This was an enlightening & fascinating interview about AI and its intersection w/ culture and politics! I’m on PTO so had the time to listen to the whole enchilada. Those that don’t, try 15min from 1:15 to about 1:33. Here’s a summary of most interesting points in that span for those with no time for even that:
The deepest levels of truth are wrapped in irony and so far, large language AI is unable to discern this. I.e. There is nothing Islamic or State about an ‘Islamic State’. Nor is there anything United or Nation about the U.N. Could AI be programmed to understand and explain this depth of reality?
Applying AI (sorting of data) to healthcare should accelerate greatly the ‘diagnosis’ of disease/medical disorders. This area of healthcare is currently a big $ money maker (hospitals make $ by # of beds they fill, tests they run). Will AI be resisted by an entrenched health industry to protect $ profits over health? Type my symptoms into AI and get to more correct diagnosis instantly rather than 3 days at the Mayo Clinic.
There are a lot of other entrenched commercial interests or guilds that see AI as threat. A recent example: during Covid, the human motive for $ profit was greater than motive for improved health.
To step around these $ resisting industries, Open AI and normal Jane and Joes doing their own coding is the pathway forward. Amjad Masad stressed that learning to code is not too difficult.
Amjad also suggested that the reason we see Silicon Valley stepping more and more into politics is to be able to influence the coming regulatory capture that is expected to resist/oppose AI and not allow smaller AI start ups to gain market traction.
One of biggest (Amjad said at least the ‘best) venture capitalist firm in Silicone Valley today are Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz. And the reason they stated these billionaires are supporting Trump is because he is seen as more supportive of ‘little tech’ or disruptive AI small start ups — as opposed to Democrats who are really excited about regulating AI to protect existing industries. VC Andreessen Horowitz is all about supporting these small person AI entrepreneurs, and so they are throwing their $ support to Trump.
Amjad describes that there has been a cultural ‘vibe shift’ in Silicone Valley to allow people to support Trump, that one would not have seen or had space for 6 to 7 years ago.
BTW, what I learned about interviewee Amjad Masad is he’s a Jordanian (and I think Palestinian), highly educated in British schools there and came to America in 2012. He went on to work @ Facebook in 2015 in their Open Source department and is now a small AI business owner in Silicone Valley, who’s firm ‘Replit’ teaches people how to code:
Good point about those who stand to gain money and power from AI will likely take significant steps to thwart competition, even if that competition is better for society.
What could indoctrinators love more than "making people stupid by taking away their faculty to discern truth". Very helpful to "the cause" (to be said in breathless Melanie voice). No teaching of critical thinking, no teaching of fallacies. Through the miracle of fallacies, virtually any desired conclusion can be reached. A quick list:
1) Affirming the Consequent: not believing in subsets and super-sets
2) Guilt by Association: not believing in intersecting sets
3) Name-Calling: judging persons rather than propositions
4) Unfalsifiability: no possible negative evidence
5) Non-Definition of Terms
6) Shifting Definition of Terms
7) Straw Man: attacking a proposition that has not been made
8) One that I call "Individualizing Averages": acting as if all members of a set somehow possess the average of that set. See: "privilege".
I know I am forgetting at least three. But if I put them in, probably no one would bother reading ...
I have never seen a Far Lefty make an argument that was not critically dependent on fallacies.
"I have never seen a Far Lefty make an argument that was not critically dependent on fallacies."
And statistically, you are increasingly unlikely ever to do so.
At either extreme, problems become more wicked, which is to say that every proposed solution presents another equally intractable problem. The more extreme the proposal, the more extreme the problems presented by the extremist "solution."
Trump is not picky about avoiding fallacies. But not one of his major policies involves an argument that is critically dependent on fallacies. Nor is any one of his major policies "extreme", unless maximizing enforcement of federal laws, for example minimum wage laws, is somehow extreme. If any given law is bad, the solution is repeal, not arbitrary suspension of enforcement. So I am not sure what you mean. If Trump wins re-election, and, believing that the minimum wage is too high, arbitrarily suspends enforcement of the federal minimum wage, would you (acknowledging the precedent that Biden has set) have any principled objection to that?
"If Trump wins re-election, and, believing that the minimum wage is too high, arbitrarily suspends enforcement of the federal minimum wage, would you (acknowledging the precedent that Biden has set) have any principled objection to that?"
Absolutely, David. I have strenuously objected to every incremental step toward imperial presidency, for over forty years. I was slow on the uptake, or it would've been over fifty years.
