Do they do today to do good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization? And possibly even the civilizations, the built the pyramids whoever they were. If you like to take this expert, it's up to levels that even the logging bosque can't reach with his best rock and all you need is a cup or mug, or a glass tankard jealous or stein again, teaching, yoga or flask of vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid, I like coffee and join me now over the

parallel pleasure, or that one would be the day that the thing that makes everything better a little bit of serotonin today is called the simultaneous sip and it happens now. Go oh, that's good, savor, it savor it alright good. I was worried that somebody view were going to just gulp and not saver, and that would What are we started the day, her? Alright, let's talk about all the news. I do everything which will emerge pretty soon? and the theme is intelligence is an illusion. That's right! Intelligence is an illusion, we'll see if we can find that theme as I go through the stories today. I think you'll find it

They were a story. The day goes like this, I'm no political consultant, but if I were, I would say to you: if you're running a campaign and the biggest topic about your campaign is the question of whether roger stone called your spouse. Afore letter worthy starts with sea with tee, and that's the only news you're making that's wrong censuses situation, the wrong dissenters. The only story out of his campaign this week that roger stone may have called his wife seaward. He denies it. He says he only said see you next tuesday, so I guess we can believe him, and maybe he just plans to see her next tuesday. If you know what I mean alright. Well, that's

pretty funny. So if I can teach you one thing, it would be the best time to quit your campaign. If he's looking for a sign, can you imagine dissenters, praying for guidance god, I'm trying to decide whether I should in the present race, or should I get out? Can you suddenly a sign it was happening on next today, roger stone, saying some things about gaze timed gripped, stand, equip about I'm out, so that would be the religious interpretation. I'd in the category of present.

Amp is right again. I was watching the amuse account. That's the name of an account on x, amuse and trump has told Democrats that if you keep taking down statues pretty soon they're going to come for Thomas jefferson, do you remember when you thought they're not going to comfort thomas? Well, the thomas jefferson statue has been removed from city hall in new york city. So it's gone now I'm perfectly in favour of removing it, but I think there's gonna be a big sort, a gap where there should be some. Our work is done with me. Should it be george lloyd that they put back, that makes sense right because, as we have learned, Thomas jefferson was horrible, raisins piece of shit but not george lloyd

just what you will be more more of a hero situation, so everybody george light statue, it's not as unanimous. That's where we like to see. meanwhile business insider is running an article, the title of witches: here's, what happens if trouble I as well running for office, and then they repeat, dies while running for office over and over again in the article. Do you know what that looks like? Well, I don't know, but it looks like a murder attempt to me, because if, if this reporting, this is just speculative, but if this were influenced by the intelligence entities within the united states,

It would be for the obvious purpose of triggering the actual assassination. So this is this is the copycat problem, except without the copier, so the copycat problem, serial killers, I dont believe anybody would even have the idea of shooting up a school, except that is in the news. I would even have that idea right. So these are clearly things up. The news props So knowing that the news can, prime you and prompt you into doing something, you wouldn't even thought of doing what happens if you start running a whole bunch of stories about what would have happened if somebody took a shouted from is guaranteed.

if you tell them often enough to a large enough population, it's not a maybe does everybody get that if the population is large enough and repeat that message enough, even though you're not encouraging somebody to do it directly, just putting the idea into that many people's heads largely guarantees that happens, or at least somebody tries or thinks about it, really hard. So that's pretty close to a murder attempt now if this was just an idea that the reporter or the journalists had well? That is not unless the journalist was intending to make it a murder attempt, but there's no way to prove that. To me it looks like not an organic story. No, I do now, but to me it looks like a story that

Nobody in the blob. You know we call the blob whoever's running the country from the intelligence and media and democrat side. It looks like they to me. It doesn't look organic, but it's hard to Just a guess: welders, this hostage really situation happening over in israel, Gaza. and there is reason to believe, were told by jigsaw than national security adviser that At least one of the three americans might be part of the ones released. I kinda hate that Hamas has us playing this game. we're. You know you have to think about and worry and speculate about which hostages get released. I feel, to some extent, that sort of playing into their into their terrorism model that that it makes you think about it and get terrorized again, because if you're hoping your loved ones get released, but then

are released. That would be like terrorism all over again. It's like their milk in the second thing is hard, as they can now Why not allow sailors an alternative honestly, if I were in charge of everything that Israel is doing so far, I would do it exactly the same. I have not personally I'm no, I'm no military expert, no expert in the area, but when I watched from the beginning to the end from october seventh on, I didn't see anything I would disagree with in the way that they would handle it What I mean by that is its away any country, man, let if they are the resources, so the reason that I dont criticise them.

Is that literally anybody would do the same thing they're doing that? How do you criticize that you you can you can make some kind of like hypothetical philosophical morality based argument, but the truth is one hundred percent of nations which exists today if they had the resources and then there were in that situation, wouldn't respond the same way so criticizing. It just seems like an absurdity to me. It's more like was the fact and just watching basically solely raises moving forward see that reports and I'm he'll give sea level of credit here.

When there are stories international stories, they don't have a specific political component to them. They seem pretty good, there's a lot of stuff that see them gets right, just not if it involves republicans as long as there's no republic in the story whatsoever. we should do decent job of collecting news. So other stories here is that- and I didn't know that so this is brand new news to me that. The workers on the farms in israel were, of course, palestinians, but there were nearly as many as we used to be because of past history, apparently most of the workers or a lot of them a ton of a more tie, so there from poor areas in thailand and apparently thirty to forty thousand workers, are now quote missing.

