Pirate Wires - Elon Musk Brings Trump Back To X & The EU Wants To Censor Them.. | Pirate Wires Podcast #65

Episode Date: August 16, 2024

EPISODE #65: This past week, we gathered around our iPhones like it was the 1920's to listen to Trump and Elon speak on Spaces. The media of course, had a meltdown over it. We then get into the insane policies of the EU that threatens to jail everyone for speech. CNN's Kaitlan Collins goes on Stephen Colbert's show, only to find the audience laughing at them. And finally, our pal (the one who claims that math is racist), Jo Boaler, is back with her new book Math-ish. We also have some sad news at the end of the show :( Featuring Mike Solana, Brandon Gorrell, Sanjana Friedman, Riley Nork We have partnered with Polymarket! Get your 2024 Presidential Election Predictions: https://polymarket.com/elections  - Disclaimer: Not Financial Advice, For Entertainment Purposes Only. Sign Up To Pirate Wires For Free! https://piratewires.co/free_newsletter Topics Discussed: Pirate Wires Twitter: https://twitter.com/PirateWires Mike Twitter: https://twitter.com/micsolana Brandon Twitter: https://twitter.com/brandongorrell Sanjana Twitter: https://twitter.com/metaversehell Riley Twitter: https://x.com/rylzdigital TIMESTAMPS: 0:00 - Welcome Back To The Pod! 1:00 - Pirate Idol! Submit your videos! 3:00 - Elon & Trump Take Over Twitter With Spaces Conversation 23:45 - Polymarkets Predict If Trump & Elon Will Be Censored In The EU 20:15 - EU Censorship 55:00 - Entire Audience Laughs At Stephen Colbert & Kaitlan Collins 1:02:35 - Jo Boaler - The ‘Math Is Racist’ Lady - Release a Math Book 1:09:30  - Sanjana’s Last Show :disappointed: 1:11:00 - Submit Your Videos To Pirate Idol! See You Next Week #podcast #technology #politics #culture

I know you guys are objective over there, that you just report the news as it is. Oh, I know. That's supposed to be a laugh line? It wasn't supposed to be. Elon Musk interviewing Donald Trump. We all huddled around the iPhone. I would say entirely negative coverage. I have this overwhelming sort of feeling that the media is in the bag for Kamala.

The only thing he's tweeted out since then was like that AI video of like him and Elon dancing. Until he's saying, dump Kristen Stewart. She cheated on you, sir. Until he's saying, I've never seen a skinny person drink Diet Coke. Until that's a tweet that's happening, Trump's not there. That's not Trump. That's something else that's happening. else that's happening. What's up, guys? Welcome back to the pod. First up, before we get to the pod itself, I've got an announcement to make about a little something I'm calling Pirate Idol.

Okay, enter the gauntlet. We made a call yesterday on Twitter. We were looking for not even one, but just new co-hosts in general. We want to bring new voices onto the show. And I thought it'd be fun to just do a round of like, send me a 30 second to 60 second take a video clip of you. Just email me, Solana at PirateWires.com. And I don't know if we think you've got something, a little spark, a little potential. We will bring you on the show and have you compete by take for a spot, for a seat on the Pirate Wires pod. I don't know exactly how this is going to go.

I do suspect that we'll start next week because I think it'll be fun. We already have a bunch of people who've emailed their take and I don't either. Maybe it'll be an all for one. I'll bring all of you on at once. It'll be like a crazy group chat of like 60 of you just fighting each other, like take by take. Maybe we'll do, you know, one a week for a segment. Um, I'll have more details next week on the, on the exact rules. But what I do know is I want you guys to reach out to us with a take. Twitter is a good place to source that. I think this, the actual show, will be an even better place to source it because you guys are all watching it every single week. Send us whatever it is. I mean, it could be something on the news. It could be a

take about reality. We just want to see you on video. Do be well lit. I've already got one where I can't see the person's face. Not that well. I mean, I'm not asking for like a studio or something, but like, let me be able to see you. And that's that on Pirate Idol. Okay. Again, Solana at Pirate Wire. Send them your way. Send them my way. Send them to me. Number two, we also have our Polymarket partnership. So the Polymarket news segment is coming up where we're going to talk about a take. This week, it's going to be just the chances that Elon Musk is literally arrested by an EU bureaucrat or something to that effect. You'll see in a moment.

And now I want to just get into it. We, of course, have to talk about the radio segment heard around the world, Elon Musk interviewing Donald Trump. This happened on Monday night. I watched it with my mom. We all huddled around the iPhone as if it was like the 1920s or something. And we were listening to the radio in, uh, or let's say 1918. I don't know the 1940s wartime. I don't know what it was. It did not feel like the future. It felt like it felt like the last tether we had to free society. There's a lot to talk about here. I do want to do... Sanjay is going to break down the media reaction in a minute because I think there's a lot there and it's pretty interesting and quite frankly funny. I do just want to give you guys a quick update or not an

update, a quick recap on what happened in case you missed it. So just in terms of the substance. So it starts late, first of all, and this is going to come up again and again in the media coverage. This is reminiscent of what we saw with Saks, right? So Saks, the all-in pod, sort of now famously did an interview with DeSantis. It was super late. There was too much traffic. Twitter crashed. It took a minute for them to get it up. Same thing happened this time around. Apparently Elon said they stress tested it with 8 million listeners or something.

I don't know how any of this shit works. That's what they're saying. Trump is like, no, no, no, no. There were just so many people trying to listen that it crashed. That's great. Congratulations, Elon. We're the most popular conversation in human history. Whatever it was, it was like 42 minutes late. They both framed it differently.

Elon immediately frames the conversation as a conversation rather than an interview, which he thinks is a more, I guess, important way to get to know somebody rather than a sort of combative, here's what I think. What do you think? Here's what you said. Gotcha, whatever. For what it's worth, I think Trump does better with a really stressful back and forth. But it was two and a half hours. We talked about, let's see, assassination. We talked about immigration.

We talked about the Iron Dome, an American Iron Dome. Should we build one? Should we have some kind of defense against nuclear weapons? It sounded very futuristic and exciting. We talked about the need for strongmen. It sounded like to me there was a lot of emphasis on the way a leader should look in the world and the geopolitical consequences of that, of just seeming strong. And they both felt like Kamala, the coconut queen, does not. TLDR. They talked about crime. They talked about the fact, Trump talked about the fact that crime in venezuela is going to be better because all of their

criminals are now here uh and then there was a question that we left with the viewers which was just the question of how many viewers or listeners rather were there and much like illegal immigration there is just no way to tell the number but probably in the tens of millions and that was that that was that. That was the thing. It was two and a half hours. I thought it was pretty interesting. I thought it started kind of boring and then got better and better.

