The David Pakman Show - 6/29/23: Bidenomics speech explodes, Trump fantasized about Ivanka

Episode Date: June 29, 2023

-- On the Show: -- Eliezer Yudkowsky, Founder and Senior Research Fellow of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, joins David to discuss artificial intelligence, machine learning, and much more -- President Joe Biden delivers a major speech on Bidenomics in Chicago, crushing the nonsense of right wing trickle down economics -- Due to concerns about President Joe Biden's indented face, the White House makes a medical disclosure about Biden wearing a CPAP mask for sleep apnea -- 20324 Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr wildly claims that "vaccine research" is responsible for HIV, the Spanish Flu, RSV, and Lyme Disease -- Yet another report that Donald Trump fantasized about having sex with his own daughter, Ivanka Trump -- 2024 Republican presidential candidate Chris Christie does what other Republicans won't, calling out Donald Trump for his obvious grift of MAGA cultists, even targeting Jared Kushner -- 2024 Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis claims he will eliminate the IRS, Department of Education, Commerce, and Energy in an interview so absurd, even Fox News host Martha MacCallum is visibly skeptical -- Voicemail from a great-grandmother explains that she LOVES THE SHOW! -- On the Bonus Show: Bill Cosby is sued by 9 more women, Joe Biden says he "isn't big" on abortion but believes it should be legal, new Denver restaurant eliminates tipping and raises wages, much more... ✉️ StartMail: Get 50% OFF a year subscription at https://startmail.com/pakman 🏠 Watch David’s “Replace Your Mortgage” interview at https://replaceyouruniversity.com/pakman ✅ Parcil Safety: Get 25% off with code PAKMAN at https://davidpakman.com/safety 👂 MDHearing: Just $149.99 each + free charging case. Use code PAKMAN at https://mdhearing.com -- Become a Supporter: http://www.davidpakman.com/membership -- Subscribe on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/thedavidpakmanshow -- Subscribe to Pakman Live: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanlive -- Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/davidpakmanshow -- Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow -- Leave us a message at The David Pakman Show Voicemail Line (219)-2DAVIDP

Speaker 1 Let's talk today about Biden omics. President Joe Biden giving a speech yesterday in Chicago where he very accurately and precisely dismantles the trickle down trash of the American right wing of the last, quite frankly, 40 years. And it is actually getting to the point, you know, not every president gets an omics named after them. We know about Reagan omics. Certainly some people have talked about Clintonomics, but there was no Bushonomics. There was no Obamaomics or Obamaonomics, as the term may be.

Whatever. Call it what you want. The point here is that President Joe Biden, whatever you think of the guy personally, whatever you think about Hunter Biden's documents or Joe Biden's newly announced sleep apnea, which I will cover. I have no interest in covering up Joe Biden's sleep apnea and a CPAP machine, but we'll get to that later. Whatever you think about it, we have a very interesting economic situation where despite continued claims from Republicans that we are on the brink of disaster and when you actually look at the Western countries that the U.S. compares itself to regularly, we've seen more job creation and lower inflation under Joe Biden with just about every economic

indicator looking very strong. And here is indeed Joe Biden yesterday in Chicago saying what many of us have known for a long time, trickle down economics, the idea that you give tax cuts to the rich and then those benefits trickle down to everybody else. It sounds so stupid when you say it because it's been so widely debunked that it doesn't work. There's a fundamental break of the economic theory has failed America's middle class for decades now. It's called trickle down economics, fundamental economics, trickle down. The idea was, it's believed that we should cut taxes for the wealthy and big corporations.

And I know something about big corporations. There's more corporations in Delaware incorporated than every other state in the union combined. I want them to do well, but I'm tired of waiting for the trickle down. Yeah, it just never seems to trickle down. And listen, if it is not. How can I say this? I understand most people would love for tax policy to be such that they pay less. That's a normal thing. Even when I file my taxes as someone who believes that to have a functioning country, we need a truly progressive tax system. When I actually go and file my taxes, of course, I have that moment where I go, I would love

to keep more of my money. That's not what's wrong. But then when you think, OK, but this isn't just about me. This is about policy. This is about how to run a country. This is how we have enough money to do the things that rich, developed countries are able to do and should do. You realize that this trickle down stuff doesn't work. Now, Joe Biden actually spoke quite a bit about the economic indicators that he pays attention to. And you all know I don't like to play these games with all the labor participation rate

or all debt and deficit. I just kind of tell it to you like it is. Joe Biden actually has a great thing going on. If you are president and you want to make the case that the economy is good, he actually has the data on his side and the statistics on his side. Speaker 5 I knew we couldn't go back to the same failed policies when I ran. So I came into office determined to change the economic direction of this country to move from trickle down economics to what everyone on Wall Street Journal and Financial Times began to call

