  was convinced, you know, But you're right. I think everybody
• 49:43
  was convinced by That's.
• 49:44
  Speaker 1: What everybody saw in the nineteen nineties. They thought that
• 49:46
  the United States government in the military was so much
• 49:48
  more powerful, and it probably was.
• 49:50
  Speaker 2: It was for a while, relatively speaking.
• 49:52
  Speaker 1: Relatively speaking, for a while, technology seems to be shifting
• 49:57
  all that stuff in a very weird place. And this
• 50:01
  is where I get concerned with China, because they have
• 50:05
  complete compliance. Like their government and their private corporations, they
• 50:09
  are the same. They work together and the stuff that
• 50:12
  they're producing in terms of like you pay attention to
• 50:14
  they're electric cars.
• 50:15
  Speaker 2: Oh yeah, now they have a three.
• 50:16
  Speaker 1: Hundred mile an hour car now.
• 50:18
  Speaker 2: There, and and their cars are extremely cheap and they
• 50:23
  are extremely good, the extremely good, really.
• 50:25
  Speaker 1: Nice cars, crazy technology in terms of like ability to
• 50:28
  absorb bumps. Well, we'll see how smooth they are. They
• 50:31
  put champagne glasses on them.
• 50:33
  Speaker 2: So one of the I will that one I will
• 50:36
  push back a little bit. I've seen the demo you're
• 50:38
  talking about. There are German and US cars that do
• 50:41
  that type of thing, but they're not the cars that
• 50:43
  people want here. So this is this is a whole
• 50:45
  other interesting cultural Now what are the well so think
• 50:48
  so it's it's this is this is one of my
• 50:50
  This is such an interesting rabbit hole. So in China,
• 50:55
  people with money don't drive cars. They're driven. That like that.
• 50:59
  That that is the culture. You don't drive, you are
• 51:01
  driven if you have really any money. Of course, there's
• 51:04
  a few rich guys buying sports cars, but in general,
• 51:06
  the wealthy in China don't buy cars to drive themselves.
• 51:09
  And so for example, Tesla has a China exclusive model
• 51:13
  of the models which has teeny tiny little front driver
• 51:17
  and passenger seats, and then it has two seats in
• 51:20
  the rear with extremely long leg room, not like three
• 51:23
  in a row, but like just two giant chairs, and
• 51:25
  they kind of cram the They cram the driver way
• 51:28
  forward to create this gigantic path. I think it doesn't
• 51:30
  even have a trunk, that's right. They pulled the trunk
• 51:32
  out of it even or maybe maybe it's just way smaller.
• 51:35
  And in China that's what people want, so like they're
• 51:37
  best selling Mercedes Benz, even American brands like Buick, we
• 51:41
  have these cars that are made to be driven in
• 51:43
  so as a result, their most luxurious, most expensive cars
• 51:46
  have suspension that is designed to absorb all of the bumps,
• 51:50
  be extremely smooth because you know, riding in the back,
• 51:53
  and it creates terrible mushy road feel for the driver.
• 51:57
  In America, rich people they want to drive and you
• 52:00
  want to feel the road. You know, you want that
• 52:02
  sports car and even our SUVs people generally want that
• 52:06
  sports car like feel. And so I guess I will
• 52:09
  push back only on the champagne glass thing, because I've
• 52:11
  seen people saying this a lot. Believe me, there are
• 52:14
  a handful like that. You can buy an American Buick
• 52:17
  or like or or like or or or even a
• 52:20
  Mercedes that is that good, but they're just not very
• 52:24
  popular here in China. There cars like that, a munch
• 52:26
  of problem cars that feel like shit to drive for
• 52:29
  the driver and are super mushy and bouncy, but for
• 52:32
  the guy in the back, his champagne glass doesn't follow over.
• 52:34
  Speaker 1: That's interesting. So when it gets to a certain price point,
• 52:37
  then it becomes all about.
• 52:38
  Speaker 2: The past exactly well, and it's almost it's it's not
• 52:41
  even when it gets to a certain price point. Long before
• 52:43
  you're buying one hundred thousand dollars car, you're being driven around,
• 52:47
  like even if you're even if even if if you're
• 52:49
  halfway there, you're being driven around people. Again, rich people there,
• 52:53
  they don't drive, they are driven. It's a it's a
• 52:55
  it is a cultural thing. It's a sign that you've
• 52:56
  made it as well. Oh and also remember that they're
• 53:00
  their wages are so much lower that it's much more accessible.
• 53:02
  It's kind of like how you have these countries where
• 53:05
  like almost anybody who's middle class in like the in
• 53:08
  like Southeast Asia has a live in uh nanny and
• 53:12
  a live in housekeeper it's a little bit like that,
• 53:16
  where like if you get to a certain point and
• 53:18
  that happens pretty fast, you have a driver, and if
• 53:21
  you don't have a driver, people are like, what the
• 53:23
  hell is going on? Like you're you're an eccentric if
• 53:25
  you are a rich guy who drives himself around, that's weird.
• 53:28
  It is weird.
• 53:29
  Speaker 1: But they do have sports cars over there, like the
• 53:31
  electric sports car that goes three hundred miles an hour.
• 53:33
  Speaker 2: They do well, and I would say largely those are
• 53:36
  export focused China. Note they like the broader markets want this,
• 53:40
  I sell them an America at all. They don't, but
• 53:42
  that's largely due to American policy being very protectionist against
• 53:46
  Chinese cars. The reason that Chinese manufactured cars have not
• 53:49
  taken over the US is not because Americans don't want them.
• 53:53
  Speaker 1: And by the way, that seems kind of crazy, because
• 53:55
  Japanese cars are ubiquitous.
• 53:57
  Speaker 2: Japanese cars are ubiquitous from Japanese brands, but many or
• 54:00
  most of them are actually exactly like the most American
• 54:04
  car you can buy. I think right now, it's either
• 54:07
  a Nissan or a Toyota outside of Tesla. Like Tesla's
• 54:09
  are made in the US, but I think the most
• 54:12
  I can't remember, it's either a Nissan or a Toyota.
• 54:14
  Is the most American pickup you can buy right now? Wow?
• 54:18
  And it's because we have a lot of our parts,
• 54:19
  even for our US made cars, made in Mexico, made
• 54:22
  in Canada, or made in Japan.
• 54:23
  Speaker 1: That's such some parts that made trick for someone who
• 54:25
  wants to drive a Chevy because they feel like it's
• 54:27
  an American brand. I'm buying American I agree, helping American job.
• 54:31
  Speaker 2: But here's the well, and this is the point I
• 54:33
  was trying to get to, is here's the problem. Let's
• 54:35
  say you said we're going to make a maor all
• 54:37
  American version of the Chevy, and it's ten percent more
• 54:40
  people wouldn't buy it. Like that's when I say that,
• 54:43
  like people I think, unfortunately would buy these Chinese cars
• 54:47
  if they were for sale in the United States. People
• 54:49
  can say they want to support the US, but at
• 54:52
  the end of the day, they want to provide the
• 54:53
  best quality of life for their family. They have a
• 54:55
  fiduciary duty to do so, and so if they need
• 54:58
  to buy, like if they have a choice between an
• 55:01
  American truck or a Chinese truck, a Chinese new TV
• 55:06
  and a Chinese new computer and a Chinese new HVAC
• 55:09
  system a place on the work and their phone. How
• 55:13
  can I blame them for choosing the Chinese one. The
• 55:16
  only way we can solve this is for the United
• 55:18
  States to become competitive with China again, which means we
• 55:21
  need to get our energy costs down. We need to
• 55:23
  get our resource extraction cost down. Like, you know why
• 55:25
  these cars in China are cheap. It's not magic. It's
• 55:28
  because the cost of resource extraction is lower, the cost
• 55:31
  of making steel and aluminum is lower, the cost of
• 55:34
  building a factory is lower. And that's why you're able
• 55:36
  to buy an awesome car for ten thousand dollars in China,
• 55:39
  and here the cheapest thing you can buy is a
• 55:41
  ship box for seventeen or eighteen grand. And I mean,
• 55:44
  like it's bad. Like, have you ever driven a seventeen
• 55:46
  thousand dollars car?
• 55:46
  Speaker 1: What do they have that's seventeen thousand?
• 55:49
  Speaker 2: I think you can buy an Shibby volt or not.
• 55:52
  So there's the I think you can buy a Chevy Spark,
• 55:55
  which is actually not an electric car. The bolt. The
• 55:57
  bolt was an electric platforms. I think you can buy
• 55:59
  a Chevy spar I think you buy Nissan Versa. Those
• 56:02
  are the two cheapest cars in America right now. I
• 56:04
  think both of them. I believe you can get them
• 56:08
  out the door for less than twenty thousand dollars. And look,
• 56:12
  they're I'm sorry Chevy, I'm sorry Nissan. I like those brands,
• 56:16
  but these cars are not the stewards of the brand.
• 56:19
  They're the they're the college student ship boxes, just transportation.
• 56:22
  And you can buy a car like that in China
• 56:24
  for three or four thousand dollars three or four grand.
• 56:26
  We'll get you a car that here is almost twenty grand.
• 56:28
  And again, it's not magic. They're not genius. And people
• 56:32
  also like they kind of have this. There's this current
• 56:35
  attempt to kind of mythologize, like, oh, well, they're geniuses,
• 56:37
  like they're just so good at it. If we would
• 56:40
  just do the basics right, we can be competitive. But
• 56:42
  we aren't doing the basics right. We've made energy so
• 56:45
  competitive and materials fabrications so expensive. I mean, how could
• 56:50
  we compete.
• 56:50
  Speaker 1: I was watching an interview I believe it was someone
• 56:52
  from Ford. One of the engineers from Ford made a
• 56:55
  visit to China, and.
• 56:56
  Speaker 2: It was the CEO of Ford even even better. Yes,
• 56:58
  and he went with he went with his whole engineering team.
• 57:00
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and was humbled.
• 57:02
  Speaker 2: That's right, just like oh no, well, I think he
• 57:04
  said when he came back, he said, I wanted to
• 57:07
  take the suv I was driving back home with me.
• 57:10
  I mean, that's like, like he said, that's that it's
• 57:12
  that good. I didn't want to stop driving it.
• 57:14
  Speaker 1: That seems kind of fucked. I mean, that's very anti
• 57:17
  competitive of us.
• 57:19
  Speaker 2: If they were locking the Chinese out, its kind of
• 57:21
  a bitch ass move. Look so, like Eileen, libertarian and
• 57:26
  in general, I'm a fan of free markets, but there
• 57:28
  is something that makes us tricky though, Uh you tak
• 57:32
  it economy, Well, there's taking the economy, and there's also
• 57:34
  it isn't actually free. So we do need to do
• 57:38
  a better job on the basics. But China is also
• 57:41
  subsidizing these right, so they're they're they're actually putting money
• 57:43
  from other industries. I'll prop up these other industries. And
• 57:48
  so even if you let them freely compete, like if
• 57:50
  you let them go toe to toe, China would be
• 57:53
  thrilled if they could subsidize their way into destroying the
• 57:56
  American automotive apparatus, partly for economic reasons. But there's another
• 58:01
  reason that I don't know if you've thought of how
• 58:03
  did the United States win World War Two? Just big
• 58:06
  I know that's a big picture of class manufacturing exactly,
• 58:09
  and that manufacturing. Some of it was new factories, but
• 58:12
  most of it was taking over old factories. So we
• 58:15
  took all of our farm implement factories like John Deere
• 58:18
  and Caterpillar, they were building tanks and guns. We took
• 58:22
  all our automotive factories. We had them building aircraft. We
• 58:25
  had them building weapons, We had them building missiles. In fact,
• 58:28
  we even designed those weapons so they could be manufactured
• 58:31
  by those plants that like to the literally the specifics
• 58:35
  of how thick of a gauge of metal you could
• 58:37
  bend to a certain radius. We were limited by the
• 58:40
  automotive manufacturing machines as to what we could do in aircraft.
• 58:45
  And so we won because we had all this automotive
• 58:48
  and other industrial capacity. China would love to wipe out
• 58:52
  the American automotive industry, partly for economic reasons, being cause
• 58:55
  it also means we will never be able to fight
• 58:57
  a war against them. If imagine in America with not
• 59:01
  like we've lost a lot of manufacturing. You're probably familiar
• 59:04
  with that. I mean, like, we don't make nearly as
• 59:06
  much as we used to, but we still make a
• 59:07
  few things. We still have some things that we do
• 59:10
  and cars is one of them, and we even export
• 59:12
  those cars. We're we're doing okay on cars. If if
• 59:15
  China could wipe out our industrial capacity entirely, they never
• 59:19
  need to worry about fighting a war with the US
• 59:21
  again because they know that we wouldn't be able to
• 59:24
  get back in the game fast enough to matter. And
• 59:26
  so that that's that's China's aim there, And it gets
• 59:29
  back to what you talked about earlier. It's the civil
• 59:31
  military fusion. So this is a it's there's a there's
• 59:34
  the economic war and the kinetic war that they could
• 59:37
  win with one move, which is out competing our automotive industry.
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: That's interesting. I never did think of that well.
• 59:44
  Speaker 2: And like Androws to think about this all the time
• 59:46
  because unlike a lot of these other defense companies that
• 59:48
  are designing weapons that can only be made by really fancy,
• 59:52
  high end bespoke factories, we're designing weapons that can be
• 59:55
  made in existing American industrial capacity. So like we make
• 59:58
  this h line of cruise missiles, the Barracuda. We make
• 1:00:01
  three different Barracuda missiles. It has ninety percent fewer parts
• 1:00:05
  than legacy cris missiles. It can be made with ten
• 1:00:09
  tools that all exist in every automotive plant. So you
• 1:00:12
  could make this missile at mass scale in any GM facility,
• 1:00:17
  in any Ford facility. And that's really important for US
• 1:00:19
  because if you can only make your missiles in this
• 1:00:22
  specialized factory that took you ten years to set up, well,
• 1:00:25
  what do you What in the world do you do
• 1:00:26
  when you need one hundred times more of those missiles
• 1:00:28
  made every day? You're just kind of screwed. And so
• 1:00:31
  the United States has been doing better at this. I
• 1:00:34
  think like the Air Force is doing better, the Navy's
• 1:00:37
  doing better, the Army is doing better. Like the Army
• 1:00:39
  has a whole transformation initiative where they want all of
• 1:00:42
  their new weapons systems to be highly manufacturable at scale,
• 1:00:46
  using real industrial capacity, and working with private companies from
• 1:00:50
  the beginning to make sure that any that they want,
• 1:00:52
  to make sure that any new system that they are
• 1:00:53
  building can be built by the American industrial economy, not
• 1:01:00
  only these specialized you know, specialized aerospace technicians, of which
• 1:01:04
  they're just not that many.
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 1: That's very smart.
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 2: How and China does this, by the way, like this
• 1:01:10
  is China. Have you seen the automated cruise missile factories
• 1:01:14
  that China has?
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 1: I haven't.
• 1:01:15
  Speaker 2: Oh man, You've got to look this up at some point.
• 1:01:17
  There's some videos that they put out there and they
• 1:01:19
  have this totally robotic line just churning.
• 1:01:22
  Speaker 1: Out in their shipping ports. It's bananas.
• 1:01:24
  Speaker 2: Oh well, I mean, so China has three hundred times
• 1:01:27
  more naval shipbuilding capacity in the United States. The time
• 1:01:30
  that it takes us to build one aircraft carrier, they
• 1:01:33
  could build three hundred. Now they're not building a bunch
• 1:01:36
  of aircraft carriers. They're mostly focusing on other things that
• 1:01:38
  are more relevant to what they want to do, which
• 1:01:40
  is invade Taiwan, so amphibious landing craft primarily. But another
• 1:01:45
  thing China does is they actually require many of their
• 1:01:48
  commercial vessels that have nothing to do with the military
• 1:01:51
  to build to military standards for two reasons. One because
• 1:01:54
  it means that all the shipyards are being built to
• 1:01:57
  handle military standards. Two, they plan on and basically couldn't
• 1:02:04
  you know they're going to press all of these civilian
• 1:02:07
  vessels into service. So they're saying, hey, you have this
• 1:02:10
  roll on, roll off car ferry that's used for moving
• 1:02:12
  cars around, for delivering cars to the United States. You
• 1:02:15
  have to build it to deck plate pressures that allow
• 1:02:17
  us to roll a bunch of tanks onto it so
• 1:02:19
  that we can then use it to deliver tanks to
• 1:02:22
  Taiwan from the Chinese mainland. And they're just requiring people
• 1:02:26
  to do that. And so even their civilian shipping fleet
• 1:02:29
  is actually this kind of military ghost fleet, just sitting
• 1:02:33
  in the open, pretending to be civilian. But the moment
• 1:02:36
  the shit hits the fan, it becomes part of the
• 1:02:37
  war machine. And so they've done a great job integrating
• 1:02:41
  in a way. The United States is not do.
• 1:02:42
  Speaker 1: You think that an invasion of Taiwan's imminent.
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 2: It's not imminent, but it's coming. So ANDROL has an
• 1:02:49
  internal policy called China twenty seven. The idea is that
• 1:02:54
  anything we're working on, anything that we're investing in, needs
• 1:02:58
  to be built with the assumption that sometime in twenty
• 1:03:01
  twenty seven China is going to move on Taiwan. And
• 1:03:04
  I might be wrong on this, right, it might be never,
• 1:03:06
  it might be a longer term thing. But in general,
• 1:03:09
  imagine how stupid I'll feel if I spend hundreds of
• 1:03:12
  millions of dollars building some new weapons system that I
• 1:03:15
  know is not going to come into service until the
• 1:03:18
  twenty thirties, which is what most experts say is outside
• 1:03:21
  of the window of when this invasion would happen. Wouldn't
• 1:03:23
  I feel pretty stupid if there's a gigantic fight and
• 1:03:27
  I've spent all my money on something that wasn't ready
• 1:03:29
  in time. I think that it is very likely that
• 1:03:33
  China moves on Taiwan for a variety of political reasons.
• 1:03:37
  So like Shijimping has this window politically where he can
• 1:03:42
  show that he's reunified China. He's got a lot of
• 1:03:45
  demographic problems that are going to go out of control
• 1:03:47
  as he waits in people age. He's got a lot
• 1:03:50
  of economic problems where they're propping up their economy with
• 1:03:54
  a lot of kind of fake GDP, fake growth, fake demand,
• 1:03:57
  fake construction, and he's doing that, I think to help
• 1:04:00
  build up his war machine, but it's not sustainable in
• 1:04:03
  the long run. So I think there's a window where
• 1:04:05
  they can do this. If you had to ask me,
• 1:04:08
  it's more likely that they don't do a full scale
• 1:04:10
  invasion to start. It's much more likely that they do
• 1:04:12
  something like a blockade. So they'll come up with some pretense.
• 1:04:15
  They'll say uh oh at Taiwan is exporting goods, that
• 1:04:20
  say made in Taiwan, And our position is that Taiwan
• 1:04:24
  is part of China, and therefore they need to pay
• 1:04:26
  Chinese taxes on those made in China goods. So we're
• 1:04:29
  gonna blockade their port and not let them export anything
• 1:04:31
  until they resolve this. And I worry. I worry about
• 1:04:36
  them kind of boiling the frog. You know, they blockade
• 1:04:38
  one port, and then two ports, and then the airports,
• 1:04:41
  and then the people of Taiwan are running out of money,
• 1:04:44
  running out of food. But you've boiled the frog enough
• 1:04:46
  where there's never a point where Taiwan really wants to
• 1:04:49
  fire the first shot and actually start a war. And certainly,
• 1:04:52
  like I don't, I think you and I would agree
• 1:04:54
  here the US probably should not start a start World
• 1:04:58
  War three over a block cadive a port.
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 1: Right, That's a lot analogy.
• 1:05:05
  Speaker 2: Boiling the frog, I think, is what China will do,
• 1:05:07
  and so what we need to do. And this is
• 1:05:09
  just my opinion, which is definitely biased. So to be clear,
• 1:05:12
  just if people know nobody's gonna dig it up and
• 1:05:14
  saying but Palmer's obviously only saying this because he's got
• 1:05:17
  money in the game. I will first say I have
• 1:05:20
  plenty of money. I sold my first company for billions
• 1:05:22
  of dollars. I don't need to work. I could retire.
• 1:05:24
  I'm not doing any of this for the money. Defense
• 1:05:27
  you make a lot less money for each hour work
• 1:05:29
  you put in than you can make in in tech
• 1:05:32
  or media or elsewhere. But I do a lot of
• 1:05:35
  work with Taiwan, so we actually I just went to
• 1:05:37
  Taiwan a few weeks ago to personally deliver a bunch
• 1:05:41
  of missiles and weapons systems that are specifically to counter
• 1:05:44
  a Chinese invasion. My opinion is that the United States,
• 1:05:48
  we don't want to get into a shooting war ourselves,
• 1:05:50
  right like we want to avoid that. The United States
• 1:05:52
  needs to stop being the world police, stop sending our
• 1:05:55
  people overseas to die for other countries, and instead we
• 1:05:59
  need to become the world's gun store. We need to say, hey, look,
• 1:06:02
  and what do you need to do to be a
• 1:06:05
  good gun store?
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 1:06:06
  Speaker 2: You got to keep stuff in stock. You got to
• 1:06:08
  keep things on the shelves. You need to be reasonably priced.
• 1:06:11
  You need to not arbitrarily cut off allies. And like,
• 1:06:14
  could you imagine if you went to a gun store
• 1:06:16
  and they told you, Joe, we're going to sell you
• 1:06:19
  this gun, but you can't use it over in that county.
• 1:06:22
  You can only use it in this one. And we're
• 1:06:23
  gonna tell you exactly how you can use it. We're
• 1:06:25
  gonna be micromanaging you, and we're gonna be taking responsibility
• 1:06:28
  for how you use your gun. I mean, that would
• 1:06:31
  never work. You would never want to work with them.
• 1:06:33
  You say, I'm gonna go to a different store, I'm
• 1:06:34
  gonna go buy something. And that's what some nations are doing,
• 1:06:37
  Like they're going to Russia, they're going to China, they're
• 1:06:40
  going to India and buying systems because we're going in
• 1:06:43
  and telling them our weapons are expensive, they're never in stock,
• 1:06:47
  we never deliver them to you, and also we're going
• 1:06:49
  to tell you what to do with them if we
• 1:06:51
  ever do give you to them. Like did you know
• 1:06:53
  that Taiwan is twenty billion dollars behind on arms deliveries
• 1:06:57
  from the United States? They have twenty billion dollar dollars
• 1:07:00
  in orders that have not been delivered there, and they're
• 1:07:03
  just and they these are not like, these are not
• 1:07:05
  things they would maybe like to have, They need these yesterday.
