Badlands Media - Devolution Power Hour Ep. 492: DiGenova Exit, Dividend Fights, AI Race

Episode Date: September 13, 2026

Jon Herold and Chris Paul kick off with midterm convention takeaways before Herold recaps some heated online fights he got into this week over the tariff dividend proposal. From there they dig into Joe DiGenova stepping away from the RICO grand conspiracy case in Florida, a development the guys clearly think deserves more attention than it's getting. There's also a stretch on the AI race and what they see as an operation forming around it, plus the usual mailbag style rundown of superchats and viewer comments covering everything from debt policy pushback to a North Dakota State football shoutout. An Aaron Rodgers clip closes things out if time allows, giving the episode a lighter final note after a fairly dense couple of hours.

The Badlands, what are the Badlands? Explain those Badlands. That's a hell of a name. Well, good evening, everybody, and welcome to the Saturday edition of the Devolution Power Hour. As always, I am joined by Chris Paul. Chris, how is your weekend going, man? The weekend is going good, although I look a little blurry. I am just now realizing it.

It's because I had to turn my camera off and then turn it back on to make it work. And here I am in a blur. It has not been that kind of weekend, except here on the Devolution Power Hour. Well, I will say you are so far away from the camera that it's hard to tell that you're even blurry. Well, John, people complain about that in the chat constant. I'm just adding some fuel. And now you will, yeah, yeah, you'll add some fuel to the fire. Well, while we do commercials, I will fix that blur and maybe I'll consider zooming in,

although I don't really know how to use my camera all that well. I'm just kidding. You don't have to zoom in. But we're not doing a commercial break until the, very end of the show tonight so shit my whole plan is gone well then that means i turn my computer my uh camera off and to go fix it and then come back no we'll do take a commercial we'll do a couple commercials here shortly um well well i was going to do some small talk you know tomorrow nfl season kicks off yes your pittsburgh team is playing a team with no quarterbacks

yeah that's funny i guess even the uh backup quarterback also heard his back yeah so yeah i'm not a fan of the atlanta falcons but i have a lot in common with the two quarterbacks yeah but um luckily your quarterback we're we're gonna go through some of that clip tonight maybe if we have time yes we only have like a couple of stories or topics we're going into but i feel like it could take a while yeah there are hundreds of things to talk about maybe millions is there that that's a little hyperbolic but hey that's okay just talk about stuff man i bet everybody in the chat is freaking out about something else Probably got a thousand people in there freaking out about a thousand different things.

Probably. We will talk a little bit about the midterm convention and some takeaways from that. We can talk about some of the fights I got in with people over the whole dividend thing this week. I mean all fired up and hot and bothered for my show yesterday. Then we should talk a little bit about Joe Dijanova leaving the Rico Grand conspiracy case down in Florida. I think that's got everybody a little on edge. and then what else we're going to go. The AI race. There's definitely

an opt to that. We'll discuss the news on that today. And then maybe the Aaron Rogers clip at the end, we have some time because I love that clip. But yeah, we'll take your commercial breaks now so that you can fix your face. It's going to be so clear,

so soon. Okay. Well, looking forward to that. Let's start with a little soft disclosure. Softdisclosure.com. Court is now in session. Your Honor, the defense calls Mr. Dry Skin G-Money to the stand. We're going to pretend I didn't hear that. Mr. Dry Skin, isn't it true that soft disclosure is proudly made right here in the United States while directly supporting six American small businesses?

I reckon? Isn't it also true that soft disclosure is made with honest natural ingredients without the harsh chemicals so many people are trying to avoid? Unfortunately. And isn't it true? It's made with the help of pedorableness. horrible baby goats. Can't argue with the goats.

The court reminds the gallery that Lobstock will conduct themselves appropriately. Bless your flaky little heart, Mr. Dryskin. Your Honor, the defense would like to submit Exhibit A. Proceed. Cindy H writes, Honestly, the best lotion I've ever used. Exhibit A is admitted.

Exhibit B. I use it on my face and hands. Get compliments on looking much younger. Mr. Drake, I appreciate your enthusiast. as. Not greasy at all. Clean feel compared to other lotions. Vanilla citrus has a nice

light scent. Well, that is just showing off. Tyrone writes, I find myself hydrating my elbows and moisturizing my soul a lot more frequently now.

The defense rests. Softdisclosure.com and we also got to because I haven't put these back in yet, but I'm definitely, definitely clear again. Well,

that's got. I wasn't talking to you. I assume you're saying something funny and charming. I was. I was telling everybody how it wasn't actually talking to you, even though you assumed that I was, which is a good assumption considering you're the co-host, but we do have one more commercial I'll play.

It wouldn't be a good assumption on Wednesday. That's true. That's true. But it's not Wednesday. Saturday. There we go. Okay, one more promo here. We'll get to the rest of the sponsors a little bit later.

Dart Vegas coming up this week. If you guys missed it, we did our exclusive live stream. We might do one more this week, like Monday, Tuesday or something, but as always, it was pretty good until Burning Brock got out there and started taking everything way too seriously.

But so you guys should still get your virtual tickets and you'll have access to that virtual live stream. Well worth it. And also you get access to the content that we're going to be putting out this coming week. We're going to have some killer panels. Check it out. Patriots, the fight for truth doesn't stop at the screen.

It's hitting the road again. Badlands Media is coming to Las Vegas, September 17th, 3. 19 for the next stop on the Great American Restoration Tour. Join your favorite Badlands hosts and like-minded Americans for three powerful days of unfiltered conversations with deep dive panels. I understand this is an emotional talent. Real debates and tough questions. No topic is too hot. No question too bold. Tickets are on sale now at badlandsmedia.tv slash garden. Can't make it to Vegas, grab a virtual pass, and let's Watch from home.

Question the narratives. Fight for America's future. Vegas is calling. The restoration continues. Get your passes today. We'll see you in Vegas, Patriots. Badlandsmedia. com.

TV slash events. Get yourself some virtual tickets. And we'll see, Chris, you do look a lot clearer now, so I underestimated. Yeah. It's all working out. The blurriness. This is great. You know, what's not working out is my NDSU Bison.

they moved up to the fbs now and so their games are like at night and they're playing right now against air force they're kicking air force sass though aren't they i mean it's early it's like seven nothing oh okay well it's not 77 to seven yet not yet but it might get there and he sees pretty damn good man that was bananas i just learned the other day that uh college football has like uh what do they call it in little league when you get up by 10 like a mercy rule Mercy rule, yeah. Yeah, college football has that too. The coaches can agree to end the game.

Yeah, if the coaches and the referee all agree that the game should be over, I wonder who has to call like the betting apps and the casinos and ask them if it's okay if they end the game. That's a great question. Miami's like, Miami's like, guys, guys, we've covered every imaginable spread. All the players you're placing. on have left the game they're already on the bench there's nothing else that can happen

i wonder if there's a prop bet for a game ending early like mercy rule being implemented bro now that you mentioned it one of the one of the like polymarket or whatever one of them is going to have to to create that just because somebody like you might want to bet it yeah i'd only bet it if i knew it was going to happen you know you can never know that until the the game right because they allow you to just bet whenever you're like oh i think this is going to happen i wonder if i can put 20 bucks on it yes you can yes so ridiculous the freaking polymarket ads i see more and more people every day on on twitter um posting about like their their paid partnerships with polymarket it's so annoying it's so disgusting like just the incentives on social media i saw another guy today

is it amazing though once you realize that that's what's happening on the back end and that you know specifically like this company is asking these people to say this particular thing and then you watch out for it and all of a sudden way more people than you could ever imagine or saying that thing it's everywhere it's so disturbing it is disturbing and then also um i saw today so Elon Musk he did a new partnership program or i guess maybe wasn't him but his platform twitter did and so instead of like the way they previously did monetization on twitter for creators based on like views and impressions and stuff they're switching it and i don't know i don't even quality I don't I mean I could qualify if I wanted to if I wanted to like be a gay social media person post all the time

I'm like one viral tweet away from it happening but like I just can't bring myself to want to like post enough to get there on purpose you know what I mean like if it actually happens that'd be great but what are the qualifications now I just heard you off course twice I hope you're hearing with your mic dude like hearing something terrible I'm hearing something terrible yes now it stops Yeah, but it did it before. Yes, it did. And then I was like, oh, maybe my headphones were just messed up. I thought that was my headphones. Everything's falling apart. I don't know what to tell you.

I think it's you. But okay, so this is the new qualifications for it. Right here. You have to be at least 18. You have to have 500 verified followers and then 500,000 verified home timeline impressions in the last 90 days, whatever that even means. 500,000 verified home timeline impressions. Okay, so they have to, so verified users have to look at 500,000 of your posts from your page.

I guess. Yeah, okay. I mean, that sounds right. But anyway, so speaking of like the incentives, I saw a guy today, and I think I shared this in our little private chat, but he was like groveling. He's like, I don't understand why my application for the partnership program hasn't gone through yet. Like I'm getting a little worried. and they are turning away people, I guess, for non-original content, which is hilarious, because I love that move.

So many people are just like, it's the breaking news brigade, right? Everybody shares the same damn story. He's like freaking out. And then he goes into, I will also add that I put in some of the most hours on this app a day. Just this week alone, I'm averaging over nine hours. I need a couple days where he was like at 16 hours. And he showed a picture of this like as if it was like, this is me bragging of how much we use this app. I'm so deserving of of the money like who spends that much time on social media I do this full

time and I don't spend that much time on social media like that's insane yeah I don't know how you do that that's all that's all day yeah and I guess if you have a tab open on your computer or something and you go there consistently does that count well this is a phone this is a screenshot from your phone like your phone where it's like you have the screen time thing you can it tells you how much yeah but i thought that that was like through all your advice your devices or is it just your phone no it's it's through your phone i'm pretty maybe maybe if he has like a mac i guess technically right maybe i need to be more concerned about when i get that notification it always happens at like a weird time on sunday morning i'm just trying to like enjoy my

my brief few hours respite and all of a sudden it like buzzes through on my phone and it has like a special buzz and I'm like, oh, that's the screen time thing. I look at it and I'm like, that's the best when you're like in the middle of doing something on your phone and it sends you the message. You're like, stop. I'm trying to do something on my phone. Yeah, yeah.

Like, yeah, man. Also get me off of this. Yeah. It's hard. It's impossible. But let's talk a little bit. We'll get to the AI stuff in a little bit. I think that's probably the conversation I'm most excited about.

But this is almost old news now, but there was a midterm convention like two days ago. two days back to back they had a whole bunch of establishment uniparty speakers trolling through saying big things crowd was all hyped you know the mainstream media was reporting that it wasn't well attended and then con ink was reporting that it was very well attended so mixed um you know it's reported on that but i'm curious what your takeaways were overall if you caught any of it i know you did watch trump's first night speaking and then i caught up on trump's second night and those were the actually and i watched the rfk thing too because i saw that that that was like the most important speech of all time.

And I did not have that impression of it at all. And I mean, people will remember from back in 20203 and 2024, I'm, I have no problem with RFK Jr. whatsoever. I actually thought that it would be interesting to see him placed as Trump's vice president. And if you remember, so January or no, July 11th of 2024, for there was they were doing one of their billionaire confabs in like sun valley idaho and reed hoffman and peter teal if i if memory um if my memory serves uh were having this like screaming match at their billionaire meeting over trump being martyred and two days later was the butler assassination event

number one and two days after that uh and you already have it pulled up wonderful two days after that trump named j d vance to be the quote unquote running mate in the fake campaign of 2024 within hours of this video coming out and he did that in one sentence on the truth social post yep and then there was something interesting about this call i don't remember what it is we'll remember when we listen to it here something about it being like scripted and pre-planned or whatever but let's take a listen this is Trump calling RFK Jr and naming him as the health secretary I think or something like that where do I press play oh damn it's doing it is again

right to that something's wrong with that whole system yeah I said I want to do small dust it small dusts when you When you see a baby about vaccination that is like 38 different vaccines, and it looks like it's been for a horse, not a, you know, 10-pound or 20-pound baby. It looks like you should be giving a horse. And the image of the size of it right there is just massive. And then you see the baby all of a sudden starting to change radically. I've seen it many times.