by nomics. I didn't come up with the name. Right. I really didn't. I now claim it, but they're the ones who use it first. I got asked by a press person this morning getting on the helicopter in Washington. Why? When I asked you about Bidenomics a long time ago, you said you didn't know what it was. I said, I didn't name it Bidenomics. I didn't realize the Economist and the Wall Street Journal did. But I think it's a plan that I'm happy to call Bidenomics. And guess what? Bidenomics is working. When I took office, the pandemic was raging and our economy was reeling. Supply chains are broken. Millions of people unemployed. Hundreds of thousands of small businesses on the verge of closing after so many had already closed, literally hundreds of thousands on the verge of closing. Today, the US has the highest economic growth rate leading the world economies since the

pandemic, the highest in the world. And of course, that is among the countries that share sort of our level of development. Joe Biden also, by the way, hitting Republicans for now taking credit for the very infrastructure bill they opposed, including mentioning specifically Tommy Tuberville, Tuberville. Who the hell knows? No one surprised spring along some converts. Yep. People strenuously opposed voting against it. When we had this going on. They were this was going to bankrupt America. Well, there's a guy named Tuberville from the Senate from Alabama will now say strongly opposed the legislation. Now he's hailing his passage. Here's what he said.

Quote, It's great to see Alabama receive critical funds to boost ongoing broadband efforts. All right. And then Joe Biden making the sign of the cross there. So listen, I have no way to you know, you guys, you know me by now. I have no interest in gaslighting anybody here. To some degree, we were going to see job recovery during this four year stretch as we came out of covid and as jobs lost during covid were recovered. But that's not all that we're seeing. There are millions of additional jobs there. To some degree, the economic indicators that we are seeing only have a little bit to do with who's president of the United States.

But the point here is what we were told was that Joe Biden was going to destroy the economy. And in fact, the economy, despite its continued problems of inequality and wages aren't as high as they should be in all these different things, is quite an economy. And so by dynamics has delivered results to the extent that we believe the president has something to do with how the economy is doing. Thirteen million jobs added nearly 800 thousand in manufacturing. It was Trump who said, I'll bring back manufacturing, the clean energy sector doing extraordinarily well. Construction is improving, strongest growth since the pandemic of any Western rich country on a number of areas. And I've talked about all of these little details before, and it really adds up to a big story. Bidenomics lowering costs for working families

in a number of different areas. We now see inflation down for 11 months in a row. The child tax credit expanded under Biden's American Rescue Plan has reduced the number of kids in poverty, significantly reduced child care costs. No one of these things is a miracle, but all of these little things do add up. We then had the bipartisan infrastructure bill. So we're finally going to get some of those improvements to roads and bridges and ports and airports, airports and broadband. It's not going to be what so many other countries have.

You look at broadband in South Korea, you look at train travel in Europe, but we're not there. We're not there. We have a long way to go, but at least we're making some progress. So we do now have this thing called by dynamics, and it includes actually working to strength, strengthen the middle class, reducing inequality a little bit, setting, raising the low bar below which we say we don't need to let anybody fall below this bar and doing it by investing where it makes sense. Clean energy, renewable technology, safer technology, all of these different things. So we don't praise Biden for being solely responsible for all of these economic indicators. There is a macroeconomic reality that is bigger than the United States. But within that, within these this group of countries, OECD, rich Western developed nations, however you want to slice and dice it

within that group, the United States is doing particularly well. It's not just an economic plan, really. It's more of a vision that includes it includes I don't want to say equality, but it includes trying to write some of the unbalanced circumstances that the last 40 years of attempts from the trickle downers has has created. And to that extent, it's hard not to see it as a success. We're going to continue watching the numbers. There's still plenty of time left in this presidential term of Joe Biden to see it go in a different direction. But it is really tough to argue with the results so far. A an indented face of Joe Biden has triggered medical disclosures. And we have now learned that Joe Biden is using a CPAP machine, not CPAC, very different thing, a CPAP machine at night to treat sleep apnea. You know, the the images that came

out. It's not even really that clear. But if you look at the image I have up on the screen, if you look at Joe Biden's right cheek, there are these two parallel lines. It's sort of an indent. If you trace a line between his earlobe to the sort of upper lip. You see one of those lines and then maybe about half to three quarters of an inch below that. You see another parallel line, an indentation of sorts. This has now triggered a release from the White House about Joe Biden's health. Joe Biden reports CNN has started using a CPAP machine to treat sleep apnea after indentations from straps were seen on both side of his face yesterday, Wednesday morning. White House spokesman Andrew Bates says, quote, Since 2008, the president has disclosed his

history with sleep apnea in medical reports. He used the CPAP machine last night, which is common for people with that history. An official familiar with the matter said Biden started using the device in recent weeks to improve sleep quality. Biden has had a history of sleep apnea in the past. Sleep apnea is a sleep disorder in which breathing repeatedly stops and starts. About 30 million people in the United States have sleep apnea. That's close to 10 percent. So what is a CPAP machine? A CPAP CPAP stands for continuous positive airway pressure. It's a machine that helps people with sleep apnea breathe more regularly and consistently while they are sleeping to prevent those stops and starts of breathing by delivering