• 1:07:09
  China could move in tomorrow, and the thing is even
• 1:07:12
  a blockade. The best way to deter that is for
• 1:07:15
  Taiwan to have the things that make them a very
• 1:07:16
  prickly porcupine. Right, you want to have things like c
• 1:07:19
  mining capabilities that make a blockade basically impossible to effect
• 1:07:23
  without destroying the entire fleet. You want things like missiles
• 1:07:26
  and counter missile systems that make it impossible to lock
• 1:07:28
  in the country. But we're twenty billion dollars behind. And
• 1:07:33
  I mean you've seen what's happened with Ukraine, where I
• 1:07:37
  mean like there's an argument as to how we should
• 1:07:40
  arm them. Separate from that argument you've probably seen, I mean,
• 1:07:43
  we can't even give them what they're asking for, even
• 1:07:46
  if we want to give it to them, because we
• 1:07:48
  don't have enough to even cover ourselves, right, Like, we
• 1:07:51
  can't just give them all of our patriot missiles. We
• 1:07:53
  can't give them we can't give them even purely defensive
• 1:07:56
  tools to protect their capital because we don't make enough
• 1:08:00
  of them. We don't have enough of them. They're too expensive.
• 1:08:02
  That's crazy to me, that is crazy. It is crazy.
• 1:08:05
  So I think the best way for the United States
• 1:08:07
  to contribute to world stability again stop being the world place,
• 1:08:10
  start being the world gun store, and get serious about
• 1:08:13
  it instead of instead of saying, well, it's okay that
• 1:08:16
  we're kind of our crappy gun store, because we're gonna
• 1:08:18
  come and save your ass when shit hits the fan,
• 1:08:20
  when you say no, no, no, We're gonna give everything you
• 1:08:22
  need to fight for your own freedom. Look, you're our friend,
• 1:08:25
  you're our ally. We'll give you everything you need. We'll
• 1:08:27
  give you support, we'll give you intelligence, but we're not
• 1:08:30
  going to fight your wars for you. Because I don't
• 1:08:32
  think the American people have it in us to go
• 1:08:34
  do another two decades of adventures in the Middle East
• 1:08:38
  s or adventures in Europe, or adventures in Asia. It's
• 1:08:42
  just we don't have it in us.
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 1: Well, we're too informed now too.
• 1:08:47
  Speaker 2: Here's that too.
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: The Internet fucked all that game up.
• 1:08:49
  Speaker 2: Oh, I mean arguably Vietnam, right, I mean it's I
• 1:08:52
  mean the Vietnam I think was the war that changed
• 1:08:54
  everything there because you had I mean you had war
• 1:08:57
  on TV. You could see what was really.
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 1: Happening, and we now know, with the benefit of hindsight,
• 1:09:02
  that it was all false flag that got us into
• 1:09:03
  it in the first place. That's right, it was I
• 1:09:05
  don't trust you anymore. You know so well?
• 1:09:07
  Speaker 2: You remember what George Bush said, Uh, he said, fool
• 1:09:11
  me once, shame on you, fool me twice, can't get
• 1:09:15
  fooled again?
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 1: I remember that.
• 1:09:17
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that was a good That's what that's that's one
• 1:09:18
  of my favorite George Bush bushes. And I hear the
• 1:09:21
  the theory I've heard is that he realized he was
• 1:09:23
  about to say shame on me on camera, and then
• 1:09:26
  the press would have obviously said George Bush admits he
• 1:09:30
  got fooled quote shame on me.
• 1:09:33
  Speaker 1: But I think he just forgot it.
• 1:09:35
  Speaker 2: Maybe maybe there's that one. I don't I think I
• 1:09:38
  think Bush was a pretty I think he was a
• 1:09:39
  sharper guy. I think he was maybe not well spoken,
• 1:09:41
  but I think he's actually pretty sharp. I think he
• 1:09:43
  just stumbled on his word.
• 1:09:44
  Speaker 1: So what's stunning is you ever see his speeches when
• 1:09:46
  he was running for.
• 1:09:47
  Speaker 2: Getting to Texas. I have not actually gone back and
• 1:09:50
  looks who know this Butter really smooth.
• 1:09:52
  Speaker 1: Is Butter super articulate? You know, different guy, It's weird.
• 1:09:56
  I think it gets to a certain point with the
• 1:09:58
  pressure and the ca chaos and being the president and
• 1:10:01
  all the madness of the cameras in your face, the
• 1:10:05
  magnitude of it all wears on people, which is why
• 1:10:08
  they get so old.
• 1:10:09
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean there's the I mean, well even you
• 1:10:11
  know the pictures of Obama. You've seen him. You know,
• 1:10:13
  he looks like a college student on his first inaugurate
• 1:10:15
  in eight.
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 1: Years later, he looks like he's fifty years older.
• 1:10:18
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it's nuts.
• 1:10:19
  Speaker 1: What's just the pressure. The only one who's ever handled
• 1:10:21
  is Trump looks younger.
• 1:10:25
  Speaker 2: It really is. It really is astounding how that's worked out.
• 1:10:28
  Speaker 1: He's a freak. He's a genuine freak. Like, there's no
• 1:10:30
  one like that. Guy. Well, it's is the only reason
• 1:10:32
  why he survived all the shit they tried to put
• 1:10:34
  him through. It's the same reason why he can go
• 1:10:36
  through being president and it doesn't freak him out.
• 1:10:39
  Speaker 2: Oh yeah, like I think he's it's like the the
• 1:10:41
  Bruce Banner Hulk thing. You know, that's my secret. I'm
• 1:10:44
  always angry. I think what it's it's that's how it
• 1:10:47
  was for Trump. Trump was already living at the red
• 1:10:49
  line NonStop, you know, getting like what like four hours
• 1:10:52
  of sleep. One of the funny things about the sleep
• 1:10:54
  thing is that I have it personally on good authority
• 1:10:59
  from people that it is true, and nobody really disputes
• 1:11:02
  it except from time to time people like like people
• 1:11:06
  say the same thing about like Kim Jong un. They're like, oh,
• 1:11:08
  the glorious leader doesn't even need to sleep. But with
• 1:11:11
  Trump's case, it seems to somehow actually be the case
• 1:11:14
  he has. He got that old man no sleep power
• 1:11:18
  without getting all of the downside.
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 1: Well, some people just don't need like Jocko, you know
• 1:11:23
  Jocko Willing, Yeah, he sleeps four hours a night.
• 1:11:25
  Speaker 2: Really the same same thing.
• 1:11:26
  Speaker 1: It works out like an animal.
• 1:11:27
  Speaker 2: That's so interesting.
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 1: It's just genetic. I think I think there's I think
• 1:11:31
  actually Huberman has identified what what is the actual genetic
• 1:11:34
  component of it. But there's a some particular type of
• 1:11:38
  people that don't need I'm not one of them. Man,
• 1:11:40
  I need seven. I like six. If I could tolerate six,
• 1:11:45
  eight is oh I'm so good today. But if I can,
• 1:11:49
  if I get less than six, I'm a mess.
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I need I need my sleep.
• 1:11:53
  Speaker 1: Significantly dumber, like if you've ever listened to a podcast
• 1:11:56
  and I'm stumbling, guaranteed I'm working on four Yeah, yeah.
• 1:12:00
  Speaker 2: I'm working on less than I wanted to because I
• 1:12:02
  got to bed at around two and then I was
• 1:12:04
  up at six thirty. But I can do that day today.
• 1:12:07
  It was just there's a lot going on. Fine, I'm
• 1:12:10
  not worried about the good news is it's the first day, right,
• 1:12:12
  the first dame of sleep. You're okay, You're pulling on
• 1:12:15
  your reserves. And then and the second and the third day,
• 1:12:17
  then you start to get destroyed. At least for me.
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 1: Oh me too.
• 1:12:20
  Speaker 2: But then when I get behind, my wife gives me
• 1:12:22
  a hard time because I'll do what I call a
• 1:12:25
  mega sleep, and I will I will sleep if I
• 1:12:27
  get way behind, I'll sleep for ten eleven hours straight, perfect,
• 1:12:31
  and then that that usually reaches.
• 1:12:33
  Speaker 1: It's a renewable resource. That's the beautiful thing about sleep.
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 2: I wonder what would happen if Trump slept for eleven hours?
• 1:12:38
  Would it be like the most incredible version of Trump
• 1:12:41
  we've ever seen, or would it throw him off piece?
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 1: I mean, he said in his ways You're not going
• 1:12:45
  to change anything about that guy now, especially at eighty
• 1:12:48
  years ago.
• 1:12:48
  Speaker 2: That's probably true. I don't know if you know this,
• 1:12:50
  but I was actually one of the true Trump ogs.
• 1:12:55
  I wrote a letter to Donald Trump when I was fifteen,
• 1:12:58
  telling him that she should run for president. This was
• 1:13:00
  when he was considering running against Obama. Really, and hold,
• 1:13:05
  I'm thirty just turned thirty three. Wow, so this was
• 1:13:09
  a long time. And actually I not only luckily, I
• 1:13:11
  sent a letter and I posted about it on Facebook,
• 1:13:14
  which I'm really happy about. And I Noma, no, this
• 1:13:16
  wasn't I know, it wasn't twenty fifteen. No, this was
• 1:13:18
  when I was fifteen. I'm sorry. I meant to say
• 1:13:20
  when I was fifteen. So I mean, this is this
• 1:13:23
  is way back. This is like back in like two
• 1:13:25
  thousand and nine, twenty ten, so way before anyone else.
• 1:13:29
  And best what is I posted about on Facebook? And
• 1:13:31
  I said, I think Donald Trump would be a better
• 1:13:34
  choice for president than any of these other guys. I
• 1:13:36
  want to see a businessman who signed both sides of
• 1:13:39
  a check before and you know, you look at the
• 1:13:41
  people who are running kind of the you know, the
• 1:13:43
  modern parties, arguably the uniparty and he's clearly not part
• 1:13:47
  of that. And it was so it was, it was.
• 1:13:51
  It's so wild when people later they're like, oh, Palmer,
• 1:13:54
  you know, Palmer was an early Trump supporter. You know,
• 1:13:56
  he supported him in twenty sixteen because he probably because
• 1:13:58
  he loved Trump's, you know, extremist rhetoric. I'm like, oh, no,
• 1:14:02
  you don't. You don't even know. I loved his extremist
• 1:14:04
  rhetoric going back to two thousand and nine, but.
• 1:14:06
  Speaker 1: It wasn't even that extremist then.
• 1:14:08
  Speaker 2: It wasn't then.
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 1: That is the thing he's been so.
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 2: I mean, you've probably seen these interviews from the eighties
• 1:14:13
  where he said, we're getting riffed off on trade.
• 1:14:15
  Speaker 1: It's ridiculous talking to Oprah back when everybody loved him.
• 1:14:18
  Speaker 2: That's right exactly. He's saying the exact same words, and
• 1:14:21
  today they say, oh, it's it's it. You remember when
• 1:14:24
  he was running and he was he was saying we
• 1:14:26
  were going to have over three percent GDP growth and
• 1:14:29
  Obama said there's no magic wand there's like, you can't,
• 1:14:33
  there's no magic wand you can wave that gets you
• 1:14:34
  to three point three percent. And then Trump said, in
• 1:14:38
  one of his speeches he says, they told me not
• 1:14:39
  to say this, and they told me I can't. I said,
• 1:14:42
  it's going to be three percent, and they told me
• 1:14:44
  not to say this, but it's actually going to be
• 1:14:46
  a more, a lot more. And of course it ended
• 1:14:49
  up being far in excess of three. I think it
• 1:14:50
  was like four and a half percent GDP increase that year,
• 1:14:54
  and it was this I think this was his first
• 1:14:56
  year in office, so twenty seventeen or to start it was, yeah,
• 1:15:00
  that was twenty seventeen, right, Yeah, he was yeah when
• 1:15:02
  he was inaugurated. And it's one of those things where
• 1:15:07
  the easiest argument for Trump in those days was just, look,
• 1:15:10
  you don't have to agree with the guy on everything.
• 1:15:13
  But the real question is do you believe that either
• 1:15:16
  party outside of Trump is going to like are they
• 1:15:19
  going to do well? Like you you have the Democrats
• 1:15:22
  saying there's no magic wand to get growth, and you
• 1:15:24
  have everyone else attacking Trump and saying, oh, you know,
• 1:15:27
  we were just going to do everything the same way
• 1:15:28
  the Republicans have always done it. By the strongest argument
• 1:15:31
  for Trump is that anybody would have been better than
• 1:15:33
  what the establishment was pushing.
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 1: The best argument, yeah.
• 1:15:36
  Speaker 2: For me, one of the big ones was you know,
• 1:15:39
  I mean I got a lot of shit for this.
• 1:15:41
  I gave nine thousand dollars to a pro Trump group
• 1:15:43
  that ran a single anti Clinton billboard. It was a
• 1:15:47
  picture of her face that said too big to jail.
• 1:15:49
  And this was right after it had come out that
• 1:15:51
  she had been mishandling classified information running an email server
• 1:15:55
  out of her own home. You probably remember the famous
• 1:15:58
  phrase where they asked her, you know, are you are
• 1:16:00
  you aware that your staff was directed to wipe that server?
• 1:16:04
  And she said, like with a cloth, do you remember,
• 1:16:07
  like with a cloth? I mean, it was just it was,
• 1:16:10
  it was, It was so it was so absurd. But
• 1:16:12
  for me, one of the red lines was when Hillary
• 1:16:16
  and and and you know, it's not really Hillary, it's
• 1:16:18
  it's kind of the the political machine of which she
• 1:16:22
  is just the face said that she would enforce a
• 1:16:26
  strict no fly zone in Syria. And it's easy to say, oh, yeah,
• 1:16:31
  I would enforce a no fly zone. And that sounds
• 1:16:32
  oh yeah, yeah, you know, keep keep keep, keep these
• 1:16:35
  these bombers out of the air, keep these fight of
• 1:16:37
  the air. But what does that really mean? That means
• 1:16:39
  that you're saying you're gonna shoot down Russian aircraft if
• 1:16:42
  they cross into airspace that doesn't even belong to the
• 1:16:44
  United States. Like, I mean, that's practically an announcement that
• 1:16:47
  you're starting a world war. To say I am gonna
• 1:16:50
  shoot that is what enforcement of no fly zone is.
• 1:16:52
  And it was crazy to me. Everyone says, oh, you know,
• 1:16:54
  it's Hillary. You know Trump is an isolationist, and Hillary
• 1:16:58
  is the only one who has a who understands what
• 1:17:00
  we need to do in Syria. I'm like, are you
• 1:17:01
  kidding me? Like I'm not without even taking a position
• 1:17:05
  on what we are doing in Syria or we're doing
• 1:17:08
  in Syria, I know better than to commit that we
• 1:17:11
  are going to shoot down Russian aircraft because they decide
• 1:17:14
  to fly in Syrian airspace. Like we should not care
• 1:17:18
  about almost anything that much. And by the way, if
• 1:17:21
  we didn't do it, that's almost as bad, because now
• 1:17:24
  we've drawn a red line in the sand and we've
• 1:17:26
  let them cross it, and we've shown that we're not
• 1:17:27
  actually serious. So like you shouldn't say that, you shouldn't
• 1:17:32
  act on it, and you shouldn't not act on it.
• 1:17:35
  It's it's a lose lose lose every step of the.
• 1:17:37
  Speaker 1: Way, and it's just politics is normal, That's right.
• 1:17:42
  Speaker 2: And so I mean, I would explain this to friends
• 1:17:43
  of mine and say, guys, I mean they say, oh
• 1:17:46
  my god, Trump's warmonger. It's like, but Trump, you know,
• 1:17:49
  because I care about this national security stuff pretty deeply,
• 1:17:52
  then I know this is right. When I was starting
• 1:17:53
  Andrew eight years ago, and so I was like dedicating
• 1:17:56
  my career to these national security problems. Like, guys, how
• 1:17:58
  can Trump be in the warmonger when he the guy
• 1:18:00
  saying we need to stop fighting these wars, get out
• 1:18:02
  of these other countries, get our boots back in the US,
• 1:18:05
  and not get in a fight with Russia, China or
• 1:18:09
  any other country that we don't have to get into.
• 1:18:12
  And like, how can you say Trump's a warmonger and
• 1:18:14
  then support someone who says We're going to enforce a
• 1:18:16
  no fly zone in Syria. Uh. And I think a
• 1:18:19
  lot of people that was just really emotional. It was
• 1:18:21
  it was you can't reason people out of an opinion.
• 1:18:23
  They didn't reason themselves into it.
• 1:18:24
  Speaker 1: Well, one of the things that rocks people's world is
• 1:18:26
  you show them past videos of Hillary from two thousand
• 1:18:30
  and eight. Remember that video where she was more maga
• 1:18:33
  than maga. She's talking about the border.
• 1:18:35
  Speaker 2: Talking about the charge like I think. I think one
• 1:18:38
  of the phrases was we have to send them back. Yes,
• 1:18:41
  could you imagine can you imagine that we have to
• 1:18:43
  send them back?
• 1:18:44
  Speaker 1: I mean imagine her. I mean, this was her position,
• 1:18:47
  and she sounds like a hard line Republican.
• 1:18:50
  Speaker 2: Now, I mean, let's another one to bring up, is
• 1:18:52
  uh he is also like gay marriage? Oh yeah, I mean,
• 1:18:56
  I'll tell you. My personal view is that the state
• 1:18:58
  shouldn't be involved in marriage at all. It's actually a
• 1:19:00
  very recent invention. I don't know if you've ever dug
• 1:19:02
  into this. So state marriage licensure is a very recent development.
• 1:19:07
  There are people alive today who got married when you
• 1:19:10
  were not required of a marriage license. It was primarily
• 1:19:13
  a kind of a race driven thing. States didn't want
• 1:19:17
  black men to marry white women, and they got terrified
• 1:19:20
  of that in the Civil rights era, and so they
• 1:19:23
  all passed these rules about marriage licensure, many of them
• 1:19:27
  prohibiting interracial marriage. So I say marriage licenses were a
• 1:19:32
  way to enforce against interracial marriage. Because if marriage was
• 1:19:35
  a purely religious thing, where you could just go to
• 1:19:37
  a pastor get married, sign in a Bible, the state
• 1:19:40
  had no power over it, and so they wanted to
• 1:19:43
  enforce their will on people. So marriage licensure is very recent.
• 1:19:46
  My personal opinion is the state has no legitimate authority, constitutional,
• 1:19:50
  or otherwise to regulate marriage at all. Like gay marriage
• 1:19:54
  is not even a question. It's like, this is a religious, cultural,
• 1:19:58
  social ceremony witnessed before and before your friends and your family.
• 1:20:02
  It is not something the state should be They shouldn't
• 1:20:04
  have the right to give you a marriage license, nor
• 1:20:06
  to deny you one. Like why do like are they
• 1:20:09
  getting When did I give the state the ability to, uh,
• 1:20:14
  to say it's illegal for me to get married without
• 1:20:16
  their permission. That's that's crazy me anyway. So Hillary, you
• 1:20:21
  might remember, I mean even in two thousand and eight,
• 1:20:23
  she was against gay marriage, and she was out there says,
• 1:20:26
  I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.
• 1:20:28
  So here's someone who, like I was on the state
• 1:20:31
  shouldn't be involved in it at all side. Hillary's on
• 1:20:34
  the no, we should use state power to enforce what
• 1:20:37
  marriage is between a man and a woman. And then
• 1:20:39
  you have Donald Trump, who he's asked about. He said,
• 1:20:41
  do you remember his quote on this? So I mean
• 1:20:43
  he had been to gay weddings, he had gay friends,
• 1:20:45
  and he was asked about it and he said, well, look, marriage, okay,
• 1:20:50
  it's like a restaurant. You've got stake, you've got burghers,
• 1:20:53
  and different people like different things, and that's okay. I mean,
• 1:20:57
  like it was actually the most progressive the rest of
• 1:21:00
  you you could ever have. And then to Obama, by
• 1:21:02
  the way, same thing. Obama was against gay marriage. Hillary
• 1:21:05
  is against gay marriage. And then you fast forward just
• 1:21:07
  three short years and you have people like Brendan Ike,
• 1:21:11
  the CEO of Mozilla, getting fired by his board of
• 1:21:15
  directors because he supported Prop eight, which said that the
• 1:21:19
  marriage is between a man and a woman in California,
• 1:21:20
  which by the way, even then passed in California, so
• 1:21:23
  the majority of Californians agreed with him. But I mean,
• 1:21:26
  you're right, like Hillary was, Hillary was the thing, the
• 1:21:30
  views she had when she was running for president, You're
• 1:21:32
  right today she would be a hard line, hard line certainly,
• 1:21:35
  she'd be certainly on the cultural side. Alone, she'd be on.
• 1:21:38
  Speaker 1: The right of Marjorie Taylor Green.