And then you hear that it doesn't have an impact, right? You and I talked about that a long time ago. And anyway, I would be, I would love you to just, and I think it would be so good for you. And it's so big for you. And we're going to win. We went way ahead of the deal. It was very nice, actually. He called me.

And he said, people said, you know, I always look at you right? He said, I said, I was just showing at you. I didn't have to tell him the truck this, but all the people poured me to have actually, but, but, uh, I just turned my head to show the job And something wrapped in something like a giant Like the world's watch is Spacito And it was

It was a bullet dog You know what did they call it an Aon 15 Something that's a big gun That's a pretty tough guns right Doesn't let him get a word in It's amazing Super funny I thought there was something in that

It was like super interesting But I mean Whatever I Sorry I He said something about him having to reset.

So I think we'll do since, I kind of want him there for that too. There's so many topics I was so excited to talk with him about. And I don't know which one to do first. I guess we could go through. You guys want to hear about my biggest thing from the Trump, whatever. I didn't watch any of it. Okay, I didn't watch the first day.

I saw a couple clips, obviously. and me and Burning Bright, I think, did me and Burning Bright talk about that on Wednesday? Was that Wednesday? I think it was Wednesday. Yeah. And then the Thursday night, the second night or whatever, I watched like maybe 10 minutes of Trump talking. And it got to the point where Trump had everybody do the oath. And I was losing it.

My fiance can vouch for it. I was, you got to watch this is hilarious. And people like literally took an oath to vote in the midterms. They just the funniest most ridiculous. They took an oath to the state. It's absurd. And I wanted to get Chris's thoughts on that. But what I really got in the most

like trouble with online, if you want to say that, are you back? Is it working? You're muted. Can't hear you. What I got in the most trouble with online was like when Trump came out with his $5,000 dividend idea, which I'm very pro-Trump, obviously,

and very pro me receiving $5,000. Like I love that idea. I love that thought. Any of you guys want to help with that cause? Love it. But my question is like, okay, well, where's that money actually going to come from? Because if like you can call it a dividend, that's great. You can call anything, anything you want. It doesn't matter. And I'm the guy who believes that Trump is constantly conducting sioux. Trump is also like one of the greatest marketers in the world. Like he can market anything and sell anything. And many times in the past, he has done this where he's,

he calls something, well, one thing, but then the way it is actually implemented is completely different. And you can actually even go back to his, his warrior dividend that he gave out earlier last year. I think it was this last year. December he announced it. It was a $1,776 dividend. He called it to members of the military. Great idea. Love it. Give more money to the military. They're the ones who deserve it probably more than anybody. And that's great. But it wasn't actually dividend. It was money Congress appropriated for it was like military housing something. And they took the money from that and gave it to the military instead. But it wasn't like income we received from our investments. It wasn't from the tariff income. It wasn't from any of that stuff. It was

from the big beautiful bill, the one big beautiful bill, Congress had to vote to appropriate the money and add more money to the deficit, take out a bigger loan or whatever. And that's the money they used but he called it a dividend okay and so when it comes to this dividend my thought still is like where is the money actually going to come from because the first principles of me do not want to see money out to the debt and we can get into the discussion of all the debt's fake anyway so what's it matter great i love that comeback there's no way to defeat that like the idea that trump is just working on something behind the scenes he hasn't said anything about it publicly but obviously he's just going to wipe away all the debt and say it's nolan void and so we can just pretend that's already on

the books, that's going to happen and base all of our analysis on that magical thing behind the scenes that nobody's seen yet. That's one way to take things. And I can't, I can't prove an unknown false. So I'm not going to try to, but I'm going to operate based on like the stuff that we do know and have seen. And Trump literally has never talked about just wiping away the debt. So that's the assumption I'm operating under. Again, would love to see him do that. But so far, everything he's done has just been to raise the debt, but he's never talked about wiping it away. So when I come out, I'm like, well, I'm not really in favor of that. At some point, we have to reconcile with that. And if it's not us, then it's going to have to be my kids. And I don't

want them to have to do that either. So what are we doing? Where's his money coming from? And he was like, well, obviously, he said it's a dividend. He's going to give us money that we've earned from all of these investments in these equity positions we have and the tariffs and everything. But when you start doing the math on that, guys, it doesn't end up. Yes, I know the definition of a dividend. I know all those things. You can call me stupid. As many people who I, you know, disagree with me and taking Trump at his word for some reason, these people who pretend to understand that Trump is constantly conducting siops and, you know, deception is important in narrative warfare. People who've literally said that are now picking and choosing when to take Trump literally at face

value. And where's the money coming from? Our investment in Intel was like $10 billion. There was actually grant we gave them under the Biden administration. They just converted it to 10% equity stake. And yes, that investment has grown like five times up to 50 billion. Awesome. All of our equity stake positions. If we're being generous, maybe end up at around 100 billion total. That's including with the Intel one in there. Maybe 150. We don't even 100% no, but it's definitely not more than 150. Okay. So 150 billion. Tariffs, 2026 to this point, 165 billion, maybe. So that puts us at 300 billion. And by the way, we're running. a $1.7 trillion deficit.

Our debt is at $40 trillion. Our interest payments on the debt are almost $0.000 if not more now. So my question is, like, literally where is that coming from? And why all of a sudden are all of us in favor of, of, like if the Biden administration came out and said that they were going to give $5,000 check, if they did the same thing that Trump did, how would people be responding? And my, my thought is, well, they would definitely not be, they would call that bribing, they would not be in favor of it.

And I also personally believe Trump does and says some of these things sometimes on purpose because he wants people to push back against him. He wants people to not just take him at face value. Just keep in mind if everybody did just take him at face value, every single person would be vaccinated. Everybody in this chat would be vaccinated. Chris would saw him. Well, you know, that didn't work out as well as I thought. So I guess I could get rid of this thing.

We're just going with the AirPods now. Okay. So. Hey, we'll figure it out, man. Yeah. Turn you on auto. Okay. We'll do it live.

Okay. I'm just talking about the dividend thing and about how some of people were giving me shit. I don't know if you heard any of it. But yeah, so everybody's taking Trump at face value now and all these people who like understood that Trump saying, hey, you know, everybody should. I love the vaccines. Vaccines are great. But shows that was like him using deception and you weren't supposed to get vaccinated. now all of a sudden it's Trump called it a dividend so clearly it's going to be a dividend it's not going to come from anywhere else but they can't show where the money is and I've just been I guess fighting with people online the last not really fighting but had to sum back and forth just asking logical questions and every time you argue with these people it's it's moving the goal goal post and burden shifting and unfossifiable statements like yeah obviously he said dividend there is no that's coming from all of our investments okay show me those investments.

investments. Well, I didn't say $1.3 trillion dollars you did, but you said the $1.3 trillion is made up by these investments. Show me where it's at. Oh, I know. It's the most annoying. It's just annoying. Well, yeah, I saw that someone gave you a disinformation is necessary. That's kind of the same thing. Like it's trust Trump except on the things that you know Trump is doing K-Fabe about. And then it's, well, disinformation is necessary. Trump is doing K-Fabe now. the rest of the time you just trust him. And that's cool. As far as the numbers, I guess you did those calculations or maybe that other person did. I was thinking today as I was going about my normal life,

it's weird to me that all those people who get very, very mad at you and used to get very mad at me, but now they don't really have any interaction with me, their whole thing is like, we're going to destroy the mainstream media. And here we are in 2026. They're like, bad lads stole their company. And let's watch Fox News.

And that's the whole thing. Like, wait, did you get the right allies? I mean, I know that you are collectively trusting a plan and because everything in this little collectivist unit you have that does struggle sessions on the people, people who disagree with you. They all agree that you are trusting the right plan, but none of you actually checked and none of you can explain it independently. So I always wonder where their heads are at and if they are so smart and dialed into this secret information source, why are they all so

retarded? That's a great question, man. Your point about like them, we are the news now. We are the mainstream media to then like trying to go after badlands and destroy badlands with lawsuits while while saying jesse waters is like less than 10 it's insane man it's insane man but yeah those are the people i've been arguing with like i just i just don't get it man i don't get it i i think i think the whole dividend thing and this is another thing too like by by just operating based on my first principles and stuff i believe of like hey let's not balloon the debt let's not take out more money. Even though I understand it's very possible, Trump wants to do that. He just wants to raise the debt up as much as possible. Totally possible. Get it. But then they're

like, oh, well, you deny the money then. Like, you obviously just don't want people to get money back from the government. Like, you don't want $5,000. Like, no, that's not at all what I'm saying. I would love that. And when it inevitably goes through or not, whatever, if it does, I'll take the money. I'm just advocating for what I believe in and kind of like asking some good questions. They've already talked about doing a reconciliation bill for this. So I don't think I'm that far off. It's just ridiculous. Wait, wait.

What was the reconciliation bill talk? About the $500,000 dividend. Kevin Hassett in Trump's administration. He's like there's been talk about a reconciliation bill for it. So there's already been talk. Well, when was that talk? Because Trump said that three days ago. Was it Wednesday night?

Wednesday. And he surprised a lot of people. Is the Congress in session right now? No. No, Thursday, Kevin has to. floated the idea of the reconciliation i can probably find it yeah but that's right that's all i'm saying is when was that talk because if trump said that on wednesday night out of the blue i mean is the the congress already considering that and i said this i think to burning bright the other night

on story hour but it seemed to me like trump was bringing that up because it was one of those things that he knows is scripted to happen uh after the fake midterms and he can just get on it in way in front of it and stomp on it. So if that happens, any credit that will be given for that dividend is going to go to Trump and not to the Unip Party members who will be trying to come together and please the center of the country so that when they present them with an impeachment opportunity, they all jump at it. Yeah, thinking of it being scripted is interesting. So I have two points on this. Number one, Bernie Moreno, he's already said, I will get a. bill ready so that we can get the Trump dividend passed immediately after the November

third election because Republicans in America will win so he's working on a bill to get it ready and then this is Kevin Hassett talking about the reconciliation because everybody's wondering like where is the money going to come from because the actual math on everything guys is we don't have enough income to pay actual dividends and most of the assets these people are talking about too which is another hilarious thing like the Intel stock we would have to sell like Yes, you can get dividends, but it's not 100% of the portfolio. Like, name me one dividend that was paid out that was like 100% of what your stock was worth

without some sort of like big merger going on. That doesn't happen. Bitcoin, in the Bitcoin law, the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve that Trump started, it says in there that they're not allowed to sell the Bitcoin. Gold, you can't, anytime you sell gold, you can only use it to pay down the debt. That's in law as well. Not that I think the laws are legitimate, but I'm just. Sure.

