Transcript
A (0:00)
Good morning. Take a seat, there are plenty of chairs ready for you. And let me check your stocks just to see how the days are going to go. S and P is up a little bit. Tesla's up a little bit. Nvidia is down a little bit. Not bad. Could be worse. Good morning everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization. It's called Coffee with Scott Adams. And you've never had a better time. But if you'd like to take a chance of elevating your experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains, all you need for that is a cup of mug, glass, attacker shells, a canteen, jug of flask, a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine. End of the day, the thing that makes everything better, it's called the simultaneous sip. Go. Delicious. Well, in news, China allegedly found a million year old skull. A million year old skull. Oh, I'm getting an update. It wasn't a million year old skull. It was Joe Biden. No, I'm just kidding. It wasn't Joe Biden, it was a million year old skull. But since the oldest known human skull was half a million years old, this doubles the potential time that maybe humans are better out in their current form. But they got to do genetic tests and then they'll find out for sure if it rewrites the entire history of humankind. Have you ever believed the anthropologists? I find that I've never believed them. You know where they find, oh, we found this, this little fingernail and this fingernail tells us there's a whole new branch of humanoids. I always think of that stuff just made up. I don't believe any of it. So it just went from, well, the oldest human was about 300,000 years old. Well, no. Well found what is. No. 500,000. 500,000. Oh, no. Nope. Double that. One million. We don't have any idea what was happening back then. Pure guess. Well, Ben Carson, Dr. Ben Carson has been added to the Maha mix and he'll be working on improving the nutrition standards, which I love, I love that I'm sure he's the right person and I'm sure that this is one of the most important things we should be doing. But I will give this one, this one bit of caution. There's no real nutrition science. I don't know if you know that, but all that, you know, how many vitamins you need and all that, that's all just Made up back when I was years ago when I tried to make the product called the Dill Burrito, a frozen burrito that I tried to put all of the vitamins and minerals you would need for one day. So you might get extra, but you wouldn't be short that day. And what I learned in the process of trying to make a food that had all the vitamins and minerals you need is that the science of which vitamins and minerals and how much you need was changing as fast as we can print the box. And at some point I said, wait a minute, this isn't science. We have no idea what's good for you. It looks like we're just guessing. So that was about when I decided to stop trying to make that product. Well, believe it or not, according to one of the AI observers, Asha Tushrivas, I think that's his name. Maybe it's two words, Ashutosh Srivastava. Anyway, that's as close as I can get. Anyway, he says that Google's Deep Mind AI is now has a version that is ready for general robotics. You know how I've been telling you for a long time now that I don't believe that the current versions of AI, the large language models, I don't believe they can ever be adopted to just be a robot brain because they hallucinate too much and other problems. But allegedly Google's DeepMind has some version that would be already ready to act as a high level reasoning brain for robots that could do complicated things that it had never done before. So in theory, you could say, hey, could you wash these grapes? And if it never washed a grape, it could figure out, okay, I need a sink, I need the, I need a faucet, I need cold water, not hot water. So that's the idea. I'm going to go full skeptic on this and I'm going to say that there is no such thing as a general purpose AI that will work in a robot. I don't care what they say, I don't believe it. You know why I don't believe it? If it can actually operate a robot in a general purpose way, you would see so much video of that, it would be all over social media. Look, our general purpose robot just learned to do a thing. Look, it just learned to do another thing. And all I did was tell it what I wanted. If it could do any of that, it would be all the news. So, no, I do not believe that Google DeepMind has a general purpose AI that can run a robot. Maybe Someday. But I guarantee if it worked really well right now, you would see the robot, that it wouldn't be a text story about a robot. Right. I'm not the only one who sees it that way. Right. If it really worked, you would see the video of the robot, you know, doing full robot things. There was a video of one robot arm that acted like it was recognizing different objects. Not impressed? Not impressed. Well, according to MIT Technology Review, James o' Donnell is writing about this that there is a company that makes drones that can chase shoplifters. So if you buy this product, if you're a store and somebody robs your store, you can push a button and the drone will take off. And then I guess you have to, maybe a human has to spot the bad guy running away, but then once the drone has spotted the bad guy or the bad guy's