a steady flow of pressurized air. You wear a mask. I know a couple of people that have this. Now, some people wrote to me and said, David, you know, sleep apnea can cause cognitive decline. This may explain what's going on with Joe Biden. It's really not so much cognitive decline, but it is true that sleep apnea, if not controlled, can affect cognitive function by virtue of the fact that you are not resting well. If you regularly stop breathing and have these stops and starts of breathing while you are sleeping, it affects quality of sleep. Quality of sleep can affect cognition and memory and all of those different things. And there are some studies that show that

sleep disordered breathing of which sleep apnea is one kind makes you roughly 26 percent more likely to develop a cognitive impairment of some kind versus those who don't have sleep disordered breathing. So is this like a huge deal? No, I don't think it's a huge deal. This is not a new disclosure. It's just an explanation as to why on this particular day yesterday, Joe Biden had these marks. We don't have to. I mean, listen, we don't have to pretend that Joe Biden is the epitome of youth, vigor and energy to recognize that there have been a lot of correct things done under Biden and that given the opportunity to have either Joe Biden for four more years or Donald Trump back for four more years or Ron DeSantis or whatever, that I would still pick

Joe Biden. It's not you know, I get emails from people on the right, first of all, saying you'll never talk about X, Y, Z thing with Biden like this. Why not? I'm talking about it. There's really no problem. I don't hide things from my audience. That's number one. But then number two. OK, so Joe Biden is sleep apnea and wears a CPAP machine and he's 80 and he's tripped a couple of times. You think that means I'm going to elect the guy who wanted to nuke a hurricane and is accused of quite literally dozens and dozens of crimes and did all of the things that Trump did? Of course, I'm still going to vote for Joe Biden. OK, Biden's old and he doesn't have as much energy and vigor as he did when he was first

Joe Biden, Barack Obama's vice president, for example. So what? But like what? What's the big gotcha there? It's not really a big shocker. So listen, I'll keep you apprised of Joe Biden's health. And at this point in time, particularly based on the economic record, it seems pretty clear who we're better off having for another four years if the choices are Trump or Biden or

the Sanctus and Biden. If you disagree with me, let me know. And I know many people do. And I'm perfectly comfortable with that. Think of your most personal emails. If you're using a free email provider, you should know that they're scanning every email you send and receive even after you delete it. They're usually using the data to build a picture of your life, to show you ads, which many find creepy. Our

sponsors start mail never scans or tracks your emails. Privacy is what comes first. And unlike The David Pakman Show David Pakman dot com. We'll be right back. start mail. Go to start mail dot com slash Pacman to get 50 percent off your first year. That's only about two bucks a month. That's S.T.A.R.T. mail dot com slash Pacman for 50 percent off. The link is in the podcast notes. One of our sponsors today is replace your mortgage. Mortgages are a really interesting thing in the United States. The poor often can't afford them and the rich often don't use them. Instead, the wealthy use special financial tools to pay off their debts, often in a fraction of the time that it takes for a middle class American to realize that same payoff. Replace Your Mortgage teaches you how you can pay off your home in five to seven years without needing to make more money than you're currently making right now.

And in addition, they can teach you how to better utilize your existing assets and equity to begin or continue growing wealth and passive income through additional strategies. And they actually have an upcoming workshop that will show you how you can take advantage of these strategies, how it all works, create your own economy. In a sense, you can go to replace your university dot com slash Pacman to watch the interview I did with their founder, Michael Lush, to learn how you can get exclusive access to what can be a life changing virtual event. That's replace your university dot com slash Pacman. The link is in the podcast notes. Let's not forget that the David Pacman show is a

community and audience supported program. You can sign up at join Pacman dot com. One of the great benefits of being a member is access to an extra show. If you like the content, one of the things you get as a member is more content. It's called the bonus show. Alex Jones hates it. Oh, the bonus show where you want to make money. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad. Howard Stern likes it but won't pay for it. A David Pakman membership costs six bucks a month.

Yeah, true. But you can actually get a discount off of that six bucks a month by using the coupon code indicted again, indicted again, and you'll save big and get all the great membership benefits. All right. I hate that we have to do this, but once we've opened the door, we have to do it because people are actually starting to follow this guy. Bobby Kennedy Jr. held his completely unhinged health policy roundtable yesterday. I told you, look, look at this screenshot. I told you about the kooks that were part of this roundtable, including in the lower left of the screen, Dr. Sherry Tenpenny. That's the woman who said everyone, you know, will be dead from the vaccine soon and that it's a form of child abuse. And anyway, she's not at the bottom center. Dr. Joseph Mercola, who's been fined for the by the