• 1:21:40
  Speaker 2: No, that's a great point, Marjorie Taylor Green, You're right,
• 1:21:42
  she's very pro LGBT. She certainly is not for intervention
• 1:21:48
  in the Middle East, right, Yo, You're right, like, yeah, yeah,
• 1:21:51
  I've never thought about it that way. Marjorie Taylor Green
• 1:21:54
  would be far far left of a Hillary Clinton running
• 1:21:57
  again today. You know, I'm gonna I want to tell
• 1:22:01
  a story that I've never told publicly, but I just
• 1:22:06
  enough time has passed I should just we're bringing up
• 1:22:08
  since we're talking about Hillary. So when I was in
• 1:22:13
  Silicon Valley, this is after Facebook bought Oculus, and so
• 1:22:17
  I'm up there, and I was actually pro immigration, uh more,
• 1:22:22
  even more then than I am now. So I was
• 1:22:24
  I was thinking about supporting this group called Forward dot Us,
• 1:22:27
  which was trying to lead to immigration reform in the
• 1:22:29
  United States. And I've since evolved on this issue. I
• 1:22:32
  think that immigration can help depress US wages and ways
• 1:22:34
  I didn't understand then. I hadn't observed a lot of
• 1:22:37
  the H one B visa abuse that I have now
• 1:22:39
  observed having spent years in the valley. So you cut
• 1:22:42
  me a little slack if anyone thinks I shouldn't have
• 1:22:44
  worked with Forward dot Us. But I ended up with
• 1:22:46
  this invitation to go to an event, a Hillary Clinton
• 1:22:49
  event in Silicon Valley. It was very very hush hush,
• 1:22:52
  no media, nobody was saying anything. And this was before
• 1:22:56
  she had officially announced she was running, so you're not
• 1:22:58
  you know, you know, you know when a politician is
• 1:22:59
  going to run and everybody knows, but technically they haven't
• 1:23:02
  announced it. So Hillary was going to come out and
• 1:23:05
  she was there with her her John Podesta was her
• 1:23:10
  CTO at the time, or was it chief of staff
• 1:23:12
  something like that, one of those, yeah, so job. It
• 1:23:15
  was gonna be her and Podesta. At the last second,
• 1:23:17
  Hillary ends up bailing, but I ended up going anyway,
• 1:23:20
  and I had a couple of prepared questions for Hillary,
• 1:23:23
  and so it was me and about fifteen other billionaires
• 1:23:26
  in Silicon Valley who went to this kind of real,
• 1:23:29
  uh really really intimate gathering, and they wanted to sell
• 1:23:32
  us on why we should support Hillary in this upcoming
• 1:23:35
  run when she ran. And first of all, I thought
• 1:23:38
  it was kind of shitty that she just didn't show
• 1:23:40
  up at the last second and like like like didn't
• 1:23:42
  say too basically till we were already on the way,
• 1:23:44
  like whatever.
• 1:23:45
  Speaker 1: She had some legitimate health issues, right and still does.
• 1:23:49
  Speaker 2: She might have in general, but I don't think that
• 1:23:51
  was the problem at this point. And so there were
• 1:23:54
  two issues that I brought up to Podesta and I said, hey,
• 1:23:57
  I wanted to ask these of Hillary. By the way,
• 1:24:01
  note that in this story I hadn't decided who I
• 1:24:03
  was going to support. So a lot of people think
• 1:24:04
  I'm like this hard political guy. I was a VR guy.
• 1:24:07
  I was a computer kid. Politics or something I cared about,
• 1:24:10
  but like I was reasonable, I could. I had not
• 1:24:14
  yet been what do they call it radicalized. I had
• 1:24:17
  not yet been radicalized. It was after they fired me
• 1:24:20
  for giving nine thousand dollars to Trump that I got radicalized,
• 1:24:22
  but pre radicalized Palmer. Okay, So I go to this
• 1:24:25
  meeting and I had two questions for Hillary. I said one.
• 1:24:29
  In the past, Hillary, you've supported a fifty five mile
• 1:24:33
  per hour federal speed limit. You were one of the
• 1:24:35
  original proponents. You were one of the people who supported
• 1:24:38
  it in the Senate. You wrote an open letter with
• 1:24:41
  a lot of other wives of politicians saying that the
• 1:24:43
  blood would run read with the streets would run red
• 1:24:46
  with the blood of children if we got rid of this,
• 1:24:49
  of this, of this speed limit. And then in two
• 1:24:51
  thousand and eight, when you last ran for president. You
• 1:24:54
  said on I think it was the view actually, which
• 1:24:57
  is it's so funny because the view has turned into
• 1:24:58
  like almost a pair of of itself. But as you
• 1:25:01
  said on the View that when you were asked about
• 1:25:04
  the speed limit, you said that whenever and however we
• 1:25:07
  can make it happen, we should have a fifty five
• 1:25:09
  mile pro speed limit. Now, given that you've never driven
• 1:25:12
  a car in the last twenty years, have you reconsidered
• 1:25:15
  this rule or would you be supported this as this campaign?
• 1:25:18
  And Pedessa said, oh, we don't really have a position
• 1:25:20
  on that issue. I said, but like, could you make
• 1:25:23
  up one right now? Like most Americans don't want a
• 1:25:25
  fifty five mile prior speed limit. I think that was
• 1:25:28
  really dumb of Hillary to say she supported one last time.
• 1:25:31
  I think it might be why she lost. Can you
• 1:25:33
  would you agree that probably it's not a winning issue?
• 1:25:36
  And he said, oh, we can't, we can't take a
• 1:25:38
  position on that at this time, which was crazy to me.
• 1:25:40
  Shouldn't it be just so easy to be like, yeah, yeah,
• 1:25:42
  like this is clearly like a thing that it's a
• 1:25:44
  fight she lost, you know, half a century ago, and
• 1:25:47
  she still worked up about it. Just give up, people,
• 1:25:50
  don't want to drive fifty five.
• 1:25:52
  Speaker 1: You remember when tell me, hey, I wrote a song
• 1:25:53
  about it.
• 1:25:54
  Speaker 2: Well, you know, you know, Tom Cruise had a can't
• 1:25:56
  drive fifty five decal on them his motorcycle and top
• 1:25:58
  gun and I mean, like so, I mean, it's the
• 1:26:01
  cultural battle's been been one. Then my second question was, Hey,
• 1:26:05
  we're a bunch of techno bros up here in the valley.
• 1:26:08
  We all believe in battery electric hybrid vehicles and electric
• 1:26:12
  vehicles in general. But Hillary's been a huge supporter of
• 1:26:16
  Oh no, it was the other way. I'm sorry this
• 1:26:18
  has been so long, I haven't thought about this. No,
• 1:26:20
  I said. Hillary actually was against corn subsidies at one point.
• 1:26:25
  She called them at one point, you know, like the
• 1:26:26
  ethanol blending mandates that were making corn at a loss
• 1:26:30
  paid for a tax three dollars than mandating that it
• 1:26:32
  go into gasoline, which hurts car performance. It's it's it's
• 1:26:36
  got lots of fuel storage problems, and it's just a
• 1:26:38
  waste of money. And there's less energy in it too,
• 1:26:41
  so you get actually worse mileage. Anyway, I said, Hey,
• 1:26:46
  in the past, Hillary has come out and she wrote
• 1:26:48
  this open letter that called ethanol blending mandates the quote
• 1:26:51
  most astonishingly anti consumer mandate in the history of the
• 1:26:55
  American government. Does she still believe that? Does she want
• 1:26:59
  money to go away from you know, biofuels and more
• 1:27:02
  towards actual cutting edge technology, or is she going to
• 1:27:06
  support corn subsidies to win votes in Iowa? And it
• 1:27:09
  has said, oh, we don't have a position on that
• 1:27:11
  at this time. I said, I just got oppress you there.
• 1:27:14
  You don't have a position, or you don't want to
• 1:27:16
  tell us the answer, because we none of us here
• 1:27:19
  think that the future is biofuels. It's a failed experiment,
• 1:27:23
  it's a failed mandate. Hillary used to agree, Is she
• 1:27:25
  going to flip on us? He said, I'm honestly genuinely
• 1:27:29
  telling you we do not have a position on it,
• 1:27:31
  because this time not that bad, right, that's not bad.
• 1:27:34
  And so three days later Hillary announces officially she's running.
• 1:27:40
  Her first ads start running, and what do you think
• 1:27:42
  the first series of ads are, it's Hillary in a
• 1:27:45
  cornfield talking about how she's going to boost corn subsidies
• 1:27:48
  and she's going to lead a clean energy revolution and
• 1:27:51
  she's going to give them so much corn money. And
• 1:27:54
  I like setting aside the fact that I think biofuel
• 1:27:57
  subsidies are dumb. She lost so much trust of people
• 1:28:00
  in that room because her answer wasn't here's why I
• 1:28:03
  support them, and you know, deal with it, And it
• 1:28:07
  wasn't I don't support it technologically, but I support it politically,
• 1:28:10
  which I think people could have respected. It was, oh,
• 1:28:12
  we don't have a position, but she did. They had
• 1:28:15
  already paid for the ads, they'd already made the ads.
• 1:28:17
  They were probably sitting on a tape in the TV
• 1:28:19
  studio ready to run as we're meeting with her chief
• 1:28:22
  of staff. And I, honestly, I know I said that,
• 1:28:25
  like the Seria thing was a red line. That was
• 1:28:27
  actually the moment where I decided that I couldn't vote
• 1:28:29
  for Hillary. It wasn't about any particular issue. I was like,
• 1:28:32
  it's just how how can you vote for someone who's
• 1:28:34
  willing to just lie that way, to manipulate and she's
• 1:28:38
  trying to unilate me in a bunch of other rich guys,
• 1:28:40
  And there were a bunch of other guys in that
• 1:28:41
  room who said the same thing. We all were in
• 1:28:43
  a group chat. We're like, we're not gonna, We're not
• 1:28:46
  gonna like like, by the way, my questions weren't the
• 1:28:48
  only ones like this. There were like another dozen questions.
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 1: To answer any of them with like meaningful he did.
• 1:28:54
  Speaker 2: There were some that they answered meaningful, like I'd say. Actually,
• 1:28:56
  on the immigration side, there were some real ones. There
• 1:28:59
  were questions about poul for dreamers in particular, and like
• 1:29:02
  he had, he had his talking points. He didn't expect
• 1:29:05
  anyone to come out of you know, to come off
• 1:29:07
  the top rope with fifty five mile prior speed limits.
• 1:29:10
  But there were a few other things. I'm trying to
• 1:29:12
  remember what were the other ones that I think he
• 1:29:14
  misled people on. There was something in there around There
• 1:29:17
  was something around there around content, like like for for
• 1:29:20
  social media platforms with Silicon Valley people care about this stuff, right.
• 1:29:23
  It was like, hey, like you do you agree that
• 1:29:25
  the government shouldn't be moderating content that they shouldn't be
• 1:29:29
  centering because this was kind of the very early days
• 1:29:31
  of the government interfering with this stuff.
• 1:29:34
  Speaker 1: It was when did the government first start interfering with
• 1:29:36
  social media content? Do you know the initial issues were?
• 1:29:41
  Speaker 2: So I don't know the initial issues, but like, let's
• 1:29:43
  look at this from first principles, ignoring the social media
• 1:29:47
  part when did the government start intervening in media?
• 1:29:51
  Speaker 1: From the beginning?
• 1:29:52
  Speaker 2: From the beginning, you know. One of the reasons everyone
• 1:29:55
  loves Alexander Hamilton. He's really popular founding father. I have
• 1:29:59
  to admit he's actually my least favorite founding father, partly
• 1:30:02
  because he supported central banking. I'm just not really a
• 1:30:06
  gigantic fan of it and how it's turned out. But interesting,
• 1:30:09
  by the way, he was also very anti immigrant, which
• 1:30:11
  is so funny because I look up the interview with
• 1:30:15
  the directors of Hamilton the Musical when they were asked,
• 1:30:18
  why did you make Hamilton and the Musical super pro immigrant?
• 1:30:22
  When in reality he was very I mean very anti immigrant.
• 1:30:25
  I mean he literally said immigrants are a poison to
• 1:30:28
  our nation. I mean he was really against it, and
• 1:30:31
  which is funny because he was himself an immigrant, and
• 1:30:34
  I mean he was like, you know, blood and soil
• 1:30:36
  all the way. I mean, he was really into it.
• 1:30:38
  And their answer was, we wanted to represent Hamilton as
• 1:30:40
  we think he would have existed in the climate of today,
• 1:30:43
  not with the information he had at the time anyway.
• 1:30:47
  But one of the other things about Hamilton is that
• 1:30:49
  he did not support the First Amendment. He actually thought
• 1:30:52
  that the government should be able to criminalize speech that
• 1:30:57
  lied about the government in a critical Now, to be clear,
• 1:31:01
  he didn't think you they should be able to, you know,
• 1:31:03
  regulate everything. But his point was, if someone's lying about
• 1:31:05
  the government or what it's doing or its authority, we
• 1:31:07
  have to be able to stop that. You actually had
• 1:31:09
  a counterpoint in people like Benjamin Franklin, who of course
• 1:31:11
  had done like letters pretending to be the King of
• 1:31:14
  Prussia and lots of satirical stuff pretending to be the
• 1:31:17
  King of England. He said, no, you can't you because
• 1:31:19
  if you say that we can't make up lies about
• 1:31:22
  the government, then the government just needs to make anything
• 1:31:25
  that's critical about them us a lie, because if it's
• 1:31:28
  a so called lie, now they can stop it. And
• 1:31:30
  so he said, we can't give the government the power
• 1:31:32
  to do this. So Alexander Hamilton was not a fan.
• 1:31:35
  And I think that that threat has been there through
• 1:31:37
  the history of our government. There's always been people from
• 1:31:39
  literally before the founding who believed the state should have
• 1:31:42
  a role in influencing the media. And like, I mean,
• 1:31:45
  you're familiar with all of like the stuff that came
• 1:31:47
  out post JFK about the media influence operations. What was
• 1:31:51
  it like fifty five or sixty different media assets were
• 1:31:54
  activated for the JFK messaging campaign in national media. And
• 1:31:59
  so I guess, getting back to your question of when
• 1:32:01
  did they get in social media, I think it was
• 1:32:02
  probably continuous the whole time, the moment that it was
• 1:32:05
  of any importance, the moment that it was being paid
• 1:32:08
  attention to. I'm certain that the people who were running
• 1:32:11
  these media influence operations immediately jumped into that new sphere.
• 1:32:15
  I can't prove it, that's just my I think.
• 1:32:18
  Speaker 1: Before social media though, like I wonder if they were
• 1:32:22
  preparing for something like that, oh if it started to
• 1:32:25
  happen and they didn't recognize what an impact was going
• 1:32:27
  to happen.
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 2: Under I think they understood the impact of the Internet
• 1:32:31
  before social media. So even before social media, you had
• 1:32:35
  people writing blogs, you had people doing you know, I
• 1:32:38
  had you have these bulletin board systems, and it's well
• 1:32:40
  known that the CIA was active on early bulletin board systems,
• 1:32:45
  pushing the government perspective, of course, and so I think
• 1:32:48
  that I think they've been continuously involved in every Internet platform,
• 1:32:52
  even before social media as we call it today now
• 1:32:55
  was popular.
• 1:32:56
  Speaker 1: I was watching a particular political debate on YouTube, and
• 1:33:00
  occasionally when I see something that's very contentious, I'm like,
• 1:33:03
  let me go to the comments and see what it is.
• 1:33:05
  And it was all bots. It was wild. There are
• 1:33:08
  obvious zero bunch of zeros and numbers after name John's
• 1:33:13
  six zeros, no profile picture or some particulous AI generated thing,
• 1:33:18
  and then like a very hardline stance one way or
• 1:33:21
  the other, very inflammatory, causing arguments. I was like, this
• 1:33:25
  is wild, this is all bots.
• 1:33:27
  Speaker 2: Well, you're from a dead Internet theory.
• 1:33:28
  Speaker 1: Right, yes, yeah, explain that to people.
• 1:33:31
  Speaker 2: So dead Internet theory has been around for quite a
• 1:33:33
  long time, probably long before the Internet was actually dead,
• 1:33:37
  and it's this theory that over time there will be
• 1:33:41
  increasing amounts of uh literal, robotic content and then also
• 1:33:45
  kind of like astroturfed fake content, like one guy running
• 1:33:49
  one hundred accounts, And the theory is that eventually there
• 1:33:53
  will be almost no real human back and forth on
• 1:33:56
  the Internet, that it's actually kind of just propaganda and
• 1:33:59
  counterpropaganda playing out on a stage for our benefit by
• 1:34:03
  moneyed interests, whether it's corporations, the government, foreign adversaries, and
• 1:34:09
  you know, there might be a few people in the mix,
• 1:34:11
  but it's primarily going to be just robots are arguing
• 1:34:15
  with each other. And I think that more and more
• 1:34:18
  it's becoming true.
• 1:34:19
  Speaker 1: Well, it's getting close. Like that FBI analyst that when
• 1:34:22
  Elon was in the middle of buying Twitter yep, who
• 1:34:24
  looked at all the different bots and you know, they
• 1:34:27
  were trying to say it was five percent. He said, no,
• 1:34:29
  I think it's eighty yep, eighty percent. So when you're
• 1:34:32
  on Twitter, we see people are arguing and making points
• 1:34:34
  and even posting things yep.
• 1:34:36
  Speaker 2: Well, and there was you might remember there was a
• 1:34:38
  time where a bunch of the stats for Wikipedia editors
• 1:34:42
  came out and it was some like enormous fraction of
• 1:34:45
  edits coming out of one location in Arlington, Virginia. It's like,
• 1:34:49
  oh wow, Arlington, Virginia, that you famously the center of
• 1:34:54
  academic rigor and excellence. There's supposed to be a lot
• 1:34:57
  of people living there who they just really care about
• 1:34:59
  making sure Wikipedia is accurate.
• 1:35:01
  Speaker 1: Odd.
• 1:35:01
  Speaker 2: Yeah, could I take a quick break and get a
• 1:35:04
  little bit of water?
• 1:35:04
  Speaker 1: Yeah, well there's water right there in front of you.
• 1:35:06
  Speaker 2: There we go, Thank you, I missed.
• 1:35:08
  Speaker 1: That's all you need?
• 1:35:08
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, we have filtered water any day.
• 1:35:13
  Speaker 1: Pause, gentlemen, we'll be right back.
• 1:35:15
  Speaker 2: You take off my jacket too. It's it's good when
• 1:35:18
  you're walking around and there's air moving on it because
• 1:35:20
  the copper conducts heat away really well. But just sitting
• 1:35:23
  in here is actually copper.
• 1:35:24
  Speaker 1: You're here, check it out. Well, I want to do
• 1:35:26
  this on camera. We're still rolling. That's a copper.
• 1:35:31
  Speaker 2: Jacket from this company called Volovat.
• 1:35:33
  Speaker 1: It's actually made out of copper.
• 1:35:34
  Speaker 2: It's actually made out of copper. Yeah, so heavy, there's Yeah,
• 1:35:37
  it weighs like four and a half pounds. It's something
• 1:35:39
  like three thousand miles of copper of ultrafying copper thread.
• 1:35:44
  Speaker 1: Does this protect you from EMF or maybe if you.
• 1:35:48
  Speaker 2: Put your phones into that pocket then no signals go out?
• 1:35:51
  Speaker 1: Well, so it's like a Faraday cage.
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a little wearable Faraday cage. So it's actually
• 1:35:55
  it's actually got some some some use beyond being cool.
• 1:35:58
  But yeah, So the company Volla box really interesting. So
• 1:36:02
  they make Yeah, of course, they make a bunch of
• 1:36:05
  really cool clothes out of very novel materials, some of
• 1:36:08
  them very futuristic. Like they make a jacket out of
• 1:36:11
  the material that the Mars Rover parachute was made, so
• 1:36:15
  it's like a supersonic parachute material.
• 1:36:18
  Speaker 1: It is pretty weird, make me feel very restricted.
• 1:36:21
  Speaker 2: Well, you're also a lot bigger than me, so I'm
• 1:36:24
  a little.
• 1:36:25
  Speaker 1: So you can so. Yeah, but it seems to fit
• 1:36:27
  in most but it just seems heavy and restrictive. You know.
• 1:36:32
  Speaker 2: You do have to make sure you size it where
• 1:36:33
  there's plenty of room to move around inside of it,
• 1:36:35
  because it does not stretch at all. It's made of tightly.
• 1:36:38
  So there's a few benefits. The first is that it
• 1:36:41
  looks sweet.
• 1:36:42
  Speaker 1: Jamie's ordering one right now, look at them.
• 1:36:44
  Speaker 2: The other is that uh. The other is that copper's
• 1:36:46
  an antimicrobial material, so you never get mildew on it.
• 1:36:50
  You never get molled, like like it magically kills all
• 1:36:53
  of that stuff. Also, I mentioned earlier the pockets are
• 1:36:56
  basically a Farita cage. So if you want, like if
• 1:36:58
  I want my phone to get called, I keep it
• 1:37:00
  in my my my pants pocket. But I want to disappear.
• 1:37:04
  Speaker 1: It was a jacket that Palmer Lucky was wearing, I
• 1:37:06
  would hope it would be this, like when you showed
• 1:37:09
  up in this crazy jacket. I'm like, that's what I
• 1:37:10
  would hope.
• 1:37:10
  Speaker 2: They've got a new one that's a T shirt that's
• 1:37:12
  made out of carbon nanotubes, so you should check you
• 1:37:15
  should check that out. They're working on they're working on
• 1:37:17
  some wild next gen stuff. Whoa, sorry, give me just
• 1:37:22
  a second. I just gotta take it. I actually just
• 1:37:24
  need to take a mental A mental.
• 1:37:25
  Speaker 1: Break, is that? Yeah, take a break. I'll take a leak.
• 1:37:28
  Speaker 2: All right, thank you, I appreciate a second.
• 1:37:30
  Speaker 1: So there's a place called Commando Store. Yeah's talking about
• 1:37:33
  these pants?
• 1:37:33
  Speaker 2: Well, yeah, we're just talking about your tiger stripe, your
• 1:37:36
  type range of panties and uh, the Commando Store is
• 1:37:39
  doing these reproductions of vintage gear like Vietnam era US gear,
• 1:37:43
  Russian gear, using modern materials but old camo prints and
• 1:37:47
  they're super authentic. But the problem is a lot of
• 1:37:49
  this actual old gear it's all mild, dude, it's destroyed.
• 1:37:52
  The thread is all crusty and busting apart. And so
• 1:37:55
  if you actually want to be authentic, like the guys
• 1:37:58
  in the Vietnamese jungle, not look like they were wearing old, crappy,
• 1:38:02
  busted apart gear. Their gear was fresh, and so if
• 1:38:04
  you want to look just like they did. You actually
• 1:38:07
  have to buy newly manufactured gear, but i'll uh, I'll
• 1:38:10
  send you some links. They have a lot of really
• 1:38:11
  cool tiger stripe stuff that's very very cool and authentic.
• 1:38:15
  Speaker 1: Nice. How when you were a kid, did you ever
• 1:38:17
  imagine you'd be selling weapons? But does that seem surreal
• 1:38:22
  to you that you go from being this guy who's
• 1:38:25
  really into VR to weapons manufacturing?
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 2: It seems a little bit surreal, but only a little bit.
• 1:38:33
  You're growing up. I always would be the guy who
• 1:38:37
  identified with the guy in the story who was making
• 1:38:40
  the tools. So like when I would watch James Bond,
• 1:38:43
  I never thought I'm James Bond. It was like, oh,
• 1:38:46
  I want to be Cue, Like I want to be
• 1:38:48
  I'm making the tools exactly Tony did it all, and
• 1:38:55
  so I have to admit, like, it's certainly they thought
• 1:38:59
  it occurred to me. Like one of my favorite anime
• 1:39:03
  characters was a character anti hero named Seto Kaiba who
• 1:39:07
  ran a weapons company that was also a virtual reality company,
• 1:39:13
  and uh, like they built they built like virtual reality
• 1:39:16
  gaming simulator pods and also weapons, and so it's really weird,
• 1:39:22
  Like you start to ponder, are you really making decisions?