car, it can follow it. So I don't know what happens when you follow it because I doubt the police are going to get involved anyway. So I don't know what good the. Yeah, I don't think the police really chase too many, too many shoplifters. And it's probably going to be like a bunch of people, you know, that most of the shoplifting seems to be this, you know, gang of 30 people hit it all the same time. And one drone's not going to do much for that. But I kind of like the idea. I would feel safer even if I had one at my house. You know, if somebody tried to do something at your house and then the drone could give some photographs and take a license plate and make sure you got a picture of the perps that would be pretty useful. It's called Flock Flock safety. And I don't know what their tagline is for flock safety, but if, for me, I'd say if you steal from me, flock you. That's how I would do the marketing. All right, well, the second quarter, GDP got revised, as they always do, but higher. So all the way up to 3.8. Now if you're not a economics nerd, 3.8 GDP, if it were, you know, an honest number, would be really, really good, as in better than we have a right to expect it to be. Like really, really good 3.8. But don't get excited. It's probably just because the, the tariffs caused people to buy more and get ready and you know, once all the tariff stuff settles down, we'll get an idea what the real number is. So do not believe that 3.8 is any kind of a sustainable long term number. If it is amazing, I mean, it would be beyond my highest expectations, but it won't be. Don't expect that. But it's better than not being 3.8, that's for sure. There's a new European startup. Okay. Did you know that Europe had startups? If you heard that there's a European startup that was getting ready to solve some big problem, what would be your first thought? My first thought was, no, they won't. Nah. No, no. There's a reason that there aren't many European startups or there's no, you know, I don't think there are any unicorns. You know, the ones that are worth more than a billion and it has to do with their stultifying, what would you call it, regulations and stuff. So basically you get smothered and taxed to death if you're a startup. But this startup called euclid, according to Dr. Singularity on X, they're building this massive chip system, he says that would allow lesser powered channels chips. I think they're lesser powered, but what it does is use way less power. So, so what? What they're doing is building a infrastructure for AI that would be way more power efficient. Now what I've been predicting for a while is that the money involved in running the energy needed for AI is so big, we're talking trillions of dollars. That for sure there will be startups trying to reduce the energy drain for AI. And for sure there will be at least incremental improvements. But probably somebody's going to come up with more than an incremental improvement. So my bet is that the big companies will spend a trillion dollars on building out power and some small company will say, you know, you could do it for 1 billion. Now we solved the energy problem, so I feel like the most successful AI company might be somebody who hasn't started yet because the big ones are going to run through a, you know, trillions of dollars. But what happens if the ones that are fast followers just don't need that much energy? Suddenly you're, you're a peer competitor to chat GPT at 1,000,000th of the cost. So I think that's what's going to happen. Well, you may have heard of this in the news. Apparently there are reports that seem credible that there's now a major spike in women being admitted into the ers because they took too much Tylenol while pregnant to show that Trump doesn't know what he's talking about. And at least one woman is essentially brain dead from doing that. And has a baby insider. So her husband has some tough choices about whether to try to deliver the baby or, or what? I assume that they, they'll try to deliver the baby because why wouldn't you? All right, so that's terrible. You know that, that's the sort of thing we joked about. Remember how we would always joke. It was, it was an ongoing joke that if you wanted to kill all. Just joking, right. Not, not seriously, if you wanted to, let's say, do harm to all Democrats, all you'd have to do is say, you know, Trump really loves breathing oxygen and Trump says you should all breathe oxygen. And they would all hold their breath until they passed down died. Now that was the joke. But literally, people are taking the Tylenol and dying. It's not funny. But if you wonder how strong is brainwashing, there you go. You know, I, when I talk about brainwashing and persuasion and hypnosis and stuff, there's a tendency for people not to really understand how strong it is. Now it's not strong with every person in every situation. So that's why it's confusing. But for some people, it is a complete takeover of their mind. And I would say that the, these Tylenol victims, probably they're victims of not only TikTok or some social media because they tend to do it, you know, publicly, but yeah, they've got CDS plus they've got social, social media poisoning. Well, according to Representative Anna Paulina Luna, who apparently is in a position to see all the good secrets before we do, she says that NBC