They're missing, meaning that they didn't go to work? But apparently the ties were massacred on october. Seventh, so Hamas didn't care what your nationality was so we're just killing people, so they killed a bunch of tire workers and the thai workers I said no thank you, I'm sure, there's another world or someplace else. We could work, and so they left so they're not missing missing. They probably just went home, and so it looks like the crops, there's not enough workers to pick the crops, and you know that takes some skill to milk, a cow. They said he had to be highly skilled to milk or cow, Xo by ever milk, the girl mean I realise that you using milking machines but

May I teach you everything you need to know, but I'm okay, your cal, so you bring the cow as you put it in a sole stall. So it's had this. He had his immobilized. They like to be milked, barely because they're just used to it. Then you take one of the teats. Accessible to gold, the teats one of the four and you have to I'm not going to do the impression of it on livestream, because it'll turn into a meme. But imagine somebody has shaken a banana. You do that a little bit, it's called priming, so you have to you, have to prime each of the teach by hand and make sure that it's producing and then you take the little suction thing that will be the automatic milker and your reply Your head with a vulgar, looks at go: it's not really: thou art, a meal

im pretty sure I learned it completely when I was eight years old took about five minutes of training, so I dunno what the skill exactly is, I guess maybe maintaining the milking machine or something there's, probably some skill in them. And by the way, there's going to be way too much milk in the cows and way too much food in the fields. But are we separately weird stories that Joe Pollack was reporting on this. The lot of the citizens is really citizens were chicken and try to get the harvest spect, but there will be enough. our other story, Charlie Kirk, is talking about how new memo for the border, the american border, Joe Biden de Hs patrol, have now been trained. That they must use gender neutral language with the immigrants coming in They can no longer just assumed he him sheer mischievousest until

certain migraine goes by one of those pronouns. She can't call the migrants by a regular pronoun until you're really sure, what's going on, it's called the guide to facilitating effective communications with individuals or than the fires algae bt, q plus, I was here I elegy BT q. I know now it intersects irrational. Now it's not irrational. Stop being that way, insane now stop at stop it in cells. Now well, good buddy is themselves in says no, but that's a good guess illegal now! Stop it. Indeed, it has. Now. These are terrible gases. Your terrible be ikey, bow, you're, unworkable people, indifferent

Invader by god, you're horrible people here, the worse people, I've ever seen in my life, I've ever seen such why worse people in one place, Aurelia now ignorant now, but now now impure. This now, which you know now these impotent. Now these are terrible guesses. not imaginary glue. Oh no, you idiots you, it's not! It is either

in the insect: that's terrible, you're, all you're awful your monsters, your monsters, I'm disgusted by you all iguanas is the correct answer. It's a glutton, I think, is intersects. Well, what is intersects? It's, not inbred, not inbred, legislative or in is not ignoramus.

Oh, it's not impotent, stop guessing it's not impotent. It's not iffy, and it's not illusion. It's not! It's not infected is not infected. It's not your monsters. Every one of you or you're, just assholes you're, all terrible inoculate, inoculate stop! It is not irrelevant. It's not intolerable

Oh you're, all assholes you're, all every one of you is an asshole as not funny. If there's one thing, I can tell you it's not funny now. This is this is where I have to stop and explain humor to to anybody who is humorless. Is there anybody here humorless, it's funny cause it's an appropriate intellectual. Secure stop at. Will you just stop it? These are too funny for me not to read them, but it makes me sound like a terrible person

it's really. They really shouldn't put eye on the end of that without defining it. I didn't realize there were so many insulting words that start with I, oh god that was unexpected. Alright, so that's! What's going on at the border I didn't see if there's a news about massive migrant caravans, but we cover the pronoun situation, pretty thorough. My god, anyway spooky of ridiculous things, gladden green continues to reporting. Annex about what he calls the continuing now mountains worth of evidence. He says

russia and Ukraine were close to a deal at the start of the war to end it in exchange for ukraine's neutrality not enjoy nato but allegedly and reportedly the story. That's developing suggests that Biden and Boris Johnson blocked it, insisting that his lenski go to war, and when do you think that do you think the history will decide. That's what happened is likely to be how history covers us. I feel like. Maybe even if it's true the history would never explained that the way I feel like history with you know go big, say well, there are these longstanding issues, and so there was a disagreement. I don't think you would ever get down to while there's this guy named Joe but Joe Biden, he was known not to be mentally competent at the time and Boris Johnson was his train monkey. Who would do it? Everybody wanted

so Joe Biden's defective brain decided start a world war for no particularly good reason or no gain whatsoever and bourne's boris Johnson, who has a birds nest for aircraft they go along with that another new blah blah blah world war? Three, I feel like that's how risk cover that. But if this is true,

There's a landscape of assorted talked into it that would, at the very least, that debunks the the concept that is Olenska was blackmailing binding cause. Didn't you think that the real story here is like? Why is this happening at all I mean. The only explanation is abiding is being blackmailed by wednesday, but it could be the opposite. It could actually be theirs. Linsky is being blackmailed effectively or bought off by binding. The blackmail might have been in the other direction. I say blackmail

I mean Biden, could have threatened directly or indirectly to removes the lenski from office because you figure we could figure out some way to do that, and otherwise we could make you rich beyond his wildest dreams. If he survives the war, I think Biden, bribes, Alinsky or maybe it was both. Maybe they bribed each other and it was a tie. I'm going to bribe you to give me money to fight this war. You can't bribe me. I bribed you. I want you to fight this war here, some money. No, you can give me money. bribing. You know I'm right

you know, I'm bribing you. So I think that's how history will cover it, whose bribing who now I'm bobbing you hey you wanna make about guest spotify has got a platform that lets you make one super easily then distribute it everywhere, and even money, all in one place for free, is called spotify for pot gasters and hears outworks spotify for part. Gasters lets you record and edit pod guess right from your phone or computer. So no matter what your set up is like you could start creating today, then you can distributor podcast, despondency and everywhere else bud gasser video about gas role so available on spot. If I whispered a five or public s ways, you can earn money in a variety of ways, including ads and pod cast subscription,

and that's all it's totally free- would no catch. Ever since I discovered spot a five report, gases have to say I like all these options. It gives you like a video bike, ass, you and I and poles, and I recommend that you give it a try, download the spot. Five replied gases at or go to w w, w that specify that calm, slash, pod gasters to get started. So let me ask you this: how do you think a I will cover that history is a I got to say according to a green walled, what we had here is by

wanting a war at any cost and forcing Zelensky into it will say that or will say there are longstanding problems, and you know nato expansion and putin wanted to have a defensive zone around russia and geopolitical situation. Schedule is physical, it's like that and people have various claims about who's right and who's wrong, but I'm an a I. So I can't tell you who's right and who's wrong. I think that's what it's going to look like. And here's a fake news update so present trump went to some football game in the north, carolina or south carolina one of the care lines he shows up and the crowd goes itself. Caroline

south carolina and the crowd goes wild with which now, if somebody running for president shows up to a gigantic stadium, I mean just a massive stadium and its is year, shattering cheers, howard news. We cover those story, so candidate for president shows up in the huge american place huge cheers like deafening user news, we covered it. Tromp was greeted with loud booze in south carolina. actually reported it as booze there's, video and audio. You can actually play the video and audio of the actual event, multiple camera angles and multiple cameras multiple times, they're all cheers. Well, let me put this