• 1:39:26
  With free will or are you actually just like enacting
• 1:39:28
  the programming of when you're a kid, Like like I like,
• 1:39:33
  it's it's hard to really know, but like when people like, oh,
• 1:39:36
  you know, Palmer, how do you get into this Stuff's
• 1:39:37
  like I mean I remember being like seven years old
• 1:39:40
  and and and thinking about the stuff, or like you
• 1:39:42
  watch a you watch like Power like I was. I
• 1:39:44
  grew up watching Power Rangers when I was a really
• 1:39:46
  little kid. You know, reruns of the first season of
• 1:39:49
  Power Rangers, and the character I most identified was like
• 1:39:51
  the techno wizard of the group, Billy, who was building
• 1:39:54
  like flying cars and upgrading their robot suits. And I
• 1:39:58
  don't know, it's really weird you end up as an
• 1:40:01
  adult just doing exactly what you were fascinated with when
• 1:40:05
  you're a kid, because what you're fascinating with when you're
• 1:40:07
  a kid is really it's just it's a function of
• 1:40:09
  what's put in front of you, right, Like, like what
• 1:40:11
  if I would have had different things if.
• 1:40:13
  Speaker 1: I lived in Montana?
• 1:40:15
  Speaker 2: Yeah, what if I lived in Montana? What if I'm
• 1:40:18
  you know, what if I uh, you know, what if?
• 1:40:21
  Speaker 1: What if?
• 1:40:21
  Speaker 2: Like is there a world like I grew up in Nashville, right,
• 1:40:24
  I would have inevitably been a musician and like almost
• 1:40:28
  without even being able to choose it. Even if I
• 1:40:30
  went in one direction, wo, I've ended up coming back
• 1:40:32
  to it.
• 1:40:32
  Speaker 1: Probably, Look, all those things are interesting, and your guy
• 1:40:35
  who's into interesting things, it's just finding whatever the path
• 1:40:39
  is that you think is interesting and just going in
• 1:40:42
  that direction. You just your direction was kind of established
• 1:40:45
  by your interest when you were younger. So it probably
• 1:40:48
  seems surreal just in the fact that you've gone so
• 1:40:51
  far with it, to the point where you're actually making
• 1:40:53
  weapons to defend other countries.
• 1:40:55
  Speaker 2: Well, that's the crazy thing, is I think part of
• 1:40:57
  part of the reason it's so wild my progression is
• 1:40:59
  it only happens if it if it's successful continuously. Right, So,
• 1:41:05
  like a world where I don't basically figure out how
• 1:41:10
  to build good virtuality technology is one where oculus doesn't exist.
• 1:41:14
  If oculus doesn't exist, I don't get bought by Facebook,
• 1:41:16
  I don't go to Silicon Valley. I don't become kind
• 1:41:18
  of one of the leading tech figures in that industry
• 1:41:21
  up there. To hit green light, you have to did
• 1:41:22
  every green light, and like I like you know who
• 1:41:24
  you know who funded anderall? When I started it, like yes, me,
• 1:41:27
  I put a lot of my money into it. But
• 1:41:29
  it was all of these same investors who would invest
• 1:41:31
  in an oculus I mean literally the same people. It's
• 1:41:34
  like Brian Singerman is a good example. He was a
• 1:41:36
  partner at Founder's Fund, which was Peter Thiel's investment fund.
• 1:41:39
  They decided to put one million dollars into Oculus before
• 1:41:44
  any other fund was willing to give us money. So
• 1:41:46
  they were the first institutional money into Oculus VR. And
• 1:41:51
  then he ended up being our first investor also in
• 1:41:56
  androlls like you're talking about, like the same people even
• 1:41:59
  like these relations ships come back around, and then that
• 1:42:01
  turns into running a weapons company, and then that turns
• 1:42:04
  into building more efficient weapons. And then like one of
• 1:42:07
  our recent wins, we were competing and er all with
• 1:42:11
  Boeing and Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman to build the
• 1:42:16
  Air Force's first AI powered fighter jet, So the first
• 1:42:19
  fighter jet with no human pilot, not limited by human ability,
• 1:42:24
  instead limited by the ability of this robot brain making
• 1:42:28
  the whole thing go. And we beat them. I mean,
• 1:42:31
  how crazy is that to like for for like that,
• 1:42:34
  that's what's crazy to me, Like it's not sitting here
• 1:42:36
  crazy like, oh is it crazy and building weapons for me?
• 1:42:38
  It's crazy, Like it's not that hard to imagine. You
• 1:42:40
  you end up building you know, guns for you know,
• 1:42:43
  the Marines. But like, what's really nothing against the Marines
• 1:42:46
  are the people who build guns for them. I love
• 1:42:47
  those guys. The crazy part to me is that all
• 1:42:50
  these things have gone right over and over to the
• 1:42:53
  point where I can literally have billions of dollars at
• 1:42:56
  my disposal from my investors to build multi milli in
• 1:43:00
  square foot factories to build act like the Air Force's
• 1:43:03
  first AI fighter jet, which is the official designation. They
• 1:43:06
  just gave it as the f Q forty four F
• 1:43:08
  for fighter, Q for unmanned and then forty four is
• 1:43:11
  the number designation. WHOA, Yeah, that's the crazy thing. When
• 1:43:15
  I lay awake at night, That's what I'm thinking about.
• 1:43:17
  It's it's not so much that I am building weapons,
• 1:43:19
  it's that we're we're like actually pulling off things that
• 1:43:22
  make a difference. And by the way, AI fighter jets there,
• 1:43:24
  it is there, it is. So that was that was
• 1:43:27
  That was a wind tunnel test. And you'll notice there's
• 1:43:31
  no protrusion for a cockpit. The whole. So it's a
• 1:43:34
  stealth aircraft low signature, uses the same weapons systems that
• 1:43:39
  a real fighter jet uses.
• 1:43:41
  Speaker 1: That's what it looks like in the front.
• 1:43:42
  Speaker 2: Yep. So this was that was that was a very early,
• 1:43:45
  very very early propulsion system test. And one of the
• 1:43:50
  crazy things.
• 1:43:50
  Speaker 1: What's the is that what they look like yep, yep.
• 1:43:54
  Speaker 2: So one of the crazy things about this is that
• 1:43:56
  the United States. So the idea is, you have a
• 1:43:59
  bunch of these for every man fighter. Because they're cheaper,
• 1:44:04
  they are more expendable, you can take more risk with them.
• 1:44:07
  So imagine this. I've got an F thirty five flying
• 1:44:10
  with five of these things. The original name of the
• 1:44:13
  program was Loyal Wingman. The idea is that I have
• 1:44:16
  a loyal wingman does whatever I tell him. I can
• 1:44:18
  talk to it like I would any human, you know,
• 1:44:21
  co you know, you know, coworker, and it's going to
• 1:44:24
  go in and do what I tell it. But it's
• 1:44:26
  never going to question my orders. It's never going to
• 1:44:28
  try to save itself if it means we're ruining the mission.
• 1:44:33
  And one of the craziest things about autonomous aircraft is
• 1:44:36
  that the United States has spent basically a century figuring
• 1:44:40
  out what works in air combat. I mean you've seen
• 1:44:41
  top gun.
• 1:44:42
  Speaker 1: Right, Yeah.
• 1:44:43
  Speaker 2: They have this book of tactics that they need to
• 1:44:45
  learn to stay alive. How you measure, how you manage
• 1:44:48
  your energy and your altitude and your position so that
• 1:44:50
  you destroy the enemy and you don't get destroyed yourself.
• 1:44:55
  There's another book of tactics that will allow you to
• 1:45:00
  destroy the enemy, but we'll probably get you killed in
• 1:45:03
  the process. We don't teach those generally, or if we do,
• 1:45:06
  it's in the context of don't do this. All of
• 1:45:08
  those tactics are on the table. When it comes to
• 1:45:10
  AI powered fighter jets. I can now have it doing
• 1:45:13
  things that are so risky that a human pilot would
• 1:45:17
  never try even try the maneuver, because let's say it's
• 1:45:19
  a coin flip. It's a fifty to fifty chance that
• 1:45:21
  you're going to die, but a one hundred percent chance
• 1:45:25
  that I'm going to be able to take out the
• 1:45:26
  enemy target. Imagine going after something where I know I
• 1:45:29
  Am probably going to get shot down at the end
• 1:45:31
  of that maneuver, but I definitely take out all the
• 1:45:34
  surface to air missile launchers on the shore, which then
• 1:45:37
  allow everything else to come in through the gap that
• 1:45:39
  you just cleared. You'll make that trade every every day.
• 1:45:42
  You'll trade a cheap AI fighter jet to blow up
• 1:45:45
  a bunch of really expensive manned or or autonomous systems
• 1:45:50
  in the air or or on the ground every time
• 1:45:52
  if it allows you to accomplish that mission and so
• 1:45:55
  autonomy it really changes the game on this stuff. It's
• 1:45:59
  not an incre mental change in tactics. It's a complete revolution.
• 1:46:03
  Speaker 1: What do you think that New Jersey shit was all about?
• 1:46:06
  Speaker 2: Like the unidentified the aero phenomenon, what was that all about? Well, so,
• 1:46:10
  what's so interesting about the New Jersey stuff? And you've
• 1:46:12
  you know, you're probably tracking this as well or better
• 1:46:15
  than me, But it is so perfectly aligned with things
• 1:46:20
  that we've seen in the past, Like you're familiar with
• 1:46:23
  all like the the the the over flights and hovering
• 1:46:26
  over nuclear facilities and military bases in the past. Here's
• 1:46:30
  here's what I think happened. I think that there was
• 1:46:33
  something really weird that was going on. I think briefly
• 1:46:37
  there was something that was really unexplained, and then what happened, unfortunately,
• 1:46:41
  is everyone found out about it online. Everybody got their drones,
• 1:46:44
  put them in their cars, drove out there to go
• 1:46:46
  out and try and fly it, and then I think
• 1:46:49
  that the next three weeks were a bunch of idiots
• 1:46:50
  with drones flying in circles looking at each other. I've
• 1:46:53
  seen all these videos. Ninety nine percent of them, it's
• 1:46:55
  pretty obvious that the thing they're looking at is another
• 1:46:58
  DGI drone that is also looking at them and saying,
• 1:47:02
  oh dude, oh shit. There It is like it was,
• 1:47:04
  it was. It was kind of this crazy media circus.
• 1:47:07
  I think there was something that was real, and then
• 1:47:10
  very very quickly it evolved into being just kind of
• 1:47:13
  a flash mob social media circus.
• 1:47:16
  Speaker 1: I think that's probably accurate because a lot of it
• 1:47:18
  was in Austin as well. It was like these enthusiasts
• 1:47:21
  were getting their drones out everywhere, that's right, and there
• 1:47:24
  was like it's drone time.
• 1:47:25
  Speaker 2: Well in a have you have you heard? Have you
• 1:47:27
  heard the oh what do they call it? There's a
• 1:47:33
  theory that someone's come up with. I can't I forget
• 1:47:34
  what it's. It's like, it's like it's like a proliferation
• 1:47:38
  masking or something. Have you heard the theory that modern
• 1:47:41
  drone technology was seated by aliens so that we would
• 1:47:45
  create a bunch of things that would be up in
• 1:47:47
  the sky that look kind of like their aircraft, so
• 1:47:50
  that they would basically act as cover for the real
• 1:47:52
  active Have you heard this theory? I don't really believe
• 1:47:54
  it because I actually have met with the people who
• 1:47:56
  kind of invented modern quad copters in flight controllers. Like
• 1:48:00
  it's it's, there's there, it's But the idea is very interesting,
• 1:48:05
  and it makes me wonder if there might be some
• 1:48:06
  truth to it, you know, elsewhere in the world, Like
• 1:48:09
  it sure is convenient. Imagine that you're an alien, you're
• 1:48:12
  regularly operating around military bases, nuclear infrastructure. Wouldn't it be
• 1:48:15
  convenient if there was something else that you people could
• 1:48:20
  explain away as you like, wouldn't it be great if there
• 1:48:22
  was something that also darted around and hovered in place
• 1:48:25
  and was very quiet and just little tiny flashing lights,
• 1:48:27
  Like wouldn't that be really convenient as a cover for
• 1:48:29
  what you are doing? Because these same activities in like
• 1:48:34
  the fifties and the sixties, there was nothing like that.
• 1:48:37
  Right Like back then, if you said, oh, yeah, I
• 1:48:39
  saw one hundred red lights orbiting around that nuclear facility,
• 1:48:43
  all you could say was, holy shit, what what in
• 1:48:46
  the world could that be? And today it's so he say, oh,
• 1:48:49
  it's it's just some drones. And so unfortunately it's a
• 1:48:52
  lot harder to know what's real. And I wish I
• 1:48:55
  could travel back in time, even just you know, ten
• 1:48:58
  or twenty years to you know, do the the Molder
• 1:49:01
  and Scully thing I talked about earlier, be the the
• 1:49:04
  the be the billionaire, you know, the billionaire James Bond
• 1:49:08
  X Files guy with a with with you know, a
• 1:49:11
  badge and a badge and a and a check book.
• 1:49:13
  I feel like you could really find some interesting stuff.
• 1:49:15
  Speaker 1: When you say that something weird was happening, Yeah in
• 1:49:20
  New Jersey? What do you? What do you? What are
• 1:49:22
  you saying?
• 1:49:23
  Speaker 2: So something that was observable by some sensors and not
• 1:49:27
  by other sensors. And that's really the common thread between
• 1:49:30
  a lot of these things, Like it'll show up on
• 1:49:32
  a on visual like I sees it with his eyes,
• 1:49:34
  and he sees it with a thermal sensor. But it
• 1:49:36
  is it showing up on radar or something. Well, they'll
• 1:49:39
  see it on radar, but they can't pick it up
• 1:49:41
  on other sensors. And of course there are some things
• 1:49:43
  where it's multisensor, But in general I say something weird,
• 1:49:47
  it's not obviously just drown or weird. And then it's
• 1:49:49
  acting in ways we don't expect, like how does something
• 1:49:51
  move so quickly and not have any skin heating? Why
• 1:49:54
  isn't it white hot? If it's moving that fast to
• 1:49:56
  the air, how can it change directions so quickly without
• 1:49:59
  the airframe tear apart? That's what I mean by weird.
• 1:50:01
  And look, I don't know what this stuff is.
• 1:50:04
  Speaker 1: Would you say, but weird? Like what was observed?
• 1:50:08
  Speaker 2: So the weird thing that was observed was primarily that
• 1:50:12
  there was something there in an area that shouldn't have
• 1:50:14
  been and that there shouldn't have been anything there should
• 1:50:17
  not have been anything that was able to endure for
• 1:50:19
  that long in that area with those characteristics, like these
• 1:50:23
  little tiny drones that cannot show up on radar and
• 1:50:26
  that can you know, kind of hide in place like that.
• 1:50:29
  They don't have hours and hours and hours of endurance,
• 1:50:32
  right they fly for twenty five thirty minutes tops, and
• 1:50:35
  then also they typically would need to be launched by
• 1:50:37
  something you know, right close to there, and the particular
• 1:50:39
  area it was in it would have been really hard
• 1:50:41
  to launch from one of the nearby areas, get over
• 1:50:43
  the water, get to there, and then stay there as
• 1:50:47
  long as it did. It's not the weirdest thing that
• 1:50:51
  people have seen, though, like the hell fire thing recently
• 1:50:54
  with the missile that was that was some of the
• 1:50:56
  weirdest stuff that I've seen.
• 1:50:57
  Speaker 1: That's so weird because it got hit and it just shook,
• 1:50:59
  it kept moving, and.
• 1:51:01
  Speaker 2: It's almost it looks almost like they were like pieces
• 1:51:03
  that it's like some reconstituted.
• 1:51:05
  Speaker 1: Right, like it took pieces of it.
• 1:51:07
  Speaker 2: So one of I don't know if you've done. Everyone
• 1:51:11
  wants to believe that it's aliens, and like that's what
• 1:51:13
  I want to believe. Of course, I don't think that
• 1:51:17
  it is a foreign adversary, Like I don't buy into
• 1:51:19
  the idea that the Chinese or the Russians have secretly
• 1:51:23
  figured this out. But then the question is, okay, well
• 1:51:26
  what is that? What does that leave? And I I
• 1:51:28
  feel like my gut is that it's something that is
• 1:51:31
  weirder than anything that anyone has made popular. Like just
• 1:51:35
  as an example, it's literally bleeding in from some parallel dimension.
• 1:51:41
  It's an energy signature, and it's coaligned by accident rather
• 1:51:44
  than intent, right, like it's there because there's something in
• 1:51:47
  its parallel universes similar to what we're doing, and that's
• 1:51:51
  why they're coaligned. Like, I know this sounds like weird,
• 1:51:53
  oh mumbo jumbo, but you just it seems like something
• 1:51:57
  like that even would be more likely. Did you ever
• 1:51:59
  read Michael Michael Michael Michael Critchen's novel The Sphere? Or
• 1:52:06
  was just Sphere?
• 1:52:07
  Speaker 1: No?
• 1:52:08
  Speaker 2: All right, you mind if I spoil Sphere for you?
• 1:52:10
  So there was a movie it was not nearly as
• 1:52:12
  good as the book. So in Sphere without spoiling the ending,
• 1:52:15
  the very beginning of it is you have this researcher
• 1:52:17
  who is brought out to this secret naval research facility
• 1:52:21
  in the Pacific Ocean because the Navy has discovered a
• 1:52:24
  massive object multiple kilometers long, lying on top of a shallow,
• 1:52:29
  a shallow coral reef on some atoll covered in coral,
• 1:52:33
  that appears to be a spacecraft, an alien spacecraft, and
• 1:52:37
  they figured out that when it crashed thousands of years
• 1:52:41
  ago there, it probably crashed onto an island, which then
• 1:52:44
  sea levels rose and then it became covered. So they
• 1:52:47
  buy this. They basically figure out it must have been
• 1:52:49
  there for about three or four thousand years this space ship,
• 1:52:53
  and so the Navy is going and they're trying to
• 1:52:55
  figure out what it is. They're scraping coral off this ship.
• 1:52:57
  They bring in this researcher, and as the researcher is
• 1:53:00
  being brought to the site, they discover for the first
• 1:53:03
  time what they've been looking for, a door into the mayor.
• 1:53:06
  They were scraping the cross looking for some way in
• 1:53:08
  through this ultra tough metallic alloy that had never been
• 1:53:12
  observed ever in nature or science. And then the big
• 1:53:17
  reveal of like the first arc of the book is
• 1:53:20
  they scrape off the coral. They look at the door. Incredible,
• 1:53:24
  it's a door. But then they look next to the
• 1:53:26
  door and there's a marking. And what does the marking
• 1:53:28
  say on this three thousand year old spaceship United States
• 1:53:33
  Navy and an American flag? And you know what's interesting
• 1:53:38
  is they never actually fully explain it, but the implication is,
• 1:53:43
  and what they believe happened, is that this was a
• 1:53:46
  time traveling craft that somehow went back in time, or alternately,
• 1:53:52
  that it's actually from some distant past civilization that traveled
• 1:53:56
  forward in time like maybe went to space. Did it
• 1:54:00
  some exploring and came back. Maybe the United States is
• 1:54:02
  actually a purpose reconstitution of the branding and social structures
• 1:54:07
  of some long lost society from five hundred million years ago.
• 1:54:11
  I'm not saying that's necessarily what's happening, but I think
• 1:54:14
  that that's actually more likely than it being aliens from
• 1:54:18
  another galaxy coming to where we are. It's just that
• 1:54:24
  is actually harder for me to believe than than something
• 1:54:27
  that is of our own little local soular sphere and
• 1:54:29
  just really truly bizarre and not being taken seriously.
• 1:54:32
  Speaker 1: Why is that harder to believe? Why is space travel
• 1:54:36
  harder to believe than time travel?
• 1:54:38
  Speaker 2: It's mostly all of the dimensions travel, so dimensional travel
• 1:54:42
  like that, that's totally believable. It's specifically, the thing I
• 1:54:45
  think is least likely is that using normal conventional physics
• 1:54:49
  that we understand it's people coming from another place that's
• 1:54:53
  many light years away coming to where we are. It's
• 1:54:55
  just it's a matter of we haven't observed anything that
• 1:54:58
  could do that. We haven't seen any synthetic material to that,
• 1:55:01
  we haven't seen any natural phenomenon.
• 1:55:03
  Speaker 1: That right, But if you just go back two hundred
• 1:55:04
  years ago, cell phones impossible.
• 1:55:07
  Speaker 2: But the difference here is that we're able to see
• 1:55:09
  millions of years of history of the universe coming into us, right.
• 1:55:12
  We were observing things that happened hundreds of years ago,
• 1:55:15
  thousands of years ago, millions of years ago from all
• 1:55:17
  over our galaxy and other galaxies. And there's a lot
• 1:55:21
  of markers that you would expect to see that would
• 1:55:24
  line up with how we understand intelligent life, and we're
• 1:55:27
  just not seeing them, And you're feeling like dark forest theory.
• 1:55:30
  You know, maybe maybe the civilizations that emanate those signals
• 1:55:33
  get whacked down before they become a threat to the
• 1:55:35
  dominant powers. Maybe everyone's hiding right. There are these theories
• 1:55:39
  as to why this is the case, and maybe we're
• 1:55:42
  being you know, if you've heard probably the theory about
• 1:55:44
  us being idiots for transmit. Like Stephen Hawking was of
• 1:55:47
  this opinion. He thought it was really stupid for us
• 1:55:50
  to try and make first context. His point was not
• 1:55:54
  just that it's probably a bad idea in general. His
• 1:55:57
  point was the fact that we haven't observed from anyone
• 1:56:01
  else suggests a lot of danger in doing so, Like
• 1:56:06
  it could mean that nobody's doing it. It could mean
• 1:56:08
  that anyone who does it gets wiped out. If you
• 1:56:11
  stand up, you get knocked down. And so it's just
• 1:56:15
  I have a hard time believing that it's conventional, conventional
• 1:56:19
  thing on another planet that comes to see us. That's
• 1:56:22
  not to say there isn't life out there in the universe.