It was pretty interesting, I think, to hear them just talk. I think when you talk for that long, you forget you're talking and you end up just being yourself. Many different reactions here. Sanjana, why don't you just hold us by the hand and walk us through the harrowing darkness that is the media landscape? Yeah, I mean, so there's a good tweet that kind of, maybe Matt can put it on the screen, but that kind of compiles all of the headlines that emerged in the hours and days after the space. And it it was i mean the the headlines range from you know fact check you know cnn posts this thing about like a fact check that trump made 20 false

claims during his conversation with with elon um you know which i think is good to know when when you know someone's saying something factually inaccurate to like newsweek saying donald trump's lisp for some reason in in quotes during elon musk interview raises questions um you have usa today trump rambles slurs his way to elon musk interview it was an unmitigated disaster uh the independent trump repeats same old talking points in musk interview but quote lisp again steals the show uh lots of people making a big deal out of like the tech disaster including kamala hq which we can talk about in a second um because i think it's it's also relevant here um but basically washington post trump returns to x with technical glitches softball questions from musk um it's it's of... And then there's a lot of sort of headlines

that make a big deal out of these two megalomaniacs who have thrown themselves a self-congratulatory party basically in so many words. So basically I would say entirely negative coverage ranging from, you know, somewhat substantive nitpicks with facts to like completely ad hominem. Just like, look at this dude with a lisp who we hate. You referenced one earlier, they were talking about the attacks. It was, so I didn't quite get it out. Elon said it was a DDoS. Is that, did I say it? It's DDoS, right? A DDoS attack? Yeah. Distributed, what is it? Denial? Denial of service.

Yeah. So this is when basically you simulate a ton of traffic to a site that crashes it. And I guess this does happen sort of all the time, but did it happen now? I don't know. Vox immediately debunked it. I don't know how the fuck they managed that like it was just an instantaneous nope he's lying but also i mean to their credit trump was like this is not a d we're just popular and it's great this is awesome i'm so popular that we had to start late what do you guys make of uh i mean what did you make it what did you make of separate from the media coverage what did you make of did you listen to it at all did you get a chance to to dip in i i listened to segments of it um and i thought what really struck me because i listened to it after because i tried to log on when it was happening but it was not working on my computer

you're one of the boxers okay i'm one yeah it wasn't i mean i assumed well i assumed the trump thing which is that it was so people you you know, there was so much overwhelming when you're listening to the recording, your Twitter icon shows up with like Elon's and Trump's. And so it seems like you're just in the conversation with the two of them, listening to this phone call between them. And obviously they're talking very close to their phones. And so it does feel like you're listening into a phone call.

And it just made me think about the fact i mean kamala harris is still not deigned to to give a kind of uh you know unscripted interview and um i mean say what you will about trump's command of the facts or whatever at least he was talking about policy issues in that discussion i least he was talking about policy issues in that discussion. I mean, he was talking about the Middle East. He was talking about the border. Those are some of the segments I heard. And yeah, it just felt like, okay, I know, at least I know that this person exists as like a consciousness, right? A unique consciousness, and not just like an amalgamation of press releases and stuff.

Yeah, he does have actual policies that you can at least disagree with. One of them, I should say, it does seem to be, they talked about immigration a lot. And I had previously only seen his mass deportation policy presented through the filter of the media.

And so I assumed it wasn't quite this explicit, but he straight up said, this will be the largest mass deportation event. I can't do his voice, man. I always try. I always start to try and I can't do it. I wish I could do it. It's like when I see a great singer and I, in my dreams, sometimes I'm a great singer and I'll start to sing. And I just, I don't, I can, I don't have the range, but what he said was, this is going to be the greatest mass deportation in human history and uh that felt meaningful to me that felt like okay we're we're we're doing deportation this year it's not we're no longer just building the wall it's like we're talking about he also there were maybe 20 million immigrants here that is you know to the hysterical people are going nuts about this

they think it's the end of the world they think it's they think it's um i i was i'm gonna say like not the adjacent or something matt maybe to beep that word youtube is crazy on censorship it's fascism to a certain kind of person the idea that these people should be deported certainly 20 million is a lot though and and that's a that's a really that's a wild policy proposal brandon what did you think of this i didn't listen to it um i mean i don't know i just i have this overwhelming sort of feeling that kamala the media is in the bag for kamala well um what was that that account autism capital posted that screen grab of every headline that came out about the spaces. And it's just depressing to look at. This is actually probably the rationale that Elon has for trying to create a separate media or information ecosystem. Because it seems impossible for the current media establishment to not be partisan about Democrats versus Republicans.

Something that I've been seeing too, which is alarming to me, and I think you noticed this too, Solana, at one point in Slack, I've seen headlines recently where people are getting accused of having right-wing points of view at this point. Like at this point, it's a crime in the media to have a conservative sort of position on even just one issue. Right. So I think that the media's reaction really just reflects again, that Kamala has got them in the bag and that the country is alarmingly divided. And I don't know how this resolves, you know, I've always expected the media to be biased. It's always been, when has it not been biased? It's been biased forever. We've talked about media bias forever. Media bias is something that I remember hearing people talk about on Fox news when I was a kid, it's sort of always been a thing.

The one that is what makes this so obvious and stark and sort of disorienting, I think, is the fact that Kamala hasn't said anything. And yet she's been framed as this hero. I thought maybe we all lived through the Biden thing where they were trying to sort of look the other way while a man with actual dementia was running for president. But I thought that was an evolution on their part. It didn't seem uncritical. I mean, maybe it seemed like nothing, but it wasn't, you know, Biden did the debate and everyone said, this is fucking crazy. To the New York Times credit, I do remember journalists really asking for an interview and whatnot. This is now very different. Obviously, people are asking to interview Kamala, but you have nonstop defense of her right to not to just

actively not talk to anybody about her positions. I saw people I was accused of being a substance demander, which was like an extremely dystopian phrase. Literally, yes, someone accused me of being a substance demander. And they reflected back on an earlier presidential race. I believe it was Eisenhower. And they were like, you know, people demanded it back then too. And it was the wrong move. You see people talking about this online. Just tactically, she's doing the right thing.