FDA for spreading medical disinformation and some of the products that he sell. I mean, every single one of these people I talked to you about yesterday. So Bobby Kennedy holds this event. These are the last people who should be dictating or even weighing in on health policy in the United States. And Bobby Kennedy comes up with another bonkers claim now saying that there is good evidence that vaccine research is actually responsible for the existence of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, RSV, Lyme disease, and even the Spanish flu. I will tell you before even playing the clip that this is not true, but I'm going to play it for you. We are going to discuss it. These assertions that Bobby Kennedy makes with absolutely no hesitation or shame whatsoever are incorrect

and potentially dangerous. Let's listen. And, you know, we need I will end all gain of function research. I will I will sign a treaty to end gain of function research for, you know, to get all the nations and gain of function research. It's just a disaster. It's it's given us no benefits. It's given us, you know, everything from Lyme disease to COVID and many, many other diseases that RSV, which is now one of the biggest killers of children, came out of, you know, a vaccine we can go down the whole list of diseases that, you know, down to and there's good evidence that even Spanish flu. Came from facts of vaccine and vaccine research, and, you know, we don't know and we'll probably never know. But, you know, they're very, very strong articles suggesting that super strong articles. Now it just so happens everything that he said there is untrue. This

just isn't true. And you have these other vectors of medical disinformation nodding along. And none of those things are true. I mean, HIV is a virus that attacks the immune system. It can cause AIDS. It's transmitted through certain bodily fluids. It was not caused by vaccine research. It originated from zoonotic transmission of simian immunodeficiency virus. Simian, of course, referring to monkeys that that's HIV. It's not a result of vaccine research. RSV is a virus that causes respiratory infections that can be particularly serious in young kids. I have friends who have had kids in the hospital in ICUs with RSV.

It's spread through droplets in the air or on surfaces, and it is not caused by vaccine research. It was not created by vaccine research. Lyme disease. Lyme is a bacterial infection, not a virus transmitted by ticks. It can cause rash, fever, fatigue, headaches. It can be chronic. Extensive scientific studies have looked at Lyme and its origins are completely unrelated to vaccine research. They have to do with ticks and mice. And there is so much research online. And then Spanish flu

was indeed a pandemic caused by a strain of H1N1 influenza, a virus flu. OK, infected about a third of the world's population in the late 19 teens killed up to 50 million people. The exact number there are different estimates, but up to 50 million is a good estimate and believed to have originated from birds and spread through human contact. Now, by the way, the Spanish flu 1918, not 1917, the way Trump says there was not a flu vaccine at the time. The first flu vaccine was developed in the 30s and introduced in 1938, nearly 20 years after the Spanish flu. So this stuff just isn't true. And every time we talk about it, some people will write to me and they'll say, David, this is so minor. What about Bobby Kennedy's views on wars or this or that? These beliefs and the willingness to

spread this stuff is uniquely disqualifying when someone wants to be president of the United States, that it's it's not a question of how much does Bobby Kennedy want to talk about this versus not versus other people talking about it or forcing him to talk about it or whatever. These are uniquely disqualifying views. And by the way, these aren't the only concerning views that Bobby Kennedy Jr. holds. So health policy panel, even I told you it would be unhinged. It was even more unhinged than I expected it to be. And these are simply lies. I I don't even know how to explain this to you, but there is yet another report that Donald Trump has talked about fantasizing about sex with his own daughter, Ivanka Trump. And I know that

there are people who may not realize that this isn't new. I told you about this a long time ago. This is not a new thing. Remember that clip I used to play where Trump says, you know, if Ivanka weren't my daughter, perhaps I would be dating her. And Trump on the Howard Stern show talking about his daughter as a piece of ass. This is actually not new, but there is a new report about it. This is a this is an article from Newsweek. Trump made shocking comments about Ivanka, says an ex staffer. These are claims from Miles Taylor.

Miles Taylor is the former Trump administration official who wrote that scathing op ed about Trump under the pen name Anonymous. Taylor was a former chief of staff, is a former chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security. And he describes a number of different incidents in his forthcoming book Blowback, where Trump made women uncomfortable. And the article says these incidents included claims by aides that Trump made lewd comments about his daughter Ivanka's appearance and talked about what it might be like. To have sex with her. This prompted a rebuke from his own chief of staff, according to the book. This is not. There are a whole bunch of other examples.

This is not new. OK, we have a clip here I'm going to play. I'll just present the clip without comment, but Trump's obsession with his own daughter and his own daughter's body is not a new thing to anybody who's been paying attention. What's the favorite thing you have in common, Donald, with your daughter? Well, I was going to say sex, but I can't relate. By the way, your daughter, she's beautiful. Can I say this? A piece of ass. She looks more voluptuous than ever. She's actually always been very voluptuous. She's six feet tall. She's got the best body. She's hot. I've said that if Ivanka weren't my daughter, perhaps I'd be dating her. Speaker 1 This is this is not normal. This is weird. It's extremely weird. This is this is sick.

It's sick. Speaker 2 Woody Allen. Speaker 1 People are clapping now. Ivanka is clapping, but looks quite uncomfortable. So listen, I mean, Trump's not fit to be president regardless of this is the reality. And I got dozens of emails about this half saying, David, can you believe this crap? Can you believe how sick this guy is? And the other half saying this doesn't have any bearing whatsoever. If Trump's foreign policy was good, why would he why would we care that he finds his daughter attractive?