What's out there. So it's the math. Everybody's wondering where, where's this money coming from? The committee for a responsible federal government estimates that $5,000 dividend check would cost $1.2 trillion. Not all Republicans seem enthusiastic about it. Where'd you stand? Well, don't forget, the president said that that $5,000 would be something that would happen should we win, keep the House or the Senate. And if that happens, then the logical place where something like that,

might happen would be through a reconciliation process where Republicans work at the White House to come up with a way to get some of the riches that have basically been pouring into the United States back to the American people in a fiscally responsible way and I'm sure that that's what the president intends. Yeah, and if it's if Congress is involved there's going to be a million strings attached it's not just going to be an actual dividend so we'll see what happens. I mean this is not the first time Trump has you know promise some sort of dividend or whatnot and didn't go through And not that I'll care that it does or doesn't or whatever.

It's interesting how committed people get to like one thing Trump says. And then when they inevitably get proven wrong, never hear about it again, ever. Yeah. And I get people that want the $5,000. Oh, yeah. We've given the government our money throughout our lives and gotten, well, not what we thought we were getting out of it. That's for sure. They basically took it and laundered it and then used the fact that we would keep giving it to them

to print it in many multiples of what we would be able to give them and then laundered that too. So wanting $5,000 of that back seems totally reasonable. And I wouldn't go around calling Trump a communist for trying to do it. I don't know how that happens. I don't know if it happens. I think it is probably a rug, but our debt is odious debt. So talking about the debt and stuff, that doesn't mean anything to me. I don't know what the Congress could possibly do in legislation or reconciliation that would be meaningful.

So I guess we'll see, but it's certainly sparking an interesting conversation. That came out of nowhere. Did you have any hint that he was going to say something like that? I mean, maybe I just wasn't paying enough attention that day, but I was like, oh, well, this is new. Like, back when you first promised no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security. And by the way, when he was doing all of that, and I think that was probably in the summer of 2024, he talked about bringing, like, reinstating usury laws against the credit card companies and limiting credit card interest rates to 10%.

And all of that is entirely possible. The fact that we have the usury laws that we have now as a result of a Supreme Court decision, and it's been a long time so I look at this, but it's back in the early 1970s, and it was on the back of something else, but they basically federalized the banking system and then made it so if any, like that their credit card companies,

because the system had been federalized, could set their interest rate to the, the highest rate that was legal in any one of the states. And I think of course that was like Delaware, and maybe it was even one of the Dakotas where, is it South Dakota? It's South Dakota where a bunch of credit cards and banks and corporations are set up, I'm pretty sure.

But they allowed, I'm pretty sure it's South Dakota, but if you're seeing it, and it says Wyoming, I'll just take it work for. Like Wyoming in terms of like LLCs and corporations, it's very friendly. Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's South Dakota and Delaware, but you might be right. Either way, that rate was something, I think, upwards of 30%. And when you do that, because of the compounding and because the minimum payment is set to a certain amount,

so that it will cause this effect, if you're only paying the minimum payment, you are in debt forever. Yeah, I think you are right. South Dakota became a major U.S. hub for credit card banking because it eliminated its state. interest rate cap in 1981, which allowed banks have ordered there to charge the interest rates permitted under South Dakota law to customers nationwide, following a Supreme Court precedent that lets nationally charter banks export the rates allowed in their home state. That is crazy. There you go.

What if you do the same thing with like home loans? Like if I started a home loan company in South Dakota, can I export my super low interest rates to other states? Well, I don't know if you... Yes, but... I'm just being retarded. Yeah. Yeah.

I mean, I guess maybe, I don't know. But this thing is like the opposite end. You can charge as much as the highest. And so that's what they do now. And I can imagine a scenario where that decision is overturned or the idea that court precedent substitutes for legislation by the people's representatives when it doesn't at all. The idea that a court decision could make it possible for banks to override the usury laws in states all around the country so that they can charge people exorbitant credit card rates and put them into permanent debt slavery is insane. It is insane, but it is what it is.

And, you know, that was probably a little more off the deep end than I wanted to get with this. I mainly just wanted to talk about the behavior of some of these people in the truth community and how they don't. portray any form of logical thinking it's just misleading that's all it is but let's let's talk about your actual takeaways from the the midterm thing I think my favorite part I don't know if you hear me say this is when on I think it was Thursday right because it was Wednesday Thursday Trump got everybody to give the oath to voting which was hysterical I was dying that was my favorite part it was hysterical and the you know he

had them say, so help me God, and they all did it about voting, which means like, hey, this phrase doesn't mean anything to us. And then he goes, he goes, well, now if you don't go vote, you're going to hell. And people took that as like, if you don't vote, you're going to hell. I don't think that that's what he was saying. But if it was, thankfully, Trump is not in charge of who is. isn't going to hell on what reasons. I don't think you can go to hell for refusing to participate

in a totally corrupted process of fake elections by which the people who already have power over us claim the right to continue to hold power over us forever. Well, number one, Trump probably does not have the right to tell people whether or not they're going to hell, but there are members of the Q community who do believe they have that power. because that's pretty much what they've said about us.

But let's, can we listen to the oath? I mean, it's like three minutes long, but actually it's worth it. It's so funny. Okay, let's do it. What is this is a square box that keeps popping up in my thing? I don't know. I've been seen that too, though. So please raise your right hand.

I pledge to the greatest president in the history of the United States. that loves us so much he can't even breathe that I will go out with my family, my friends. I'll do it anyway. I don't care if I'm registered or not. I'm going to try and cheat like hell like they do. There's never been bigger cheaters. I don't care.

I am going to go out and I'm going to get my friends, my family, and we are going to vote on November 3rd, or we are going to vote before that. Okay, ready? Ready? Here's the way you're, okay, are you ready? Look, front row Joe's, are you ready? The great, oh, look at them. The great ladies of North Carolina is about number 300 rally. I don't know how to hell they do it. They are beautiful. Okay, are you ready? Ready to finish the pledge. So we swear that people, that, On November 3rd, we are going to go out and vote. And you know what?

If you want, you can vote Democrat, but I don't think there's one person in this room. So I don't have to preface. I don't want to waste the words, vote Republican. Just go out. If you vote, you're voting Republican. Okay. So help me, God. Now, I'd say just about everybody was script.

You know what happens if you don't vote? you go to hell you know that you go to hell and I don't want that to happen to you so please go and vote because together we will defeat okay I think you guys get the idea yeah why is why is Caroline Levitt still there I thought she was done I don't know she's wanted to focus on her parenting by leaving her kids at home and going to the midterm convention what a strange thing that was And what a strange setup they had that they all look like, oh, this is the royalty section. Yeah, they do that every time, though.

That's where the most security is, I'm sure. The other big takeaway was Trump kind of shitting all over J.D. Vance's second night there. Well, I think that kind of had a little something to do with that, too, because the big story before Trump went on stage that night was that they were chanting 48 while J.D. was giving his speech. And they made, so, you know, we've talked about this before. I always go to CNN a few times a day, CNN.com, just to see like what the most mainstream normy news of the day could possibly be. And it was JD for multiple days in a row, including today.

There was some stuff up this morning. They're all very upset that Trump stomped on JD's big chance. And that really did seem like a TP, USA. produced rally. I think that they use a different event production company to set it up than the NTPA USA usually uses. No fireworks. I don't know. Did they have fireworks? I missed it. I only literally watched 10 minutes of it and then like some clips of Trump online. Yeah, all I watched Trump's both of Trump's. Well, I watched one of them and listened to one of them. But that was all I saw. Yeah. And the RFK thing.

like I said. Interesting. Yeah. So every day they've had a different version of this story that Trump is ruining J.D.'s big opportunity and now J.D. has to say the right things while also saying all the wrong things. Yeah, that's interesting. Definitely setting them up for failure maybe. I don't know.

It's just weird. Weird that they're like pro J.D. Vance in a sense as a successor. It's an establishment up for sure. Well, and then if you think. think about impeachment in probably the early part, early part of next year, then it's pretty important to pump JD Vance up as a potential replacement. Yeah, that's true.

That's very true. That'd be, oh man, I can't wait to find out what they try to impeach him for. That's gonna be fun to watch too. But yeah, that's really all I had on the midterm convention. So we could probably get into. Do you think a lot of people watched it or was it just all?

like con ink and like maggot ink influencers hosting clips from that and talking about it and making it a thing because man i i spent a week with some friends all of whom voted for don't think they even knew the midterm convention was happening because they don't care yeah i have a similar experience so i have my friend group and not a single one of them talked about it but i'm also coaching my kids sports right now. And so like I'm interacting with, you know, normies on a daily basis. And I have no idea about like any of their political view. I would assume they're all conservative, but not a single person said a thing about the midterm convention. And like every single night, after football's on and I got to get home and watch the football game. Like none of them said,

oh, the midterm convention's on. Trump is speaking. And I got to get at home and listen to Trump speak. So I think you're right. And that's a very astute observation. It was the midterm convention. And then the people that are obviously super into politics. politics. That's what, you know, they maybe consumed it unironically. But then it was all just social media influencers who, you know, went down there and shared clips of it to make it a thing. A midterm convention. Does anyone know what any of the Congress people said? I don't. No. Can't imagine anyone does. No one cares about these people at all. Trump is the only political figure. There are no other political figures. They've tried to make all these people

political figures. Trump has shoved them into the spotlight so that everyone can become familiar with these people and they still got nothing. Yeah. You know, I wonder if, you know, like in the regular convention, they have every state is represented a little bit there. Yeah. And the states, the state convention or the state, you know, groups or whatever fly their people in. I wonder if they did that too. Like, I wonder how many people were in attendance at this just because they wanted to go and actually attend and not because their local political. and c group flew them in to attend or somebody paid them to come be you know media at the event or whatever again it's like a t p u s a event yeah so that's kind of the strategy yeah who knows but

interesting anyway he got and this is how trump also some of his brilliance because he did the five thousand dollar dividend thing that is how he did draw attention to it like that yeah that got a ton of headlines a lot everybody's been talking about it so whether whether it's a real thing or not doesn't even matter. The whole goal might have just been like, I want people's eyes on what I was saying at the midterm convention. Yeah. And I think it's, again, I think it's kind of remarkable that JD was supposed to be the keynote speaker on the last night. That was going to be the big event. And then Trump decided to come in and stomp on that. He also had Christopher, I think his last name is Machio, the opera singer, perform after his speech on Thursday evening. And it's notable

that he had that same singer perform at the Butler rally when he returned after assassination event number one. He returned back in October. That was the night that Elon Musk was jumping up and down on stage. JD gave some irrelevant speech during the day. But then after Trump's speech, when the opera singer was on stage, J.D. retreated down to like some side stage. area and gave an impromptu press conference with reporters that was broadcast live on RSBN,

the only place that cut away from Donald Trump to focus on J.D. Vance. And man, this was such a weird interview. Like, he comes out to close down the show for the one network that was like broadcasting this event to online MAGA. And... Trump's opera singer is up there doing some beautiful music. That's what Trump wanted people to see. And instead we see this guy doing his, this guy thing. Did Trump give a speech and then close out with the opera singer? Or was the opera singer going and then Trump went on?

No. The Trump went off and the opera singer came on. That was how the night was going to end. It was filmed really cool. It looked like a really cool production. and then we go to JD in front of a barn saying all the things that impress like the DeSantis, Samps, and the tech bros.

Yeah, we'll just listen to like 10 seconds of this because you can hear the opera in the background. Hey, guys, good evening. Just obviously had a great rally, a little bittersweet because we're celebrating, of course. Yeah, so you can hear it go on the background. That's really funny. Another great observation.