That's all that matters. Is this weird betrayal of the fact that they don't care that nobody's really home there that nobody's running the sheet that's not a person with opinions that's a person who represents this sort of amorphous administrative blob state thing and they're going to defend it tooth and claw i think the reason they weren't defending biden wasn't because he he wasn't he wasn't there it was because he embarrassed them it was because we sort of he accidentally pulled the curtain back and we all kind of saw uh saw what was there before i move on to the the next piece here though riley i would love your take on either i mean the debate itself

or another debate i'm sorry the conversation itself or you're in texas right i mean what is the vibe there well just one thing on the the positive media coverage for kamala one of the things that would help counter that would be trump being on x and that's what this was like kind of build out as was like trump's return to x um but because let's face it like when the media is going full k-hive like true social really just doesn't cut it yeah um but it looks like trump really hasn't like used his account much since the interview like the only thing he's tweeted out since then was like that ai video of like him and elon dancing which like is funny but it's not like his legendary

twitter rants that he used to do um so yeah i i think, it's just like a, yeah, I think one of the things Trump, um, one of the things Trump did that when he was back on Twitter was unfollow Mike Pence. So that's how people, uh, that's like how people knew that this was him back on using his account. Um, but he really hasn't used his ex account much since the interview. And I wish that as something he, something he did a little bit more to counter this media coverage. That is a great point. He, as soon as he, you're right, it was, it was building up. He did arrive before the interview. There were a bunch of tweets beforehand. They ran a sort of blitz of ads. The ads were weirdly good. I was surprised at how they were really just beautifully shot and kind of inspiring. I didn't even – they were clipping from Trump speeches that I really had no recollection of whatsoever.

I've never heard him speak like that. But they were fantastic ads. I – they – but the tweets were not landing for me at all. It was just regular whatever political bullshit. I – for me, he is not back on Twitter until he's commenting on robert pattinson's relationship until he's saying dump kristin stewart she cheated on you sir like until i'm getting that until he's saying i've never seen a skinny person drink diet coke until that's a tweet that's happening trump's not there that's not trump that's something else that's happening um on the media stuff building up up to it as well, this is going to bridge into the next thing, which is we've got to talk about the Europe of it all.

There was a lot of terror. Was there an interest, let's say, concern about this interview. There, I saw it go viral, a clip at the White House press conference with Janine Pierre, I forget, what is her name, Sanjana, the three names? Karine Jean-Pierre. Yes. So she's up there on the podium

talking about whatever, gets a question on this. And it's a very sort of, do you guys have any plans to sort of do anything about the misinformation or how are you thinking about the misinformation and even the press secretary was sort of like um yeah we're aware of it it's definitely it sucks but i mean this is america what do you mean what are we going to do about it let's be honest like this is just a guy interviewing another guy publicly and that guy is running for

president this was a thing here. Now, for everything we saw, and we expect that, we've gotten this before throughout the clubhouse era. We have the age of sort of unfettered conversations. And we've written a lot of, where I sort of, this is before Pirate Wires became a team, right? I was writing about the clubhouse days when it was happening and how crazy it was that people were really coming after the concept of people just talking to each other without a moderator. And this really was and continues to be a whole entire genre of content. People believe there needs to be a police officer there. Now, it occurred to me during this whole entire interview that it really is new, actually. It's not as if suddenly everyone has changed their opinion

on the concept of these massive conversations being unmediated. They've sort of never, I mean, the First Amendment has not changed, and I'm on the side of people being able to speak to each other publicly. It's crazy that that was ever even a question. But we've never had such potential before on a platform. We've never had just a guy talking to the president for two and a half hours because he's choosing to unthinkable to the average person who just ingests the media. It doesn't seem that different. You're like, it's just people talking and there's always people talking. Bertone, who leading up to the interview or conversation actually issues a sort of, I mean, it was pretty clearly a threat. He said, we know that you're doing this interview with

the president. This EU bureaucrat says to an American businessman who's about to interview an American presidential candidate and former American president, this EU bureaucrat says to an American businessman who's about to interview an American presidential candidate and former American president, this EU bureaucrat says, we know this is happening. We're here to remind you that we have laws across Europe about misinformation. And if you break them, we're coming after you. He also goes ahead and invokes the UK. Now, the UK is completely insane right now. And Brandon is going to go do an entire sort of, he's going to launch a segment about that in a moment

after we finish up this one here. But the sort of TLDR there is you have a police official in London sort of implying that Elon Musk could be extradited for speaking about politics in Britain. You then have these sentiments echoed in The Guardian, which is a British tabloid really at this point, where a former Twitter executive says Elon Musk should be arrested for inciting violence, or it was sort of if he does incite violence, which they all said he did, he should be arrested. And that was it. It was his veiled threat from europe uh what do you guys what do you guys make of this sort of

the eu involvement here my favorite thing about this was brussels actually reprimanded uh terry for sending the letter to elon i guess he did so without any approval uh just like went rogue um the eu commission said the timing and wording of the letter were neither coordinated or agreed letter to Elon, I guess he did so without any approval, just like went rogue. The EU commission said the timing and wording of the letter were neither coordinated or agreed with the president nor with the commissioners. So he just went on his own and issued this letter to Elon, which is kind of crazy. But I also think like, if you're the EU, wouldn't you want this Elon Trump interview to happen and for it to be as big as possible? Because as we've covered here, they just view our tech companies as cash cows and tax them into oblivion. So wouldn't

you want them to be as big and as profitable as possible so you can keep your revenue stream coming? Maybe that's why his EU handlers were so mad at him. I mean, I don't really think so. I think that they actually are just really nervous. I think that they just had a populist revolt across Europe. It's ongoing populist revolt. We see what's happening. And I know the UK has fully removed itself from the EU conversation. But across the entire continent, you see this now and the people in charge are scared. They're scared of popular sentiment. They're scared of what it means. They're scared of the rising. They're calling it the sort of like extreme right wing. I would say it's just the average person at this point feels really animated on the issue of immigration in particular,

and especially in Europe. And I think they're genuinely scared. And they see this platform as one of the only ways that people can collect and talk outside of the sort of elitist, gatekept, I guess, safe regions of media space. And they want to shut it down. I will say, though, the polymarket – we've got to talk about polymarket. So we have to sort of – we have to bring up the betting markets. Okay, so on today's polymarket segment with our good partner, again, how many times do I say fucking polymarket? Thank you, polymarket for this. I'm very excited to talk about it. I really am. I do love these guys, but I just want to get to it. So we actually asked this question or sort of a version of this question. I was curious about how once Theory of Proton issued the threat to Elon, I wonder what would actually come of it. I mean, was it going to be an empty threat?