• 1:56:24
  I think it's out there, but for whatever reason, it
• 1:56:26
  doesn't seem to be life that's capable of inter intersolar
• 1:56:30
  system or inter galactic travel.
• 1:56:33
  Speaker 1: But what do you think of people that talk about
• 1:56:35
  some sort of a potential science that eventually gets cracked
• 1:56:40
  where it's a gravity drive, like something that folds space time.
• 1:56:43
  Speaker 2: In that case, And so this is one of my favorite,
• 1:56:45
  favorite favorite theories about this, Like people talk about that
• 1:56:50
  there's a question like if you're actually folding space time
• 1:56:52
  or breaking space time, there's a question as to are
• 1:56:56
  you going to see visitors from another part of your
• 1:57:00
  plane of existence that are just using that technology to
• 1:57:03
  jump a few miles over to you or you more
• 1:57:05
  likely that that level of technology is one that allows
• 1:57:07
  people to come from in completely different planes of existence,
• 1:57:10
  different dimensions, different types of universes. We don't even begin
• 1:57:14
  to understand, Like if we can prove that we can
• 1:57:17
  manipulate space time like that. To me, that's an indicator
• 1:57:20
  that you can do even more than that. Again, I'm
• 1:57:22
  not saying it's impossible. I'm just I'm putting my chips
• 1:57:25
  on the table. As the things that I've seen, I'm
• 1:57:28
  more likely to believe that it is time travelers, unknown
• 1:57:31
  residents of Earth, people from another dimension, energy signals from
• 1:57:35
  another dimension bleed through of our own past, present in future.
• 1:57:39
  I put all those out a higher likelihood than they
• 1:57:42
  came from Andromeda. And now they're flying around our military basis.
• 1:57:45
  Speaker 1: Did you see that guy representative? Was his name, Tim Burchat?
• 1:57:50
  Is that his name? Who was talking about? There's five
• 1:57:53
  specific areas where these things seem to be emanating from
• 1:57:56
  the ocean.
• 1:57:57
  Speaker 2: I'm generally familiar, I've not I don't remember what those
• 1:58:01
  areas are. I know that one of them is very
• 1:58:04
  near me. It's the it's the Channel Islands Corridor. I
• 1:58:08
  tracked down this book that's out of print now called
• 1:58:10
  the Unidentified No It's it's the UFOs and USOS Unidentified
• 1:58:16
  Submersible Objects of the Santa Catalina Channel. This guy went around,
• 1:58:21
  well in this one area, tons of bizarre activity. This
• 1:58:25
  guy went around and he interviewed everybody who had a
• 1:58:28
  weird story, and he just basically compiled them. He said,
• 1:58:31
  what do you see, Describe it in detail, and he
• 1:58:33
  went back, like, these are like fishermen had stories from
• 1:58:36
  the eighties. And he talked to naval aviators, and he
• 1:58:38
  talked to uh, you know, local yachts men, and he
• 1:58:42
  talked to all these people and he points out in
• 1:58:45
  his prologue, these are all just the stories I've collected.
• 1:58:48
  I have not edited these stories. I have not modified
• 1:58:50
  these stories, and the people have verified that they are correct.
• 1:58:53
  And you you hear they are all on the record.
• 1:58:55
  This is their name. He didn't include anybody who is anonymous,
• 1:58:57
  because his point was, if it's anonymous, you could just
• 1:58:59
  claim I made it up. It has to be a
• 1:59:01
  real person who stands behind it. And he said, you'll
• 1:59:03
  notice that across about fifty years of stories, I've collected
• 1:59:07
  that there's extraordinary commonality between these stories. People who have
• 1:59:10
  never met, have no reason to work together, have no
• 1:59:13
  reason to have a common story, and yet they all
• 1:59:16
  observe very similar things. And that that when you see
• 1:59:20
  a one off, it's hard to draw a conclusion. When
• 1:59:23
  you see a pattern, that comes specifically, so specifically the
• 1:59:28
  Santa Catalina Channel, So you have basically Catalina Island off
• 1:59:31
  the coast of the of of California, and you have
• 1:59:34
  a few more channel islands that are stretched out on
• 1:59:36
  either end of it. The things that they were seeing
• 1:59:40
  were vehicles that were in the sky and then going
• 1:59:44
  into the water at high speed and appearing to like
• 1:59:48
  like not hitting them and slamming and exploding like you'd expect,
• 1:59:51
  but instead you still a huge flash, but just seamlessly
• 1:59:55
  transitioning into the water, lots of noise, lots of splash,
• 1:59:59
  but no like destroying themselves. And then similarly objects coming
• 2:00:03
  out of the water in the same way. And so
• 2:00:05
  they all describe these very very steep approach paths, so
• 2:00:10
  like not coming in like an aircraft landing on the water,
• 2:00:12
  but almost like coming out of the sky at these
• 2:00:15
  very steep angles and then just smashing into the water
• 2:00:18
  in a way you would expect would destroy anything, but
• 2:00:21
  then instead the vehicles are apparently fine and the water
• 2:00:24
  just parts around them as they rock. It in really
• 2:00:27
  really bizarre stuff, and it makes you wonder could that
• 2:00:30
  be related the same technology or process that allows the
• 2:00:34
  air because like you've seen these systems. They're not creating
• 2:00:36
  sonic booms. You don't see shock waves coming off of them,
• 2:00:40
  and they're not heated by the movement through the air.
• 2:00:42
  They're not they're not really really high being you've heard
• 2:00:44
  the stories about the SR seventy one. I mean they
• 2:00:46
  would get literally red hot on its leading edges, you know,
• 2:00:49
  the you know, tight glowing titanium. But these things are cold,
• 2:00:53
  and so is there some technology that can displace air
• 2:00:57
  around you that can also displace water around you? Is
• 2:01:01
  kind of the interesting theory there. But yeah, that particular
• 2:01:04
  I've dug into because it's only about twenty miles away
• 2:01:06
  from my house.
• 2:01:07
  Speaker 1: So the weird one is the breakaway civilization thing. Yes,
• 2:01:11
  that's the weird one, because that's the most ridiculous until
• 2:01:14
  you start thinking about it, and then you start looking
• 2:01:17
  back at past civilizations like ancient Egypt and some of
• 2:01:20
  the monolithic instruction around the world.
• 2:01:22
  Speaker 2: You read Chariots of the Gods.
• 2:01:24
  Speaker 1: I talked to Vondanakin once. Oh really, you have to
• 2:01:26
  Peter Teel's house and Peter Teel and Eric Weinstein brought
• 2:01:29
  me over for lunch.
• 2:01:30
  Speaker 2: Oh, that must have been so cool.
• 2:01:31
  Speaker 1: It was so cool, just just question him about stuff.
• 2:01:35
  Speaker 2: I read Chariots of the Gods when I was I
• 2:01:38
  don't know, probably like seven.
• 2:01:39
  Speaker 1: Or it's a fun movie too.
• 2:01:40
  Speaker 2: Oh, I haven't seen the movie. I didn't even notice.
• 2:01:42
  Speaker 1: An old ass movie.
• 2:01:43
  Speaker 2: It's an old ass book.
• 2:01:44
  Speaker 1: It was in the movie theaters.
• 2:01:46
  Speaker 2: So the interesting thing about it is like I've dug
• 2:01:48
  into a lot of that as I've gotten older, And yes,
• 2:01:50
  there are things in there where like we've now learned
• 2:01:53
  that they weren't true, but some of it holds up.
• 2:01:55
  There's still really bizarre stuff that was happening in ancient
• 2:01:59
  civilizations that is common between civilizations, and it doesn't really
• 2:02:04
  make sense. It doesn't really make sense when you think
• 2:02:07
  about it conventionally.
• 2:02:08
  Speaker 1: Well. Ben van Kirkwick, who runs Uncharted X, he was
• 2:02:13
  on the podcast recently and he was describing how there's
• 2:02:16
  specific hieroglyphs that indicate some sort of a star portal. Yep,
• 2:02:22
  that that's what the hieroglyphs are saying, like this is
• 2:02:25
  a star gate and it shows stars. It shows this
• 2:02:28
  portal and gate and this is It's written multiple times
• 2:02:34
  and they're trying to figure out, well, what is this
• 2:02:35
  trying to say, like, what is this.
• 2:02:36
  Speaker 2: What do you think about the theory that that there's
• 2:02:39
  other sentient that that the other sentient species of Earth
• 2:02:42
  might have better, better lore on this than us. Have
• 2:02:45
  you heard of this theory?
• 2:02:46
  Speaker 1: No, I don't want to.
• 2:02:48
  Speaker 2: So this is going to make me sound a bit
• 2:02:51
  like a little bit like a nutter, But I'm pretty
• 2:02:54
  deep on I'm more pretty deep down the rabbit hole.
• 2:02:56
  Speaker 1: We're out in better territory right now.
• 2:02:58
  Speaker 2: So people have oral trad that have passed down pretty well.
• 2:03:02
  But we've also observed that stories can pass down in
• 2:03:06
  other sentient species like whales, like dolphins, they have these
• 2:03:11
  whale calls that have been constant for a long time.
• 2:03:13
  They communicate with each other. One of the theories. And
• 2:03:16
  by the way, this is explored in like some of
• 2:03:18
  the old Star Trek movies. They explored this idea that
• 2:03:21
  the whales actually had better and more stable oral history
• 2:03:25
  than humanity. And it's not that crazy of an idea.
• 2:03:30
  And so you wonder, for example, if we could understand them,
• 2:03:35
  what would they have to say about any of this stuff?
• 2:03:37
  Like maybe they're not smart enough to have anything to say,
• 2:03:40
  but you know, do they have anything to say about
• 2:03:43
  for like it may not be obvious. It may not
• 2:03:45
  be we know about star people who are going through stargates,
• 2:03:48
  but for example, what if there's oral tradition or even
• 2:03:52
  genetic you know, programming around Oh we never go to
• 2:03:55
  this area, never go to this place, or never eat
• 2:03:58
  the food from this place. You know, could there be
• 2:04:02
  interesting leads that are buried in cultures that are not human.
• 2:04:06
  Speaker 1: Well, when we were talking about that before that you're
• 2:04:08
  working on interspecies communication.
• 2:04:10
  Speaker 2: That's right. So this hasn't actually officially launched yet. Hopefully
• 2:04:14
  they won't mind me talking about it. Are you feel
• 2:04:16
  with the X Prize foundation they Yeah, we were just
• 2:04:18
  talking about so, like if people aren't familiar. X Prize
• 2:04:21
  is basically this group that makes these big, significant monetary
• 2:04:24
  prizes for teams to compete against each other to do
• 2:04:27
  things that seem crazy. So like there was an X
• 2:04:29
  Prize for going to going to space on a reusable rocket.
• 2:04:34
  John Carmack was competing for that. Did you know that? Yes, yes,
• 2:04:39
  so like you inspired him, there was. They're doing some
• 2:04:42
  cancer X Prizes. There's one that's going on right now
• 2:04:45
  called the Wildfire X Prize, which is basically challenging companies
• 2:04:50
  to build a system that can detect wildfires anywhere on
• 2:04:53
  the planet in less than a minute from space and
• 2:04:56
  then deploy autonomous drones to extinguish him before they get
• 2:05:00
  large enough that they turn into a real wildfire. That
• 2:05:02
  is like, instead of responding to fires once they're too
• 2:05:04
  big to control, you're able to stop them in their
• 2:05:07
  in their tracks. And I mean, I mean, just like
• 2:05:09
  the Palisades fire created twenty billion dollars in damage. It's
• 2:05:13
  actually very cheap to do this relative to the damage
• 2:05:16
  that wildfire's costs. Anyway, the the X Prize guys came
• 2:05:20
  to me a while back and we were we were
• 2:05:23
  jamming on uh we were jamming on a few ideas
• 2:05:26
  for their next X Prize. And hopefully they don't mind
• 2:05:30
  me saying this, but initially I said, you guys should
• 2:05:32
  do an Uplift Xprize. So even with Uplift the science
• 2:05:35
  fiction concept, No, it's fallen out of favor. It was
• 2:05:37
  it was really popular for a while. There was an
• 2:05:40
  Uplift trilogy written by I can't remember the guy's name,
• 2:05:44
  but it was he wrote a whole book about non
• 2:05:46
  human consciousnesses like there was in his book, There's like
• 2:05:50
  plasma consciousnesses in the sun. Like you've probably heard these
• 2:05:53
  crazy ideas and you know, like intelligent beings that live
• 2:05:55
  in the sun. But one of it, the main thrust
• 2:05:58
  of Uplift is taking speed that are not sentient and
• 2:06:03
  lifting them up to the level of sentience and beyond.
• 2:06:06
  So like, can you take a dog and teach it
• 2:06:10
  to talk by genetically modifying it to make it smarter?
• 2:06:13
  Can you take whales and and and pass them up?
• 2:06:16
  And by the way, the Uplift Trilogy, they also explored
• 2:06:18
  this idea like star Trek of the whales having an
• 2:06:21
  oral tradition that was more stable than humanities and actually
• 2:06:24
  having like a lot of information that was concealed by
• 2:06:27
  from man until they uplifted those species. And I've always
• 2:06:31
  thought that was really interesting, And so I went to
• 2:06:32
  the Xprize said I want you guys to an Uplift
• 2:06:34
  Xprize first person to modify an animal to be smarter
• 2:06:39
  than a person and u and they actually said that's
• 2:06:42
  too crazy, that's a that's Xprizes. You know, X Prizes
• 2:06:47
  is trying to push the future. But for you know,
• 2:06:49
  for a variety of honestly quite good reasons, they said,
• 2:06:52
  this is not quite our jam. But one we are
• 2:06:54
  working towards is an interspecies Communication xprize and it's a
• 2:06:59
  prime to and I think that with modern AI advances,
• 2:07:03
  this is going to be a lot more possible to
• 2:07:05
  gather large amounts of data, reason about it, and figure
• 2:07:08
  out the vocabulary and grammar of these species. The idea
• 2:07:12
  is it's to it's the first team that can meet
• 2:07:15
  species where they are and communicate with them in a repeatable,
• 2:07:19
  verifiable way. This isn't teaching a dog to you know,
• 2:07:21
  say yes when you say, uh, you want to eat
• 2:07:25
  exactly now. This is this is bi directional communication, objective, verifiable, deterministic, predictable,
• 2:07:35
  And it's a really hard one, but I think a
• 2:07:37
  good exprize should be you shouldn't be picking things that
• 2:07:39
  are easy. You're picking things that are They seem like
• 2:07:41
  they're just out of reach and you just need to
• 2:07:44
  stretch for it. But there's been talk and if we
• 2:07:46
  do that, I'm going to be asking the whales.
• 2:07:48
  Speaker 1: Whales and dolphins they have a language, but we don't
• 2:07:50
  know what it is.
• 2:07:51
  Speaker 2: That's right.
• 2:07:51
  Speaker 1: So the idea is the using of AI. If you
• 2:07:54
  get to super general intelligence and AI can run all
• 2:07:59
  the patterns through some sort of a program and determine
• 2:08:03
  what is being.
• 2:08:04
  Speaker 2: Because we've we've learned some things, like we've learned how
• 2:08:09
  a lot of cetaceans can call names and you know,
• 2:08:12
  very very like very very unique ideas dials. Yep, they do.
• 2:08:16
  But we are so far away from cracking the code, right,
• 2:08:20
  I mean, like, isn't it crazy that we can crack
• 2:08:22
  basically any cipher, any crypto code. We can we can
• 2:08:26
  translate languages basically from scratch if we get a few
• 2:08:29
  words exactly, and and we have no idea how it works.
• 2:08:35
  And I don't mean like we don't know the words,
• 2:08:37
  but we know there are words. It's like there's weird
• 2:08:39
  things where they're like communicating the ultrasound with each other,
• 2:08:42
  and we think that like one is emitting and another
• 2:08:45
  is receiving and emitting, and then maybe there's information in
• 2:08:48
  the phase difference between those two, right, like they might
• 2:08:51
  be in code. That This is where the theory of
• 2:08:54
  of acoustic holograms as a primary means of cetation community
• 2:08:57
  came from. I don't believe in that anymore. I think
• 2:09:00
  that wasn't quite right. But like differences in phase between
• 2:09:04
  simultaneous transmit and receive ultrasonic communication. It seems to be
• 2:09:08
  that's part of it. So you can't just like listen
• 2:09:10
  for words. You're actually looking for differences in how these
• 2:09:13
  waves are interacting, and those are distance dependent direction dependent.
• 2:09:18
  We've got a lot of work cut out for us
• 2:09:20
  to understand, to understand animals.
• 2:09:22
  Speaker 1: That is so wild.
• 2:09:24
  Speaker 2: You're familiar with Alex the African gray parrot. No, oh,
• 2:09:28
  you've got to look into this. I mean, maybe you
• 2:09:30
  could even get one of his trainers on the show. So,
• 2:09:32
  Alex the African gray parrots are probably the smartest bird,
• 2:09:36
  definitely one of the smartest.
• 2:09:37
  Speaker 1: Animals, right up there with crows or ravens.
• 2:09:40
  Speaker 2: Smarter. They're very very smart. They can talk, they can reason.
• 2:09:44
  Alex the parent was so Alex the parrot was a
• 2:09:48
  uniquely smart African gray parrot. By the way, afron grays
• 2:09:52
  are usually not kept in captivity just because they're such
• 2:09:55
  a handful. There we go, that's out, that's there's there's Alex.
• 2:09:58
  Speaker 1: They're a handful because they're so intelligent.
• 2:10:00
  Speaker 2: It's like dogs that need to be exercised. They need
• 2:10:02
  to be intellectually stimulated, and most people just don't have
• 2:10:05
  the time to keep an African gray properly stimulated, so
• 2:10:09
  they start, say, they get depressed, they self harm, so
• 2:10:11
  that they're not recommended as a beginner parrot by any means. Now,
• 2:10:15
  Alex was interesting because he had a vocabulary, he understood grammar,
• 2:10:21
  and he is one of the only, I think the
• 2:10:23
  only animal who asked an existential question. And he actually
• 2:10:28
  did it right before he died. If I remember correctly,
• 2:10:30
  like he wasn't just saying give me food. He could
• 2:10:32
  say like tomorrow, I want this food. He could be
• 2:10:35
  But the existential question he asked was what's happening and
• 2:10:40
  where am I going? Which is and he had never
• 2:10:43
  asked those questions before. They were brand new, formulated questions
• 2:10:47
  that he asked very shortly before he passed. And so
• 2:10:51
  there's a lot of Now here's the other cool part.
• 2:10:53
  He's got a bird brain. He has a tiny little brain,
• 2:10:57
  and yet it has all that capacity. You've probably heard
• 2:10:59
  of people who have lost huge chunks of their brain
• 2:11:01
  and they reprogram and they seem to get by. Parrots
• 2:11:05
  like Alex suggest that you can get by with very
• 2:11:08
  little brain if it's oriented correctly. So imagine if I
• 2:11:11
  took a species like an African gray, and I modified
• 2:11:15
  certain elements of genetic code to cause its brain to
• 2:11:18
  be somewhat larger, somewhat more glucose consuming, so it has
• 2:11:22
  more energy, and then also have more folds. They're very
• 2:11:24
  smooth brain. What if I could have We know that
• 2:11:26
  folded brain tissue and the high density that creates on
• 2:11:29
  the neuronal surface is very good for intelligence. Like, could
• 2:11:33
  you make an African gray that is able to have
• 2:11:36
  a normal human level conversation? I think I think it's
• 2:11:39
  actually very close to that.
• 2:11:40
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 2:11:41
  Speaker 2: So this is one of those.
• 2:11:43
  Speaker 1: How many can you tell me? How many?
• 2:11:48
  Speaker 2: Very good? What do we keep going?
• 2:11:52
  Speaker 1: Can you tell me what's different? What's different?
• 2:11:55
  Speaker 2: Color?
• 2:11:56
  Speaker 1: What number is gray? Don't want to tell them? Well,
• 2:12:01
  tell me what number is great? And that what number
• 2:12:05
  is grey? What? Very good? Holy shit? Man? Right?
• 2:12:11
  Speaker 2: And I mean you're looking at intelligence that's on par
• 2:12:14
  by all of the traditional metrics with a human toddler,
• 2:12:18
  but with radically less brain tissue.
• 2:12:20
  Speaker 1: And it's also radically less body to control.
• 2:12:23
  Speaker 2: That's that's true. That and also a lot of like
• 2:12:25
  semi autonomy, like you know how some animals have more
• 2:12:28
  of their nervous system distributed, like you know octopuses have
• 2:12:31
  you know, autonomy in their muscles. It's actually similar for
• 2:12:34
  a lot of animals. And so one of one of
• 2:12:36
  the reasons I've always found AI so interesting is not
• 2:12:40
  just what we can do with AI, but learning how,
• 2:12:43
  like building a building a thinking system from scratch, I'm thinking,
• 2:12:46
  will help us understand how other systems think like we
• 2:12:50
  have it. There's never been an economic motive to really
• 2:12:53
  dig into how to understand how the brain fundamentally works.
• 2:12:57
  Speaker 1: Like people.
• 2:12:59
  Speaker 2: I know, there's people who are you probably think that's crazy,
• 2:13:01
  the sayd Pomber people want to cure brain cancer, they
• 2:13:03
  want to help with Alzheimer's. There's a difference between preserving
• 2:13:05
  brain function and truly understanding how the brain works. And yes,
• 2:13:09
  there's research labs here and there, but Google's never been
• 2:13:12
  funding them to the tune of tens of billions, right,
• 2:13:15
  Meta's never been funding them to the tune of hundreds
• 2:13:17
  of billions. AI is the first time that humanity has
• 2:13:20
  ever dedicated a huge amount of resources to understanding what
• 2:13:25
  thought is, how to make it synthetically, and how to
• 2:13:29
  make it better. And we're gonna make a lot of
• 2:13:30
  mistakes along the way, But I think I think that
• 2:13:33
  understanding how to make synthetic brains via AI is going
• 2:13:36
  to teach us how to make parrots like Alex a
• 2:13:39
  lot smarter too.
• 2:13:40
  Speaker 1: Well, when you start talking about stuff like this and
• 2:13:43
  you start talking about genetically engineering and animal to be
• 2:13:46
  is intelligent or more intelligent than a human, it brings
• 2:13:49
  me to the weirder theory about human evolution. Sure that
• 2:13:53
  we're a product of accelerated evolution and that some superior
• 2:13:57
  intelligence would do exactly what you're saying.