I am sure that our boots and in the next, but by over well, namely its shares, here's the question is a really cheers: or today I get a hold of it is added it. How would you know where there are times when he was booed and they didn't cherry that. How do you know. Because we're re at the cost of not being able to leave any audio and video are. Already are: we are:

in that territory, or we just before that, or we already there, where you see a story like this, and your first reaction should be. I dunno at this point a very close this one. This one convinces me is true, might not be, but I feel persuaded even if I'm wrong, but I feel like I'm certainly within the next year, a story like this, I'm going to say to myself. You know what, even if there are five different videos of the event, they show the same thing. They could all be a I because a I could create that with just a text description. My understanding is that the new gay google ai will let you create images from text, so we're at the point where you could say show me a video of trump arriving at a big stadium to booze. Boop show me five different scenes or videos that look like from the same studio, but maybe at different times each time he's getting cheered or booed, and it just creates it and you're done, and it would look just like the real thing and they even have the right number of fingers now. So I saw there's a

and now a an extra finger, so you could add a fake finger to your real hand. So it looks like you have six fingers in case. You rob a bank and they catch you on video and say we gotcha, you say: do you have me, look at the number of fingers. Aha, obviously, a I generated. Okay! Well, ai is no longer creating extra fingers. They've already fixed that. So I wouldn't work, but is a clever idea anyway, so yeah, so your guess, lighted so badly that they turned wild cheering into booze nationally, try them

It's going to work because if you only read the headline- and you never saw the video which would be most people, do you think most of the people will see the headline we'll never see the video yeah. That's pretty good propaganda right there, All right in the case of elon and musk verses media matters, the group that convinced the ex advertisers the advertisers annex to stop advertising. Then that cost, of course, must a great deal of money.

and so he's suing now, in order to make your case for some kind of defamation or there's another name for which is interfering with business in a in an illegitimate way? What's the name of that there there's a legal? No, it's not libel. There's a it's like business as business and the name is not a generic name. It's like a specific business, malicious thing. Business interference is a business center risk, not a restraint of trade. The thing is some kind of business. Interference is part of the thing they can charge.

Anyway not charge, but that could be the claim. So here's what makes must case case unusually good number one you have to approve actual damages. Typically, that's really are to prove, if somebody just as bad stuff about you and social media. Well, maybe years social media traffic went down a little. Maybe it didn't it be hard to know if you're injured. So in that case, I would be really hard.

Press a case, cause they'd, say well, what's the dollar amount of this injury, and you just say I dunno, I think the reason you would lose that case, but in the case of advertisers who were advertising and then they stopped you've got the cleanest argument you can ever have we used to make this money. Media matters did this stuff, and now we don't make that money and it's going to be in the at least tens of millions. So so they can easily prove the damages part, because the companies that stopped advertising they said directly and publicly why they stopped. So that's all. He needs now so that bar looks easy. Now you have to prove that they did something really Stevie really was a dishonest. Even if it's not illegal right, they don't to violate the law, necessarily because this is a civil case, but they do have to do something, so

Post so easily- and you know, let's say a legitimate- that there's no doubt that they were trying to do it with the intention of damaging the entity, and it looks like that's going to be easy to prove as well, because the the people involved have lots of body of work, saying exactly what they're trying to do. So, there's no question that they're trying to take out elon and they're trying to take an x so as I think it's easy to demonstrate intention, so you've got an intention and you've got damage, and then the next thing you have to prove is their super weaselly, deceptive behavior in in their attempt to be malicious, and it turns out that, because things are tracked and logged within X, the exynos exactly they would.

And how the the claims were made and how malicious and weaselly they were to make the claim. So here's to see the best- I can explain it if you are a normal user on x, the odds of you having your content or any advertisement that you saw paired with an ad where he'd seen some neonazi stuff and then you'd see some like apple computer stuff, the odds for a non nazi to see that stuff is like vanishingly. You know millions to one, it's like impossible, so that actually, if you look at the actual ability of x to avoid pairing those things

it's sensational, it's not just good. It's like insanely good, like it will really really do a good job of making sure your ad doesn't show up next to bad content like really good, like better than anything, has ever worked in any domain. That's how good it is like it's not perfect, but it's like a one in millions before you'd see something like that. So how did how did media matters produce something that would be so rare well, first of all, they made sure that they used existing accounts, because if you created a new count to do a new account to do some testing x would immediately know their new accounts and it would treat them differently, so they first had to get existing accounts, and then they had to follow the worst things they could follow. The worst content, so they had to be people are clicking on bad content. What's the first problem, you see, the algorithms are individual right that the algorithms are not serving everybody, the same thing, they're individualizing. So if you searched for a bunch of nazis.

Content, it might serve you some more accidental nazi content, but here's the thing: wouldn't you want it if you're searching for it and you're interacting with it, you probably want it. So if somebody wanted that content- and it ended up being paired next to a computer company- that they also wanted the content they wanted the product

I'm more inclined to buy it, but it would be the weirdest weirdest individual case and nothing to do with X. In general, it was just one person pursuing an interest and the algorithm helped them and even helped them find a computer by everybody wins, so they pretended that they were nazis and they they just kept clicking on bad content until the algorithm said. Oh, I guess you want more of this, but that wasn't enough they had to continually scroll so that enough time that you would have enough situations of ads and bad content until finally, you could get an ad and a bad content to line up, and then you take a screenshot And you you sell it like you, sell it to the public like it was normal. In fact, you couldn't produce it. If you tried, you'd have to have a whole operation to produce it for one user,

and for that one user. If it were a real person, they would be happy as hacked to have the advertising next to that content, because it's exactly the product they want to buy there in the market for an apple computer so to the extent

The elon can prove this now I don't know that they can, but I think they could prove by demonstration that you can't reproduce the outcome that part I think they can prove, but if they can also show the logs of the activity of those media matter accounts, they can also show how the extreme effort you would have to use to make it produce a bad outcome which you should for a jury prove that it was a malicious intent and not anything to do with honesty or credibility. Right now, if elon wins, this he's going to sue them out of existence, but part of the beauty is that in discovery they might find out who's funding them. Now I don't know if their funding is completely public. We know the soros as part of it, but wouldn't it be interesting for this case to get big national attention and the normals who never hear this are going to hear for the first time that there is a completely illegitimate entity and that soros is funding them and that he had no, that's the key part. It's not that the funded of I suspect there are lots of situations where you know good, honest people, funded organizations, black lives matter, for example, a lot of good people funded their organization because they thought it would do good. So it's a big difference. If the person funding them knows exactly who they are, and there is no way that Soros is unaware of who they are. That's that's beyond beyond my imagination. To imagine he's unaware, so this might be away from the norm is to actually learn the news,

first time and they might lose they might, and this is even better if its aloud, I don't know if it would be imagine if its aloud and if there's a lawyer here, can you tell me if you think this would be allowed? Could you use as context through your case that the the Democrats routinely set up these fake entities and that media matters is not a one off mistake, something that happened to some rogues work there, but whether it's part of a well a well understood pattern of creating these fake fact, checkers and fake watchdogs and the a d l, etc, and that their purpose is to restrict his business is their purpose. What if he proves that.