Were they going to maybe censor this? And that's what we did. So, or that's at least the question that was asked. Censorship. EU has gone off the rails with censorship. Our partner Polymarket put together a market. Will Elon plus Trump, will the Elon plus Trump interview be censored in the EU? Ultimately, the market resolved to no after floating around 7% pre-interview, which means

most people think that this was just empty bluster. There would be no censorship. I think the more interesting question to ask would have been, will he be fined? To sort of get back to Riley's earlier point, like these are, this is like welfare queen shit. Europe is just the welfare queen of the universe. And they have been sort of erroneously

or sort of, I would say, soft fraudulently finding our companies on bullshit grounds just to sort of make a bunch of money for a while now. It's sort of a secret or a sort of shadow trade war, I would say. I would like to see that. I would like to see, you know, like what are the odds that he gets fined? What are the odds that he pays? Brandon, maybe you know something about this. I'm curious because these companies have been fined a million times. My sense is a company like Apple is paying those fines. Is Elon actually paying fines for misinformation on Twitter?

Is he like, yes, here's my – I'm opening my checkbook. I'm giving Thierry Breton another 10 million or something. I just don't see him ever doing that. So the DSA is the act that Terry Baguette is basically calling and saying, this is what you're in violation of. And Sanji, I don't want to just dump this to you, but you did that piece on the DSA and the DMA. The DSA is only recently in effect. And Baguette's first, first move under the DSA was to threaten to fine Twitter for

the blue check, the verification scheme. Right. So, so he says that blue checks blue checks now deceive users because blue checks used to mean an authoritative source of information and now they mean anybody who's paid. So we don't know if so that action was basically he said that there would be an investigation into this, right? Like Riley said, it sounds like brussels is not really behind um terry uh with the most recent letter where he threatened to find uh

find musk for having an interview with trump so i think i think right now like elon hasn't paid anything because there are actually no enforcement actions again him yet. But the DSA allows the EU to fine Twitter or any company that they characterize as a very large platform, up to 6% of its global annual turnover, I think daily or something like that. It's a crazy, it's probably not daily, but it is a crazy amount of money that would actually probably destroy Twitter's profit margins. If he pays it, I just don't think he's going to pay though. I think that we're in a game of chicken right now and they're saying, we're going to threaten, we're going to fine you all this money for misinformation and so you better do what we say. And Elon's like literally go fuck your face i think is what he literally i think that's explicitly what he said yeah he said go fuck your face and um i think he's not going to pay and then it's like okay well if you don't pay what are you going to do are you

going to are you going to ban the platform yeah and they might but if they do that what are the consequences in europe what are the populist consequences of that of removing the one platform where people think incorrectly by the way that they can say whatever they want on Twitter because people are getting arrested for tweets now all over the place. I mean, that's been actually happening in Europe for a while, but Twitter has been working with the government for many years abroad in all of the different local governments. So I was going to mention that. So we covered this in a podcast a few months ago,

but I think it was in Brazil or Argentina, where basically one of these countries was demanding that Twitter disappear accounts that were critical of the regime. And I think it was Brazil. Yeah, it was Brazil. And Elon made a big fuss about this and said that he would not comply with these orders. But a week later, I think he ended up folding

and now he is complying and has been complying with these requests to disappear accounts that are critical of the regime. So, I mean, I think the leverage at play here is like access to market, right? And I think it just depends on how valuable Elon views that leverage and how that sort of dynamic plays out with these countries and country blocks. Sanj, as our resident French expert, what do you make of the EU of it all? I'm actually somewhat optimistic that, I don't know if Elon specifically, but that American tech companies in general will stop ceding to their exorbitant... They're kind of like doing extortion.

They've been doing extortion for years with American companies through these regulations. But I think there's signs that people are starting to get fed up. I mean, we wrote about this a few weeks ago, but like Apple has announced it's not going to release its, you know, AI, its new sort of integrated AI tool in the EU because of regulations. Meta is sort of doing a similar thing. And I guess with Elon, the question is, because I think Twitter is still hemorrhaging money, right?

For him, like it's this kind of personal passion project that we're all, you know, in some ways indebted to him for, his, you know, maybe equivalent of philanthropy. And so I guess there's this question of if, yeah, if they do go ahead with these fines, and it does seem like Terry is kind kind of renegade i think he has personal animus against elon because elon has like explicitly called him out on twitter and they you know sort of go back and forth in that way so i think there's part of this that's

just like you know this eu bureaucrat feels really um personally affronted by elon's rhetoric toward him but uh i do think there's a chance i mean elon's the wealthiest man on the planet he could potentially keep funding twitter as a loss at a loss despite maybe pulling out of an eu market um which would be a huge blow i think to the entire enterprise of what twitter was which was just this you know anyone all over the world could could uh you know share their opinions um but yeah it's not clear to me because you know terry's not necessarily aligned with with the rest of the european commission um on all of this so I don't agree with that. I think that they had to say something publicly because this one was so extreme.

We are this obviously his note went completely viral. Everybody was calm. There was no it was just every single tweet I think that I saw that day was about this massively viral tweet after massively viral tweet, uniform condemnation. Everybody was extremely upset about it. And the word that was being, or the phrase that was being bandied about was election interference. And the EU is a major, you know, it's like, these are our NATO partners. These are major trade partners. And now we've allowed, as you correctly brought up, the extortion to go on for a long time. Our government has not gotten involved. Our government is,

not only has it not gotten involved to protect our companies, our government has assisted the Europeans. Because over the last four years, we've had an administration that is hostile to business, I think at the conceptual level, but certainly specifically tech businesses. It's been extremely hostile towards. And this was, I think, a little too far for the American partnership. You can't be interfering to this degree and expect no reaction at all. Now, increasingly, what's also happening, I think, is this sort of extortion is getting the light of day. People didn't talk about it for a long time. It was just, oh, these are whatever fines, there's bureaucrats abroad, the tech companies aren't following the rules. People are starting to see it for what it is. Tech companies are only reacting because they have to at this point. They can't remain solvent if they don't react in some way. I think the real thing that will be interesting is the question of what happens if Trump becomes president. Okay,

the EU just tried to censor Trump. What does that mean for NATO? I think that's what the EU is thinking about. This guy could reset. I mean, the administration, the former administration that is hostile to business, and I think probably the concept of a national identity is on its way out, potentially. If that happens, I don't know, do we we get and trump loves to talk about trade right like he loves to talk about trade disparities um trade unfairness he wants he's gonna he's gonna be like great you want to fine our tech companies into oblivion all of your consumer goods are banned like we're gonna put insane tariffs on them to the point that nobody can afford them and what is europe but tourism and consumer goods they, does the country just cease to exist?

The country, the continent cease to exist after that? Possibly, I have no idea. But I know that they don't want it. I don't think they want to challenge him on that. And they had to hedge. So I do think sentiment is roughly aligned with theory, but they're maybe nervous. They're nervous about a lot of things.