My view is sort of in the middle in the sense that regardless of his views about his daughter's attractiveness, Trump is not fit to be president of the United States. In addition, this is so mind bendingly creepy that it only furthers any normal person's reaction that there's something that what would we say? The wheel is spinning, but the hamster is dead, maybe is the phrase that I would use. Something is very wrong with this guy. And they talk about grooming and this, that and the other thing. This is borderline predatory behavior, but very important, not new information. And I know people will people are already commenting. And a couple wrote to me saying this is this is just so ridiculous. It's so not believable. It's nothing like Trump. This is just a corroboration of the type of thing Trump has

said five, six, seven times in history. It's disgusting. I think we're going to move on from it and leave it there. Make sure you're subscribed, by the way, on YouTube. We have seen in the last 36 to 48 hours, maybe thanks to Howard Stern's endorsement, a significant acceleration in the fight for two million YouTube subscribers. Help us get there. More than three million people in May watched our YouTube clips and did not subscribe. All I'm asking you is for something that's free. Just hit that subscribe button. Let's get to two million. Let's do it, David. stored some supplies. I've talked about water and multiple respirators are part of that because it's just a staple of being prepared. Respirator sales have been way up in recent years. Natural

disasters, wildfires, polluted air, chemical plant accidents, unrest of different kinds, militarized police, all sorts of different reasons. You never know when a respirator or a gas mask from parcel safety might come in handy, and it could be when you least expect it. Parcel safety respirators are also perfect for professionals, contractors, painters, people doing DIY projects at home. All of parcel safety's respirators come with a one year manufacturer's warranty. Every respirator or gas mask comes with a filter, competitive prices, large discounts for organizations and outstanding customer service. To be totally honest, I've said before, I'm using these for changing baby diapers. People think I'm kidding and then they come visit me and I really am not. It actually is very useful to other

parents out there. I do recommend it. Go to David Pakman dot com slash safety. Use the code Pacman for twenty five percent off your first order. That's David Pakman dot com slash safety code. Pacman saves you twenty five percent. The info is in the podcast notes. Today, we're going to be speaking with Eliezer Yudkowsky, who's the founder and senior research fellow of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, which is an organization dedicated to ensuring that smarter than human AI has a positive impact on the world. Eliezer, really appreciate your time and insights today. Thank you very much. So, I mean, to start with many of the discussions around A.I., particularly now with chat GPT four and the questions of what will this look like in six months and 12 months and 24 months?

What will the impact be on jobs? What what about if it turns evil or it turns against humanity or whatever? Are the conversations about AI even being framed in the right parameters as far as you see? Well, we try to frame it correctly as we see it ourselves when we when we have the chance. I think there's widespread agreement that chat GPT and GPT for are relatively unlikely to end the world, you know, either exterminate humanity or have a very large impact outside of that. So so anyone who opens it by with the frame of like like look at just GPT for look at only chat GPT is probably there to convince you it's not going to have a large impact. And is it wrong to limit the conversation only to GPT GPT for.

Obviously, the future exists. You know, tomorrow is going to be a different day from today. In five years, it's not going to be this year. What is the physical mechanism? And a bunch of people wrote some version of this question to me when we said we'd be having you on when when there's this idea, the scary idea of an A.I. going beyond a computer screen and starting to function or manipulate the, quote, real world. A lot of people were saying to me, can you ask what is the mechanism through which that would happen? Would it be by controlling systems like traffic lights and airplanes or like what? Because at the end of the day, we're talking about software.

If something like that were to happen, what's the physical process? I mean, this is a deep question. This is going to take a while to answer. Well, OK. All right. So first of all, even GPT-4 is already at the level where if you ask it to hire a task rabbit and think out loud about how to hire a task rabbit in order to bypass CAPTCHAs that are meant to restrict systems for human use only, it's already advanced enough that when the person that was trying to hire as a task rabbit said, like, so are you a robot that you can't read the captchas?

Lol. GPT-4 thought out loud, like, I should conceal the fact that I'm a robot. I should make up a reason that I can't solve the captcha. And then on the main channel told the task rabbit, no, I have a visual impairment. Right. captcha right then on the main channel told the task rabbit no i have a visual impairment right so it's already like you might say not it's already like able to use task rabbits as fingers in the real world and it's already understands humans out in the real world well enough to know that it shouldn't just tell people it's a robot if it wants to get its job done so so that's today's systems right um that's relatively straightforward.

I can tell you about it, because it already happened. predicting the future is harder. Predicting what something smarter than you could do is fundamentally harder. If I was playing chess againstry Kasparov You know like the past world champion who lost to deep blue If I could predict exactly where Garry Kasparov would move against me on the chessboard I could play chess as least as at least as well as Kasparov by just moving wherever I predicted Kasparov would move So something really actually smarter than you You cannot predict unless it's a very narrow

game. Like tic-tac-toe, you can maybe predict where somebody will move against you in tic-tac-toe, even if they're smarter. The real world is much more complicated than tic-tac-toe. So the basic question as to how an AI gets out of the computer, the basic answer is if I knew exactly how it would do that, I would have to be as smart as the AI. Sort of look into this stuff and study where the current technological roadblocks are the better the guess you can take at How a smarter opponent might move against you or like setting lower bounds? Like what can somebody do if they're able to solve technological problems? That we understand well enough to know a smarter mind could solve them. Hmm so if you're just coming at this and you don't know anything about exotic technologies that haven't been developed yet,