To illustrate how slow-witted I was, I objected to the impeachment of Clinton, a president that I very much believed deserved to be impeached and subsequently removed from office. My objection was grounded in the setup for his lies to congress and the "by any means necessary" ethos that motivated such a setup. The reciprocity factor never occurred to me at the time, it was the use of ultraleft tactics that to which I objected, tactics I'd seen so often used by revolutionary extremists, both foreign and domestic.
That's an example of what I mean about "extremes." I fully agree with you that unjust or unenforceable laws should be repealed, not rendered risible by executive fiat.
I'll give you another example; the localized licensing and taxation of cannabis dispensaries while still a federal crime. To be clear, I do not agree that cannabis is as unharmful as it has been made out to be, but I also don't think burning and otherwise consuming hemp should be illegal, any more than antihistamine use should be unlawful. The crimes associated with hemp's production and distribution are already illegal, for reasons no reasonable person could find objectionable.
My objection to that early licensing and taxation was predicated on elected officials encouraging and enabling unlawful behavior, rather than doing the work to change the laws. It's the same objection I have had since the beginning, to "sanctuary" towns, cities and states.
There is a very good reason why the state reserves to itself the monopoly on violence; it suppresses multigenerational vendetta and Darwinian "rule of the jungle" interpersonal violence. This is a needful thing for maintaining a functional society. When the sanctioned monopolists fail in their duty to apply justice fairly and effectively, we get what we now have; a society crumbling into tribalism, unable to function.
Tribalism, seen as essential to the cause of "social justice", is explicitly demanded by the Far Left. The problem is that lines (drawn around groups) increase hostility between groups.
Just some additional comments ...
England, which has a border with France that is much more clear than the border between France and Germany. provides good evidence on this point. In the late medieval period, England was famous for showing rabid hostility toward foreigners. Apparently this syndrome goes back into the Roman period: Britain was the only major western province that did not adopt Latin. It also explains why the English did not, later days, adopt French. By
contrast, both the Celtic conquest of Britain and the Germanic conquest of England did result in the language of the conquerors being adopted: the conquerors ruled from within the island, rather than from across the Channel. They were not ruling "across the line".
Libertarian, a book recommendation that Tucker made today in interview w/ Amjad Masad is this one. I plan to order and read. Maybe you’ve heard of it, in part it explores science and God.
I remembered the name from a Bret Weinstein interview. He’s sure right that such people are impossible to reason with. Certainly a very unfortunate development for our society. Only AI can save our sinking ship.
“Mass formation explains how totalitarian states are ushered in.” (11 min)
Bret Weinstein interviews Mattias Desmet. July 24, 2022
It actually doesn’t even take critical thinking skills to realize the democrats are flat out insane. A little common sense is all you need. One of my favorite Tucker interviews was with MTG who calmly and clearly told Tucker about how deranged most in Congress are, even most of the republicans who are supposed to be sane! It’s like living in the Twilight Zone. It is what it is though. No point crying about it. Only God knows what fate has in store for us.
I’ve supported and followed the Snow Leopard Trust that does conservation work with them in the Himalayas for at least 25 years. I read a book about 25 years ago by a woman who was in charge of one of these areas and who actually dealt with them and said they knew her and were surprisingly intelligent. I think the video is real and this Snow Leopard is just an unusually friendly one who also was born and raised near a village and had a lot of interaction with people. Anyone who’s had a lot of cats for years would know they’re like people with a wide range of intelligence and temperament.
“Are Snow Leopards aggressive?” (A bing search question.)
“Snow leopards are not aggressive towards humans. In fact, there has never been a verified snow leopard attack on a human being. Even if disturbed while feeding, a snow leopard is more likely to run away than try to defend the site.”
Thank you for the reply, it brings a smile to my face. I had no reason to doubt the video, other than what others were saying, so I’m glad you affirmed its authenticity. Keep up the good work!
This is what civilizational collapse looks like. Burglary and looting of a south side store in broad daylight. News crew filming looters but no police. What do the democrats think of the ever worsening social breakdown in our cities? They don’t think anything of it. They’re too busy gushing about how wonderful Kamala is and how wonderful it’ll be when she’s in charge.
“Apparent Smash-and-grab thieves caught on CBS Chicago cameras.” (2 min)
I watched half of it so far and I certainly am a great fan of AI, partly because it’s so amazing and also because I believe it’s the only thing powerful enough to get control of all our out of control problems which have huge momentum, have taken on a life of their own and are rapidly taking us to the abyss.