is withholding a never before seen video of Lee Harvey Oswald near President Kennedy's limo at the moment of the assassination, which would mean that he was not involved in any way in shooting the President. If that's true. Now question number one, why would NBC be holding it as opposed to, let's say, our government in some entity? Why would NBC have the most important video that could ever be and they're just sitting on it and now they just decided to release it? Really? Really. I wonder if it'll be a grainy image. I haven't seen it yet, but you want to make a bet? I'm going to make a bet that it looks approximately like this. Oh, look. Oh look. It's. That's totally, that's totally Lee Harvey Oswald. Do you see him? Do you see him? Yeah. Something tells me it's going to look like that. Do you believe that when you see the picture you're going to say, oh my God, that is Lee Harvey Oswald or Could it be like those pictures of the 50s, you know, the old videos you see of people walking in the city and they all look the same in 1963, right? That's what happened in 1963. Every guy approximately that age was the same size. None of them were fat. They all looked exactly like Lee Harvey Oswald. They had the same haircut. They were white guys. They dressed the same. They had the same body. All skinny. Everybody looked like him. I looked like him. If I had been around then, yeah, a picture of me would look just like him, at least at some point in my life. All right, so I'm going to say I don't believe anything about that. What do you think? I don't believe any of that. But it gets better. According to Representative Anna Polina Luna, another story. She says she's getting horrifying reports that in Haiti, organ traffickers are killing people were found dead on the street with missing organs. So do you believe that? Do you believe that people are being found with missing organs dead on the street because they're selling the organs? Again, Again, I'm going to go with no, because that's like one of the most. That's. That's one of the most famous fake stories of all time. And the people were found in the bathtub with a note and their. And their kidneys were missing. Okay. No, I don't believe that anybody has been found. I mean, there might have been somebody found that, you know, some damage to their body. And then somebody else said, it looks like they took his kidney. And then, you know, then everybody believes it. No, I do not believe that the Haitians are taking organs. I don't believe you could just carve it out with a butcher knife and sell it on the open market. I think it's a little harder than that. Well, you all want to talk about James Comey's indictment. So the indictments that come down, there are two of them. Let's say one of them is that he lied to Congress about having a third person leaked to the media, when indeed Andy McCabe has already said, oh, yeah, he authorized me to leak. So we've got his number two from the FBI, who interestingly is also sort of on Trump's enemies list, if you will, virtual enemies list, not an actual one. But McCabe probably will be the witness because he's already said this, probably the witness that takes down Comey. Now, I kind of like that it'll be McCabe who takes him down. But then the second indictment is that he lied to Congress about that. Every other author right now, the other one was lying about something. One, one is. One is obstructing justice and the other is lying. But I think that they're both based on the same set of acts, maybe. Anyway, so the background is, you know, that the prosecutor who was in charge got canned for not doing enough. He seemed like he wasn't sort of on board. Might have been more of a Democrat lover than what Trump needed at the point the statute of limitations was about to run out. That's why there was some urgency, and at least from the Trump side, some urgency. Now, of course, as you expect, the Democrats are going on tv, the talking heads, and they're saying that it's lawfare against Trump's enemies and that that's a bad thing and should never be done. And it's setting a precedent. Really, really is setting a precedent. So going after somebody with lawfare just to end their political career looking for the crime as opposed to responding to a crime. Are you saying that that's suddenly, that's, that's wrong and as if it's never happened to anybody named Trump? I mean, it's the most, it's the most obvious thing that's happened in the last several years. But the Democrats have no shame. And they also know that their Democrat base won't really be able to follow this story. They're only going to get the top line. So if the Democrats go on MSNBC and say, well, nothing like this has ever happened before, I mean, we've never seen anything like this going after a political person with a bunch of trumped up charges or even real charges that normally would be ignored. What? So that's funny, but it's working. You know, on one hand, I'm criticizing the Democrats for such obvious lies. So they're lying about their liar. So Comey's being indicted for lying, you know, under oath, and the response to his supporters is to lie about it. So they're literally lying about the liar. Have I ever mentioned that? That's all they have. The Democrats only have hoaxes and lies. They did have Lawfare, but not anymore because they're not in charge.