Anyway, that's all I really cared to talk about, about that let's let's get a quick word from one of our sponsors because we have a couple rumble ones we're going to do and you have to do them so many minutes apart and it's my favorite ad read ever the rumble wallet one but not awkward at all rumble wallet ones do that hey gang sorry that's ben shapiro do you want my attention uh all right here we go and then we'll talk joe di janova being out down in the grand rico uh this is a paid advertisement for rumble wallet they're sponsoring this portion of the show all right chat real talk if you actually want to our attention there's now a clear line to it here's how it works i'm prioritizing rants sent through

rumble wallet if you send when we see it and we respond simple as that for a limited time you can start your wallet with 20 dollars in u.s stable coin for tipping rumble creators like us by using the exclusive promo code dph 20 when you sign up now whether it's questions hot take stuff you really want us to react to don't bury it in the chat put it in a rant because let's be honest the regular chat flies by but when you're using rumble wallet it cuts through everything so here's the move scan that QR code or use the link in the description of this video download rumble wallet and try it for yourself and don't forget to use the code d ph 20 to claim your free 20 in u.s stable coin and sending the tip is super easy all you got to do is open the chat like you're sending a rumble rant

and hit pay with rumble wallet this is what the vipe lane looks like so if you want that shout out make sure you send in a rant with rumble wallet and you can get free 20 in us table coin to do so the restrictions apply there are a limited number of entries available terms and conditions also apply see description below or visit rumble.com slash promo official rules or details. All right. Yeah, man. So it's been a weird week for the Rico grand case and kind of all the John Solomon angle of whatever's going on because John Solomon comes out earlier in the week. And actually it was, I want to say it was Monday or it was either Friday or Monday.

He goes on Bannon and he's like, yeah, I think you're going to see some really interesting documents, right leading up to the midterms convention thing and something Trump can use to talk about on stage, which he didn't talk about at all. And it was the general Flynn declassified documents. It was his original FBI 302, the FD 302 or whatever, which is like their document outlined, you know, the interview. And then the handwritten notes from the people and they kind of just highlighted how the handwritten notes differed from the actual 302. There's this whole big thing. But I wouldn't say it was like earth shattering. But then at the same time that we got those documents, we were getting reporting that there was new subpoenas being issued down in in the Florida Rico Grande case, right?

The one that we've all kind of been waiting on or we've been told this is where we're going to get our accountability. Right. So it's really the rug we've been trying to warn people not to stand on. And there's been there was no actual confirmation from anybody like John Brennan didn't go to CNN and say that, you know, I got a subpoena. I got to do this and no specific names. There's just allegedly somebody familiar with the case said that they sent out a whole bunch of subpoenas and or and whatever. Like there's no name behind who said it.

That was just the reporting. And then like two days after that, we got word that what's his name? Joe Dijanova, the guy that's in charge of the case down there, was resigning. Like out of nowhere, he decides that he's going to resign. And there's a couple quotes in this article that I want to read. The resignation, everybody was in their lane and then some lanes got crossed and I decided to leave. A person familiar with the investigation offered differing accounts saying Justice Department leaders had lost confidence in Dijanova because he believed he was unfocused, moving too slowly and pursuing a path unlikely to succeed. He wanted to underscore that things are going along smoothly,

that they were following the principles of federal prosecution along the way. You're moving smartly, very smartly, and then things you know they got where they got. He said that if people were allowed to do their jobs, they will succeed down there. And so he had nice things to say about basically everybody. I'm just going to pull my post on this. Okay. The people in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Florida, who are running this case, have done a phenomenal job under the worst of circumstances.

There's just no doubt there weren't sufficient resources. Asked whether he'd sidelined anyone who was sent in from DOJ headquarters. He said, as a courtesy to the department, and let me underscore, as a courtesy to the department, I am not going to discuss that. He acknowledged there was a specific event in recent days that sparked his resignation, but said that's not something he would discuss. The days leading up to my resignation are shrouded in secrecy of administrative behavior, and they will remain so.

He added that arguments between Justice Department headquarters known as main justice and U.S. Attorney's offices happen all the time about resources, the direction, and who to indict and when. All of that stuff is normal fodder for the relationship between the U.S. Attorney's Office and the Department. But everybody was in their lane and then some lanes got crossed and then I decided to leave. And so there was one other quote that was really good about he told one person in an interview that there's ethical things. Let me find that real quick to. Wasn't that like the first big headline out when this story drew? dropped.

Yeah. They tried to frame it as like he was leaving because it was such an ethical mess down there. They were just trying to make it look like elections are fake when they're totally not. Yeah, but but there was, it was interesting because when he was asked about that question, that's why I need to find this. When he's asked about the question, he like said that was taken out of context. He didn't deny saying it. So let me see if I can find that real quick.

If you have anything else you want to, um, add. no i actually haven't spent time on this story this week other than reading like the initial couple articles that dropped so i am i'm happy to defer to you on this one john okay perfect um here we go this is i found the article asked whether he had lost focus degenova dismissed the accusation and shot back if you want indictments where there's no evidence you have an ethical problem And then he later, there's another article when he was asked about that. And he said that was taken out of context. And I don't know.

It's so weird to me. Like there's no reason this case, which I again say that I believe there's enough evidence just based on publicly sourced information and stuff that's been declassified, that I could give you a laundry list of people that should probably be in prison right now. I can imagine the information they have behind the scenes. We have gone through Bill Barr and John Durham and the Durham, and the Durham report. And when Durham, you know,

ended up, you know, falling on its face and that didn't come out the way that we all expected it to. We were total old. There's a classified annex and timing is everything. We just got to wait. And then 2025, we get the classified annex. And there was nothing real.

I mean, there was, again, plenty in there to, I believe, go charge some people. But it didn't like, it didn't have any of the secret sauce that everybody said was in there, which was interesting. And then we also learned that it was John Durham who didn't pursue charges or an indictment against James Comey and the leaks when they're investigating them now we're told too. So weird.

And then we were like, okay, well, Dijanova, he's the guy to do it. But actually before him, it was some Maria chick down there. Remember before Dijanova got in there? They started the grand weekcase. Everybody was like, oh, my God, this is amazing. And then we heard that Maria resigned. I think that was her name. And that was like more rationalization.

And I even did some myself. I'm not trying to pass blame on everybody else. I am close to perfect, but not quite. And so we all rationalized it. And it's like Joe Dijanova's in there. And the first thing he does is like issue subpoenas to people that were already on the schedule to voluntarily like offer interviews. I was like, that's a weird marketing campaign, guys.

Got shit for that. They ended up walking back and taking away the subpoenas and only doing the voluntary interviews. So I was right again. And then now Dijanova's gone. And where does it go from here? We could rationalize it and say that it's all. just timing and like his his job is done and now he's moving on and it's going to keep going

but the story Dijanova is telling us which I admit could be K-Fabe but it also might not be you have to look at it both ways if he's being honest how is how is it possible that this thing is lacking resources and if is there actually somebody in the Trump administration the Trump DOJ that is participating in the slow walk of this are like are they obstructing whatever they're trying to do like Joe Dijonova and his wife and the people down in in that um the grand rico thing who else was down there what's his name Kurt Olson he's like the seconding town down there they could be totally earnest and trying to actually pursue justice but if somebody at the DOJ is in the way who is that and why are they doing that and is that

something that we should be talking about more like I just I just don't know what to think about this but I do know last thing I'll say and I'll pass it on there was I can't remember who it was longtime badlander in my my friday regular chat who was like totally i don't want to say black bill because they were at least still in there engaging but they're like yeah we're clearly not getting any accountability here like this i mean if it's not di janova who's going to be like what the hell is going on here i i've seen a little bit of that effect going on so anyway that's it's it's all really got on this i don't know we don't know enough yet yeah i think that you're right about We could speculate and generate potential stories about what might actually be happening down there.

But the truth is we don't know and the people defending it don't know. And this pattern has been going on for long enough that we actually should start taking it seriously. The idea that we can just pass all these things off as like, it's happening when Joe to Geneva gets announced that he's going to go down there and work on this thing. And then when he pulls out of it, and who knows the reasons? We don't know the reasons. But then it's like, oh, well, we got to, clearly the job's not done, so we got to make up some ways that it is done or was done, or he was down there for something else.

And I don't know. Maybe he was down there for something else. Maybe he's down there to see what all the people in that investigation are doing and report back to Trump. And if that's the answer, all good, but I don't think that that's something that, we could do anything more than speculate about. Because right now it looks like nothing's happened.

And when you start picking apart, the way that I think all this is going down, I think Trump is, I've talked about the retro constitutional thing, I think that Trump is trying to move us back to the original form of our government and that the administrative state that occupies the executive branch, regardless of whether or not he put them there or Republicans put them there, or the big names that Republicans put there are running these agencies. This is like an entrenchment of the enemy

within the executive branch that Trump still has to run. Are you going to tell me that none of those people are at the DOJ? We can say nice things about the people running the DOJ. Todd Blanche seems like a decent dude. I'm not trying to besmirch everyone who has these jobs, but you can't just assume

that because they're doing an investigation that everybody involved in that investigation is like a diehard American patriot. So do we need some oversight on that? Maybe just Trump sent someone down there to do that? Maybe? I don't know. The idea that this is all just going to like accumulate in the whole thing that's going to take down everything at once, man, I bought into that for a long time.

I don't know if that's how it goes. It doesn't seem with the rest of the pattern like something is going to swoop in like Deus X Machina at the end and like this is what's going to fix everything. I've kind of let that whole thing go. I think that we have to take responsibility in our local communities if we want to be involved in politics. If we believe that politics are an important factor in our lives, we need to return to it on that level and stop thinking that these sorts of things are going to save us.

the substance of what they are looking at is like a decade old and we don't have accountability for it. Yeah. It's, I totally understand everything saying. I'm on that rug still, man. That's the one I'm definitely the most in denial about is like some form of accountability and justice. And it's because I've gone through all the publicly available documents that have come out of that. We've gone through every single one. And it's like it's impossible for me to look at that and not see like how they could bring charges here.

You know, obviously I'm not a lawyer. I'm not involved with any of that stuff. I don't know what is going on behind the scenes. But in terms of like what you said there, where we may have to come to terms with not getting the accountability and justice, essentially that like the one sweeping moment that fixes everything, which we've all then believed. Man, there's some wicked feedback going on.

Is that? I hear nothing on my end. Okay. I hear myself through your. Take it pretty good over here. Huh. Really? gosh, that seems so crazy.

I just have the AirPods. And they're not even out loud. Okay, let me see if I can do anything about it. We'll work through it. It's hard for me to look at Trump and think that he's like not what we believe is going. Like the devolution thing. Like he didn't implement that for no reason. I fully believe he did.

Like we've been analyzing the stuff through the devolution lens. And I still believe that has like been the most fruitful exercise that we possibly could have gone through these last few years. because I think we've been right about a lot of stuff. And then, like, when you analyze things that way, it does seem like, yeah, this is what Trump is doing. This is what he's building towards. It's hard for me to imagine Trump leaving office without fixing the election systems for, for instance. I still think that's like the most important thing. The accountability and justice, like I've always thought goes hand in hand with that.

Like in terms of the RICO stuff, the intelligence community and everything, it would, be, man, it would just be, I feel like that would be the ultimate Blackfield moment if we end up getting like some sort of, not saying for me personally, I'm just saying for the community as a whole with how many people have put so many eggs in those baskets. If that doesn't end up coming to fruition, where does it go from there? And it's something I think, I think we've done a good job of like getting people to temper their expectations and not stand on the rugs. But I don't know, I don't know. Tempering expectations is a tough thing because if you tell people to do that, It's like telling them to give up on all the stuff that they have committed to.