I do recommend reading a couple of very good books I’ve read that I was reminded of in the interview. One is “The Blind Spot: Science and the Crisis of Uncertainty” by William Byers. Fascinating book where he talks about “the cultural project of reducing reality to rationality.”
Reminds me of Simone Weil: “Freedom and God are objects of faith, not of knowledge; in other words, freedom and God are infinite abysses whose bottoms cannot be sounded by knowledge.”
“The conclusion of the previous discussion is that, in the deepest and most profound sense, the things that make up the world cannot be defined, nor can they be understood or pinned down in any definitive way.” P. 9
“The entire world of science is grounded in human consciousness and rationality. In science, the world is described in a specific way, using a certain kind of language- and so reality is reduced to rationality. How accurate is the picture of reality obtained through science? The existence of the "ungraspable” implies that there are intrinsic limitations to the cultural project of reducing reality to rationality.” P. 10
Another is an excellent book by a physicist named Michael Guillen PhD “Believing Is Seeing: A Physicist Explains How Science Shattered His Atheism and Revealed the Necessity of Faith.” He was able to show how quantum physics supports faith and religion and even an impersonal God of “Absolute Nothingness” beyond the mind with its endless chattering and stories it constantly tells us about ourselves and about the world we live in. Excellent book.
With regard to free speech, it is unfortunate that violating the spirit of the law while not violating the letter of the law is so easy. The framers did not anticipate that "the press" would in effect become an oligopoly. The free marker is all fine and dandy, till Standard Oil comes along ...
I try. I come across a lot of good info so I do my best to share it. What does it mean to follow someone on Substack. I saw that you and some others do. What does that involve? Do you ever get people who want to direct message you? I get that occasionally. Just got one today. Do you know what that’s all about.
Hey Seva, I hope others here will help answer because I am not fully sure. I think “to follow” means to be able to see their reposts on my home page. And if go into their profile, I can see what hey read and like. I do see any direct messages. I don’t follow many, but I have not encountered any challenges or down side with the ones I do.
Thanks anyway. I tried to research it but didn’t find a good answer. I haven’t responded to any of the direct messages. I don’t trust that. Three of them so far. The first one was several months ago and he keeps trying to get me to answer. I don’t plan to. Too many crazies out there.
Sasha, Tucker's gaining weight. Someone needs to tell him that it's only going to be more difficult to get back to a healthy size if he waits too long.
Oh, yeah, right.... almost forgot; thanks for the link, appreciate it.
I don't know why Sasha has to sort of apologize for putting Tucker Carlson on this website. I'm not a fan of David Packman or TYT but I don't get the vapors if I see someone posting a link to their channels. Freedom of thought is about allowing people to disagree. Sometimes by listening to another viewpoint I end up changing my mind.
A couple of interesting videos of how young men and women are diverging. This can only increase due to technology giving us things like ChatBots that will be our digital human friends and then even humanoid AI powered robots as companions so people won’t have that much need of other people. I think this is coming far faster than many expect due to the exponential advance of AI and the huge amount of money and brainpower going into this both here and in China.
Seva got a Shout Out!
Well deserved!
This was an enlightening & fascinating interview about AI and its intersection w/ culture and politics! I’m on PTO so had the time to listen to the whole enchilada. Those that don’t, try 15min from 1:15 to about 1:33. Here’s a summary of most interesting points in that span for those with no time for even that:
The deepest levels of truth are wrapped in irony and so far, large language AI is unable to discern this. I.e. There is nothing Islamic or State about an ‘Islamic State’. Nor is there anything United or Nation about the U.N. Could AI be programmed to understand and explain this depth of reality?
Applying AI (sorting of data) to healthcare should accelerate greatly the ‘diagnosis’ of disease/medical disorders. This area of healthcare is currently a big $ money maker (hospitals make $ by # of beds they fill, tests they run). Will AI be resisted by an entrenched health industry to protect $ profits over health? Type my symptoms into AI and get to more correct diagnosis instantly rather than 3 days at the Mayo Clinic.
There are a lot of other entrenched commercial interests or guilds that see AI as threat. A recent example: during Covid, the human motive for $ profit was greater than motive for improved health.
To step around these $ resisting industries, Open AI and normal Jane and Joes doing their own coding is the pathway forward. Amjad Masad stressed that learning to code is not too difficult.
Amjad also suggested that the reason we see Silicon Valley stepping more and more into politics is to be able to influence the coming regulatory capture that is expected to resist/oppose AI and not allow smaller AI start ups to gain market traction.