It's a very gun-shy continent that hasn't had to worry about its own defense for the last, what, eight decades? So I don't know. They're not setting their best. Riley, what do you make of it? Yeah, I guess then like either scenario is equally crazy. Like either he went on his own to write this letter to Elon or they kind of like threw him under the bus after like both are equally insane. Like both are equally insane. Yeah. I just, I,

I do think he did it on his own, but I don't think it ever mattered before. And I think now they saw the reaction and they felt they had to do something, but it's not like he's the first time he's theory is hysterically said something crazy to an American businessman. This is very common. I don't know. I do think the probably most interesting part about it

was the way that he opened with the UK in his letter. The UK is not a part of the EU. So why would you open with that for any other reason than to threaten Elon? Of course, he's invoking, as I alluded to earlier, all of the crazy shit that's happening in the UK right now. Brandon, you were just editing a piece for Pirate Wires. We published it today, Thursday when we're recording. So Friday, it'll be out in your inboxes already.

Why don't you just take us through what the hell is going on over there in the nation of our, what is it? Are they our forefathers i don't know they're the ancients should i start with like does our does our start with the uk police just like beating a 40 year old mother in her house and dragging her out for saying she doesn't like that immigration okay so we're gonna go we're gonna skip over the riots she doesn't like them migrants i guess i guess i mean listen we also we don't like to cover europe generally we like to sort of focus on america this i think is interesting and important for us because it really is the uk is sort of like a bizarro world where the hard left which wants to abolish free speech that is

a mainstream opinion not even hard i would say it's a mainstream left-wing opinion. Now the UK is a bizarro world version of America where that actually happened. And so I think we need to talk about, I mean, UK is where our free speech rights come from. They no longer have it. Yes. Let's take it to the riots and kind of walk us back from there. Sometime last month, three girls were stabbed to death at a dance class. Last month, three girls were stabbed to death at a dance class. Eight other children were stabbed. Five of them are critically injured. Two adults were injured.

And the personal trainer who stopped the attacker described him as wearing like a full track suit, had his hood up, and he had a knife. Per news reports, the attacker is, this is already, I feel like I'm getting into controversial territory about who the attacker is. The attacker, per news reports, is a 17-year-old. Actually, he's 18 now. He was 17 when he stabbed those children to death. A 17-year-old named Axel Ruta Cabana. He was apparently born in Cardiff, England to Rwandan parents.

And just this is going to become relevant in a second. Rwanda is 2% Muslim and the majority is Christian, pretty religion there. So he's unlikely to be Muslim. However, because of laws regarding minors, the authorities couldn't release this guy's identity for like the first week or two weeks. And a lot of people on the internet in England came to assume that this guy was a Muslim. And there was this thing going around where um somebody thought that a guy named ali al shikati was the killer so again like there is it appears to be this like misinformation going around that um the attacker was a was a muslim which does not appear to be true so what followed that was a series of riots across the uk um not just in big cities, but in smaller, less diverse towns. There's attacks on mosques, attacks on businesses owned by minorities, and hotels that are actually holding migrants.

There have been attacks on those. So that's kind of like what has happened. And I mean, basically the protests are about British is like the British country's immigration policy. Right. So to get like to the, to the piece that we published today, um, you're actually seeing right now, um, people that are literally getting arrested for speaking about these riots, um, expressing anti-immigration sentiments. I think somebody has been arrested for having a sign in their window. Like we talked about a little bit earlier, London's Metropolitan Police Chief has publicly warned British citizens

that they will throw the full force of the law at people. And they even, he even said that, you know, whether you're in this country or you're online, we will come after you. This is a direct quote. The UK government tweeted this really, I don't know, it wasn't probably a good idea but they tweeted think before you post um indicating that like you know basically we'll arrest you if you essentially like express an opinion that the regime does not approve that they deem hateful that they deem hateful and they they refer to this as right violent this is these are this is violent speech. I saw the phrase that they used, armchair riot. Armchair rioter.

Armchair rioter. So an armchair, this is an extremely, I'm very interested, as you guys know, in dystopian language. Armchair rioter, it's right up there at the top. This is a person who just is posting, and this is equivalent in some way to rioting. Not causing a riot, not even incitement. They're saying that the post itself is, in a is equivalent in some way to rioting. Not causing a riot, not even incitement. They're saying that the post itself is, in a sense, a part of the riot. So the piece that we published today is in large part about the speech laws that have been in the UK for quite some time.

for quite some time. And I was surprised to find out today that like when I was, or yesterday and today, when I was editing the piece that like they've, Britain has actually had pretty restrictive and kind of like impractical speech laws on the books for years. You know, so just to take you guys through what the law basically, what the laws basically are, you can be arrested and jailed for up to seven years for speech that is, quote unquote, abusive or insulting or likely to cause somebody to feel harassed, distressed, or alarmed. What constitutes abusive speech is actually dependent on entirely on the orientation of the hearer. So like there's no objective measure for these things. It's whether or not the person who heard the speech feels, for example, harassed or abused or insulted.

You can be offended. You can be arrested for actually just offending someone online. So there's this, the UK Communications Act 2003 makes it a crime for somebody to send, by means of public electronic communication network, a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or it's indecent, obscene, or of a menacing character. So whether that opinion is true or a joke, it doesn't matter.

Determining the message's offensiveness is what the judge has to do in these cases. So, these laws have been on the books for a while, but basically, politicians in power have not really made it a point to enforce them. Now, recently, a new labor government just took over, and they are actually going nuts with the speech stuff. And that's why you're seeing, like you said, some 40-year-old woman got dragged out of her house for expressing a dissident political opinion and is getting arrested or charged by the courts. So that's pretty much the, that's kind of the summary of what's going on. These laws have been on the books forever. It's just that there's kind of a fanatical government in place right now that's weaponizing this against its own citizens. I would say also, you know, in the buildup to this,

it wasn't as if there has been no crime committed by Muslim immigrants. It's not like knifing was synonymous with Islam for no reason whatsoever. And the very important newest development I saw was the government is considering legislation specifically targeting speech about Islam, which many are calling a kind of anti blasphemy legislation. The idea being explicitly in the language that there is something inherently big racist about going after Islam. Now that's crazy. You have to be able to criticize religion, right? And I don't, again, I don't want to be too, it's the UK, I expect them to be crazy. It's not America. I have a higher standard for us. But I just see a lot of agreement in America on this. And in fact, I would say it's close to half

the country seems to agree with this. And it really concerns me. I think this is coming. I think this kind of thing is coming. I think you are not going to be able to criticize. They're talking about just immigration generally. They're about to get very specific, not only about, you know, they're like, we don't want to see discrimination against Muslims. But if you are criticizing cultural practices inherent to that faith, that has to be legitimate. If it's not legitimate, then you are effectively, I don't know, you're effectively running the government. Like Islam is the government. But that's what I was going to say, that is representative of Islam actually taking power in the UK government. I mean,

this gives Welbeck's submission. And so if this doesn't represent a sort of incursion of Islam into the UK politics and the UK political system, I don't know what else that would look like. And yeah, that's scary because even, I mean, I don't want to get in hot water here, but like even moderate Muslims believe that, for example, you know, it's a wife's duty to obey her husband. They believe that, yes, I think 60% of Muslims believe that it should be a crime for gay people to get married, according to one of the most recent studies I looked at. So this is like, this is an anti liberal trend that I think is, is sort of, again, there's an incursion here and it doesn't look good at all.