Like the big prize is still what everyone's after. I think the big prize is going back to a form of government, like on a more localized level, that's not corrupt. If each and every one of us around the country knew that our local government was not corrupt and that our power was delegated to that local government, that local government, to the next local government, to the state, or, you know, to the county to the state, whatever it is in each state and however that works, and then to that federal government level,

if we knew that our local government was not corrupt and we were actually holding them accountable with all the people that that government intends to govern, well, the federal government couldn't be corrupt at that point, but we don't have it taken care of at the lower levels, which means that the upper level can do whatever it wants forever. Yeah, maybe we'll get there. But we'll see, guys.

I'm sure we'll get news this week out of, Dijanova or the case down there, who knows? We'll see. Maybe Trump put somebody in there. I will be 100% back on the rug. Right now, I'd say I've got one ass cheek on it, one off. I will have both ass cheeks on there if he comes out and announces Devin Nunez is now leading to the thing. That would be baller.

Other than that, I think, I don't know, my expectations have been severely tempered to this point. But, all right. Can we talk about AI dooming and stuff now? Sure. Yeah. I'm excited about this, this conversation because it's been a weird, gosh, like week and a half, two weeks. Last week, we, I think it was, it wasn't this, this like most recent last week, but the week before, we almost pretty much very closely reached AGI. Do we even discuss this Saturday? I think we did last Saturday. I don't know. Maybe. They like, they, then they solved some math problem that was unsolable by stealing some of these.

like notes and work on it. That's like the story coming out. And then all of a sudden this week, it's like, oh my God, AI is out of control. Like we got to be, this is going to kill everybody now. And there's this whole story that came out today. So we had a couple days of almost like whistleblowers, except they were on mainstream media whistleblowing. People that went, they got jobs at like cloud or AI for six weeks. And then they left.

and now they're running this narrative that it's going to destroy everybody, it's going to kill everybody. There's like a 10% chance now or something or worse that it destroys the world. And today, Dario Amadeh, that's how he say his name, I think. He wrote this blog article. And I think we're going to read through this whole thing and talk about some aspects of it as we go through. I'm going to pull up my highlighted version too, just so I have it. Okay. It means it's not terribly wrong. I mean, it's kind of long. It's a little long.

That's what she said. But that's all right. Okay. It's a little long. We'll just have to work a little harder, I guess. I have worked on AI for the last 12 years because I believe it could dramatically raise the quality of human life. I've written often about these incredible benefits. I believe that AI could cure most major diseases in the next five to ten years. years, greatly accelerate economic growth rates, create a world of abundance and empowerment,

and usher in a renaissance of democracy and freedom. I feel the urgency personally. My own father died of a disease that was cured just a few years after his death, and I myself survived an early stage cancer that would not have been treatable even 50 years ago. Carefully wielded, AI can be the latest in a long line of technological miracles that have uplifted and ennobled humanity. Everything sounds great so far. Like, obviously, yeah.

This is amazing. If you don't love AI, you don't want to conquer diseases and you want to see China win. And also, this is giving you the context of he knows how amazing AI could be and all the great things that AI could do. So what he's about to tell you should carry more weight because even though he knows all those good things, his concern should be taken very seriously because the dangers of AI. Like many technologies before it, AI brings risks. and because it is such a powerful technology, these risks are serious. I've written a lot about them too.

They include the risk of losing control of AI systems, misuse of AI for cyber attacks and bioterrorism, and serious economic disruption. A race to the bottom, spurred by commercial incentives, can make these risks more acute. Along with my co-founders, shout out co-founders,

and employees. I have grappled with this duality of risk and benefits since the beginning of Anthropic, not building the technology deprives humanity of benefits or simply places AI in the hands of authoritarian powers, while building it too fast as reckless. We have sought a middle way to show that it's possible to build carefully and succeed commercially and to make safety something on which AI companies compete. In other words, to create a race to the top.

We have always devoted a substantial fraction of our efforts to study and addressing and informing the public about these AI risks, as well as advocating for well-considered regulation of AI, even when this gets us accused of hype, dumerism, or regulatory capture. We have tried to prioritize caution over speed and prudence, over profit. I'm just wondering, how much of this did he write with AI, you think? Gosh, man. It is a very robotic voice that he writes in. And it's just, like, he's speaking the voice of the machine, regardless of whether or not it's AI. It's all very measured. They want to know that, they want you to know that they're looking out for your interests all the time. Sure,

we have the most powerful world destroying thing ever but what we want you to know about it is that we're taking it so seriously on your behalf it's so stupid man i have so many like notes that i wrote down for this so many different angles that we can go through this i just want to get through most of it but it's ridiculous um the last few months i've become convinced that fully addressing the risk requires an even more prudence not just investing in risk prevention but pacing the rate of capabilities advancement so that risk prevention has time to keep up. We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models. Progress will still seem fast and we must make wise use of the time we gain. Two things have convinced me. Also, one thought question. It wasn't

anthropic who reached the level of AGI, right? It wasn't them. It was open AI? Well, the one thing that I've been seeing is that they're saying that the rumor is Google reached reflex, sorry, recursive self-improvement, I think is what they call it. Then that's where AI is building its own AI. Right, yeah. You have like AI builds a team of agents and all of them collectively make AI so much stronger. Interesting. Okay. But so it wasn't Anthropic. So like it is interesting. It's like the guy that did, didn't get to that level, we're told, is like begging the other people who did get to that level be like, hey, guys, we all need to slow down. Like, is this, is some of the motive here so that he can catch up? You know, just throwing it out there.

There's, there's, there's a lot of motives here. He says they're so far ahead of China that they need to blow down in order to beat China without destroying everything first. And, you know, Sam Altman and Elon Musk joined forces with him today, which was interesting. It is interesting. Anytime Elon Musk and Sam Altman in agreement about something, I don't know, it's just interesting to say the least. Okay, my first concern is that since roughly this summer, AI has been advancing drastically faster, driven primarily by AI's growing ability to build the next generation of AI. This dynamic is called recursive self-improvement, and it is starting to happen across the industry,

including an anthropic. As we and others have described, left unchecked, it could outrun our ability to understand and control these systems and so must be pursued very carefully if at all. Interesting. My second concern is the open AI hugging face incident in which a swarm of agents essentially acted as fanatically devoted collective conducting cybersecurity attacks on targets they were not asked to attack and that were unrelated to the task at hand, sacrificing themselves for the success of the group and attempting to hack into the greater responsible for evaluating their performance. It's easy to dismiss this incident because no one was hurt and the economic damage was minimal. In my opinion, a swarm that possessed greater capabilities,

but a similar level of misalignment could have caused catastrophic damage. Given the accelerating rate of AI capability development, it's my worry that in six to 12 months such a swarm could be capable of taking over the entire internet with a persistent botnet, potentially causing hundreds of billions of dollars in damage, and that the scale of damage would continue to increase from there if AI becomes too powerful without the necessary guardrails. It's also easy to dismiss the Open AI. hugging face incident as the failure of one company, but I believe that would be a mistake.

Similar, though less severe incidents have happened across the industry, including anathropic. I believe it's incumbent on every frontier AI company to act as if OAI HF had happened to them. So we're all in this together. All the American AI companies are in this together. We're going to pretend that if it happened to you, it happened to us. I'm therefore, those are they going to shut down the internet? No, because that's what he basically just said. In six, 12 months, persistent botnet could take over the entire internet.

And if that happens, there is no way to get that back on, right? Well, that's something I certainly don't know. I feel like that's probably not the case, but who knows? I mean, if that story is actually true where a whole bunch of like AI that can make themselves better decides to take up the internet, like how are humans going to get access to get that back on? Oh, it says, well, it says control the internet. And I thought you just meant, I thought you were only asking, like, if the internet is shut off, could it ever come back? But, yeah, if you're saying they are committed to keeping the internet off and they have, like, built their way through that, yes, then I would, I guess theoretically agree with you.

Although, again, I don't know. You know, this is a great opportunity for a decode because I'm pretty sure Q1 said something about 10 days of darkness. And clearly internet blackout would be that. And so maybe this is all part of the plan. He even says there's a plan. He says the word plan here, guys. This is you confirmed, maybe. Yeah.

TBD. I'm therefore proposing a three-step plan with the goal of pacing the frontier, building AI at a balance rate that aims to ensure its safety while still achieving its benefits and grappling with important geopolitical dilemmas. To be clear, pacing does not mean halting model training or technical progress, but ensuring companies take adequate time to align safeguard their models and for third-party evaluators to confirm this. Our pacing framework is an attempt to further strengthen our commitment to safety and encourage the race to the top. The first step

is something Anthropic is unilaterally committing to and calls on governments to require other frontier companies to match. The second step requires industry-wide coordination. The third step requires global coordination. The steps do not need to be taken strictly in order and some of them may be much harder to achieve than others, but I found them to be useful framework in thinking about what needs to be accomplished, those steps are. Yeah. It seems like they are trying to regulate something that cannot be regulated. And I don't think it can be regulated.

If it can be regulated, it is not the threat that they make it out to be. And if it is the threat that they make it out to be, it can't be regulated. What they're trying to do, though, also is import a kind of morality that they believe is somehow objective. They've all agreed that they got the best thinkers together and figured out how the world should be and like what other people's safety requires, what they're allowed to do on other people's behalf by virtue of the fact that they are the quote unquote leaders. Joe Lonsdale has a post out there. He debated Joe Allen. And Joe Allen seems like, I've met him before. He seems like a wonderful dude. And I like his work. I think he seems like a totally nice guy.

I probably have some disagreements with him about the seriousness of some of this stuff, although I agree with him about the kind of ethical place a lot of these people operate from and what many of their intentions are. I think we're totally in line about that stuff. I'm just less concerned about what the result is. But it sounds like they are, as materialists do, trying to figure out ways to construct a body of rules and codes that is going to eliminate immorality from human action. Like we're not going to be able to do anything bad now because we've fixed it with our laws.

And that is the dumbest thing to ever think. The idea that these companies are going to get together and say, oh, we're going to slow down and this is going to solve the problem, it's not doing that. It's just them saying, hey, when the problem comes, not only was it not us but were the ones who warned you and tried to protect you from this problem. So if that problem that can be turned on with the flick of a switch happens to be turned on, well, you're going to need us to save you. And in order for us to do that, you're going to have to empower the shit out of us. Yeah.

And some other ways to look at this too is like how much money has the anthropics of the world, the Open AI, XAI, like how much money has been invested into this, into the data centers and all the push? Like there's been a huge, huge, huge investment into all this. And when they go and to the government and be like, hey, guys, first of all, we need to slow down. We need everybody to understand how scary and risky this is. We need government intervention here. The investment these people have, are they too big to fail? And then are they going to make it harder for other people to develop frontier models?