One of biggest (Amjad said at least the ‘best) venture capitalist firm in Silicone Valley today are Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz. And the reason they stated these billionaires are supporting Trump is because he is seen as more supportive of ‘little tech’ or disruptive AI small start ups — as opposed to Democrats who are really excited about regulating AI to protect existing industries. VC Andreessen Horowitz is all about supporting these small person AI entrepreneurs, and so they are throwing their $ support to Trump.
Amjad describes that there has been a cultural ‘vibe shift’ in Silicone Valley to allow people to support Trump, that one would not have seen or had space for 6 to 7 years ago.
BTW, what I learned about interviewee Amjad Masad is he’s a Jordanian (and I think Palestinian), highly educated in British schools there and came to America in 2012. He went on to work @ Facebook in 2015 in their Open Source department and is now a small AI business owner in Silicone Valley, who’s firm ‘Replit’ teaches people how to code:
https://replit.com/
https://amasad.me/about
Good point about those who stand to gain money and power from AI will likely take significant steps to thwart competition, even if that competition is better for society.
Very interesting comment, thank you. I will definitely listen to this interview now, since I am one of those who has been wary of A.I.
Tucker depending on his guest is worth listening to. He's grown since his bow tie days.
Thank you Sasha, very interesting!!
I listened on a long drive today & also thought of Seva. He makes some interesting points. Smart dude.
What could indoctrinators love more than "making people stupid by taking away their faculty to discern truth". Very helpful to "the cause" (to be said in breathless Melanie voice). No teaching of critical thinking, no teaching of fallacies. Through the miracle of fallacies, virtually any desired conclusion can be reached. A quick list:
1) Affirming the Consequent: not believing in subsets and super-sets
2) Guilt by Association: not believing in intersecting sets
3) Name-Calling: judging persons rather than propositions
4) Unfalsifiability: no possible negative evidence
5) Non-Definition of Terms
6) Shifting Definition of Terms
7) Straw Man: attacking a proposition that has not been made
8) One that I call "Individualizing Averages": acting as if all members of a set somehow possess the average of that set. See: "privilege".
I know I am forgetting at least three. But if I put them in, probably no one would bother reading ...
I have never seen a Far Lefty make an argument that was not critically dependent on fallacies.
"I have never seen a Far Lefty make an argument that was not critically dependent on fallacies."
And statistically, you are increasingly unlikely ever to do so.
At either extreme, problems become more wicked, which is to say that every proposed solution presents another equally intractable problem. The more extreme the proposal, the more extreme the problems presented by the extremist "solution."
Trump is not picky about avoiding fallacies. But not one of his major policies involves an argument that is critically dependent on fallacies. Nor is any one of his major policies "extreme", unless maximizing enforcement of federal laws, for example minimum wage laws, is somehow extreme. If any given law is bad, the solution is repeal, not arbitrary suspension of enforcement. So I am not sure what you mean. If Trump wins re-election, and, believing that the minimum wage is too high, arbitrarily suspends enforcement of the federal minimum wage, would you (acknowledging the precedent that Biden has set) have any principled objection to that?
"If Trump wins re-election, and, believing that the minimum wage is too high, arbitrarily suspends enforcement of the federal minimum wage, would you (acknowledging the precedent that Biden has set) have any principled objection to that?"
Absolutely, David. I have strenuously objected to every incremental step toward imperial presidency, for over forty years. I was slow on the uptake, or it would've been over fifty years.
To illustrate how slow-witted I was, I objected to the impeachment of Clinton, a president that I very much believed deserved to be impeached and subsequently removed from office. My objection was grounded in the setup for his lies to congress and the "by any means necessary" ethos that motivated such a setup. The reciprocity factor never occurred to me at the time, it was the use of ultraleft tactics that to which I objected, tactics I'd seen so often used by revolutionary extremists, both foreign and domestic.
That's an example of what I mean about "extremes." I fully agree with you that unjust or unenforceable laws should be repealed, not rendered risible by executive fiat.
I'll give you another example; the localized licensing and taxation of cannabis dispensaries while still a federal crime. To be clear, I do not agree that cannabis is as unharmful as it has been made out to be, but I also don't think burning and otherwise consuming hemp should be illegal, any more than antihistamine use should be unlawful. The crimes associated with hemp's production and distribution are already illegal, for reasons no reasonable person could find objectionable.
My objection to that early licensing and taxation was predicated on elected officials encouraging and enabling unlawful behavior, rather than doing the work to change the laws. It's the same objection I have had since the beginning, to "sanctuary" towns, cities and states.