Yeah. We had a bit of this stuff. I remember that we had a piece on the Muslim town. I believe it was in Minnesota that banned pride and, or they got, they banned the pride flags and all of this. And it's just the liberals installed them yeah that is the that's the ground floor it gets so much worse

than this especially when you're talking about a religion like like islam which is inherently political it's an inherently political faith the fact that you can't even have that conversation potentially is very very uh well it's very alarming and i also wonder what it means for us abroad so kind of related to this you have that unhinged trans activists. What is her name? Calabaro, Caballero, Matt, pull up. Alejandra Caraballo. talk which i mean libs of tiktok is gonna live of tiktok i'm not uh i'm not a i'm not a huge libs of tiktok stan what i don't what i do not think is that libs of tiktok should be arrested for going after a bunch of olympic athletes uh on the question of the trans stuff that we were discussing a couple of weeks ago so apparently this person libs was in portugal when they were writing uh

one of one of her critiques of the Olympics. And Caballero, or whatever the fuck, sees this and is just straight up like, you can be arrested there for this speech. You know, like, go get them, basically. The tweet goes viral. And I think that we, this is, it sounds panicky and hysterical. And oh, you're crazy. You're not going to get arrested for speech. I mean, people are getting arrested for speech in Europe.

The police are saying that foreigners can be, You're not going to get arrested for speech. I mean, people are getting arrested for speech in Europe. The police are saying that foreigners can be, I mean, America would have to agree to this, extradited over this. And I certainly think that Americans abroad do need to think about this. You have to obey the law in whatever country you're in. So, you know, we're in London or whatever, hanging out, writing a piece, tweeting, whatever. I think that you actually have to be careful about what you're saying in a place that, you know, used to feel pretty free. Europeans push back here. They think they do have free speech. I've often gotten into these weird conversations with them. Europeans, various, a bunch of, this has come up when I was

living in Spain, this came up, it was years ago. So these books, these laws like this have been around for a while. I remember saying like, oh, it's like you guys, I thought you guys had free speech, but it doesn't seem like you do. And they said, what are you talking about? That's American propaganda. Of course, we have free speech. And I said, OK, so like if you wanted to say X, Y, or Z sort of controversial thing,

and they gasped, they're like, no, of course you couldn't say that. Why would you want to say something like that? They just don't get it. It's like they don't even grasp the concept. And now as brandon's your point that what you guys published today now they're actually doing something about it it sounds like a lot about it assange what what do you uh what do you make of the the uk stuff the uk stuff in particular well i think it's an interesting thing um because i actually i don't know if the uk stuff really breaks down along the left rightright lines we traditionally think of in the US with free speech, though I do think this current Labour government

is like insane and drunk on power. It's interesting, some of the speech laws that were enacted were enacted by Tory governments, actually, originally, in response to riots. So that in the actually, originally, in response to riots. So that in the Pirate Warriors piece, the authors talk about this Public Order Act of 1986, which, you know, prohibits distressing speech or something like completely insane like that. Very subjective, sort of open to interpretation, bad speech. And that was introduced by a conservative minister and passed under Margaret Thatcher. And I think the common thread that you see with some of these laws is that basically there's unrest, right? That was passed in response to riots in South Hall and Brixton. And the ruling power takes the opportunity to consolidate their control over speech because I think the UK as a country has this ruling class that's like

incredibly i don't know still sort of victorian and like really scared of um i think currently the the demographic ticking time bomb that they've kind of engineered of their own creation which of course was gonna it was only a matter of time before this, this country, um, this collection of countries, cause they get really mad when you don't acknowledge that's four countries was, was going to erupt into, into violence. Um, but I think ultimately what's happening is what always happens, which is that the ruling class is, is consolidating their power. And I agree that most of europeans i've talked to don't they do have a very different conception of what free speech is than americans i mean i think most americans you're sort of in school you're brought up on these examples of people saying you know these supreme court cases

where people say you know heinous things um and you know the supreme court says okay we defend your right to say that under the first amendment. People burn flags, whatever. We defend this. And we do have this incredibly robust and unique protection of free speech that in Europe, they just don't have. And most of the people I know are very comfortable saying, yeah, there is something called hate speech and it should be illegal. Whereas I think, I think most Americans, I would like to think might agree that there is something called hate speech, but that it's very nebulous and we don't know what it is. And in any event, it shouldn't be illegal. And the only thing that worries me on the American, well, there's a lot that worries me on the American front, but on this issue particularly, I worry that hate crimes, right, which is this very similarly nebulous category of crime could be eventually broadened in a way that would limit our speech, but we have the First Amendment and they just don't. So very different cultural

context, unfortunately. I guess I think what you see in America regarding free speech is it's always free speech for us, but not you now in a political context and in the partisan war. in a political context and in the partisan war. But yeah, I don't think, I sort of think like, would a Kamala administration actually allow an American to be extradited for a free speech violation in the UK? Like, is that an ultra paranoid thing to think? Well, we currently under our extradition treaty it's one-sided so we can force britain i think to extradite people to us but they can't force they can't force us to extradite people to them i think but i mean like if you have somebody

you want to get rid of in the states, that's super critical of the regime. I think it would never be someone so high profile as Elon. It would be some idiot keyboard where it's me. I'm getting fucking extradited. I'm the one. I mean, we, we jailed the January beans on toast for years or whatever.