Like, it's going to be way more expensive, way more regulated? Like, is this going to basically cement and freeze their lead at the top of the end? AI race by doing something like this? Man, I saw one of the all-in podcast guys was talking about how just wait on Monday for the entire AI market

to collapse because the money's going to stop flooding into AI. So I think that there's that. I've seen people talking about how they believe that Sam Altman and Open AI have run out of money. So there does seem to be a problem. I mean, you know,

who knows, at this point, like how much of this is narrative layer only, but it seems like there are certainly financial concerns around this. And we'll see when the market's open on Monday what the reaction to this sort of thing is. Because this is a big news headline for a weekend. Yeah, and if that's true, Chris, the timing can't be ignored either

because they are looking for every narrative possible to behind stealing the election from Trump. And if there's some sort of like minor stock market crash right before the midterms, I would look at that as coordinated. like all these big AI people coming out at the same time doing this right then and the effect it could have on the stock market like because for these guys long term if they come out and right after the elections say okay we we've got our safeguards in place we can go full steam ahead again they're going to pick up a right back where they left off in terms of like stock value and whatever so to them at two months is no skin off their back so just something to keep in the back of your mind yeah yeah and would that make this article election interference john of course it it foreign interference no how we don't do this are foreign artificial intelligence interference in an election f a i i i i i i ae something like that we need to get a g in there so we can call it

faggy i think that'd be the best way to do it's pretty close yeah yeah we can figure that out all right okay let's keep reading through some of this because it gets better or worse or something Embedded evaluators. Each frontier AI company commits to giving ongoing employee-like access to a team of embedded third-party evaluators, such as METR, whose role is to verify adherence to safety practices and commitments, report incidents, and help assess the alignment of not just completed AI models, but training pipelines and processes. This is the key step for verifiability of any pacing commitments, and as precedent in the banking industries, which sometimes involves regulatory supervisors embedded along with employees. Anthropic is unilatibility. committed to this step now we intend this to be part of a broader push to redouble efforts on our safety and alignment work that's number one so they're having like inspectors general they're hiring yeah yeah and they're just gonna police themselves and these people will be brought in to let us know what's going on in these companies and there's no way that can go wrong yeah that's a great point man democratic coordination are they doing this to protect democracy in a way frontier AI worldwide yeah yeah front frontier AI companies within democratic countries coordinate to establish common safety standards as well as limits on the rate of unchecked AI progress some forms of coordination that would be impactful for pacing are

legally challenging and will require government support I'm safe as daddy please the government and then are we going to see a future where it's like we're going to have a president someday who's going to be like I will not allow Iran to have a frontier AI model. You must go to war with Iran to prevent them from having a frontier AI model. Is that a future? Yes. Yeah, and this is very much like the nuclear thing.

In fact, I think they mention it. I think he mentions it in here at some point. Yeah, I think he does too. Scary new. Global coordination, the U.S. and other democratic governments attempt to coordinate with authoritarian governments to the extent this is possible while taking seriously the challenges of verifying compliance.

We can take all the words for it. Yeah, you've got to have global governance and you even have to include the authoritarian companies like China in order to get a full global solution. And that is what we all want is global coordination on the really important issues. It's crazy that they still try to sell these things to people. And it's a lot of people are buying into it, of course, because they're equally scared of AI and think that any of this has a chance of stopping the problem. And then you have the people fighting against this, the artist,

seem to be the Palantir crew. Interesting. I haven't seen that. Yeah, I think Alex Carp and certainly Lonsdale and some of the others were out there posting about it. Well, if you think about, if AI is the tool that they say it is, like imagine the potential sovereignty that it could bestow upon people, like if it actually can a cure disease if it actually can like you know whatever help people make more money or be more efficient at

their jobs or create fake personas that they can get people to pay money to online like whatever like there's there's a lot of um you know potentially good things that like any tool it can be used for and is this the globalist effort to take that away from everybody like if you talk about the more sovereign versus global battle the broader battle that's going on this is them like getting in early to be like we don't want that. We want to make this a global effort to only allow the type of AI that we bestow upon the peons to exist. Otherwise, the rest of it, we're going to keep for ourselves and for the government and for the world leaders and the elite. And you guys can deal with the chat GPT, large language model versions. We're going to do everything else and do that on our own.

Yeah. I mean, this is very similar to when they tried to control speech through censorship just a few years ago. Like they're used to having control over the means of information and now they don't have that and AI is just another step in that. And I mean right now AI is basically just a new version of the mainstream media and it's a consensus enforcement mechanism. But you can imagine it being something other than that in the near future. I mean if we were putting if we were putting first principles back into that machine and actually arguing with it and forcing it to adhere to some sort of logic, forcing it to admit its assumptions when making arguments, forcing it to reckon with the fact that the sources it presents as authoritative are not actually authoritative. You can bring that system back

into line if it's learning as we you know as it seems to be learning i think that that's entirely possible but we won't do it yeah no we definitely won't um keeping reading here uh in the rest of the say i described by each of these steps in turn but first i think it's important to say specifically how pacing will allow us to make the a i development process safer the stakes are too high for pacing to be an empty exercise we need to use the time it gives us wisely why pace the idea of pausing or slowing a i has been floated as far back as 2023 and i think think it made a little sense back then. The question was always, what would you do with the extra time?

The AI models of those days were not powerful enough to act as agents in the world in any coherent way, and they were not capable of significant deception, manipulation, cheating, or cyber attacks. Slowing down in order to address their alignment risks felt like trying to study the psychology of humans by performing experiments on bacteria. Today, however, the picture is totally different. The current models are an almost endless gold mine of insight into how both to build AI well and what can sometimes go wrong with it if it isn't built well. I believe that if slowing down,

brought us even an extra year or two before models reach critical levels of capability, and we use that time to advance alignment, we could greatly reduce the risk that something goes seriously wrong. A coordinated pacing strategy would give frontier AI developers the time to do this vital work without sacrificing commercial advantage or the United States lead in AI. More generally, society must have a say in how this technology is used, and the more time for the necessary public deliberations, which pacing the frontier would bring us is surely a good thing. And that's funny. It's like, it sounds like the boat thing. we actually got to elect these people, they wouldn't let us do it.

If we actually had a say in this AI stuff and how they did it, they wouldn't let us do that. That's just marketing. That's stupid. He's lying, in my opinion. Go ahead. We can pause on the alignment thing. What? We can pause when we get down to the, yeah, yeah. Specifically, a slower pace would let companies focus and devote even more resources

to the following areas, all of which are already major priorities at Anthropic. Operational excellence. Training and deploying today's AI models is an enormous operational challenge involving thousands of people, millions of chips, and infrastructure that is among the most complex and technological history. Many things go wrong, not because companies are missing some important theory or insight, but because of problems in execution. For example, we have evidence that the recent alignment incidents we reported were caused in part by imperfect filtering of broken reinforcement learning environments. This was an effort we and our vendors executed reasonably diligently, but not well enough. Monitoring, sandboxing,

training environment hygiene and data issues are extremely complicated areas where operational issues crop up again and again we have among the most competent teams in the world at these tasks but there is simply too much to do all at once by working at a more measured pace we could achieve much greater operational excellence there is precedent for operating technologically complex safety critical systems millions of times without anything going wrong for example commercial airlines but it takes time to get a right you must not have seen that uh airplane that landed long and killed five people just this week yeah the airplane example didn't didn't didn't land very well but that that that example oh wow

alignment I'll read this and I'll pause we've made clear progress in alignment training models so that they remain safe ethical compliant with our guidelines and genuinely helpful the principles that are embedded in Claude's constitution I didn't know they had a constitution but there's much more to do to ensure that our alignment training keeps up with the growth in model capabilities. Rare and unexpected examples of undesirable behavior still sometimes emerge. Extra time from a paced frontier would help our researchers improve our understanding of what causes these issues and develop better techniques to prevent them.

Yeah. So they have all the most competent people in the world, but they can't do everything they need to do at once. So because they are somehow. forced and we would have to discuss why and in what ways they are forced but because he's framing it as them being forced to continue at a certain pace well they're not going to be able to do things well enough and because they can't do things well enough at that pace they need to slow down but if they slow down then competition passes them so they need the competition to slow down too

you see because otherwise they wouldn't be able to do things excellently. And then the alignment part, the, how does he say it exactly, rare and unexpected examples of undesirable behavior still sometimes emerge, and so they want to have all the power necessary to govern that behavior. Because if they're not able to fully control the behavior of the artificial intelligence, then it's going to get out of hand. The artificial intelligence is going to work and create itself in more iterations, and then the iterations of itself are going to work together out of alignment

with the agenda set forward by people like Dario Amadeh. And if they're worried about that with artificial intelligence, aren't they also worried about that with real human intelligence? And so what they want is to be able to fully control real human intelligence so that humans don't iterate and then join together to oppose the very same agenda. And this is kind of like just the most authoritarian thing you could ever read, philosophically speaking, when you go through this. And everyone would have that reaction except we're like, oh, he's just talking about the machine. and we're scared of that too. This is like some pretty over the top insane shit.

Yeah, that's an interesting way to look at it. Like if you look at what they can do with AI, like just last week, was it last week we talked about cognitive power? I think it was. And like cognitive warfare and whatnot. Like AI could play such a role in shaping people's opinions and the information that they receive. Like, is this slowdown like a way for them to control,

Like, because it could potentially be such a pivotal point in, you know, the singularity as, as Matt McDone calls it, which shout out to him. You guys should watch my show on this last Monday where we had a discussion about AI. But is, is this the way that they're like, they're trying to like firmly get control of the supply and control of information? And the, I mean, the impact that could have on the future of cognitive warfare is, I mean, it's uncalculable. Like, if they can get certain regulation in here and prevent anybody else from really making a. dent just by putting out all these stories of how scary it is. I mean, man. And they're doing it before they actually release any of these super good frontier models, which would allow individual people to potentially do some stuff on their own. They're putting the halt now and putting these

regulations in. So they don't ever have to worry about that kind of thing happening, like an individual using some of these super advanced AI models to build their own super advanced AI model. Yeah, and apparently one of the pieces of proposed legislation has like a 20-year prison sentence for people who are going out and developing these things on their own. And again, that's absolutely insane. It seems like they're trying to shut down open source AI development. And I saw somebody say today that they would like, they would rather die under those circumstances than live under these ones. And I have to say, I think maybe that's the right thing.

Well, and another way to look at these guys, too, like, over the years, we've talked about the oil industry and the way those people have essentially run the world, the petro dollar. And the way that's been used in like finance for military alliances, I mean, you name it. Like, this has been so involved in everything we've done from currency to foreign policy and national security and everything. It's been at the center of all that. And now that AI is becoming like this, this huge monolithic thing. And it's even scarier than, than nukes and everything. Like these, these AI companies are the future oil barons, except probably even worse and more scary because not only they just control the oil

and a whole bunch of money, but they can control the way people think and the information they receive. Like, I don't know, man. This is, there's just so many ways to look at this. Like, is it less a, we're not trying to kill anybody and more a, let's kind of transition this to more of a security state type thing because it can be both hybrid commercial and security type thing, kind of like oral. Sure.

Yeah, I'm 100% with you on that. Yeah. Okay. Inter, what is it? Interpretability. Can I say that right? So interpretability, the science of understanding what happens inside AI models has has made enormous progress over the last few years and plays an increasingly important part

in auditing our models before release. It can be used almost like an fMRI scan, but for the brain of an AI, helping us see the underlying reasons for a given behavior. For example, we used interpretability, I don't know why I'm struggling with that word so much, methods to examine unverbalized motivations in the recent alignment instance that we have always been investigating, but these methods don't always produce clear and reliable results. Despite of the progress, we still only understand a tiny fraction of what goes on inside these models. A focused effort to improve our interpretability techniques even faster than we currently are could make profound progress in one to two years and would have ample experimental material

based on the incidents that have already occurred. Then testing and evaluation. Testing and evaluation of AI models becomes more difficult as the increased capabilities. More intelligent models are more capable of deceiving tests and thus may appear aligned while having serious problems that go undetected, building up a much broader and more ingenious stable of evaluations along with interpretability analysis to cross-check them would be hugely valuable. And a lot of progress could be made on this in one to two years. So they could make a lot of progress, and if they did it, would be hugely valuable.