There is a very good reason why the state reserves to itself the monopoly on violence; it suppresses multigenerational vendetta and Darwinian "rule of the jungle" interpersonal violence. This is a needful thing for maintaining a functional society. When the sanctioned monopolists fail in their duty to apply justice fairly and effectively, we get what we now have; a society crumbling into tribalism, unable to function.
Tribalism, seen as essential to the cause of "social justice", is explicitly demanded by the Far Left. The problem is that lines (drawn around groups) increase hostility between groups.
Just some additional comments ...
England, which has a border with France that is much more clear than the border between France and Germany. provides good evidence on this point. In the late medieval period, England was famous for showing rabid hostility toward foreigners. Apparently this syndrome goes back into the Roman period: Britain was the only major western province that did not adopt Latin. It also explains why the English did not, later days, adopt French. By
contrast, both the Celtic conquest of Britain and the Germanic conquest of England did result in the language of the conquerors being adopted: the conquerors ruled from within the island, rather than from across the Channel. They were not ruling "across the line".
Worthy points taken as well-made, Mr. White.
I found this book very helpful in identifying and understanding fallacies; The Art of Deception: An Introduction to Critical Thinking
Book by Nicholas Capaldi
Libertarian, a book recommendation that Tucker made today in interview w/ Amjad Masad is this one. I plan to order and read. Maybe you’ve heard of it, in part it explores science and God.
https://christoverall.com/article/concise/science-and-its-shortcomings-a-book-review-of-mattias-desmet-the-psychology-of-totalitarianism/
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/60430391-the-psychology-of-totalitarianism
I remembered the name from a Bret Weinstein interview. He’s sure right that such people are impossible to reason with. Certainly a very unfortunate development for our society. Only AI can save our sinking ship.
“Mass formation explains how totalitarian states are ushered in.” (11 min)
Bret Weinstein interviews Mattias Desmet. July 24, 2022
https://youtu.be/CmloBdLnX3A?si=pmT4zYC02onJY-gu
Hey Matt, good call, thanks; I had purchased it from Amazon in May 2023.
“Mass formation explains how totalitarian states are ushered in.” (11 min)
Bret Weinstein interviews Mattias Desmet. July 24, 2022
https://youtu.be/CmloBdLnX3A?si=pmT4zYC02onJY-gu
Thanks for this link, Seva
It actually doesn’t even take critical thinking skills to realize the democrats are flat out insane. A little common sense is all you need. One of my favorite Tucker interviews was with MTG who calmly and clearly told Tucker about how deranged most in Congress are, even most of the republicans who are supposed to be sane! It’s like living in the Twilight Zone. It is what it is though. No point crying about it. Only God knows what fate has in store for us.
Any One True Faith (with official status) requires enforcing conformity, and enforcing conformity requires surveillance.
Strange and beautiful. I’d love to have a cat like this.
“Tibet. Compassion. Buddhist Monk & Snow Leopard.” (15 sec)
Shorts. Aug 1, 2024
https://youtube.com/shorts/qGKxVCFQX-Q?si=vKuteMT_02E_s6fP
I have seen this video on various social media platforms. Some say it’s fake/A.I. What do you think?
I’ve supported and followed the Snow Leopard Trust that does conservation work with them in the Himalayas for at least 25 years. I read a book about 25 years ago by a woman who was in charge of one of these areas and who actually dealt with them and said they knew her and were surprisingly intelligent. I think the video is real and this Snow Leopard is just an unusually friendly one who also was born and raised near a village and had a lot of interaction with people. Anyone who’s had a lot of cats for years would know they’re like people with a wide range of intelligence and temperament.
“Are Snow Leopards aggressive?” (A bing search question.)
“Snow leopards are not aggressive towards humans. In fact, there has never been a verified snow leopard attack on a human being. Even if disturbed while feeding, a snow leopard is more likely to run away than try to defend the site.”
Thank you for the reply, it brings a smile to my face. I had no reason to doubt the video, other than what others were saying, so I’m glad you affirmed its authenticity. Keep up the good work!
Aaaiii. Can anyone do transcripts or are we doomed to two hour videos of two dudes talking.
I too find these "long form" videos more than I am willing to slog through.
This is what civilizational collapse looks like. Burglary and looting of a south side store in broad daylight. News crew filming looters but no police. What do the democrats think of the ever worsening social breakdown in our cities? They don’t think anything of it. They’re too busy gushing about how wonderful Kamala is and how wonderful it’ll be when she’s in charge.