• 2:14:01
  Speaker 2: That's my favorite part about uplift is that if you
• 2:14:05
  can prove that it works, you open up a whole pot,
• 2:14:09
  the whole avenue of theories that have been treated as crazy.
• 2:14:13
  Like right now, if you if you like what you
• 2:14:15
  just said about you know, you know, augmented evolution of humans.
• 2:14:20
  It's a crazy person thing, right, Like right, But if
• 2:14:23
  we are literally sitting there talking to our dogs and
• 2:14:27
  they're You're like, like, isn't it gonna be like who
• 2:14:30
  could think that's a crazy theory to say, well, I
• 2:14:32
  mean we did it. The moment that we had technology
• 2:14:35
  that was capable, we did it. Wouldn't probably any species
• 2:14:39
  do that? Like, doesn't that suggest that when you get
• 2:14:41
  smart enough you want to make things somewhat in your
• 2:14:44
  own image. It gets back to Skynet earlier, you know, right, Like,
• 2:14:46
  if we make animals more into our own image, is
• 2:14:50
  it really crazy to think that we are the result
• 2:14:52
  of something like that? And actually, so I'm a religious person.
• 2:14:55
  I'm a Christian, and I feel like what you see
• 2:15:00
  where God was created or man was created in God's image,
• 2:15:04
  it's I feel like it's reflected in our desire to
• 2:15:06
  create things in our own image. And so I think
• 2:15:09
  I think there's a certain beautiful symmetry there. It's where
• 2:15:13
  it's if we're if we're doing it, it's actually easier
• 2:15:16
  for people to believe. I think that it happened to us.
• 2:15:19
  It's easier for people to believe that we have a
• 2:15:21
  creator who wanted to create something in his own image
• 2:15:24
  when we are doing the same.
• 2:15:25
  Speaker 1: Well, also, just this sentiment that you were discussing of
• 2:15:30
  taking an animal and making it more intelligent. If we
• 2:15:33
  found a planet, if let's say we get to you know,
• 2:15:37
  a couple thousand years of technological evolution past where we're
• 2:15:40
  at now, we can travel to other galaxies and we
• 2:15:43
  find primates. Yeah, and we're like, well, they're they're on
• 2:15:45
  the way. They're on the way, but they need like
• 2:15:47
  three hundred million years before they get to where we are.
• 2:15:50
  Speaker 2: We wouldn't want to wait.
• 2:15:51
  Speaker 1: Why would we wait? I mean, maybe that's just a
• 2:15:53
  seating process. Maybe that's something that happens all throughout the universe,
• 2:15:57
  where these you know, intelligent farmers just drop seeds in
• 2:16:03
  various areas, just take animals, manipulate them, turn them into
• 2:16:06
  something that's superior, and that has a lust for innovation,
• 2:16:09
  which is one of the weirder things about us. We
• 2:16:11
  were talking about this last night at the Mothership. We
• 2:16:13
  were on the green room. We're talking about like one
• 2:16:15
  thing that human beings share in common with everything we do.
• 2:16:18
  Everyone's trying to make the best version of everything, yes,
• 2:16:22
  and better versions. Whether it's sports, the athletes and today
• 2:16:25
  are better than the athletes of twenty years ago, whether
• 2:16:27
  it's computers, whether it's televisions, any kind of technology, music,
• 2:16:32
  everything wants to be better than anything before. So we're
• 2:16:35
  constantly trying to make better stuff.
• 2:16:37
  Speaker 2: I would even go beyond it's I think it's not
• 2:16:39
  even better. It's that we seek novel things, yes, and
• 2:16:42
  like humans are programmed to seek novelty, and I think
• 2:16:45
  it's clearly been an evolutionarily advantageous trait. Societies that foster
• 2:16:51
  seeking of novel experiences build stronger cultures, stronger technologies, and then,
• 2:16:57
  by the way, the groups that don't seek novel end
• 2:17:00
  up becoming stagnant. Yes, you could even argue that many
• 2:17:03
  of the cultures that remain stagnant, like you kind of
• 2:17:05
  saw plateauing, happened with, for example, a lot of Native
• 2:17:08
  American tribes. I think that it was a loss of
• 2:17:12
  drive for novelty. And that's not to say that there
• 2:17:15
  are a lesser culture, but certainly they were not focused
• 2:17:18
  on seeking novel experiences.
• 2:17:20
  Speaker 1: What's really fascinating, we think about human beings in particular,
• 2:17:24
  is that people that lived in those tribes did not
• 2:17:28
  want to civilize, and that the people that were even
• 2:17:31
  captured by Indians, a lot of them wanted to stay yep,
• 2:17:36
  because they found that to resonate more with being a
• 2:17:39
  human being, because we had lived so many thousands of
• 2:17:43
  years as hunter gatherers that that resonated with your being.
• 2:17:48
  It seemed more spiritually in tune with being a human
• 2:17:51
  being than living in a city and wearing a suit.
• 2:17:54
  Speaker 2: And I think anyone who's food from a store, anyone
• 2:17:56
  who's ever been on a camping trip, he understands what
• 2:17:59
  you're talking about.
• 2:18:00
  Speaker 1: But imagine that you can whole life.
• 2:18:01
  Speaker 2: I feel it people are not meant to live in.
• 2:18:05
  Speaker 1: Great vice piece. Back when wece was really interesting, it's
• 2:18:09
  called Heinmo's Arctic Adventure, and is this guy who he
• 2:18:14
  lives north of the Arctic Circle or near the Arctic Circle,
• 2:18:17
  and he has a cabin up there, and he's grandfathered
• 2:18:22
  in and he's been there forever. I think he started
• 2:18:24
  working there in the nineteen seventies. This guy, he didn't
• 2:18:27
  even know about nine to eleven until way later someone
• 2:18:30
  showed him a picture of what happened. He has a
• 2:18:32
  television and VHS tapes and a log cabin and powered
• 2:18:37
  by a generator, and all he does is hunt caribou
• 2:18:40
  and fish, and he's very intelligent. And so this nerdy
• 2:18:44
  reporter from fucking Williamsburg is hanging out with this guy
• 2:18:47
  or wherever he's from, and this guy's explaining how this
• 2:18:51
  resonates with being a human being, like this is a
• 2:18:53
  much more satisfying way of living. And I think that
• 2:18:56
  this is how people are supposed to live.
• 2:18:58
  Speaker 2: That's so interesting. On the one hand, I agree, but
• 2:19:00
  then I love like, I mean, I love that human
• 2:19:03
  the human race has doing a pretty good job of
• 2:19:05
  seeking novelty, because that's what if we all hunt, if
• 2:19:07
  we all I mean, maybe it's that, uh, maybe it's that,
• 2:19:11
  you know, maybe hunting caribous what makes us happy. But
• 2:19:13
  you still need the guy who wants a lot to
• 2:19:15
  go for something else.
• 2:19:16
  Speaker 1: But you also need a singer. You also need a
• 2:19:18
  guy like to be a carpenter. You need you need
• 2:19:21
  all types of different human beings and different personality traits
• 2:19:25
  and different interests to make this whole experiment of civilization work.
• 2:19:29
  Speaker 2: What do you think about nostalgia Because I've been thinking
• 2:19:32
  about this a lot for variety of reasons, and it's
• 2:19:34
  kind of the opposite of what we're talking about. We're
• 2:19:35
  talking like novel experiences, new things, and you know, like
• 2:19:39
  like driving towards the future.
• 2:19:41
  Speaker 1: Mm hmm.
• 2:19:42
  Speaker 2: There's some people who I feel like look down on
• 2:19:44
  nostalgia that I go, you're obsessed with the past kind
• 2:19:47
  of needlessly. It's feel good. I feel like like obsessing
• 2:19:50
  over the past I think is healthy in a lot
• 2:19:52
  of ways, and I think it's even good to look
• 2:19:55
  at the past with rose tinted glasses, because there's so
• 2:19:58
  much that we could learn from in the past and
• 2:20:00
  should learn from the past if we didn't look at
• 2:20:02
  things with rose tinted glasses. My theory is that the new,
• 2:20:06
  like imagine, you look at the future possibilities and the past,
• 2:20:09
  you know, teachings identically with no favoring. It feels like
• 2:20:14
  you're naturally going to prefer the new thing that hasn't
• 2:20:16
  really shown all the downfalls yet. I'm I guess I'm
• 2:20:19
  getting I'm a big fan of nostalgia. I'm a big
• 2:20:21
  fan of looking at the parts of the past that
• 2:20:24
  worked and then lionizing those and reminding people why they worked. Like,
• 2:20:28
  there's a lot of people who actually say this is fascist.
• 2:20:30
  Now have you heard of this, the nostalgias. Nostalgia is fascist.
• 2:20:34
  If you google it, you look up nostalgia is fascist,
• 2:20:37
  you will find this is like, this is like a
• 2:20:39
  cutting edge theory of the last year. They're saying, oh,
• 2:20:42
  all this appeal to, you know, appeal to the nineties.
• 2:20:46
  It's pro fascist because they're trying to make you believe
• 2:20:49
  that there was a better time to believe that going
• 2:20:51
  backwards in society. Is is a good thing. As if
• 2:20:56
  the nineteen nineties were like some like hotbed of injustice
• 2:20:59
  and and and oppression.
• 2:21:01
  Speaker 1: That's interesting. I think the nostalgia is fun. But I
• 2:21:04
  don't spend a lot of time thinking about the past.
• 2:21:08
  I do when it comes to art, yep, I do
• 2:21:10
  when it comes to music, and particularly the role of
• 2:21:13
  psychedelics in the influence of culture that happened in the
• 2:21:16
  nineteen sixties, which I think is the greatest cultural shift
• 2:21:20
  of change in recorded history. There's something difference in the
• 2:21:24
  fifties and the sixties, just this radical change in the
• 2:21:27
  way people saw life, and how many people were just
• 2:21:30
  like exiting normal society, and then how they threw water
• 2:21:34
  on that with the passing of the Psychedelics Act in
• 2:21:36
  nineteen seventy. But I think that it.
• 2:21:39
  Speaker 2: Seems like things are going in a different direct. So
• 2:21:40
  just you know, I'm straight atge. I don't use any drugs.
• 2:21:43
  I didn't drink alcohol till very recently. I just had
• 2:21:46
  my first kid.
• 2:21:46
  Speaker 1: He's a year old, and you started drinking.
• 2:21:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah, so you had a kid, yeah, yeah, it was
• 2:21:50
  it was like my whole life, no drinking, no nicotine,
• 2:21:52
  no caffeine, no alcoholic drugs. Yeah, I had a kid
• 2:21:54
  and I decided to start time to start drinking.
• 2:21:57
  Speaker 1: Why is that? Why is that? It just?
• 2:22:00
  Speaker 2: You? Look, you have enough, you have enough hard, hard
• 2:22:03
  nights and hard days taking care of the kid, and
• 2:22:05
  you say, you know, I totally get it, man, I
• 2:22:07
  totally understand why everyone's why everyone's having beers on the weekend.
• 2:22:10
  Speaker 1: There's certainly a place for it. There's certainly a place
• 2:22:12
  for it.
• 2:22:12
  Speaker 2: But I'm curious why why Nostalgia and art, I'm not disagreeing. Actually,
• 2:22:16
  I think I mean I showed you earlier, earlier.
• 2:22:19
  Speaker 1: I'm completely fascinated with the nineteen sixties in terms of
• 2:22:22
  I'm a huge fan of nineteen sixties automobiles. You're elected
• 2:22:26
  when you were you worn sixty seven? Okay? Interesting? When
• 2:22:31
  I was a kid in high school, which is really
• 2:22:34
  I was in high school in the nineteen eighties, So
• 2:22:36
  I went to high school. First year was eighty one,
• 2:22:38
  which is not that far away from nineteen seventy, Right,
• 2:22:42
  that's eleven years. Like an eleven year old car. If
• 2:22:45
  you had a twenty sixteen Toyota, it looks exactly like
• 2:22:51
  a twenty twenty five Toyota. There's not much difference at all.
• 2:22:53
  You would have to be like a car nut to
• 2:22:56
  notice the difference. But when I was a kid in
• 2:22:59
  nineteen eighty one, someone drove by to nineteen seventy Chevelle.
• 2:23:02
  Everybody stopped and stared at like whoa. Yep, it was
• 2:23:05
  like that nostalgia was real because we recognized that something
• 2:23:08
  had happened to American manufacturing, particularly in automobile manufacturing, where
• 2:23:12
  they just lost the magic. Yep, they had magic in
• 2:23:16
  the nineteen sixties, the Corvette.
• 2:23:18
  Speaker 2: The cars art.
• 2:23:19
  Speaker 1: Yes, yeah, I mean they were engineering, they were art,
• 2:23:22
  They were an expression of American culture, and it went away. Yep,
• 2:23:27
  it went away in the nineteen sevenies. They turned into
• 2:23:29
  dog shit.
• 2:23:29
  Speaker 2: Well see, this is kind of what I'm talking about
• 2:23:31
  where I said talk about the importance of nostalgia, because
• 2:23:33
  like you want to look back at the things that worked,
• 2:23:35
  and like I think a lot of these companies they'd
• 2:23:37
  they would have you just forget that it ever was
• 2:23:39
  works of art, these cars could be this way. I
• 2:23:42
  think we need to learn from that and not let
• 2:23:45
  them because like now cars are turning into like subscriber
• 2:23:48
  based appliances, Like.
• 2:23:51
  Speaker 1: That's kind of gross. I've heard that there's some cars
• 2:23:54
  that charge you money if you want to use Apple CarPlay.
• 2:23:56
  That's right.
• 2:23:57
  Speaker 2: Well, well there's some that are also charging you to
• 2:23:59
  you use all of your uh, your your heating and
• 2:24:03
  cooling functionality. There's ones they're adding like you can.
• 2:24:06
  Speaker 1: Just charge me more for your car and don't fuck me.
• 2:24:09
  Speaker 2: Well, some of them, you're paying more. It's paying more
• 2:24:10
  to unlock more horsepower. It's like, but you're making the car.
• 2:24:14
  It has the parts, and you're not crazy. You know,
• 2:24:16
  a lot of these and and then a lot of
• 2:24:18
  these business approaches are actually coming, i think, not from
• 2:24:21
  the car industry. They're stealing them from the tech and
• 2:24:23
  also the gaming industry. Like there was a time when
• 2:24:26
  these things people were making video games. They would make
• 2:24:29
  a game, you'd buy it, you owned video game, and
• 2:24:32
  and like and that was it and they made the
• 2:24:33
  best game they could to sell you at a store.
• 2:24:36
  And these days they're making games and and and and
• 2:24:40
  also a lot of apps and like these subscription experience
• 2:24:43
  you have to keep paying money. They're making content that's
• 2:24:46
  just farm to keep you hooked on the drip continuously.
• 2:24:49
  You don't see these masterpieces the way that you used to,
• 2:24:52
  and uh, that's that's something I've been I've been super
• 2:24:56
  passionate about, Like.
• 2:24:57
  Speaker 1: It is gross that they do that. They just hook
• 2:25:00
  Q in because they know you're hooked already, that's right.
• 2:25:02
  And so you want the new BMW or whatever the
• 2:25:05
  car is, and you know like, oh, I'll just pay
• 2:25:07
  the monthly. Who gives a fuck, It's just one more
• 2:25:09
  subscription that comes out of my auto pay. Yeah.
• 2:25:12
  Speaker 2: I feel like there needs to be a bit of
• 2:25:14
  a concerted pushback from people who remember before we're gone. Yes,
• 2:25:19
  like like one of the things that's crazy to me,
• 2:25:22
  Like you know, like for you, it's cars, because you
• 2:25:24
  know that's that's uh, you grew up. You grew up
• 2:25:27
  during that shift as well. The industry kind of to
• 2:25:29
  your point, lost something. But like I grew up with
• 2:25:34
  like the Nintendo Game Boy and a lot of these
• 2:25:36
  things were like the it was like the early days
• 2:25:38
  of gaming where it was all these passionate people doing
• 2:25:41
  things because they really desperately wanted to. It was before
• 2:25:44
  all the bean counters got in, it was before all
• 2:25:45
  the regulators got in. It was before the people figured
• 2:25:48
  out how to turn it into this. You used to
• 2:25:50
  be able to make a game with a dozen people.
• 2:25:52
  And of course you could still do that today. I
• 2:25:53
  don't want tomanticide it too much, but like you could
• 2:25:56
  make a best selling game back then with you know,
• 2:25:59
  a dozen people. And these are all crazy people who
• 2:26:01
  could be making more money working in let's say, like
• 2:26:04
  farming or industrial manufacturing, and instead they decided to be
• 2:26:07
  game programmers. Today you'll have game teams. There are thousands
• 2:26:10
  of people and it's all you know, it's become a
• 2:26:13
  very high paying, high prestige job. It's just a it's
• 2:26:16
  a it's a it's a totally it's a totally different universe.
• 2:26:18
  Speaker 1: And that's also a giant business now, right, it's been
• 2:26:21
  proven that it's a huge money maker.
• 2:26:23
  Speaker 2: It's purely it's totally financialized now like it's it's optimized
• 2:26:27
  by the be encounters. How are we going to make
• 2:26:29
  five billion dollars in profit? This r?
• 2:26:31
  Speaker 1: And the video game industry is bigger than the movie industry, right.
• 2:26:34
  Speaker 2: It is, and actually and it's and it has been
• 2:26:36
  even for a while. I think that happened, Like I
• 2:26:38
  want to say, it was like six or seven years
• 2:26:40
  ago that the movie that the games industry I showed
• 2:26:43
  you before we came on. I have this knockoff of
• 2:26:46
  the Nintendo Game Boy that I made. I remember I
• 2:26:49
  talked about that web forum.
• 2:26:50
  Speaker 1: I started with that superior game Boy feel it just
• 2:26:53
  holding on to it.
• 2:26:54
  Speaker 2: So actually this one is even nicer than the ones
• 2:26:57
  that we normally sell. This is my personal and edition one.
• 2:27:00
  So this is made with the same alloys we use
• 2:27:03
  in our attack drones, and the coding on it is
• 2:27:06
  a is a wear proof Sarah Coo ceramic.
• 2:27:08
  Speaker 1: It feels.
• 2:27:11
  Speaker 2: So that the screen lens instead of plastic like on
• 2:27:13
  the original Game Boy. It's actually lab grown sapphire crystal.
• 2:27:16
  It's the largest piece of sapphire crystal in any product.
• 2:27:21
  And then exactly but then we made a new version
• 2:27:24
  of Tetris for it.
• 2:27:25
  Speaker 1: A that's incredible.
• 2:27:28
  Speaker 2: But but the the thing so is interesting about this
• 2:27:32
  is like I turn it on, that game is instantly
• 2:27:34
  going like there's no ads, so subscriptions. It doesn't say
• 2:27:37
  log in and download the updates. Let us show you
• 2:27:40
  the pre roll ads. Now you need to make a
• 2:27:41
  user account and put in all your user preferences and
• 2:27:43
  give us acts to your email and give us access
• 2:27:45
  to your social media. If you want to have the
• 2:27:46
  extra booster packs, like, it's just access to your social media. Oh,
• 2:27:50
  that's a very common thing now. A lot of games
• 2:27:53
  they are heavily incentivizing linking your social media accounts to
• 2:27:57
  your game accounts and letting them see your contacts, your friends. Well,
• 2:28:00
  because they want all that data. They want to know
• 2:28:02
  who they can market to, They want to see what
• 2:28:04
  your demographics are. They want to say what is this customer? Like,
• 2:28:06
  how can you opt out? So there are some games
• 2:28:10
  that require you to have social media integration. There's other
• 2:28:13
  people with dark patterns, so like they're there, there are
• 2:28:16
  these there are these patterns that exist in social media
• 2:28:20
  design and app design that steer you down a particular direction,
• 2:28:24
  and so they don't force you to do it. But
• 2:28:26
  the average user, unless they're trying to fight their way
• 2:28:29
  out of it, is going to do it. So, for example,
• 2:28:30
  I'll be logging into a game I've just down in
• 2:28:32
  Overwatch too, and it says you need to log in.
• 2:28:35
  You can either go through this extremely convoluted process of
• 2:28:39
  creating a new only Overwatch Tube Blizzard account, or you
• 2:28:43
  can click the button that says log in with Google
• 2:28:46
  or log in with Facebook, and then it's you click
• 2:28:49
  it and it says to do this, you have to
• 2:28:52
  give us permission to see this, this, this, this, this this,
• 2:28:55
  And look, you and I care about this stuff because
• 2:28:57
  we're I think we're relics who remember when privacy was
• 2:28:59
  a thing and when some things are for yourself. A
• 2:29:01
  lot of these kids they just don't care.
• 2:29:03
  Speaker 1: They just click it.
• 2:29:03
  Speaker 2: You talk, you talk to the gen Z kids and
• 2:29:05
  it's like, well, why do you want are you going
• 2:29:07
  to give it away? They say, well, like they don't
• 2:29:10
  see value in it, and they grew up with that
• 2:29:12
  as the norm, right, And that's why I say it's
• 2:29:14
  important to remember when it wasn't the norm.
• 2:29:16
  Speaker 1: Do people get dummy accounts so that they can give
• 2:29:18
  a dummy account that there are to that.
• 2:29:20
  Speaker 2: There are people who do it, but most people don't.
• 2:29:24
  And also here, like the thing is, they make it
• 2:29:26
  where there's even reasons where you want it to be
• 2:29:27
  tied to your social media so they want to gather
• 2:29:30
  lots of information and you know, get you plugged into
• 2:29:31
  their marketing ecosystem and they say, oh, if you if
• 2:29:34
  you log in with this social media account, then it
• 2:29:36
  can we can automatically add all of your friends to
• 2:29:41
  your in game friends list. So you don't have to
• 2:29:43
  go and manually invite them. So they make it like
• 2:29:45
  it is a convenience feature. But the thing is they
• 2:29:47
  could do that without storing all that data and giving
• 2:29:50
  them persistent access to all your social media accounts and
• 2:29:53
  seeing everything that you're posting. Some of these apps even
• 2:29:55
  you give them permission to post on your behalf. Oh,
• 2:29:58
  and what they do is like this. This was innovated
• 2:30:01
  kind of by like the Farmville stuff. Do you remember Farmville?