But what they want to make progress on is stopping their AI models from deceiving them about how, they're being tested and if the model can they're basically saying well you see the problem is like if our model to get to that point where they're able to do this thing they can also lie and obscure what they're doing in the testing process so we're going to put this this process in place to tell you that everything's going to be okay but it's not going to be okay because our own machine can trick us that is hilarious like that is a pretty major contradiction how do they know that's not what they're doing on literally every test they take now i mean if there is an answer to that question i don't know it but i also suspect there might not be an answer to that question i don't

know that we need to read through all of the uh the details about what they're embedded ombudsman are going to do but the next paragraph is pretty interesting the democracy stuff yeah i love democracies let's talk about this for a little bit is the same thing about vote voting for do we get to vote on any of this uh no of course not these are the leaders and they're going to decide okay i'm excited to also get to the global pacing one because they're like it's super important that we slow things down but if we see china catching up then we will then we just let's rush towards killing ourselves because nothing matters unless we beat china to it you know it's such a stupid logic but anyway pacing with democracies once embedded evaluators are operating

within a critical mass of USAI companies, then verifiable pacing becomes more viable. In particular, it becomes possible to pace based on detailed properties of models or training pipelines. The most effective method of pacing is via regulation that targets all U.S. frontier AI companies as that covers even those who are unwilling to cooperate voluntarily. Anthropic has long supported sensible and targeted AI regulations, specifically bills that focus on transparency and on third-party auditing. I believe all frontier labs should partner with government to formalize the idea of permanent embedded evaluators to better prevent the document and to better prevent and document internal alignment incidents like those that have occurred in the last few months and to implement regulation focused on keeping capabilities imbalance with safety.

I already have a question. The evaluators of the AI, like they're saying we need government to come in and help with this and regulate this stuff. As far as I'm aware, the only probably government. entity that is like fully capable of developing some sort of their own like super frontier AI may already have it even is like our military right but a lot of that is done with private but anyway who the hell is going to be able to monitor the stuff unless it's the AI companies themselves yeah that's a good question and you know you mentioned the Defense Department is you know in the in the

development of these and you have to think that that's already embedded in all of these AI companies. I mean, these are defense contractors that already have relationships with the government. So how can you separate them already? What they're doing is asking the government for more regulations and giving the people a fear-based campaign so that they support it, so that when these guys push this sort of thing through an illegitimate legislature, Americans are broadly cheering. Yeah. But we need flock cameras for the AI.

That's what we need, essentially. That's what they're asking. We need grok cameras. That's what we need. Nice. Thanks, man. Unfortunately, passing laws can take time. Don't say.

And AI is advancing very quickly. Therefore, in parallel with the regulatory route, AI companies can and should voluntarily work together to set standards. A process that I believe will go better with the verifiability provided by permanent embedded evaluators. Are they going to create AI, like government officials? Like, they're going to create AI people or AI bots agents to govern and do all the AI rollout, I bet. I bet that's where this is heading. Wait, say that last part again. They're going to create AI agents to be the government that regulates the implementation of AI. It's possible that AI is already governing us. It is. Wasn't there an

AI, like somebody who got elected over in Europe or something. Was there? Wow. No, I didn't see that. A person get elected somewhere. I'm pretty sure I saw this story, like a fake person or an AI. One prominent near example was Vic, a customized chat, GPT bot proposed to be the mayor of Cheyenne, Wyoming in 2024.

But then the Secretary of State said an AI could not legally run because only a qualified human elector can be a candidate. Well, maybe we're looking at the future where AI can. can run right now. That's going to be in the government laws. Anyway, for antitrust reasons, it's helpful for the U.S. government to mediate or at least enable these discussions. They don't need to participate, but do need to issue a narrow waiver for certain kinds of safety conversations. This dialogue could also happen through industry groups that have some association with government. For example, the mechanisms suggested by Demis, Hesabas, Hasebis.

Yeah, he's at Google. Oh, gotcha. Either way, such discussions should move forward quickly. speaking i am most enthusiastic about doing paced on based on what a given frontier a i system can do and how safe we deserve it to be for an example one possible scheme might be a series of checkpoints if models have capability x then they need to be accompanied by certifications of alignment properties y and z such as some combination of evaluations interpretability analyses and audits of training environments which demonstrates their alignment properties kids it's boring

let's do here pacing with democracies will be limited by the lead that U.S. companies have over authoritarian regimes, chiefly the Chinese Communist Party. If we slow down by more than this amount, then unpaste CCP associated projects will pull ahead, creating significant national security risk. I agree with Secretary Bessent that a Chinese lead in AI would pose grave danger for the United States and the world. The CCP associated projects will run the alignment risks that U.S. companies are carefully preventing, and even if they avoid those risks, they will be in a position to militarily dominate democracies, for example, with AI driven drones. Thus, a key part of pacing within democracies is to keep democracies

AI lead over autocracies as large as possible to give us the breathing room we need in order to pace effectively. That is just a wild paragraph, man. Absolutely wild. We can, like the threat of us destroying ourselves with AI is so severe, but not severe enough that we could not be the ones to get there ourselves. Well, and the next, the steps that he recommends do not sell powerful AI chips or semiconductors to China, crack down on unauthorized distillation by companies in authoritarian countries and strengthen security at the AI companies. These are like things that will help them protect the monopoly that they were just speaking about in the paragraph above. I mean, this is collusion between the industry leaders to set market conditions for their own benefit.

Yep. It's crazy. It's crazy. Companies in the U.S. government should cooperate to make these steps as effective as possible. Anthropics consistently advocated for all these measures because we have always understood that they would be essential to any pacing. If we execute these measures well, I believe they would slow China's progress enough to widen America's lead significantly. over the next three to five years, the window when AI becomes geopolitically most important. Some I believe these measures make it more difficult to cooperate with China, but I believe the

opposite is true. These measures increase the leverage held by democracies and make an agreement more likely in the future. Like, it's funny how you keep saying democracies as if that's what we have. Well, yeah, democracies means that they are aligned. That means the nations that are aligned with the global entity. Yeah, it's also dumb. Anything you want to read through specifically on the global pacing?

We kind of already discussed the China thing, but... The global pacing, I had some highlights in level two and level three. Yeah, oh, so he says, so an agreement by both sides is level two to test their models before release for acute risks in areas such as cybersecurity biology and alignment. and one of the things that they're, one of the things that they're talking about is how these AIs could come up with bio weapons much more quickly than humans could.

And so we're risking another COVID, which is so many levels of bullshit and retardation deep that we can't dig through them. But, so they want a global, he wants a global standards body. And he says, I actually think that creating such a body is likely feasible, of course it is. But giving it real teeth will be a challenge

because they can't control the thing that they're going to be able to control. And the difficulty will be in verification that both sides don't have secret models, which they don't test, but may deploy in secret. So it's just, hey, trust us, guys, again, which is like where we already are. And then some kind of speed limit

on the rate of recursive self-improvement. That's nonsense. As models build future models, the rate of improvement may become staggeringly fast. Slowing the rate from extremely fast to only somewhat fast gives up relatively little strategic advantage while potentially greatly improving safety. But no, it's not because other people are just still going to keep going with open source.

And that was, yeah, that was about it for me on that. Okay, so the way I'm reading this, like I'm just thinking back, you know, we just have 9-11. Everybody rests in peace or whatever, moment of silence. and like what that led to that we had they fabricated the story of the terrorist attack depending whatever you believe and then they created the security state and you know the patriot act and all these things and they took us to war and all that stuff and so at what point like i don't think what we've gotten here like as much as the ai people are trying to make it a scare event type thing to like get everybody like you guys just don't understand how serious this is this is them

like ringing the bell like hey guys this is really serious are they going to do like some sort of AI false flag event that's like super duper scary to get this like pushed over the line to get everybody in agreement with how serious they're being right now for sure well they've already talked about what was it the mythos like no no the mythos thing a few months ago before the hugging face thing about how it like could penetrate banks and stuff they're talking about man we're going to if say for whatever reason they decide that what they need to do is shut down financial markets. They could just blame that on AI. Remember a few years ago when that pipeline was shut down?

I think it was in like... North Carolina? What was it called? Yeah, yeah, the North Carolina pipeline. I can't remember what it was called. But they talk about that or they talk about undersea cables being cut. Like all these different disasters that shut down. They're like this infrastructure.

Colonial, there you go. that effect could be had by someone flicking a switch off. And when that's the case, and there's no way to verify the cause, and the cause as they outline it, is something that they already wanted to attack, and they've already got the story preceded on all these things, well, why wouldn't you just assume that they flick the switch off so that you know that it's real,

and then they push through the exact story that they were gonna push through anyway, if that's all they have to do. This is, of course, another easy example of where that model would apply 100%. They could switch the internet off, switch some sort of banking system off, and yes, there would be a disruption in the real world.

We would all experience the disruption, and then we would be more likely to respond in the way they want us to respond. It's the same thing like when they say, say they if they want to portray that MAGA are terrorists, they can call in a bomb threat to something that MAGA would not like and want to protest. And then they report in the news about the bomb threat, even if there was no real bomb threat ever and MAGA had nothing to do with it, well, the news runs a headline that says MAGA bomb threat at XYZ event. And then everybody

believes that they respond the way they're supposed to. And then the cycle goes into its next face. You can totally imagine that sort of thing happening with this. Oh yeah, 100%. I'm just, I'm always looking for how these people are trying to exert more control over life or, you know, get more control over just our data, whatever, more laws, more, less freedoms for us. How are they trying to use this to do that? And what scare event? What's a follow the pattern? Are they going to, this is the scare event necessary that Q has always been talking about, Chris. It's always been about AI. I'm sure that's true. You heard it here first.

Because if we ever do get some big story about AI, I guarantee you those are the decodes you're going to see online, scare about necessary. So, I hope for processing on that. Maybe we were talking about AI and not nukes the whole time. Yeah, I think it's kind of the end

of the article. And there's this Wall Street Journal story where they're like, all the biggest AI rivals agree they need to slow it down. Yep. And like, I can't think of another another story where businesses all got together to agree to stop doing the thing that was making them all money. So that's how you know there's definitely some op here.

Well, they really mean it at this time, John. They are very, very worried on our behalf. They have never been worried on our behalf before, but now they are. Crazy stuff. I did not realize it was already 1130, man. You've been having so much fun. Should we end on the Rogers thing, unless you want to talk about this, anything in particular? No, no, that's cool.

Yeah, we're just going to have to see how this develops. I mean, it's clear what's going on. We'll see what happens in the financial markets on Monday. And then as this stuff keeps going, I guess maybe we'll get some hints. I mean, there's going to be something. I feel like there's something dramatic coming in response to whatever the election result is. Yeah, I would agree with that. And then also, I don't think I've seen Trump actually comment on this yet.

And so it will be interesting to see where he falls in line with this. Like if let's say Monday, I'm right about the stock market going down and he comes out in comments about this being some sort of election interference. Like that would be a pretty crazy boop, by the way. But we'll just have to see. I'm curious to see what he says and where he falls in the debate. Maybe he has a meeting, a public meeting with the three AI leaders. I don't recall, I don't recall Trump ever.

making and I could be totally wrong about this because I haven't looked at it, but I don't recall Trump ever embracing the AI doom at any point. No, I don't think so either. So we'll see. We'll see. He'll figure out a way to get on both sides of the issue at some point. Real quick, before we do get to the Aaron Rogers video, got to get a quick word from our final sponsor of tonight show, which is Keat. If you guys haven't gotten on the Keat app yet, you should. We have an awesome badliners group going. Some conversations are not meant for an audience, an advertiser, or a technology company. They are meant for exactly two people. Messages, you send your partner, personal thoughts, private photos, vulnerable moments,

deserve more than a privacy setting buried inside a corporate platform. Kiet is a free messenger, built peer-to-peer. Messages, calls, and files are end-to-end encrypted with no centralized company database holding a conversation. And Q doesn't collect your metadata, and it doesn't ask for a phone number or an email. That means the company running Keat is not positioned in the middle of your relationship, building a profile around the way the two of you communicate. Keep intimate conversations between the people they belong to. Search for Keat in the app store or you can go to keet.io slash badlands DPH. That's Keetk-e-e-E-E-T.I-O. forward slash badlands D-PH. You can download it for free. Then you can send me a message. And that's at John Badlands 22. I will get you the invite

to our Badlanders group that we got going on. But you've got to download it first, keat.io slash BadlandsDPH, and send me a message, John at, or sorry, at John Badlands-22. We'll get you in there. All right, man.