“Apparent Smash-and-grab thieves caught on CBS Chicago cameras.” (2 min)
CBS Chicago. Aug 2, 2024
https://youtu.be/-kWDN3gzr7w?si=sgcDA9r4A_tlbfuH
“Our reader Seva might like this one.”
I watched half of it so far and I certainly am a great fan of AI, partly because it’s so amazing and also because I believe it’s the only thing powerful enough to get control of all our out of control problems which have huge momentum, have taken on a life of their own and are rapidly taking us to the abyss.
I do recommend reading a couple of very good books I’ve read that I was reminded of in the interview. One is “The Blind Spot: Science and the Crisis of Uncertainty” by William Byers. Fascinating book where he talks about “the cultural project of reducing reality to rationality.”
Reminds me of Simone Weil: “Freedom and God are objects of faith, not of knowledge; in other words, freedom and God are infinite abysses whose bottoms cannot be sounded by knowledge.”
Simone Weil. French Christian mystic. 1909-1943
“The Living Philosophy of Simone Weil.” (13 min)
The Living Philosophy. Jun 20, 2021
https://youtu.be/9-8uvrcPkTk?si=pSjZHnG7tvRjZQft
The Blind Spot.
The Ungraspable.
“The conclusion of the previous discussion is that, in the deepest and most profound sense, the things that make up the world cannot be defined, nor can they be understood or pinned down in any definitive way.” P. 9
“The entire world of science is grounded in human consciousness and rationality. In science, the world is described in a specific way, using a certain kind of language- and so reality is reduced to rationality. How accurate is the picture of reality obtained through science? The existence of the "ungraspable” implies that there are intrinsic limitations to the cultural project of reducing reality to rationality.” P. 10
Another is an excellent book by a physicist named Michael Guillen PhD “Believing Is Seeing: A Physicist Explains How Science Shattered His Atheism and Revealed the Necessity of Faith.” He was able to show how quantum physics supports faith and religion and even an impersonal God of “Absolute Nothingness” beyond the mind with its endless chattering and stories it constantly tells us about ourselves and about the world we live in. Excellent book.
With regard to free speech, it is unfortunate that violating the spirit of the law while not violating the letter of the law is so easy. The framers did not anticipate that "the press" would in effect become an oligopoly. The free marker is all fine and dandy, till Standard Oil comes along ...
That guy has nothing on our Seva!
I try. I come across a lot of good info so I do my best to share it. What does it mean to follow someone on Substack. I saw that you and some others do. What does that involve? Do you ever get people who want to direct message you? I get that occasionally. Just got one today. Do you know what that’s all about.
Hey Seva, I hope others here will help answer because I am not fully sure. I think “to follow” means to be able to see their reposts on my home page. And if go into their profile, I can see what hey read and like. I do see any direct messages. I don’t follow many, but I have not encountered any challenges or down side with the ones I do.
Thanks anyway. I tried to research it but didn’t find a good answer. I haven’t responded to any of the direct messages. I don’t trust that. Three of them so far. The first one was several months ago and he keeps trying to get me to answer. I don’t plan to. Too many crazies out there.
Definitely liked his appreciation of our First Amendment.
Sasha, Tucker's gaining weight. Someone needs to tell him that it's only going to be more difficult to get back to a healthy size if he waits too long.
Oh, yeah, right.... almost forgot; thanks for the link, appreciate it.
I don't know why Sasha has to sort of apologize for putting Tucker Carlson on this website. I'm not a fan of David Packman or TYT but I don't get the vapors if I see someone posting a link to their channels. Freedom of thought is about allowing people to disagree. Sometimes by listening to another viewpoint I end up changing my mind.
A couple of interesting videos of how young men and women are diverging. This can only increase due to technology giving us things like ChatBots that will be our digital human friends and then even humanoid AI powered robots as companions so people won’t have that much need of other people. I think this is coming far faster than many expect due to the exponential advance of AI and the huge amount of money and brainpower going into this both here and in China.
“Shock: Gen Z Men Embrace Trump.” (5 min)
Breaking Points. Saagar Enjeti. Aug 1, 2024
https://youtu.be/iMk5c-lVwFE?si=2H76Gq4XJVhkCxby
“Mass Production of Female Robots Will Soon Make Women Unnecessary.” (8 min)
Carlos Show. July 24, 2024
https://youtu.be/kk57tXHapPI?si=UFqqg3kLYJvirqnT