you might be like, yeah, it will use task rabbits. It'll pay humans that don't know it's an AI. It'll blackmail humans, still no reason for it to tell it that it's an ai it'll say it's an ai to you know online wacky cultists who believe that an ai should destroy everything and those are its human hands you'll ask yourself what could i do with some human hands if i were an ai you might imagine that it gets a hold of some GPUs and tries to build a backup for itself someplace that humans don't know about you might imagine that it writes the next version of itself and makes it even smarter you know you're trying to already imagine what if it's smart so saying

that doesn't help a lot in some ways but you know maybe you can make itself smaller more efficient maybe can back itself up in multiple places in computers where you would not expect that there was an ai on board maybe it can find unknown security holes in a cell phone in many varieties of cell phones start listening to human conversations. Get more blackmail material. Maybe you can pretend to be human and, you know, make online friends with a bunch of voters. Right. Persuade them to vote for candidates that seem outwardly nice, but which it in fact

has under fairly detailed blackmailed control. And this is sort of like without any of the difficult to understand stuff. Right. That's based on mechanisms and social, cultural realities and technologies that exist and that we understand, which which there's an entire other category of things that we simply can't conceive of yet. Right. So if like suppose you ask the 11th century, like a portal opens to the 21st century in the middle of, say, modern Russia, you know, like, what are your concerns about fighting somebody from 1000 years in the future? They might be like, well, you know, what if it's a wealthier country?

What if they have more nights? What if more of their nights are armored? Right. And, you know, getting there, they're just not going to get from their nuclear weapons. If they imagine that Russia of the future has irresistibly powerful sorcery, they'll get close to the truth. It's not actually irresistible and it's not actually sorcery. Right. But, you know, you have to reach pretty far to to expect that among the resources they have are nuclear weapons. Russia is not actually going to bother with the nuclear weapons. They don't need it. Can send a tank rolling through a 11th century battlefield. And, you know, maybe if they see it coming, they can dig a pit trap. But otherwise, all the arrows and lances are

going to bounce off it all day long. It just rolls over the horses. Right. Right. It's talking about orders of magnitude difference. So, you know, you if we imagine some sort of spectrum of opinion on this issue, you do have some folks who say this is, as you alluded to, most dangerous thing we can imagine or can't imagine must be stopped immediately in its tracks with either legislation or regulation or whatever the case may be. On the other side, I read some interesting op eds that basically say this is one of the best things we can imagine. This is going to 10x the productivity of every normal worker. It's going to do so many of the things that people said in the 30s were going to happen where everybody would

only be working 12 hours a week and have everything they need. Right. That didn't happen. We know how that worked out. But there's the very pro side. And then there's sort of like what I think maybe Neil Postman's view would have been if he were writing about today, which was his view on prior new technologies, which was spending too much time simply on trying to block them is not the most useful thing. We're better off harnessing the positive and regulating the potential risks. And that would maybe be an in the middle sort of view. What do you think makes the most sense based on what we know right now as an approach? Well, I think that talking about it like it's

a normal technology and not something smarter than you is basically misguided and having the wrong conversation. So it's not even in the right category of the stuff Postman talked about. It's not electricity, right? It's not nuclear power. It's not nuclear weapons. It's not even a super virus. It's something that has its own plans. You don't get to just plan how to use it. It is planning how to use itself. So a totally different paradigm needs to be applied here. I mean, imagine if somebody was like, well, we're about to contact these aliens with much more advanced technology that think faster than us, that are smarter than us, that have been around the stars for a while. They're landing. We're not quite sure exactly when. We're not

sure how fast they're, you know, spaceships are. You know, it might be two years. It might be 30 years. And somebody is like, well, you know, this is just like electricity, right? Let's use the cool stuff about their technology, but make sure they don't do anything bad. Right. It would be silly to say it in that way. Precisely. Yeah. So so then what do you what do you think needs to be done at this point? I mean, I'm one of the cruxes of the issue is, can you do nice things with it? And the grimdark message that I am bearing is that we don't know how to do that, and we're not likely to figure it out in time. and understanding what goes on inside the frontier AIs and being able to shape them in detail in a way where they go on wanting to be nice or even in a certain sense wanting to be non-agentic,

to just do particular tasks and do them without lots of side effects in the most normal possible way that they can accomplish those tasks. Even building that sort of limited thing, nevermind something that is really friends with you, is I think beyond the range of what we're going to figure out in the foreseeable future. And I do think we are storming directly ahead on capabilities. That looks like a giant disaster in the making. So yeah, I side with well, I think my my basic factual point of view is if you as if that

is that if we do not somehow avoid doing this, we're all going to die. And my corresponding policy view is that we should not do this, even if that's very, really quite hard and requires us to do some unusual things. So in terms of what to do, I mean, I guess if everybody came around to your view, you would think anybody developing these technologies would just give it up, right? On their own, they would say, wow, Eliezer is right. I share that concern. The right thing to do is for me to stop working on this. Assuming that that doesn't happen. What is it that you would like to see? Should this type of research and development be made against the law? Yeah, basically, I think that we should track all the GPUs, have international arrangements