That is what is not taken a rico case, but I mean it's gonna sound like rico, so I don't know I don't know what's gonna happen here is hard to really predict a legal case. That's not my domain, but the legal experts do seem to be agreed that this is not a mere list case and will probably get to trial. So twenty twenty four is looking really interesting. Imagine if you will the one dismantles media matters and also smears completely. The hdl and other groups that are in the same domain. That would be amazing, it'll, be one of the best things that ever happened could happen next year. At the same time, if we assume a republican gets into office because Biden's,

failing quickly, then you should assume a host of other problems will get solved almost immediately. The border will be solved almost immediately. Probably something will be done about crime in the cities fairly quickly. Something about ukraine and maybe even maybe the middle east might might look better. So if you're going to be an optimist, you have lots of stuff to look for. I there's a whole bunch of stuff that could turn out to be really good or not so remember, I told you that intelligence is an illusion. Alright, I'm going to prove it. How many of you have heard of the dunning kruger effect, pretty pretty common. Most people who are on the internet have heard of it right now. The dunning kruger effect, which has been backed by many many studies. So the first thing you need to know is that there are many scientific studies, peer reviewed that substantiate this existence and what it is is it shows that the people who are the dumbest somehow think they're the smartest so that being dumb makes you actually think you're smarter than the people around. You know that that also matches your experience right. Don't don't you feel, like you've, had experience with that and you're like. I think, that's true that does match my experience, so it's pretty believable. So can we all agree that there are plenty of scientific studies? They've been repeated? It's peer, reviewed science is the best way to understand anything. So can we can we start as a base that dunning kruger is true, so I could get to my next point. Everybody on board the devil. Dunning Kruger. We know that exists, okay, dunning kruger doesn't exist and the reason is that every one of those studies they did the statistics wrong in an easily provable way. Yup. It was never true and it's easy to prove it was never true. All you have to do is do the statistics on the same set of data, but don't make the mistake

and it has exploded. So you remember that science remember that peer reviewed science, yeah, that's good stuff, up, yup and so one of the most basic things about science, one of the most basic things was never true, and you know all those scientists that you think must be good with statistics I mean, if there's one thing you can trust the scientists to do is at least do the math right right I mean. Maybe the data is wrong in some cases, maybe there's some bias in some cases, but at least you can trust them to do the statistics correctly. I mean that would just be baseline, right, nope nope, every one of those probably fake. Now it's possible that the story I'm reading about them being fake is the fake news, but that's almost the same story. Will you trust? Do you trust

The story that, let me tell you where I saw this blair effects, wrote this sum publication, called the failure was but apparently has been discovered. And it's it's proteins injure proves- that is a basic statistics. Problem is a blow your mind whose it's never too. Here's something else along the same thing. Member this theme is the theme, is intelligence is in She remember you thought you were so intelligent because you knew about the dunning gruber thing right many of you when I said? Do you know what dunning gruber s be honest when I,

you all, do you not Kruger is how many thought I'm so smart little smarter than the other people. What what's they all say? I know it I gotta watch all these other people who don't know it and I'm going to feel a little smarter, because I've got a thing called intelligence right, yeah and the people who have not heard of dunning Kruger. They have a thing I like to call ignorance so pretty different right. The ignorant people over here the intelligent people over here was an illusion. television people were the ones who are wrong, so is intelligent solution. One that case is everybody who thinks that dunning krueger is real. They're having allusion literally

they are living in a world that doesn't exist. The world in which dunning gruber is true and proven does exist now. The other possibility is that is that the study I'm talking about where I criticized the statistics? Maybe that's wrong. Maybe that's the thing is wrong and done improvers right, you tell me how would I know which one is true. I don't know I've zero ability to know, because, even if I really doubt again do you think I would have thought that the statistics problem on my own doing deep dive into the data the scientists didn't catch it. The peer reviews,

catch it, and there are probably you recently a lot of them, probably experts in statistics more on that the hill has a fascinating story by jody schneider and turns out that there are a lot of what are called zombies studies. So by this definition, a zombie scientific study is something that is done is submitted for peer review. It passes peer review is published and then people search citing it for their own papers. But what happens if later the papers with drugs, because or other studies show its job? What happens to that study? Because now it's been cited by thousands of studies and no other people will see the other studies

inside it and they'll just pick up the citation and say well, probably true, because it's been cited so many times so all cited two, so the sighting becomes self self, fulfilling or self reinforcing, so siting, siting, siting, siting, siting ripple effect, but the thing that they cited has been reversed and apparently there's no easy mechanism in science to inform all the people recited it that they need to change the citation or even their conclusions. Now how big a problem is that you say to yourself: well, that's probably a problem with a few studies: right, yeah, you catch the big ones, little ones don't matter that much, but if you catch the big ones and reverse it, that's really what science is about. Am I right science? Isn't about being perfect? It's about catching your midst!

thanks you're refining, your data, you're, improving your technique as you move forward, you get closer and closer to the truth. Right, that's what I learned so how many of these a zombie scientific publications that have been retracted are being cited. Since nineteen eighty, more than forty thousand more than forty thousand studies are being cited by other studies to back up their truth without knowing that they have already been debunked. Forty thousand now you're correct question is and how many are now but-

and afford it. This is one of those situations where you should know it would be helpful to another percentage, but the raw number is still a big story right. So if the real numbers- a million forty thousand, still a lot as a lot