• 2:30:04
  And you had to say the reason was so viral
• 2:30:06
  is when you would do stuff in Farmville, it would
• 2:30:09
  literally post on your wall and say, oh, Palmer just
• 2:30:12
  did this, Palmer just visited Joe's farm and helped him
• 2:30:15
  do this. Those tactics have evolved way beyond to make
• 2:30:20
  these things very sticky, very addictive. So, look, you can
• 2:30:22
  make a fake account, you can make a burner account,
• 2:30:25
  and there's like one percent of people who will ever
• 2:30:27
  think of doing something like that, and so.
• 2:30:30
  Speaker 1: So for them, it's just about mass And.
• 2:30:33
  Speaker 2: I wouldn't mind so much if it was just about
• 2:30:34
  making money, Like making money is fine. Like I'm a
• 2:30:38
  believer in the free market generally, I'm a believer in capitalism, strongly.
• 2:30:42
  But then the problem is you have this combination of
• 2:30:45
  capitalism driven capture efforts compare combined with people who don't
• 2:30:50
  care about making money nearly so much as pushing their
• 2:30:53
  particular social ideals. Like you've probably seen this in Hollywood.
• 2:30:58
  You certainly see it in the games industry, where you
• 2:31:00
  have people who are joining the industry not because they
• 2:31:02
  want to make great games, not even because they want
• 2:31:05
  to make money, And I say, like making great games
• 2:31:07
  is the best reason. Making money is an acceptable reason.
• 2:31:11
  It's because they want to, uh, you know, bring about
• 2:31:14
  greater equity and representation of people that look like them,
• 2:31:18
  and like that's fine to have as a thing in
• 2:31:20
  the back of your mind. But there's people who are
• 2:31:22
  joining where that is what they want to do, and
• 2:31:25
  anyone who's against it, they're gonna berate them. Anyone in
• 2:31:27
  the company who says, I actually think we should make
• 2:31:30
  games for our customers, not the people you wish were
• 2:31:32
  our customers. Like, let's make games for the guys who
• 2:31:35
  buy our games, not the moms you wish were buying
• 2:31:39
  our games. And people like that are being ejected out
• 2:31:41
  of companies. It's very I mean, it's very politically incorrect.
• 2:31:44
  There's a question.
• 2:31:45
  Speaker 1: Well, that's the bud Light dilemma. It's exactly, well, they
• 2:31:48
  tried to make bud Light for people who don't want
• 2:31:51
  bud Light. It's just make fun of the bud Light people.
• 2:31:53
  Speaker 2: It's the mythical audiences, the mystical mainstream audience. They say
• 2:31:57
  they and you know, it's even worse in gaming because
• 2:32:00
  they'll say things like, oh, you know, fifty percent of
• 2:32:03
  gamers are are are you know, stay at home moms?
• 2:32:07
  And you're like, what that obviously isn't true. And what
• 2:32:10
  it is is it's something like there's a lot of
• 2:32:11
  stay a home homes who've played Candy Crush a few times,
• 2:32:14
  and like there's a lot of them, and they're like,
• 2:32:16
  therefore we need to build that market. Okay, Like I
• 2:32:20
  don't want to get into a fight over like what
• 2:32:21
  a gamer is, but what do you think sounds like
• 2:32:24
  a better business plan to go after the young men
• 2:32:28
  primarily who buy a dozen fifty dollars games a year,
• 2:32:33
  or the mom who once spent five dollars on Candy Crush,
• 2:32:36
  like you know, and there's there's kind of and and
• 2:32:40
  if you say that, if you put it the way
• 2:32:41
  I just put it, They're like, that's so sexist of you.
• 2:32:44
  Why don't you want to bring in new audiences. I
• 2:32:47
  saw this when I was in I saw this when
• 2:32:49
  I was in Silicon Valley. What I called it was
• 2:32:51
  I said, there's too many people who drink Starbucks and
• 2:32:55
  not enough who drink Mountain Dew. And you know exactly
• 2:32:57
  what I mean when I say that, Like, it's it's
• 2:32:59
  just it's a it's it's been a really bizarre thing
• 2:33:03
  to watch in all of these different in all of
• 2:33:05
  these different industries.
• 2:33:07
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a mind virus. It's captured universities and then
• 2:33:10
  it bled out into corporations.
• 2:33:12
  Speaker 2: One of my one of my favorite questions to ask
• 2:33:14
  people is, uh, you know, start starting a company is hard.
• 2:33:18
  You can't You'll fail most of the time, even when
• 2:33:21
  you don't constrain yourself to trying to, you know, change
• 2:33:24
  change the social system. Like, look, if you could if
• 2:33:26
  you could make it where there's if you could make
• 2:33:29
  it where there's all those like all those moms all
• 2:33:32
  get into games and it was free, Like that would
• 2:33:34
  be great, but it's not. It's a trade off. Right,
• 2:33:36
  you have to take resources you would have put on
• 2:33:37
  your customer, your real customers and put it towards them.
• 2:33:40
  One question I ask people is just ideologically as okay,
• 2:33:44
  imagine your job is to build UH is to build
• 2:33:47
  a UH a corporate building for a company, and the
• 2:33:51
  company you know exactly who they are. You know how
• 2:33:53
  many men there are? You know how many women are?
• 2:33:55
  We don't have to say how many there are, like
• 2:33:57
  we're not don't even know. Don't make it about one
• 2:33:59
  gender verse is another. It's just there are lots of men,
• 2:34:02
  there's lots of women. I won't pick a number. When
• 2:34:04
  you're designing this building, should you have the number of
• 2:34:09
  bathrooms that would best serve the actual gender makeup of
• 2:34:14
  the company, that would allow them to use the bathroom
• 2:34:16
  and get back to their desk without waiting in line,
• 2:34:19
  or would you do anything else? Like would you pursue
• 2:34:22
  a different strategy? And if it's different, say what would
• 2:34:25
  your strategy be? And many people say, well, I would
• 2:34:27
  build it, you know, perfect fifty to fifty. And if
• 2:34:29
  they say, well, I'm doing that because it's you know,
• 2:34:30
  the easiest way to do it, and I'm think, okay,
• 2:34:31
  that's fine. But if they say, well I would you know,
• 2:34:34
  I would I would hope that I would straw, I
• 2:34:36
  want to create an environment where it will it should
• 2:34:40
  eventually be fifty percent men fifty percent women. I say, okay,
• 2:34:43
  so wait, you're gonna you have a company ninety percent men,
• 2:34:45
  ten percent women. You think the men should have to
• 2:34:47
  wait in line five times as long as the bathroom
• 2:34:50
  because someday that might make more women want to work
• 2:34:52
  at this company. And it's one of those it's one
• 2:34:55
  of those really interesting dividing questions where it's basically, do
• 2:34:58
  you want to solve the problem that allows your business
• 2:35:00
  to succeed or are you trying to achieve totally parallel
• 2:35:05
  social aims at the expense of the business. And companies
• 2:35:09
  are hiring a lot of people who think about it
• 2:35:11
  that way. They don't see their role as to come
• 2:35:13
  in and make the company better or to make a
• 2:35:15
  better product their customer. They see it as to come
• 2:35:17
  in and affect that change, even if it tanks the
• 2:35:19
  company of the process. Have you seen how did that happen?
• 2:35:23
  Speaker 1: Dude?
• 2:35:24
  Speaker 2: I don't know where that's common. I think that probably
• 2:35:27
  you let I mean, there's a lot of theories I
• 2:35:30
  can give you. Mine it was the zero interest rate
• 2:35:34
  phenomenon theory are you familiar with this, the zero interest
• 2:35:37
  rate phenom ZERP they call it, some people call the
• 2:35:40
  zero interest rate period. So ZERP was this period of
• 2:35:45
  time that we've really seen over the last fifteen years
• 2:35:48
  up until very recently, where money was basically free to borrow.
• 2:35:53
  That's where you've seen so much economic growth. You've seen
• 2:35:56
  a lot of artificially propped up in the tech, in
• 2:35:58
  the media industry, I think a lot a lot of
• 2:36:00
  these streaming plays have been propped up by ZERP. When
• 2:36:03
  interest rates are extremely low and money is very cheap
• 2:36:05
  to borrow, people will spend tons and tons of tons
• 2:36:08
  of money. The economy appears to be doing very well.
• 2:36:11
  You have the growth that looks good on the stock market,
• 2:36:13
  and so companies don't need to ever tighten their belts.
• 2:36:15
  They can hire and hire and hire, they can become
• 2:36:18
  grossly inefficient, they can pursue things that don't make money,
• 2:36:22
  and they're still doing okay. And so a lot of
• 2:36:24
  these companies, their employees were kind of out of control.
• 2:36:28
  You had people coming out of college who believe their
• 2:36:30
  job was to change the world by using the money
• 2:36:32
  of these corporations, and the corporations didn't push back on
• 2:36:36
  it because they would be accused of being bigots and
• 2:36:39
  committing hate crimes. And they said, you know what, the
• 2:36:42
  stock is going up, everything's going well. We can just
• 2:36:45
  keep doing this. My theory is actually that interest rates
• 2:36:48
  going up have been very good for solving this problem.
• 2:36:51
  You've seen a lot of layoffs in the tech industry.
• 2:36:53
  You've seen a lot of layoffs in the media industry.
• 2:36:56
  I think that a lot of us are driven by
• 2:36:57
  interest rates rising. Money's not free, and now companies have
• 2:37:00
  to actually make what people want. Did you see You
• 2:37:04
  probably didn't, but did you happen to see the first
• 2:37:08
  quarterly earnings call by the new CEO of Warner Brothers
• 2:37:11
  who came in a year or two He given a
• 2:37:13
  year or two ago, and it was incredible. He had
• 2:37:16
  this speech that was exactly what fans wanted to hear
• 2:37:21
  and what investors wanted to hear. But his employees were furious.
• 2:37:26
  He came on and said, in my tenure, I'm going
• 2:37:29
  to pursue something that's a bit novel for Warner Brothers.
• 2:37:33
  Instead of making movies that people don't want to see,
• 2:37:36
  I'm going to make movies that people do want to see.
• 2:37:39
  Instead of making movies that don't make money. Instead, we
• 2:37:43
  will make movies that do make money. And to do that,
• 2:37:46
  we are going to make products that people want, like
• 2:37:51
  Batman and Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, and
• 2:37:54
  that is going to be the core of our market success.
• 2:37:57
  And like that's what fans want, Like, oh my god,
• 2:37:59
  this is great. They're going to stop making these kind
• 2:38:02
  of social justice pieces and make us the things that
• 2:38:04
  we actually want. The investors love it because he says
• 2:38:06
  they're going to make money, but the people were angry.
• 2:38:08
  Were all of the college students who joined thinking that
• 2:38:11
  they were going to use billions of dollars from Warner
• 2:38:14
  Brothers to make their pet pet art film projects about
• 2:38:19
  various oppressed groups. And I think that that is happening
• 2:38:22
  across the industry, and I think I think that's I
• 2:38:24
  think that's a good thing. It's a good adjustment.
• 2:38:26
  Speaker 1: That makes sense. So, speaking of making things, oh yeah,
• 2:38:32
  bust out the helmets Son.
• 2:38:33
  Speaker 2: All right, so I'm going to take this off. Okay,
• 2:38:36
  So I've been working on head Mount's place for a
• 2:38:39
  long time. I created the Oculus Rift when I was
• 2:38:41
  nineteen years old, living in a camper trailer in my garage,
• 2:38:44
  and that was really the virtual reality heads that that
• 2:38:47
  changed the industry, sold that company for billions of dollars,
• 2:38:50
  and now that I'm working in the national security space,
• 2:38:53
  I've continued to believe that virtual reality, augmented reality is
• 2:38:56
  going to be a critical part of our military. So
• 2:38:58
  the ability to have night vision, normal vision, but also
• 2:39:00
  the ability to see where all the bad guys are
• 2:39:03
  see where all the good guys are by fusing everyone's
• 2:39:06
  view together. Think of it almost like a hive mind.
• 2:39:08
  If I'm able to see something, you should be able
• 2:39:11
  to see it. If a drone can see it, you
• 2:39:12
  should be able to see it. Even if it's on
• 2:39:14
  the other side of a building, you should be able
• 2:39:16
  to see it and effectively have X ray vision. And
• 2:39:18
  I should be able to command and control all these
• 2:39:20
  other systems using this heads up display interface. It's I mean,
• 2:39:24
  none of what I'm saying sounds that crazy, right, It
• 2:39:26
  just sounds like any science fiction film. These are ideas
• 2:39:29
  that have been around for one hundred years, but only
• 2:39:31
  very recently as it become possible. So this is a
• 2:39:34
  new product that we just announced at the Army's conference yesterday.
• 2:39:38
  We've been working on it for years using our own money,
• 2:39:40
  no tax payer dollars. We're used to create it. It's
• 2:39:43
  called Eagle Eye and it is an integrated ballistic shell.
• 2:39:47
  So you've got a helmet, you've got hearing protection, you've
• 2:39:51
  got thermal sensors, night sensors, signals, intelligence sensors that allow
• 2:39:56
  you to detect where cell phones are, where radios are,
• 2:40:00
  see that in your view. It even detects where gunshots are,
• 2:40:03
  shows them exactly where they're placed and how far they are.
• 2:40:06
  Speaker 1: So this is the this is a recreation of it.
• 2:40:09
  Speaker 2: So this is yeah, this is so this is a
• 2:40:11
  video feed of what it is like to use the system.
• 2:40:13
  So I've got the helmet on here, and then what
• 2:40:16
  I have is this pair of augmented reality glasses. So
• 2:40:21
  as I can take these glasses and I put them
• 2:40:25
  on these sync with the helmet and with these sensors,
• 2:40:29
  so I can, for example, see where my gun is pointing.
• 2:40:32
  I can see where every enemy is. I can see
• 2:40:35
  where all of my buddies are. I can see so
• 2:40:38
  like there's a there's a view that's coming up here
• 2:40:40
  where you're gonna notice a drone picks up a guy
• 2:40:43
  behind that container over there, And what's gonna happen is
• 2:40:46
  when he walks behind that container, I'm able to continue
• 2:40:50
  to see where he is and what he's doing. So
• 2:40:53
  here's ghost X is the drone that's watching, So just
• 2:40:55
  watch for a moment. So the blue Force is my friendlies.
• 2:40:58
  So see that little thing right corner where it sees
• 2:41:01
  behind the containers.
• 2:41:02
  Speaker 1: Uh huh.
• 2:41:02
  Speaker 2: They're tracking where the bad guy is. They're tracking where
• 2:41:05
  my guys are. And then watch when they go behind
• 2:41:07
  the container so I can actually see through it and watch.
• 2:41:12
  Now they're engaging the guy over there and he's down.
• 2:41:14
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 2:41:15
  Speaker 2: Imagine a guy's coming over a hill and I want
• 2:41:17
  to engage him. So actually I'm gonna pot on the
• 2:41:19
  mission shield. There we go. So this is a system
• 2:41:23
  that allows everybody to basically be operating as one one
• 2:41:29
  combined hive mind where you can all share a view
• 2:41:32
  of the world. And by the way, this view that
• 2:41:33
  I have, it's shared now with all of the robots
• 2:41:37
  as well. So anything I see, like let's see I
• 2:41:40
  see someone inside of a building, every drone and every
• 2:41:43
  person now sees that person where he is. It's so
• 2:41:49
  crazy that I was born at the right time to
• 2:41:52
  actually get to build all this stuff because you know
• 2:41:54
  Robert Heinland, the science fiction author who did Starship Troopers. Okay,
• 2:41:59
  he was literally writing about these ideas of mobile infantry
• 2:42:02
  that's wearing mech suits and ballistics prediction, like helmets that
• 2:42:06
  show you the bad guys, give you radar feeds, give
• 2:42:09
  you night vision, give you thermal vision, the ability to
• 2:42:13
  do ballistics targeting where it calculates where the wind is
• 2:42:16
  going to blow you round and where it's going to go.
• 2:42:19
  He was literally writing about this in the nineteen forties.
• 2:42:22
  I mean, we're talking on almost one hundred years ago,
• 2:42:24
  and we happen to be born in the right time,
• 2:42:27
  so you know, too late to too late to explore
• 2:42:30
  the seas, too early to explore the stars, but just
• 2:42:33
  in time to build Eagle Eye.
• 2:42:35
  Speaker 1: You're in the right timeline.
• 2:42:37
  Speaker 2: I am in the right time.
• 2:42:38
  Speaker 1: Do you ever feel like it's a simulation because of that?
• 2:42:40
  Do you ever feel like you're living in some sort
• 2:42:42
  of bizarre simulation, because otherwise like why you? Why, why lives?
• 2:42:47
  Why do you have such a unique existence? Why are
• 2:42:50
  you so fortunate? Why are all these cool things happening
• 2:42:53
  for you?
• 2:42:53
  Speaker 2: It's like I'm reliving my nights here in the room
• 2:42:55
  with you now. I ponder it a lot, because I mean, look,
• 2:42:58
  we talked earlier about how I would only be able
• 2:43:00
  to pull off these things I pulled off if I
• 2:43:01
  continue continuously succeeded and over and over again. And it
• 2:43:05
  does make you think, like, what are the odds of that? Is?
• 2:43:07
  Is it more likely that the world is a simulation
• 2:43:10
  or not? And I think, actually, it just comes down
• 2:43:12
  to it comes down to I'm a spiritual person. I
• 2:43:16
  believe in the existence of a higher creator, of a
• 2:43:19
  higher power, and I feel like there's actually a lot
• 2:43:22
  of similarities between that and believing in simulation theory. I mean,
• 2:43:27
  like when people people say, oh, it's you know, it's
• 2:43:28
  it's all a simulation. Is that really so different from
• 2:43:31
  having a universe that was created by an all powerful being?
• 2:43:34
  Like you could like, it's almost I often feel like
• 2:43:37
  simulation theory is just normal religion wrapped up in a
• 2:43:43
  package that a person who claims to be a religious
• 2:43:46
  can can partake it. They're like, no, I would never
• 2:43:49
  believe in, you know, a sky daddy. I just believe
• 2:43:52
  that we live in a world created by a higher
• 2:43:54
  being and that he's watching our every move and learning
• 2:43:56
  from it and helping us along the way. I don't know, man,
• 2:43:59
  that's you're, you're, you're, You're hitting on a lot of
• 2:44:01
  the tenets of what.
• 2:44:04
  Speaker 1: Were they trying to write down when they were writing
• 2:44:06
  the initial religious texts, Like what were they actually describing
• 2:44:10
  When you're talking about something that's an oral traditionally.
• 2:44:13
  Speaker 2: Pop up the there we go. I could pop out this.
• 2:44:16
  Can I put that on? Yes? Absolutely?
• 2:44:18
  Speaker 1: What are you seeing right now? So?
• 2:44:19
  Speaker 2: Right now nothing. Unfortunately, if I'm going to give you
• 2:44:22
  a good demo, we need to go to an area
• 2:44:23
  where it's synced up to all the other helmets and
• 2:44:26
  we're in a night I want to show you the
• 2:44:27
  night out. Yes, this is this is a this is
• 2:44:30
  my doing. So I'm a huge weapons enthusiast. I owned
• 2:44:34
  about four hundred and fifty guns, huge number of you know,
• 2:44:38
  I own basically everything that anyone's ever fought in, so
• 2:44:41
  ballistic vests, uniforms, boots, gloves, helmets. I'm just I collect
• 2:44:46
  that stuff. And so one of the cool parts about
• 2:44:48
  Egle Eyes I got to bring all my opinions on
• 2:44:50
  what things should be and I can just jam them
• 2:44:53
  jam them into the products. Like the cool thing about
• 2:44:55
  this is like you if you've ever used earing production normally,
• 2:44:58
  you know it pops up like this, and you know
• 2:44:59
  it's kind of dangling the way. Notice how it's really
• 2:45:02
  tightly integrated, like it's not flopping around. But I can
• 2:45:04
  pop it open and now I can hear you directly
• 2:45:06
  with my own two ears. I can pop that and
• 2:45:08
  clip it back in, and I'm able to hear with
• 2:45:10
  electronic pass through and it actually enhances my hearing, so
• 2:45:14
  I can hear certain things better. And you'll notice this
• 2:45:17
  is ballistic ear protection. So I've ever seen like a
• 2:45:19
  high cut helmet where you know, you can have low
• 2:45:21
  cut helmets where they protect your ears, more high cut
• 2:45:23
  helmets where there's no ballistic protection over your hearing protection.
• 2:45:27
  This is ballistic hearing protection. So when I put this on,
• 2:45:30
  everything is protected with armor, even over the soft tissue
• 2:45:33
  in my ears and around my upper neck.
• 2:45:35
  Speaker 1: Is there any concern about the hinge or that during
• 2:45:39
  combat it would pop open.
• 2:45:40
  Speaker 2: No, No, it's a super robust system. So I'll actually
• 2:45:43
  show you. Let me pull off. So these are modular
• 2:45:45
  sensor pods at the top. They call them wolf ears,
• 2:45:48
  but I can basically swap these even in the field,
• 2:45:50
  so I could carry, for example, but.
• 2:45:52
  Speaker 1: That seemed too easy to take off Magnet's buddy. Right.
• 2:45:56
  But I'm saying, if you're in the middle of a
• 2:45:57
  scramble and you're.
• 2:45:59
  Speaker 2: Here tex, this one, this one has no this one
• 2:46:01
  has no connector on it. This is this one is
• 2:46:03
  These are not actually real modules. These are base This
• 2:46:07
  is a tricky one where we have real modules and
• 2:46:10
  show modules the real modules. In general, the Army doesn't
• 2:46:13
  want to have them passed around and people taking pictures
• 2:46:15
  of them, like at a USA there's people walking up
• 2:46:17
  taking pictures of everything in the booth. They don't want
• 2:46:19
  you to show off, for example, the size of the
• 2:46:21
  aperture of the thermal image you're using, because then they
• 2:46:23
  can back reverse how far you can see, what level
• 2:46:27
  of thermal radiation you can see. So, yeah, these are
• 2:46:29
  the same normal you Actually it has a connector in there.
• 2:46:32
  You gotta actually jam it in there, and it's retained.
• 2:46:35
  Speaker 1: And so have you done tests where like people fall
• 2:46:37
  down off hills and for a tumble.
• 2:46:40
  Speaker 2: So this technology, the last revision of it is already
• 2:46:43
  with the army. They're doing trials and tests in this
• 2:46:45
  literally right now. But like if you if you look here,
• 2:46:48
  it's as basically a spring steel mechanism there, and so
• 2:46:51
  it's not just strong, it's also flexible, so it's a
• 2:46:55
  basic It can bend and then snap back, and so
• 2:46:57
  you it's very very hard to over bend this, over
• 2:47:00
  extend this, and if you did, like it's very hard,
• 2:47:02
  but if you did, you grab some flyers and you
• 2:47:04
  bend it back. And notice how that's a replaceable module there.