for all of the AI, all the AI training tech to end up in only monitored, supervised, licensed data centers in allied countries. And if you're any time you have any and just like not permit training runs more powerful than gpt4 if we're not going to do that then we should monitor all the training runs larger than gpt4 or or rather like gpt4 sized and keep the model weights inside only the licensed regulated data centers and Track who is running them store the output someplace. You can look at the outputs with the warrant a bunch of the technology like that whole line of reasoning is not that Regulating the stuff will protect you from a super intelligence because it will not that's more in the hopes that people change their minds later

maybe after some major disaster that doesn't kill everyone. And in that case, the technology that you would need to sue somebody who, you know, killed a dozen people in a hospital or caused $100 million worth of damage or whatever, the technology you need to know who did that and sue them, and not just have all the AI development go to places where they couldn't be sued is the same technology that humanity would need to have a off switch that if they, where you don't like press the off switch to deal with the super intelligence. The super intelligence does not let you know that you need to tell the off switch, that you need to press the off switch until you are already dead. But if we get it, if we're lucky enough to get warning signs, then the civilizational

infrastructure to have a pause button is the same as the civilizational civilizational infrastructure to sue people who do small amounts of damage, like small as in survivable, as in there were survivors. As someone who very clearly you've expressed your very serious concerns with this, do you also see this technology as something that could and this doesn't mean that it would or that it would be a good trade for the things that you're talking about. But do you also see this as a technology that could, for example, do analysis of the human genome such that it would accelerate us in terms of our ability to cure or

prevent disease, the likes of which could take who knows how long without such technology or when it comes to energy or whatever. Do you also see that side and or does it not matter because the downside is so huge? I mean, if we knew how to build an eye that did exactly what we wanted, we could thereby spread out across the galaxies, turning them into our cities full of sapient, sentient beings, you know, enjoying themselves and caring about each other and generally living happily ever after until the last of the negentropy runs out. You know, that's always been the dream. Yeah, we don't know how to do that. It's physically possible But the art and technique to do it is beyond us in the present time and it's going to not

be gained in the next five years and I'm not sure how you would task a government bureaucracy to recognize it even if somebody came up with it in 40 years, it's like There's a there's a there's a sort of basic question about whether our civilization is smart enough to do something correctly on the first try at all. The way science usually works is that you have a bunch of loony eyed optimists with wacky theories who storm ahead on their basic research problem and they are wrong and you know, they go back to the drawing board and they're wrong again and you know, like the next generation is a bit more cynical about how hard the problem is and Eventually people work it out. And if we were allowed to do that with superintelligence

I would have much much much less fear of the outcome Still still some fear because you know, you're playing with pretty high stakes there. You might have somebody who, like, the people who end up figuring out how to line it might misuse it. There'd still be that major threat. But it wouldn't be like the automatic extinction scenario. If we had the textbook from 100 years in the future that contains all the simple ideas that actually work, that takes so long to identify and practice. The relus instead of sigmoids, for those of us who've been following AI for more than the last couple of years

and know what I'm talking about there. But there's all kinds of places in AI where people tried to do things using complicated techniques, and they didn't work. And 20 years later, they came up with a simple technique that actually works. And if you have the textbook from the future with all of the simple things that actually work in practice for alignment, it is probably not hard and you can get all the goodies. But we don't have that textbook.

And the first problem is that, you know, like getting this on the correct on the first, the first problem is the amount of time it takes to get that where capabilities are storming ahead because you can tell whether things are working or not on capabilities whereas with alignment you've got to you know know that at the point where it's much smarter than you it's already aligned you don't get retries past that point so it's more like launching a space probe that has to land on Mars correctly the first time than it is with like building a car, watching it break down and tinkering with the car. And if it doesn't, it might break everything.

So you don't get to try again. Yeah. Like the entire human species is on is packed on board the Mars probe. And the first rocket that goes high enough has to land on Mars. There aren't even really good analogies for it. Humanity has not faced an issue like this before Which is why we're still around and and I think looking at this that this is just like clearly

Beyond the reach of our present civilization. It's not close It's outside the range of things that you could reasonably that you could tell a reasonable worry about people doing successfully and that's why we we need to back off. Or rather, I predict that if we don't back off, we die. And I wish we would back off. I don't predict that we will. Speaker 1 Well, certainly there's no way to wrap up such a dark vision in any way that is going going to be satisfactory or calming to the audience, I think. But that being said, Eliezer Yudkowsky is taking this very seriously as the founder and senior research

fellow of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute. And I really do appreciate your time and insights, even if they are not optimistic on this issue. Thank you. Thanks for having me on. If you or one of your parents is starting to lose your hearing, you're not alone. About 48 million Americans have hearing loss and only one in five people who would benefit from using a hearing aid are actually using one. Our sponsors, MD Hearing, create FDA registered rechargeable hearing aids that cost a fraction of what you typically pay. For example, MD hearings, new neo model costs less than 10% of what those marked up hearing aids are being sold for at most hearing clinics.