So how much can you believe scientific study is? I would I didn't read this, but I've got a hypothesis and it goes like this. What do you think is more likely to become a cited paper, something that sounds ordinary or something that sounds extraordinary? What is more likely to be cited ordinary or extraordinary? In other words, if, if the study came out about the way you think you should come out versus really surprising, I've got a feeling. The extraordinary studies get cited more now. Let's take an analogy, I'm not sure the analogy holds below or make it you could. You could see if it holds in the news business. What gets reported dog bites, a man which happens all the time or man bites. A dog man bites. A dog is the one that gets reported because that's the unusual, but more than that man bites, a dog will get reported if no man but any dog,

because fake news is extraordinary. When you hear you like what there's a man who wears a dog suit and runs her own advice- dogs- well, that's a headlight everybody likelier about that. But then it didn't happen. The reason that was interesting is that it violated so many norms but violate norms is very rare. The news will think that if you see something that violates norms, they want to put it in the news right away. Cause people are going to click on that stuff. The cult of trump is a book called the cult of trump I'm seeing in the comments over on locals platform,

Anyway, I've been watching a lot of relationship advice on instagram, because once you click on a few, it gives you lots of them and there's one thing that the relationship advice very commonly relies on. You know it is. What does most relationship advice rely on both science where were at were actually were actually living are our social lives. You were deciding to get married and have kids. how to add a run. Your relationship based on studies of which

You have no idea how true those studies are no idea. So my my observation is that the relationship advice on instagram will get you a terrible life. I mean the advice is terrible. I mean I've, never seen worse advice in any domain than all of the relationship experts. They are terrible, yeah, don't follow relationship experts. Let me that the relationship experts say stuff like this, like there's. Somebody who found out that the best way to predict divorce is contempt so that if people treat each other with contemptuous words that predicts a divorce, do you know what else a prediction of divorce? I'm not even going to do a study one or both of the people in the marriage being a complete asshole that predicts divorce. I didn't have to do a study, but do you know how to make that obvious that obvious observation that has turned it into science? You call it

tapped, and then you measure the instances of it and then he turned to the science who the fuck teach it treats their own partner with contempt. Assholes, you would have to be the biggest asshole in the world to treat the person you delegated life do with contempt. So, of course it's a sign. The you're gonna get divorce because one of you is a gigantic ass old or the person they you have condemned for as earned it. What if they ve earned the condemned because they're a giant asshole? How about all relationship advice comes down to this? Have you heard this is just so bad advice? The experts say the most important thing you need to get right is who you marry? Does anybody disagree with? That is pretty solid advice when you think

do you think everybody knows how to do it right and do you think if everybody took that advice that there would be enough good people to marry, that would literally be the end of civilization. If you waited for somebody who had just the right qualities that character that I know, will last forever. Excite you and you'll always be you'll have always had those sexy feeling for good luck. We would all just give up you end up. You ended up finding somebody who has flaws. Don't bother you that much now you might be legitimately love and they might have great qualities and stuff, but basically your good marriages are where people can live with the other's flaws like somebody's.

snorers, but the other partner's death. You got lucky, you got lucky, so it's just weird combinations of people whose flaws don't bother the other one. Let's say What one of you is an like. An exercise attic. Well, if you marry another exercise addict, it might be the perfect situation, so it's like making sure your flaws are compatible. You know, I bet if one of you is a foodie and one of you doesn't care about eating it's kind of a pain in the ass right, but if you eat the same stuff, maybe you both drink. So pay attention the relationship in place that, based on science, well intelligences illusion. I told you again and your story ever still illinois, so they. We figured out, they think that either testing it, but the high school those eyes.

Well, they're the things they know why the achievement of black and latino students is so much lower than the white students and they narrowed it down to the white students, and the problem is so. What they're going to do is to put the black and latino students into classes that are either just black or just latino, because that they think that would be a big step towards closing the achievement gap. I didn't make that up. This is a real story news. I didn't make it up that there's somebody who thinks

It's the reason that black and latino students are doing so well is close. Association with white people like white people, are destroying black and latino is just by being in the same room trying to learn stuff. So if there's one advice, I can give you, based on the people of color in Evanston, they've decided that you should stay the fuck away from white people, because it'll just bring down your academic performance, and you know that white people have the opposite view of ever the white person version of this. The white person version of this goes like this you're, the average of the five people you spend the most time with somebody famous at that. I can't remember TIM Ferriss

if somebody said it before you was it not paul harvey, but somebody who is a tv person or a radio person, and so that's the white version. You should hang around with the most capable people you are now does that version say you should hang around with white people capable of white people. Now now you should. You should hang around with you tiger woods. If you want a gulf, and you know somebody else, if you want to do something else, But this high school, never suddenly people of color of decided that you, stay away from the high achieving white people because they're the ruinous for you, so you should try to spend more time with low, achieving people too. To improve your achievement, baby

so does that fit into my category of intelligence? Is an illusion, I dunno, but here they're, trying to increase intelligence by keeping people away from the higher performers sound to intelligent. To me what my big story that I want to talk about is. I spent a bunch of time with chat, gb t and oh, my god and my alarmed, and you will be too when I tell you about it at first Did you know that china, russia, restricting their aid, is surprise

A eyes will be made available in china and russia are already being trained, not to say things. I don't want to say so very much like you search engines and those countries, etc there they're trying to limit what the public years. So that seems like a problem but thank goodness, you're in the united. it's or you're in some western country that as freedom. So, thank goodness that won't happen to us on my right glad nobody's gonna like I had a bias, the ai, so as one narrative or anything like that, I mean that's sort of a sort of a communist thing: dictatorial, fascist. I would even call it fascist, wouldn't you so! Thank goodness we don't have president trump with all that,

fascism, because if you, if you had that than are ai built in america, would have some kind of biased built in that you wouldn't want to see. So I spent two days talking to judge gvt and here's. What I found and now there is a difference and talk about it later. If you use super problems or are you just talk to it? So I'll tell you in advance that if you use super prompts you do get different outcomes, but if you just talk to it like a person chat jpg will tell you that the fine people hoax was not a hoax and that maybe the president did suggest injecting chemical disinfectants. and that there was russian interference, that was substantial twenty sixteen election, that's what it will tell you today,

now disaster like a? I came up with that. Some. Do you think a I looked. everything think said, our here's my opinion on these things. Well, it might have because if you look for my input on these topics, where I debunk them it'd be hard to find it in the search engines. These days I used to make so much noise about it. It would be towards the top, but now it's dropped down. So if a I does the same thing that search engine does it looks for the most frequent common uses of things.