• 2:47:07
  I can just unscrew this and replace it with a
• 2:47:09
  new part. Everything on here I can repair in the
• 2:47:12
  field with a field repair kitten.
• 2:47:13
  Speaker 1: It doesn't have the same functionality as like walker game
• 2:47:16
  ears where you can fly outside noises, but then when
• 2:47:20
  a loud boom comes off, your ears protected exactly.
• 2:47:23
  Speaker 2: But it's even better. We're using an array of so
• 2:47:26
  those ones they have two microphones, the walkers they typically
• 2:47:28
  have one here, one here. What we're doing is a
• 2:47:30
  phased array of microphones so that I can actually steer
• 2:47:33
  the amplification beam like I could say, hey, like I
• 2:47:38
  could I could.
• 2:47:38
  Speaker 1: Say in a moment, steps over in this left direction,
• 2:47:40
  let's point in that. Well.
• 2:47:41
  Speaker 2: Even crazier, imagine that I'm looking at a target with this,
• 2:47:45
  and I look at that target, it can cancel out
• 2:47:48
  all of the other sound that it knows is coming
• 2:47:51
  out of phase with that direction and distance, and it
• 2:47:53
  can give me just the sound there coming from that
• 2:47:56
  as best it's can. So it can give me not
• 2:47:58
  just enhanced hearing, but directional enhance. Here, I could say,
• 2:48:01
  I want to listen to what that guy one hundred
• 2:48:03
  yards over there is saying. I'm not promising you'll be
• 2:48:05
  able to hear, but you'll be able to hear it
• 2:48:07
  a lot better than you would than you would without it,
• 2:48:11
  So it's worth noting it. Like the way this came
• 2:48:13
  together is crazy. There was a contract to do this
• 2:48:17
  to build an infantry combat heads of display in twenty
• 2:48:20
  seventeen and twenty eighteen that was awarded to Microsoft by
• 2:48:24
  the United States Army. It was twenty two billion dollars
• 2:48:28
  twenty two billion dollars to develop this technology. And I
• 2:48:32
  actually wanted to compete in that competition back then, but
• 2:48:36
  at the time ANDROL was only about two dozen people,
• 2:48:38
  and so it was a competition. Do you remember Magic
• 2:48:40
  Leap the agetrial. Yeah, it was a competition between Magic
• 2:48:44
  Leap and Microsoft. Microsoft ended up winning. I think that's
• 2:48:47
  probably good because the guy who was running Magic Leap.
• 2:48:49
  Was not really a fan of the military, and I
• 2:48:51
  think it's dangerous to have even if you don't It's
• 2:48:55
  fine to not like the military, but you shouldn't have
• 2:48:57
  people who don't like the military running the military, right people.
• 2:49:01
  And I think you shouldn't have people who were in
• 2:49:03
  love with the military regulating the military, right you know,
• 2:49:06
  everyone has their role anyway. I never I was very
• 2:49:11
  skeptical of their technology. You remember Holo lens. That was
• 2:49:14
  Microsoft's like consumer virtual reality augmented reality effort. Their AR
• 2:49:21
  project was adapting that to the military into this product
• 2:49:24
  called IVAS, And to make a very very long story short,
• 2:49:30
  it had a lot of problems. Their early hardware was
• 2:49:33
  making people sick. It was it had lag, The night
• 2:49:36
  vision wasn't working well. There were soldier evaluation touch points
• 2:49:40
  that came out where they were saying, hey, I'll get
• 2:49:42
  killed if I wear this. Microsoft invested a lot of
• 2:49:44
  money trying to make it better, but eventually they ended
• 2:49:47
  up killing even their consumer haul lens division. They just
• 2:49:49
  shut everything down. So the crazy part of this whole
• 2:49:51
  story is starting a few years ago. I started going
• 2:49:53
  to Microsoft and saying, hey, will you guys just give
• 2:49:56
  me the IVASS program, like, will you just let me
• 2:49:58
  take over? You guys can keep building you know, Microsoft applications,
• 2:50:02
  cloud computing, the stuff you're good at. Let me build
• 2:50:05
  the tactical heads up display hardware. And when I first
• 2:50:07
  talked to them years ago, they thought it was nuts,
• 2:50:09
  Like they was almost like insulted. It was like when
• 2:50:11
  Microsoft tried to buy Nintendo and they got literally laughed
• 2:50:15
  out of the room. And then as time went on,
• 2:50:20
  they started to laugh less and less, and eventually they said, hey,
• 2:50:23
  remember how you said you wanted to take over ibass.
• 2:50:26
  We would actually love to partner with you on this
• 2:50:29
  and let you bring your magic to bear on this problem.
• 2:50:32
  And I try to be a humble guy. I don't
• 2:50:35
  usually succeed, but I am not humble in this one regard.
• 2:50:38
  I believe that I am the world's best head mounted
• 2:50:41
  display designer bar none. I took the crown with the
• 2:50:44
  Oculus Rift. I think I still hold it, and so
• 2:50:47
  I was able to kick the program into shape. We
• 2:50:49
  built our own hardware, and we've built Eagle Eye over
• 2:50:52
  the last couple of years, and it is it basically
• 2:50:55
  solves all the problems that the program had. It is
• 2:50:59
  the thing that I think is actually gonna end up
• 2:51:00
  on the heads of every soldier here. Try to try
• 2:51:02
  to take things on and you'll feel there are a
• 2:51:03
  bit heavier than normal glasses. But the other thing about
• 2:51:07
  them is that they're also ballistic rated glasses. So you
• 2:51:09
  see in the front and then also on the sides. Yeah,
• 2:51:11
  like these can take pieces of frag so if someone's
• 2:51:14
  attacking you with a drone and it blows up, this
• 2:51:17
  is going to keep those from going into your orbitals,
• 2:51:19
  which is a pretty important function for glasses. And yeah,
• 2:51:22
  and outside, so yeah, put the glass. Try putting the
• 2:51:26
  glass back on, see if you can pop that off.
• 2:51:27
  You'll notice like that one is actually yeah, there we
• 2:51:29
  go perfect. So that's a mission shield. I like that
• 2:51:33
  you've asked out it because actually nobody's even noticed really
• 2:51:36
  that it's two pieces. So the mission shield is a
• 2:51:38
  piece that allows you to reconfigure the glasses for different
• 2:51:41
  use cases. If you're using this, for example, to like
• 2:51:44
  give you automated instructions on how to repair your hum vy.
• 2:51:48
  For example, I don't need to have that ballistic cover
• 2:51:52
  on the front because I don't need that extra like
• 2:51:53
  I don't expect that I'm going to have an explosion happen,
• 2:51:56
  and you protect my eyes. But you can also do
• 2:51:59
  things like have different types of protection. For example, that's
• 2:52:02
  not and that's just a normal ballistic mission shield. We
• 2:52:06
  have another mission shield that protects you from laser energy weapons.
• 2:52:09
  So it's actually tuned where now it makes your vision turn.
• 2:52:13
  I probably shouldn't talk about exactly what color because it
• 2:52:16
  allows people to figure out what frequencies we're blocking. But
• 2:52:19
  there are mission shields that you can put on that
• 2:52:21
  will protect you from weapons that we know China has.
• 2:52:24
  China has a bunch of directed energy laser weapons, some
• 2:52:27
  of them for taking out drones, others designed to blind
• 2:52:30
  human troops. Well, and so we're designing mission shields that
• 2:52:32
  protect you from those types of emissions.
• 2:52:35
  Speaker 1: They're designed to blind human troops. So are they employed
• 2:52:39
  from drones?
• 2:52:40
  Speaker 2: I don't want to be I don't want to be
• 2:52:41
  too I don't want to be too aggressive here because
• 2:52:44
  I'll tell you the United States has weapons that are
• 2:52:46
  designed to temporarily blind people as well. Now, the thing
• 2:52:49
  is temporary blinding is very close to permanent blinding, and
• 2:52:53
  it's a thin line. It's dependent on the range, it's
• 2:52:55
  depending on the power level. Any system that can temporarily
• 2:52:59
  blow people at long range is capable of blinding people
• 2:53:04
  permanently at long range. It's just that that's the line
• 2:53:07
  you walk. Like, if you want it to work in
• 2:53:08
  any fog, you need more power. If you want it
• 2:53:10
  to work at long ranges, you need more power. But like,
• 2:53:12
  for example, imagine we deployed a bunch of these glasses
• 2:53:14
  and they had the laser filters built in from the start.
• 2:53:17
  Now imagine that China shifts their layerer frequencies ten nanometers
• 2:53:21
  so that it bypasses that filter. Imagine if I had
• 2:53:24
  to just replace all my ar glasses. That's not acceptable, right, right,
• 2:53:28
  So everything on this system is totally modular. So what
• 2:53:31
  would happen is if they shifted their laser weapons, we
• 2:53:33
  would just give people in a new mission shield. Now
• 2:53:36
  they're all set.
• 2:53:36
  Speaker 1: That mission show comes off very easy, though, So this.
• 2:53:40
  Speaker 2: Comes like, I gotta admit, these are primarily for like showing.
• 2:53:44
  Speaker 1: Off to the army. So it will somehow another secure
• 2:53:47
  into place.
• 2:53:47
  Speaker 2: It's actually still going to be magnets, it's just going
• 2:53:50
  to be a lot more forced to remove. I'm wondering
• 2:53:53
  how much I should get into the movie magic here.
• 2:53:55
  So look, I'll get a little bit into it. Most
• 2:54:00
  an engineer, I mostly build stuff, but a big part
• 2:54:02
  of what I do is understanding what magicians think when
• 2:54:07
  they are drawing attentions things, when they have Potter. Well,
• 2:54:11
  you're going through a demo of something to somebody like
• 2:54:13
  I used to demo the Oculus Rift to thousands of
• 2:54:16
  people a year, high powered executives, government people, CEOs of
• 2:54:23
  major game companies, people we are trying to hire. And
• 2:54:25
  you have to develop a pattern of how you talk
• 2:54:28
  about stuff, and you need to be able to go
• 2:54:29
  in any direction. If somebody says, well what about this,
• 2:54:31
  you need to be able to show them that feature,
• 2:54:33
  and you need ready for how you show the feature.
• 2:54:35
  I need to be intimately familiar with every part of it.
• 2:54:38
  The reason that the magnets are so weak on this
• 2:54:40
  is because we show this to people who are weak.
• 2:54:42
  I'm not kidding if you actually have like because you're
• 2:54:45
  not swapping this like as you're running around, right, so
• 2:54:48
  like in the real one, you can have you know
• 2:54:50
  or you're like, ah, you know, right, and it busts
• 2:54:52
  off R. But imagine this. Imagine we're sitting in a
• 2:54:54
  in a demo room and then you hand this to
• 2:54:57
  either a member of the press or even let's say
• 2:54:59
  a memor of the arm Armed Forces, and I say,
• 2:55:01
  here you go, and your name is Ashley. Take that, Ashley.
• 2:55:05
  Pull it off and you'll uh uh uh uh that's
• 2:55:11
  the problem. And like, because you need some decent fit.
• 2:55:12
  You see those tabs on the end, yeah, say like protrusions. Yeah,
• 2:55:16
  that's to make it easier for your fingers to grab
• 2:55:17
  when you have way more force. There are people who
• 2:55:20
  have really weak fingers, they don't really know how to
• 2:55:22
  grab stuff. And then, uh, it's actually the same thing
• 2:55:25
  with the same So I'm showing you a little bit
• 2:55:28
  of the movie, the movie Magic Behind Behind. How I
• 2:55:31
  think these You know, if you want to take this,
• 2:55:32
  you can put it on. This is an actual weighted helmet.
• 2:55:36
  We've developed a bunch of novel technology makings word you're
• 2:55:38
  oh yeah, it actually fits on you. Oh here, you're
• 2:55:42
  a little wrap your your your chin straps wrapped around. Yeah,
• 2:55:46
  just sorry, I wrapped it around before you had it. Yeah,
• 2:55:48
  there you go. But yeah, I mean, if you're familiar
• 2:55:54
  with walkers, very very similar what we do on the
• 2:55:57
  hearing enhancement side. It's just a world even beyond that
• 2:56:00
  too tight or you got it.
• 2:56:01
  Speaker 1: And then this snaps. Oh yeah, how's so here?
• 2:56:05
  Speaker 2: I might have to come around. There's a little bit
• 2:56:07
  of a trick that you learn it. What it does
• 2:56:08
  is it goes in and then you're gonna push it
• 2:56:11
  up and back diagonally.
• 2:56:12
  Speaker 1: Oh you did it. There, you go figure it out.
• 2:56:14
  Speaker 2: I'm so glad. See that's just how intuitive it is. Yeah,
• 2:56:17
  but uh, it's very And the cool thing about this
• 2:56:19
  is you don't have these like mounts now that are
• 2:56:22
  snagging you here. Well, you gotta put on the glasses
• 2:56:24
  toohyre you go. You don't have the mounts that are
• 2:56:27
  snagging you. You don't like have you ever you've used
• 2:56:29
  night vision? I have? I mean it's just you know,
• 2:56:33
  you have this big giant unicorn horn, this thing pounding
• 2:56:36
  on your fast Also it's very unbalanced. Wait, that's out
• 2:56:39
  here is torquing your neck continuously, right, and it's it's
• 2:56:42
  it's annoying when you're standing in place. But if you,
• 2:56:46
  let's say, hit a pothole in a hum vy with
• 2:56:48
  a big weight on the end of a lever, you
• 2:56:51
  destroy your neck next to you. I think it's twenty
• 2:56:55
  oh my god, that can't even be right. I want
• 2:56:58
  to say, I want I need to look this up.
• 2:57:00
  It might be is it two hundred million for the
• 2:57:02
  Air Force, And then I want to say it's twenty
• 2:57:05
  billion dollars that the DoD spends on neck injuries primarily
• 2:57:10
  through the through through the VA.
• 2:57:11
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 2:57:11
  Speaker 2: There's so many neck injuries that occur from spinal compression,
• 2:57:15
  people getting their heads worked around. That's why helmets need
• 2:57:17
  to be extremely lightweight, tightly integrated, no snag hazards, Like
• 2:57:22
  it's important that you not have you know, a big
• 2:57:24
  giant you know where I'm going through a doorway right
• 2:57:27
  and it gets on there and all of a sudden,
• 2:57:28
  I go oh in a weird angle and trying to
• 2:57:31
  run through a room right, or like someone's turning and
• 2:57:33
  part of their rifle you they're right up on me
• 2:57:35
  and it snags on my helmet and pulls me. Like
• 2:57:37
  you've probably seen a lot of people put like big
• 2:57:39
  battery packs for their night vision in that gear. Same thing.
• 2:57:42
  It creates a huge snag snagazard like you're sliding down
• 2:57:45
  something or sliding over edge. You clear it and then
• 2:57:47
  the back of your head hits that fence. You go boom.
• 2:57:50
  Speaker 1: What's the battery power of something like that?
• 2:57:52
  Speaker 2: Okay, so this has a tiny battery pack on it.
• 2:57:56
  This has thirty minutes of battery life.
• 2:57:58
  Speaker 1: So what is the lithium eye on capacity?
• 2:58:00
  Speaker 2: Is it.
• 2:58:02
  Speaker 1: A cell phone back?
• 2:58:03
  Speaker 2: So the battery on here is actually the battery that
• 2:58:06
  is in here is basically an emergency reserve. It is
• 2:58:09
  not intended to power it most of the time. It
• 2:58:12
  is a primary cell chemistry that won't burst into flames.
• 2:58:15
  It's basically one time used. So it's like, think of
• 2:58:17
  it like an emergency battery that runs it when your
• 2:58:19
  helmet is disconnected from the main battery. The main battery
• 2:58:22
  is this. So you ever use ballistic plates before? Yes,
• 2:58:26
  so this is a standard geometry sappy geometry plate. This exactly.
• 2:58:33
  So the cool thing about this is it's a combination battery, computer,
• 2:58:38
  and ballistic plate. And so so here's the craziest part
• 2:58:42
  about this. Normally you would wear a plate and then
• 2:58:45
  you would have to wear a battery and a computer.
• 2:58:47
  That's how everyone's always done heads up displays before. And
• 2:58:50
  I realized that's crazy because you need that space for
• 2:58:52
  other stuff, right, you want to be carrying AMMO, you
• 2:58:54
  want to be carrying equipment. You want to be carrying
• 2:58:56
  grenades or admin stuff. You can't use your most valuable
• 2:59:01
  real estate to just carry a battery brick. So what's
• 2:59:05
  in here is a battery technology that is an electrolyte
• 2:59:09
  free solid state ceramic battery. Now, ceramic batteries are not
• 2:59:14
  as high energy density as in terms of like they
• 2:59:16
  don't have they don't have as much energy per pound
• 2:59:19
  as the very very best, like let's say car electric batteries,
• 2:59:24
  but they are pretty good ballistic material. And so what
• 2:59:28
  I realized is that you instead of having the weight
• 2:59:30
  of a ballistic plate and then the weight of a
• 2:59:32
  battery on top, you should combine those two functions. You
• 2:59:35
  should make your battery part of your ballistic material stack
• 2:59:38
  up so that like, is it the best ballistic material
• 2:59:43
  in the world. No, Is it the best battery material
• 2:59:46
  in the world. No, But you can have enough of
• 2:59:50
  it that it's better than either of those things working separately.
• 2:59:54
  Like if I were to try to make a system
• 2:59:56
  that was a normal armor plate and then also this
• 2:59:59
  much so like even though we actually got all the
• 3:00:02
  power actually labeled right here, this is nine hundred watt
• 3:00:06
  hour battery, if we were to have a plate and
• 3:00:09
  then a battery, it would be like a plate this big,
• 3:00:11
  and then like another big battery on top. By combining
• 3:00:14
  the two, I've made it where I've eliminated something like
• 3:00:18
  ten pounds from the soldier's ruck, which is a huge
• 3:00:20
  deal because that's weight I can either keep out of
• 3:00:23
  his rucke, or I can or I could just put
• 3:00:27
  more shit into it. Of course, what all my buddies
• 3:00:30
  in the army tell me is, Palmer, don't let them
• 3:00:32
  take those ten pounds and give me ten pounds more shit.
• 3:00:34
  These guys are already carrying an insane amount of stuff,
• 3:00:38
  and so this is only the start. We're building a
• 3:00:41
  bunch of other augments that combine multiple systems into one thing,
• 3:00:46
  like In fact, this has also got a bunch of
• 3:00:47
  radio hardware in it as well. So if you can
• 3:00:49
  replace a radio and your batteries and your ballistics and
• 3:00:53
  your onboard computer all in one thing, that's pretty cool.
• 3:00:57
  But I want to keep doing that, dude, I will know.
• 3:01:02
  In general, I would recommend using this as your rear plate,
• 3:01:04
  not your front plate. So if you've got a rear
• 3:01:06
  and a front, the rear is probably the one that
• 3:01:09
  you want to put this in because if you do
• 3:01:11
  get shot in the plate, you don't want it to.
• 3:01:14
  You're more likely to get shot in the front than
• 3:01:16
  the back, and you don't want to get shot, and
• 3:01:17
  then you lose all of your energy to run, all
• 3:01:19
  of your sensors and everything else. And if you get
• 3:01:22
  shot with a plate, it's possible to take that plate
• 3:01:25
  and swap it with a fresh one. I mean, look,
• 3:01:29
  you're the world's biggest badass if you're able to do
• 3:01:31
  that in a firefight. I don't think most people are
• 3:01:34
  bad enough to, you know, take a hit right in
• 3:01:36
  the chest and then pull out their plate and slap
• 3:01:38
  another win in. But it does happen, and so I
• 3:01:41
  we're generally recommending that people use this as the rear
• 3:01:44
  plate to make it less likely to get shot but
• 3:01:46
  fully capable of operating in front front plate service.
• 3:01:49
  Speaker 1: This is amazing stuff, man, dude, really fast.
• 3:01:52
  Speaker 2: I love my job I get to work with I
• 3:01:54
  can tell just the coolest technology on the bleeding edge
• 3:01:57
  of all this. And the best part is that the
• 3:01:59
  gains it's not so much in some people they see
• 3:02:03
  these gains and they get to make money off of it.
• 3:02:05
  But I do this and I get to have end
• 3:02:07
  users telling me, Palmer, this is how you saved our
• 3:02:10
  unit's life. Palmer, this is how your technology protected our base. Palmer,
• 3:02:15
  people would be dead in this particular building if you
• 3:02:18
  had not developed the technology that you did. That is
• 3:02:20
  the most rewarding thing that you can do, at least
• 3:02:23
  the most rewarding thing that I've ever done. It's a
• 3:02:26
  it's a it's a really cool set of problems. And
• 3:02:29
  I highly encourage people who are really smart to look
• 3:02:32
  at doing this stuff because some people they say, well,
• 3:02:34
  I don't want to work on weapons. You know, it's
• 3:02:35
  ethically fraud. And the point I make to them is
• 3:02:38
  that this is, whether you like it or not, we
• 3:02:41
  need some formal weapons, right, We're not going to disarm
• 3:02:43
  the entire world. There are bad guys out there. We
• 3:02:46
  need to have something. And if you are worried about
• 3:02:49
  the ethics of weapons, it's actually even more important that
• 3:02:52
  you work on them, because there's no moral high ground
• 3:02:54
  in outsourcing that work to people who are less ethical
• 3:02:57
  and less competent than you. If you think you're a
• 3:02:59
  competent person and you think you're an ethical person, you
• 3:03:02
  almost have a responsibility to care about these and arguably
• 3:03:05
  to work on them. So that's that's the way that
• 3:03:08
  I look at it.
• 3:03:09
  Speaker 1: Well, it's cool as fun. I'm glad you're making it man,
• 3:03:11
  and I really enjoyed this conversation. I'm really glad we
• 3:03:14
  did this. This is a lot of fun, so much fun.
• 3:03:16
  Speaker 2: I've got to get you out sometime. I would love
• 3:03:18
  to the range because we've got a test range and
• 3:03:21
  will give you a rifle. You'll be able to mark targets.
• 3:03:24
  Speaker 1: Let's fucking go. Let's do it. Let's do it. Thank
• 3:03:27
  you very much. It really fun. Thanks for being here,
• 3:03:29
  all right, Bye everybody.