Yes. I, you know, like I do think we're living in a different world, but if you recall, remember when, um, uh,

what was her name the one who was going to do the disinformation organization for the government it was like the disinformation department was it i was thinking jankowitz jankowitz so that whole thing fell apart like nina it was nina was trying to create the disinformation cops uh like like trump did the space force and nina said no're going to have a seventh branch of the military and they're going to be targeting people who say bad things that annoy me on Twitter. And that fell apart under the Biden administration. That didn't happen. Now things feel like they're getting worse and worse. So anything's possible if Kamala wins, but I think no. And then it goes to the courts. And I mean,

I don't know, the left also wants to pack those. So once they do, if you no longer have a court, a sort of pro first amendment court in place, what does that look like? I'm not sure. I do think almost anything's possible, which is why you really don't want the courts to be packed and why you really do want to be demanding answers for people or from people who are running for office when they say things like Tim Waltz did about the first amendment, when he said that there were no protections for, and Matt, you should get the exact clip, but the gist of it was, you know, that your right to free speech does not include hateful or misinformed content and of

course it literally does like explicitly does um but this guy doesn't think that even though it's not true it's weird i mean he's not he's in office maybe minnesota it's like you could be super insulated in your bubble but i think it's just something that we have to look out for because i disagree sans with you that it's not I think it's basically like half the country now is ready for hate speech laws. And a little bit less is ready for misinformation laws. But we see how things work politically. All that has to happen for half the country to switch its view on something is for it to become a platform position of Kamala Harris. If Kamala Harris says, I think there should be hate speech laws,

the Democrats will fall in line because they will fall in line with anything she says. I mean, she's talking about price controls right now. And it's like, there's zero outrage. This is how Venezuela, you know what, that's a whole other conversation. What I want to talk about now is something more fun, which is CNN and how stupid it is. Riley, take it away. Sure thing. So CNN's Caitlin Collins appeared on former comedian term regime mouthpiece slash vaccine musical theater artist Stephen Colbert show this week. She begins by talking about how she learned about Biden dropping out of the race, the new race now between Trump and Kamala Harris. Harris. She's saying how Trump was thrown off by Biden dropping out, at which point Colbert begins what I guess was supposed to be a sincere compliment about CNN's reporting. He says, quote, I know you guys are objective over there that you just report the news as it is, to which the audience cracks up to the visible confusion of both Colbert and Collins.

I know you guys are objective over there that you just report the news as it is. Oh, I know. CNN makes it. I know that's supposed to be a laugh line. It wasn't supposed to be, but I guess it is. Dude, they laughed too. I do want to just quickly interject.

It was like, it was not because I first saw it on Twitter. I'm like, oh, it must have been like a, you know, a chuckle or something. And they uproarious laughter. The whole audience is laughing at this. Like an obvious they're like wow what a funny obvious joke you just told right and so two things i don't get

about this is like don't these shows have like those lights you know that come on that indicate when you're supposed to like laugh or applause like so maybe some producer accidentally put one up when he wasn't supposed to and he'll probably be fired. I don't know. But two is like CNN is presumably where that audience gets their news from. Like I would imagine the CNN Colbert overlap is like pretty strong. So it's like a weird tacit admission by everyone in that audience of like, yeah, I know you don't really report the truth, but I don't really care. And I'm going to keep watching your show. That was an interesting dynamic to me. I did. I mean, it was so jarring that I also wondered if, if someone had accidentally flipped the last, a laugh switch, I think that we would have heard by about that by now though,

because that would have been helpful for Colbert. You know, it would have been like, oh, someone made a mistake. And so everybody laughed. Uh, but we didn't hear about that because I think people do think it's funny. Maybe we've just internal. I could be wrong here, but my sense is that people have really internalized the idea that you can't trust the media to the point that CNN is the butt of a joke for everybody. Because I think probably the far left also hates CNN. Definitely. I think American from what I've seen, Americans have like some of the lowest approval ratings of media among at least Western countries. It's something in the 30s.

Most Americans just hate the media for good reason, obviously. I mean, they've lied so consistently, almost unrelentingly, from the Iraq War on to modern day um so you know this is never going to happen but the thing is it's okay for cnn to be biased they should just i mean this is i'm parroting you solana it's totally okay to be biased but like just say you're being biased and don't in bad faith report like you're reporting on the truth. You know, like that's all that we need to know is like you have a partisan bias, you know? And what do you stand for, right?

I think CNN stands for state control, right? It does. New York Times too. We at Pirate Wires are America first and pro-tech. I think we always make that known. And I personally can understand media coverage when I understand what the biases are, and it's helpful. So CNN is never going to do it. But yeah, I wish they would just sort of be like, here, here's what, here's what we want to happen in the U S here's our vision. And it's like, great. Okay, cool. Like now we have that context and now we know, you know, where you might stretch the truth, you know, et cetera. We can see the evidence of this in the past, uh, in our media ecosystems past. So titles of newspapers like the Democratic Gazette or the Republican, you know, Missouri Times or whatever the hell it's that you see that those

those signifiers, the liberal, the liberal epoch or all throughout local press across the country, because pre 20th century or even early 20th century, before the consolidation of everything, the monopoly, it's... Excuse me. Before the... It really... I mean, I don't know if it was where we associate the late 19th century with monopolies, but massive centralization and consolidation of businesses and giant media conglomerates and

things like this happened all throughout the mid to late 20th century. So, you know, you just increasingly fewer companies controlling everything, like single companies controlling, you know, 50 newspapers or whatever, radio stations, all of that. And as that happened, I think that you sort of had, as fewer people owned everything, you could no longer own your bias. You had to really adopt this illusion of, I guess, being above it all. Because if you didn't, it's sort of really scary. If suddenly, you know, there's one person who owns everything, all of the media, and it's clearly a Democrat speaking. That's very different than when it was just the Democratic Gazette run by, you know, my ancestor,

probably like the forebearer, like the version of me from 1855, who was just yelling about some weird well issue in a small town in Vermont. Like, who cares if I'm a Democrat, but if I'm controlling 700 newspapers across the country, then suddenly it's scary. Uh, yeah, I don't know. I don't know what to make of the, I think it's just more of the same. It's interesting that it's so mainstream now, the sort of anti-CNN ones specifically, it's interesting that it happened on Colbert. interesting that it happened on colbert i expect more of it to happen and i think it's great for us it's good for her pirate wires like the media if the media ecosystem is finally ecosystem is finally fragmenting and people are really looking for people who are honest about about their bias then that's going to be that I mean, that's just what the future of media feels like to me. You see it in places like Semaphore, I think going in the wrong direction.