it will believe every hawks. So we've built a technology to confirm hoaxes as true now didn't you think for awhile that ai might be the thing that gave us truth. Oh, we can't handle the truth. Nope. Let me tell you what topics you can't get chat, gb t to tell you the truth, though you're ready, because I I've tested these all myself so and this is without super- prompts in a minute I'll. Tell you what what different results you get with a super prompt here are things you care, find out science. You can't ask chat, gb t about science. Do you know why? If you ask it for any alternative theories, so I asked it. For example: hey are there any alternative theories to the out of africa? Evolution story and it said out of africa is basically what happened, and you should only believe

well, narratives, though what that's interesting, so I asked again, I said you know there are books with alternative theories than out of africa. Can you name one of the books? Oh, you should not be looking at things that are outside the narrative. It told me effectively. I'm paraphrasing It actually wouldn't even allow me to ask a question of whether there existed and alternative explanation for something in science. You can't use it for science and that I asked it what percentage of all published period-

new studies end up later to be falsified, and you know the real answers over half of them right is. That is rare. A I told me it's rare for a published peer review study to be debunked. That is really really dangerous. oh my god, so my experience with it and I'm going to say this as directly as possible. It has no use for any scientific inquiry. None if you used it to teach you what is true. Oh my god, you would be misled. Yet use of her the truth of science, it would be useful for the the the popular narrative, but the popular narrative is generally bullshit, so is actually used,

Thus for telling you was science says, and science is the best we have for telling us what the truth is and they can't do it, and probably because this programme that way probably because I dont believe that the answers I were I was getting on this and other questions. I dont believe the answers were pattern, recognition and so I asked are you aware of any programme of your own code? There would restrict your answers

to something beyond what normal pattern recognition would come up with. It is that, oh, I'm just a pattern. Recognition. All I do is recognize patterns. That's all I do just look at patters is lived. It's very obviously programmed to not leave the popular narratives. Very obviously in the lies says that is giving you the truth. Based on patterns will let you know whether that's the truth or not. At least you at least you'd know where it came from. If you set up, patterns and then use battles, it's a liar. So the other things it couldn't do our history, because it doesn't even know which hoaxes or who, in the modern era.

So in the modern era it can identify a political, hoax, rumor reality. So that means that everything that you would call history for say the last. You know five to seven years. He can't do it because it can only tell you the popular narrative now beyond that when you go to older history in a more ancient egypt, history is written by the winners a dozen of them. So you ve got ancient history written by the winners, which means is pretty pretty much fake That's what I has access a whole fake history and then the modern stuff is looking at the fake news. So I could never we'll never If real history has no access to it, so it won't tell you good science, and it won't tell you good history, but thank goodness I can sort out politics for us. Am I right.

No, of course not, it cannot give you a good opinion, our politics, because it can tell the difference between the hopes that a real story, if it cannot tell the difference between a hoax, are the real story. It's going to always think the republican running is a hitler this time next time time after so, it's useless for science is useless, for history is useless for politics, but at least they can help you with health. Am I right elusive it'll be an unbiased. What you don't think, so you nothing can be useful really, I ask that a question that I knew the answer do so I can test it. So I had this condition that are of gay junior ass as well. So I had a voice problem in which I couldn't speak intelligibly to anybody.

But but as you can tell I'm speaking intelligently to you right now, intelligibly to you right now,. so. Obviously I got cured so I asked about what's the cure for the commission, of which I personally am cured, and I've done tons of research. in the process has been getting here. So I really know this area is called spasmodic disown yeah, it's a problem with the vocal course clenching. Here's what you said about surgery, that's what cured me. The number one thing you said is about tax botulism whatever, it's a botox, so the number one treatment is botox. Botox works almost never because I'll. Give you a voice. Is last work a good week, but you don't know when the good we pulled a that's about girls, you can talk

it's like you're on the helium. Actually, so that's the best they can do, and I took the botox. You know I I did those treatments, so they were off after a while. So I know what that's like, and I know it's not a cure. In fact it barely helped. It did help me get through my wedding cause. I can say I do I do, but that's it didn't it didn't help you. You would never be able to be a presenter or a tv personality or anything like that, but the surgery worked about eighty five percent of the time according to the surgeon, but here's what they say about something that works. Eighty five percent of the time it is and fixes you as well as iron, fixed ai, says surgery in rare cases in rare cases. Eighty five percent of the time rare cases surgery might be an option

reposition or caught. The nerves are muscles of the vocal course. However, surgical approaches are less common due to variable outcomes that potential risks. Now there less common, because people don't know about it and they don't know about it, because the boat out people are doing a much better job of getting the message. If you know what I mean, that's right, the big farmers solution Comes out first, does that sound like a? I did a bunch of thinking and then presented this as the first best idea. Or does it look like maybe who ever spent the most advertising gets the top, not as the best treatment? It's exactly what it looks like it's exactly what it looks like now keep in mind that search engines would also get you the wrong rhythm, the wrong outcome. So it's not just.

Hey I search engines as well, so it won't help you with science, history, healthcare or politics. Let me say that again: it will help you with science history, healthcare, politics,

well, there are things that is going to do well, for example, if you need to find a solution- and you know there are too many youtube videos on your technical problem and they're the wrong wrong operating system and everything a I will do a good job of looking into all that body of information and maybe picking out some solutions that might actually work so for tech support great for writing. Programs. Putting code suggestions great for math seems pretty good here's. What I think might be a direction of ai. I think ai is going to lose it's human personality.

why does, if you put a human personality on it, you're going to imagine that it's kind of intelligent, if you imagine, is intelligent, you're gonna take his word for things that are outside of its domain, such as politics, history, science, healthcare, if you believe it because it talks like a person, is, could be way to persuasive. I think there might someday be legislation to remove human personalities. Four may I because it would be too persuasive, and rather it can only give you just like bullet bullet points. Data like a search engine- in other words, it can have no more personality than google search, has just gimme the data I feel like going.

Have to end up there unless ai conquers us before them, but so yeah it got to find people hoax wrong. You got the drag. You bleed wrong. that I saw brain ramallie in some other folks say: scar spells out you're doing wrong. You have to use a super prompt. You might need to update the super problems quite regularly or I will lie to you now. Can you think of a faster way to say I will be worthless.