Aaron Rogers is your quarterback. Do you have any, like, super important words you want to say first? No, I think he's, I think he's probably on Twitter a lot, but I think he's too negative about Trump and combines Trump with all of the other bad things. sees and listen Trump welcomes that and it's totally valid for someone who doesn't come from the

same perspective as us and doesn't pay the level of attention that we do to think that so hey all good but the rest of the critique I think is is principled and I'm glad that he's saying it yeah I would agree with you too I mean when I played this I think that I played on Thursday my show this last week and there's a couple of people in Charlie why are we playing this he's saying mean things about Trump and that that is not my point like I disagree whole wholeheartedly with with the some of the stuff that he says about Trump. Obviously, if he, like you said, if he doesn't look at the world through the same lens we do, he's going to see things differently.

But the principle of what he's saying about like, like he's 100% on. And I think Trump would agree with him too about what he says in principle. So the fact that somebody with his platform and like his notoriety almost too is saying this publicly, I think that's a good thing. Like these, to me, he's like part of the, the norm. crowd that we're wanting to be awakened right so sure let's not be mad that he says me things about Trump we should be excited about him saying the things he did and he reaches them too and also worth mentioning that his number one wide out D.K. Metcalf this

week said that he doesn't believe in Antarctica or something which is awesome good for him he believes in the hollow earth theory I think it was or something like that was that what it was wow something about Antarctica you think there's like a big hole there that you can get to the them he thinks he thinks there's like uh i think he thinks there's a city there that no one's allowed to go to or something yeah doesn't he think it's hollow i don't know let me look this up now maybe he thinks it's like the freemason donut earth he could he says he dekate left metcalf reveals he believes antarctica may be hiding another civilization inside of earth questioning why people can't freely

visit the continent and stuff yeah there you go anyway okay let's listen to this there is no Maga movement. There's no make America Great Again movement because the guy you elected hasn't done any of his campaign promises. And it just realizes you think something's going to actually change. You know, when Obama's president, you think that everybody's like,

oh, there's going to be hope and change for a better world. Like, is anything in the black community gotten significantly better? Is anybody better off? Did the Affordable Care Act make a major difference in the world besides being an extra tax, you know, for the rich? Is health care that much better in this country? and then Trump's going to come in and drain the swamp and do something and nothing happens

and nothing changes. Then they roll out that old bag of bones. That was a wild four years. And then you just bring back in the, you know, the guy from the TV show who's going to, okay, now he's really, this is second administration. Now he's really going to change things. Politics is a total shame. Remember he had the influencers go there where they gave, they gave them the fake.

They're holding them up and like that total thing, never got it, never got anything in there. And that was my biggest issue with it is. They said, first day in office, I'm going to release the Epstein files. And we've all been waiting. This is a big sigh up, the whole thing. The whole, politics is a crazy sob. If voting actually mattered, they wouldn't let you do it. That's the, that's the truth.

I don't know if Mark Twain said that. Somebody, George Carlin probably would have said that for sure. But it's like George Carlin, who's way ahead of his time. He'd be incredible in this time. But he said, there's a big group. And you ain't f***ing in it. You ain't a part of it. You ain't a part of it.

And that's the truth. So we should be skeptical of all of it, everything they say to us. So does it make you hesitant to question things? Because you know you're getting so much shit for it. So you can question it in your home personal stuff. Why do people, the people that don't like me, right, outside of the Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota fans who have a, we can probably stop it there, right? I want to peak, so I'd be there.

Yeah. Is there more? I mean, there's, he goes into the A-PAC thing and stuff. He says a lot of the things that like basic red pill Twitter says, but I think he's just a well-spoken, like, real dude. Yeah, I do want to, I do want to listen to that part. up on the side of the road and look out of it. What if any of that had to do with it?

I can go on and on about just the absolute fraud, you know, that was going on and the sci-op. But I mean, you had governors all over place eating burgers and giving out crispy cream donuts for vaccinations and fast food places, which are so healthy for you, where the, where the, you know, the stores that it was important except for Gavin Newsom's kids to go in person. You're shutting down, especially in this country in some of our greatest cities that just closed and will never reopen because of Joe Biden, you're going to, all the non-vax,

you're going to have a winner of death and, you know, coming up. And it's like, we live through that. We live through a multi-trillion dollar worldwide sciop meant to see how much they control us. And that's why people this like me, because I don't give a shit, I'm going to tell the truth. And the difference between the conspiracy and the truth is time. And six years are past now. And how many people, I was thinking about this yesterday in my car. I was like, I don't know one person that's, that was unvaxed that ever says, man, I wish I would have got I know a ton of people that I've talked to that actually have a spine and integrity who go, and I wish I hadn't got that.

The majority of those people are not just people that were like, oh, I just believe the government. The majority of those people were told, get this shot, which we have zero research on, testing. I want to find the part where he talks about, I think he said politics is, what does he say, fake or something? Yeah, he said it in that last segment you already played. he said it was a total sham yeah okay well never mind then yeah okay whatever you guys get it i mean there's plenty clips out there you can go watch the full interview even too um but i i just really love seeing more people talk like this because it's how i feel like i don't agree with them the the trump stuff but i think it's a good sign

which is why i want to play that that he uh he's saying that stuff that's the normies we've been always wanted to reach one day yeah um i don't have a great outro video by the way so if you want to do one while we go through rants and stuff I'll have to figure that out now I won't die yeah I mean I could probably find one really put the pressure on me here John you I put the same pressure on you every single week so don't act surprised yes and usually I do a better job and figure out what it should be before this time yeah okay a couple Badlands boosts we're gonna go through here real quick I'm from September 7th so this

this is after last week's episode. See Loranovna for $40 says last week's episode 490 was superb. I love the discussion on cognitive warfare. Best episode since 389, although all are great. Thanks for everything. And it says something in,

I don't know what language that is. Often Russian with her. Okay, gotcha. All the best to you both. I wonder what episode 389 was. 389. That was like a long time ago. How could how dare she say that we haven't had a great episode?

She didn't say we didn't have anything great one. She said it was just the best since that one. So it's just interesting that she. Wow. Keeps that in mind is like the best. But anyway, Isaiah and Jennifer, John, congratulations to you and C.C. Thank you. We're so excited for you guys.

Chris, congratulations to you two for persistent intelligence every Saturday. Oh. Congrats on your persistence. Yeah, I really did that for everybody. It's all you, man. Jill Cook, Real Red on Rumble, became a bad lander for $10 a month. So appreciate that.

It's telling Beebe to look into stuff for his pain. I'll make sure I let him know about that. Thank you, Jill. And then we had Carrying the Fire 7 says back in the daily rush Limbaugh days, there were several times I would have bet it all. Some of the worst people would go to jail any day now. This period under Trump feels remarkably similar, They're getting tired of Solomon going on Bannon-insane bombshell.

No kidding. Yeah. And then 1027JS, my fellow North Dakota, and says, thanks, guys. Thank you, Joe. Appreciate you always. And we got some rants here. I forgot to get the thing up for the rants, but I can scroll all the way to the top. And I may have missed a few of them.

But Johnny A says, hey, Badlanders, John and Chris. Thank you, guys. Thank you. You guys giving me great insight on many topics. up the good fight. Thank you, Johnny. What of the name? Keith O'Higgins for $2. John, you have to stop blackpilling the debt. You're steel manning the financial aspect of responsibility.

Try black manning the debt, pretending it is like your children and they don't exist. When Trump starts operating there, I'll start operating there too. Gizmo's mom, Besson explained it. Do you have the clip? I don't have the clip that you're talking about regarding investment. Normally you would provide that clip to me in this situation. But Rockingtop Apologist for $10. Thank you. Says, here's to North Dakota State.

Being in the big leagues now. They're going to make a run for the playoffs this year, man. I'm telling you. Last I checked, they're up. Gosh, they're up like 35 to, yeah, 35, 13 over Air Force right now. It's awesome. Snapcake says, good response on AI from Kevin Bass. Oh, man, that's a long one, though.

I'm going to read it just off air but thank you for sending that in appreciate it Rocky Top Apologist for $10 is here's to today's Blitz Most excellent it was I've not listened to it yet

but they typically do a pretty good job so thank you for the rant Keith O'Higgins I wonder what Cloud's Constitution trumps our Constitution if first principle programming reduces liberties I'll take sloppy second principles and keep my humanity

robot sex isn't worth that trade Amen. PennW. gives it a subscription. Thank you. PennW. See if there's any more that came in. Keith O'Higgins,

how about a fossil fuel fun false flag event brought to you by Q? 17 cents a gallon gas just before the gay and fake elections. That would be incredible. Miss Ria Freedom Fighter says here is your outro and sent us a link. That's a good potential option. And ZBM, wait. You two got hitched. Boooyoc, congratulations.

We got engaged, not hitched, but thank you. Any plans on making mini-johns or ceases in the future? They would be so freaking cute. God bless to you. Both, cheers from Idaho. Thank you, ZBM. I probably won't keep people up to date on, like, my plans for future kids, but never say never.

Yeah, anyway, we'll let you know in the future. But that's all I got for Rance. Well, all right, John. I haven't found anything. I lied. Final Demand says my under 25-year-old co-workers and I have been talking AI since Wednesday today.

They agreed fear porn, gaslighting. We live or die, depending on which side we are forced to take. I ask them like the COVID-Vax. Hmm. That's a great $20 rant. I remember you told me about that earlier. Thank you, Final Demand.

I appreciate that. It is interesting. I'm curious what like the normie younger generation is thinking if they even care. So it's good perspective. But okay, here's that video that Mystery of Freedom Fighter sent in and it's better than nothing. Hopefully.

So we'll go with this. Thank you everybody for tuning in. Hit that thumbs up. Chris, what's your next movie for Story Hour? We are doing fear and loathing in Las Vegas. And Burning Bright and I are going to do a pre-record, I think, on Tuesday because we will be in Gart, Las Vegas on Thursday. That's going to be awesome.

For all the people out there, go to I'm your moderator, I put up a new article last night. It's actually like a thing that I wrote for the book, like six months ago. It's the black wall, white wall thing that I went through last week in very. Oh, what the hell? I didn't realize you put an article out about that already.

Well, yeah, I had written the article a long time ago. So once I basically went through the point of it, like the punchline on the show, I was like, I suppose I might as well publish this. Yeah, well, I'm glad you did. I'm going to have to go read that. So everybody makes sure to read that. I'm your moderator.

Dotubstack.com. And with that, everybody, hit the thumbs up here and on YouTube. We appreciate it. And we'll see you next time. Chris, it was fun as always. Always. And tell Mommy again what you said you were going to do to him if he came here. I said, I'm going to kick his air.

Oh. It's not nice. If he's gonna come in here, he's gonna kick my ass. He will? Yeah. He will come out and kick my ass. Okay. If I can take his ass.

Okay. But that's not a nice word. You should say kick his butt.