I think more, I think, I think we have a whole crop of new sort of new, new media companies that are more explicitly biased. Things like Semaphore kind of opened with this, you know, here's the story. Here's what other critics might say. Here's my take. And they try and show you a variety of takes. That feels dishonest to me. That feels like you're hiding. That feels like you're obscuring your actual point of view. And I don't think that's going to last. I think they're going to stop doing that. And they're going to become a regular media company. It will be interesting to see if they own their, I mean, Semaphore is a very, it's like CNN or the New York Times. It is a state left organization. And I don't know, we'll see what happens. On the far left, obviously, things are more honest. You have,

what do you even have? You have like Jacobin and MSNBC, same thing. And they tend to be a little more open about it. CNN, the state ones, the sort of pro-state hardcore pro-state people they can't really um i don't know i don't know let's talk about math sajna joe bowler remember her the the british uh suave british stanford professor responsible for california's equity-based math curriculum. The light of my life. I mean, the apple of my eye. Yeah, she has managed to escape the academic fraud allegations, not because there was like an open investigation conducted by outside parties that didn't have any interest

in her grant money or anything like that, but because Stanford kind of swept it under the rug and said, okay, we've looked into this and there's no substance. This has happened before in her career, I believe. But, you know, so she's still a professor at Stanford, still had her, you know, chance to modify California's math framework. chance to modify California's math framework. And she just came out with a book a few weeks ago called Math-ish. So, which is, I think, a very funny title. But basically, it's kind of her expounding on her, you know, math education philosophy. She's a professor of math education, for those unfamiliar with her work. and you know she defines mathish as this theory of math as it exists in the real world because a big sort of component of her math

education is that she thinks that you know kids need to be able to visualize things and you know our current paradigm for having kids memorize things by these rote techniques is, you know, insufficient and no one really has a kind of conceptual grasp of what they're doing at the end of the day. And so pictures of the book have been making the rounds on Twitter. And there's one particular page where she's explaining her technique for understanding division of fractions. And so, you know, you learn that when you're dividing fractions, you learn like the flipping technique, right, where you flip the numerator and the denominator, and you multiply them. And this is a time-tried technique for understanding fractions, but she provides this very,

I think, actually difficult to follow. I was a math major and I had trouble understanding what her method was, but this kind of visual technique where you want to change the numerator of the denominator of the fractions and then be able to sort of visualize what happens when you're dividing by a third or something like that. But hilariously, the page is riddled with math mistakes. So she's got this table of fractions that are like incorrectly multiplied, at least as it's presented on the page. I mean, maybe there's some footnote somewhere that is clarifying what technique she's using um but basically it's this very convoluted approach to teaching uh fraction multiplication and division that's been panned on twitter um though i sort of tend i tend to think

at this point like this is what we should expect from her i mean she's to me just this like british scammer who came to the u.s everyone was charmed by her accent she somehow managed to wheedle her way into these like high-paying jobs uh and like publishes this drivel this is the math is racist woman i think and she's british did you mention she's british she just did yeah yeah the accent i was zoning out yeah this is like this is the illusion of the british accent that we all fall for and uh and then i mean just here she is in living the living embodiment of is she is anything gonna happen i mean what's gonna is does the two people buy the book i see people sort of loving it online all of her all of her supporters i think she's i think she herself has blocked me um because she's published a couple of me yeah did she block you as well yeah she

doesn't like criticism but who does well i think she'll be fine i mean she's tenured at stanford stanford's gone to i think embarrassing lengths to protect her i mean embarrassing to their own institutional reputation um and she has i mean math education strikes me as probably an area that has is increasingly dominated by people favorable to her ideology um i think education in general is very very left-leaning um and so i don't know how well the book's done in sales, but in terms of her professional stature, I mean, she's got tenure. So I mean, doesn't the book say the thing I saw was she, she says that three fourths times two is six eighths.

Yeah. That's the table. It's actually, it's like 1.5, right? It's six fourths. I think it's six over four. Yeah. Well she, because if there's something. Yeah. She was saying like, she was coming up with like a new method to do the fraction. And so I think there was like some loss in translation thing where she was maybe correct, but wasn't notating it correctly or something like that. Yeah. Well, what happened, this is the charitable interpretation,

is that basically, I mean, maybe this is the charitable interpretation uh is that basically i mean maybe this is what happened but basically that she was saying multiply it by two over two so that you can sort of like keep changing the numerator and the denominator until you get it into a form where you can easily visualize uh you know what's going to happen if you've got the same denominator and you've got you know how many times you're trying to change the rules yeah well well, but she didn't write two over two. She wrote times two and then

did the math as if it was two over two. I mean, it's just... The California math framework in and of itself is not the work of a serious mathematical heavyweight.

How are these people in charge? It is mind blowing. It is frustrating. It never ends. I don't understand how these are not, like how are all these people not fired? How, I mean, the way that Biden is just taken out because he's clearly embarrassing, right?

This is a man with dementia, fine. But then he speaks and it's like, oh, you can't even, there's no hiding it at all you've got to go this she's an embarrassment how does she stay in there it's i i don't do you understand how powerful one side of the political sort of spectrum has to be to keep people like this in charge it's it's just we're living in a one-party state sad it is sad um but also funny because it's the fucking math is racist woman making mathematical errors in her book about math. And that, for me, is just a kind of poetry. We have some sort of – not some sort of.

I would say some deeply sad news to break. But it's also a scoop. So a Pirate Wire is exclusive. Sanjana – this this sanjana's last day unfortunately um sanjana it's been an absolute honor why don't you tell everyone what you're up to or what you want to say i don't know i don't know what you wanted to well i guess i'll announce the official move later because i haven't like technically signed the contract um but i'm i'm moving on to a tech tech role um but yeah this has been amazing i mean i

love this company um love you guys and uh keep doing thought crimes i'm actually i had this weird thought that maybe joe bowler is going to sue us after after we just said all that stuff about her um but don't let threats of of lawsuits prevent you from criticizing crazy people. Yes, we're going to try our best. And this is, I mean, you leaving for a tech thing is kind of interesting. I think it's like an interesting topic in itself. We don't have to delve too far into it. But there is a difficulty in coverage of an industry because most people just kind of end up working in it. Right.

It's like, this is, I think this is the real reason that you've had such a hard time with the tech press is that, uh, the smart, like, I mean, like smart people tend to want to, want to work in the actual thing that they're covering. And so we have a very, we have a minority of us here who are just ideologically very interested in this topic and also like to write. And I think it's going to be a tough uphill climb for non-hateful tech voices. Because also, why are they so hateful? I think that bitterness comes from feeling like they're not a part of it. And then here you are proving me out. And it's just, she's leaving. It's sad. I'm sad. Sanjana,

it's been great working with you uh i feel like you're gonna be back i do really feel that um i know you don't want to believe it but i've just got a vibe about it uh i'm open to believing it yes believe it let's believe it together um it's been unreal you have been phenomenal we'll maybe throw some screenshots of your stories up there uh and also you are free to come back anytime as, as a guest, maybe as a guest judge for, for pirate idol,

which reminds me, you guys, please send your clips in. I want to see you on this podcast. It's been real. Have a great weekend. Touch grass. Love you all.

Goodbye.