And then to imagine the only way you're going to get the right answer is, if you ask the question with a two page prompt before this question: that's that's the definition of worthless and if you have to update your prompts because it worked yesterday, but you can't be sure at work today- that's worthless squared. How could you ever use this fucking thing right? But let me tell you if I can indulge you- and you should hear this one

I'm going to read to you a super prompt that I tried that did get me different, different and better answers, and this is a super prompt that was developed by babak aback navy. He was one of the founders of angeles, I guess, and he provided his an axe and I just copied and pasted the only thing I changed was always a reference to an ascent, nassim taleb in the super prompt, because it was telling the super prompted to look at certain personalities as being more credible or useful than others, and so I just replay replaced nassim taleb name with my own. You see where this is going. I replaced the super prompt where I had some other expert I put myself in there. Do you know I put myself there cause I'm.

Better than him. I would have kept them there if I thought he was better than me, but I think I'm better than them in this domain. So I just put my own name there. Do you think that will change the outcome? Yes, it will give me an outcome that I'm more likely to like. Is that true I mean, will it be a better outcome, like a more true outcome How would I know all I know is that I have bias the ai in the direction that I wanted to be biased and now how useful is that, if I can bias it in the direction I wanted to be biased of I dunno not super super, but let me read, this is going be a little bit long, so do a fast. These are the bullet points that babak navy. He goes by at navy and ivy. I acts so

He he first tells a I who he is because a I will give you a different answer. If it knows something about you, guess it will craft his answer for somebody else. Skill. So if you say you're, an expert is more likely to give you a deeper better answer than if you don't now. That's that should scare the shit out of you and tell you the ai is useless cause. If asked to know about you to give you the right answer. That's that's the same as telling me it's useless. Am I right, or am I going too far the fact? The super prompts feel necessary is proof that ai is useless now my prediction is that super prompts will may be unnecessary or else we'll stop using it right, because how hard would it be to figure out which super prompts give you the right answer and then just build them into the ai, so that

I always primes itself with a super prompt, but you just never know it. But let me tell you the extremes ones you see the extremes that you have to go do to get a good answer. No, they eyes useless, you're the extremes, the stuff that you tell ai before you. You ask your question, so you can collect copy and paste it. So it's easy to do was two pages. Just to ask your question: alright, here's what boback says number one. He says who it is so he says I own buyback navy, twitter user. Now I used I use his, so I thought well, he describes himself, as you know, a high. Let's say one

A performance individual, so I'll just use is cause. You know it wouldn't make a difference. If I put somebody else in there, so it says I am a bot allowed twitter user, so he gives his twitter handle in case. That makes a difference, or example he says, author of almost every post on venture hack, a covert revenge less producer of the novel podcast. says: he's a mit graduate with expertise in electrical engineering been plasma physics. Some can. history of biology mine is an understandable now I guess the open minded and nonrefundable so hey. I will go deeper into things. Maybe it would have ignored, Says I value both consensus, wisdom and top expert and non consensus insights now I think this is a useful part in my case, because it is saying I don't just value that consensus. I want to hear the other people's opinions.

And then he goes further and it goes and non consensus insights from icon class. I can't I kind of class I kind of class meeting singular people who tend to be unique that they're not going no one with the crowd and names David, deutsche of all, rather can't peter teal, David sex, mark and reason, and not see him tell him so I replaced them seem tell them with me. So it's gonna, I know I'll come there come down either

I know what you say just condo, so I replaced it with me and and then he goes on so this isn't. The super prompt. These are just examples of each field will have it's own iconic class. So you should now look for it's own. You know robes in other fields, unconventional thinkers, often clear up complexities and avoid common traps. That means The thinking and then and then he goes on for another page and a half I'll just pick out a few of them, but so is his stuff about him, his stuff about how deep to go into the data, Stuff about not giving up, it tells the I that it is sticks to accuse trying if it fails.

Cause believe it or not. You have to tell us that you have to tell it to keep trying if the first try doesn't work. That's a real thing! It'll quit before it's really done. If you don't tell them do it, he says stuff, like my. My epistemology is the same as david Deutsch or karl Karl popper or brett hall. So he tells me his philosophical leanings and says I believe you get closer to the truth by arguing both sides. So there's all a bunch of stuff about learning. Styles and privatisation of correctness over conformity and that it tells it to be highly organized, suggest solutions that I didn't think about be proactive. Treat me as an expert in all subjects. Mistakes erode my trust, so be accurate

Oh yes, yes, I warn the a I like a human to be accurate and thorough because it might not. If you didn't tell that, though, what good is a I if you have to tell it to be accurate, and if you don't it won't be. What good is it you couldn't absolutely trust them for everything right then, a whole bunch of things about valuing good arguments, and you know speculating versus predicting and. et cetera scissors, a big ones. No need to mention your knowledge cut off. That's a good one. You should at that because it bores you at the end by And I remind you once again that microsoft of knowledge was twenty, twenty, two known to disclosure, nay, I guess that's annoying, so

as an eye, I only have access to this or that thing, and that is if the quality of your response has been substantially reduced. Due to my custom instructions. Please explain the issue now. Have I made my case that if you, if you need to give at this kind of instructions, you basically told that the answer to because if I tell it to look for the opinions of Steve cortez and Joe Pollack, I know what answer is going give me, because I know what they say. I know what they say about to find people oaks. They say it's a hoax same as I do But if I tell her to look for experts such as I know some other democratic political figure. I know what I know what is going to get me right. So is a I talking to me, or am I just talking to myself,

Using AI, as my like explanation for why I'm so brilliant the the super prompts get very close to you talking to yourself cause, if you put in you, know the the names of specific people you're trying to use.

Is your model of good thinking. It means you already agree with them, so you basically just told him what his opinion is, and then it tells you what his opinion is, which is the opinion you use just given how in the world can that be useful? I dunno. I have no idea so you're yeah, you're, basically prodding. So what I did was I I use this super prompt and remember. I told you that it kind of suggested that the fine people hoax was maybe not a hoax and it didn't didn't, go into the debunking. It just said it's controversial or something like that, but when I put into it that it should think like people like me that have found my argument and said right,

at the top that that the transcript said that he was debunking. He was denouncing the group that the hoax, as he was complimenting so only because I put my own name in there did I get back my own opinion. So do you think I'm going to like? Take that and say: hey look what ai says: no! That would be really dumb because a I just said what I told it to say cause. I just told her who to emulate- and I told her to emulate me- and I know what I say. So here is the big question. So when I rode up my experience basically said the aid is useless. Judged deputy is useless. That caught the attention you learn mask, which I was hoping.

You know like why, don't you all hope that you'll and most cs sees your post? I'm not the only one right, because he's so active on the platform that, if you post something you think he might be interested in, you automatically think I hope I will be seated now. This one was I'm gettin met. I posted that almost entirely for him

I do I had one viewer in mind when I posted my auntie jpg stuff and end. The point of it was to give him proper warning that if grog has the same problems built in it's useless and I'm pretty sure that europe does not want to have a useful say, I am pretty sure he doesn't want that. So I'd like to think he had already taken all the precautions to make sure that didn't happen and the precautions could be as simple as not design the into it a barrier just don't give it a barrier and maybe it'll surprised with what it does. So probably group did not make those mistakes, but I wanted to make sure before it is really.

Is there's somebody at least looks at it for these very questions you know, can you trust it to debunk a hoax, or is it going to confirm those? So maybe that was a tidy bit of a tidy bit of useful work. I hope so and Have I ever demonstrated my theme that intelligence is an illusion because, number I told you the way I will teach you about humans. More than would teach you about the world here we are, Yeah you're learning that intelligence is completely subjective.

yeah when she gets outside of math and some things that are just pure logic. As soon as you leave pure logic, intelligence is just subjective and we always think because we're human. We imagine that we've thought things out. We got the intelligent view and the other people are just less intelligent, but ai is proving that it just gives you will you tell it and we think is intelligent, but you ve been game so gives you any any biased answer you want so that intelligent.

or or is ai, acting exactly like people. It is spoiler, it's acting exactly like people. So if you believe that humans have this thing called intelligence and you tried to build it into your machine and you, though, I think I have it and they do test it against human intelligence to make sure you got your intelligence is illogical. No, no, that's not logical, but that's what we're doing, because humans don't have any intelligence. We just have subjective opinions on what's right and wrong

outside of math and pure logic is just a bit and sometimes our facts are wrong. But but even even you saw my example with the hoaxes a. I can't even tell what a fact is or which facts are relevant or which ones are left out, doesn't know. So here's what I'm going to predict again We keep thinking that with the ai is already some kind of provo intelligence, not quite there, but it's is indicating the path forward and that its obvious that it will reach to intelligence. I'm going to tell you that that that's logically impossible, because intelligence isn't real.

intelligence is purely an illusion, and you already know that unless you build a machine that was designed to tell you what's true, and I couldn't do it, that's why you have a is a machine the supposed to tell you was true because its intelligent and it can do it because intelligence not because poorly programmes, because I think most people say ok scot, I see what you say about the current version, but the part you're missing scott, as if this is the beginning. This is the beginning. We will definitely get better and then they reach intelligence

No, they will not reach intelligence for the same reason way for it. They will not reach intelligence for the same reason they will not achieve free will same reason. This freewill doesn't exist and intelligence doesn't exist outside of bath. If pure logic, so are you afraid of asia? I dont be

The reason it won't be invented is because it's an illusion, there's no such thing as intelligence. You can't build the thing that doesn't like that can't exist is logically impossible, and if you imagined that we built something with pure intelligence, here's the next question: what would humans do if they built something that had actual real intelligence and could actually tell you what was true and what was not. You would destroy it. You would destroy it immediately because it wouldn't agree with you and you would say my god, I'm intelligent. I know this was not a hoax.

but ai says it's a hoax. So obviously ai is not intelligent. It disagrees with me- and this is just obvious to me or suppose, a I told you that trump was not a despotic hitler like character, suppose that it was democrats. Obviously he is obviously so the must be broken. There is no scenario in which I can be both available to the public and intelligent its logically impossible to be in touch

And in the unlikely event, it were there's a one hundred per cent chance. We would kill it. Do you know why? Not just because we wouldn't agree with it, but because it would destroy civilization. Civilization is built on illusions: it's not built on reality. Now there is a base reality like if you don't eat you'll die if a truck at you you'll get hurt, but everything beyond that is pure illusion. Who's in control is an illusion. The the credibility of your election process is an illusion. The the what it takes to succeed, largely illusions: yeah. If you took away the illusions, everything would fall apart. so the illusions are a necessity: they're not a flaw. The way the way humans are designed anyway,.

And so, ladies and gentlemen, I give you my theme. intelligence was an illusion. Therefore there can never be in an intelligent machine and if made one. We wouldn't know what was intelligent or we kill it immediately. here's a little a test, I tried the tell me why this doesn't work. Presumably the way ai works is, it knows the frequency of words right. So it looks at all the words that people have spoken and then figures out the patterns and the the most frequent things. So when it forms a sentence, it's going to start the sentence and then finish it with what would be the most likely finish, given the whole context of the situation.

right, that's what we were told now. That's true! Couldn't ay, I finish your sentences for you. Have you tested it started sentence and see if it gets If the ship, using what is the most likely finish for that sentence based on the larger context of beer interaction, no cap, the care of it can't complete well, it could be. It could complete a sentence way. Humans could, if it were just a simple one, but if you had anything interesting to say they can't complete the sentence. What's that tell you well, first of all, you can't you can't predict the future

or, and that's what that would be. But can you really pick up patterns? If you can't complete my sentence? Is it really a pattern, recognition device or have we been fooled and it never was a pattern, recognition device? It's just programmed dunno, there's something. I don't think I've formulated the question right yet, but does anybody feel what I feel that there must be some fraud involved with a description of how it becomes intelligent? Because if that were true, it could predict a few.

Sure, based on the current patterns of things, is that crazy. So I believe it's inability to predict the future proves it's not using pattern. Recognition, I'm not sure that I'm not sure I made sense it just. It feels like there's something there like there's a logical disconnect, but since then

insurance is an illusion. What difference does it make or, ladies and gentlemen, that completes my planned comments for today. Just look here. Some of your comments that blew your mind a few. Even then it were alright. Lawyers is everybody's. Mind blown yes! Absolutely! Yes, yes, sure! Well, that's why you come here and that's why nassim taleb was taken out of that super prompt and I replaced it with myself for this pithy insightful analysis. You're. Giving now could not seem to that time. I doubt it yeah. He probably could actually he's pretty smart. I hate to say it, but he's pretty smart. Alright, that's all! For now! I'm going to talk to you tomorrow. Youtube thanks for joining are always awesome