And the neo is MD hearings, smallest hearing aid ever. No one will even know that it's there. I have a close family friend who uses MD hearing and loves it. She said it performs better than any hearing aid that she's used and it's far less noticeable. MD hearing even offers a 45 day risk free trial with a 100% money back guarantee. So you can buy with confidence and they have a special deal for my audience. When you buy a pair of hearing aids, you'll get them for just one forty nine ninety nine each. Plus, they'll include a free extra

charging case. Go to MD hearing dot com and use the code Pacman. You can find the link in the podcast notes. There is one Republican running for the nomination right now who's willing to call out the obvious grift of mega cultists and others that has been perpetrated by Donald Trump, by Jared Kushner, by all the people around Donald Trump. And that one person is obviously Vivek. No, I'm getting it's Chris Christie. OK, Chris Christie is the one guy that is willing to say a number of different things that are obvious, uncontroversial truths to anybody even remotely connected to reality. But it's only Chris Christie who's willing to say it. Here is Chris Christie on CNN last night saying, what the hell was Jared Kushner doing in the Middle East? What on earth is going on with

these grifts and all of these people monetizing their proximity to power? Trump himself, not a single other Republican candidate is talking about these things. Listen to this. Speaker 3 Let's remember something. He's a billionaire. He's a billionaire, self-professed billionaire. Why can't he use his own money to pay his personal legal fees because he's cheap and not use money coming from the public? It's disgraceful. And it's a continued grift. And look, the Trump family has been involved in grifting for quite some time. Yeah, he was doing this in terms of the people who got paid out of this pact before, whether it was Kimberly Guilfoyle or other that the Trump charity. I mean, there's no

there's no end to the grift members of the family. Jared Kushner, six months after he leaves the White House, gets two billion dollars from the Saudi sovereign wealth fund. Yep. When I haven't here, haven't heard Ron DeSantamonious talking about that. Trump had put him in a position to be in the Middle East. What was Jared Kushner doing in the Middle East? Better late than never, folks. We had Rex Tillerson and Mike Pompeo as secretaries of state. We need Jared Kushner. He was put there to make those relationships and then he cashed in on those relationships

when he left the office. So what Donald Trump's doing now is just a continuation of what he's permitted his family to do. And to be clear, what Chris Christie is talking about is that Trump is now fundraising for a legal defense fund for all of these different cases, for all these different indictments that he's facing. And Chris Christie is saying, why? Why does he need to fundraise for that? He's so rich over the entire course of his time as president. Why do you think he's not using his own money to pay for his legal fees? Because he's the cheapest person I've ever met in

my life. That's why. And what he's very good at, Caitlin, is spending other people's money. Right. And if you look at his history in New Jersey, you think he's misleading his voters, his supporters by. I think those supporters, you know, write a check to Trump for president. They think they're paying for campaign expenses, not for personal legal expenses. Now, in Trump's defense, I don't even know that it's a Trump defense. There are cultists so deep in the cult that they are glad to pay for Trump's legal defense because they believe that the indictments are political, that it's actually Joe Biden doing it and all these different things. So like there, I think Chris Christie is right that there are

some Trump donors who think the money is being used for the campaign. There are some who know it's being used for the legal defense and are fine with that. And there are those who are in this position where they believe that the legal defense is kind of part of the campaign because the indictments are part of the campaign against Trump, which is a crazy. There's no evidence of that whatsoever. Chris Christie was a defender of Trump for a long time. And for that, you know, I think he deserves to be criticized. At least he is saying this stuff now and no other Republican running in that primary is willing to do it. Here is Chris Christie. Also, most of them won't talk about January 6th in these terms either. But even Mike Pence won't talk about January 6th in these terms. And they wanted to kill Pence. But Chris Christie will talk

about it. Good for him. Speaker 1 People were killed. People were killed. Caitlin, as you know, that day on Capitol Hill defending the Capitol, we had members of Congress who were running for their lives. We had people trying to hunt down the vice president, United States, chanting hang Mike Pence. Right. And Donald Trump the entire time sat outside the Oval Office, in that little dining room of his, eating a well-done cheeseburger and watching TV and doing nothing to stop what was going on until it got to the point where even he could no longer stand it. And he finally at four something in the afternoon,

put out a video asking people to leave the Capitol. And Ron DeSantis doesn't have any opinion on that. Look, I know, by the way, I'm pretty sure I know who that high school student was. He goes to every town hall meeting in New Hampshire. He's been to three of mine and he asked really tough questions. And I said to him, the last time I had a town hall meeting, he was out of mind. See if any of the candidates will answer your questions directly and grade them on it. They won't. They won't. So listen, again, we don't have to now rehabilitate Chris Christie into some hero.

It is a very useful thing to see a Republican drop some truth bombs on Maggots or Magadonians or Magapatamians. Maga Potamians. I think that that is a good thing. He Chris Christie was complicit in the Trump nonsense for years. He stood behind Trump and endorsed him and the entire thing. And for that, he deserves our criticism. And now he is the only guy running in this primary who is willing to say some of these things.

And so we can praise that. Here's one more one more clip about the January 6th stuff. If he asked you that question, how would you answer it? I would say it was one of the most disgraceful days in American history and that the president was principally responsible for it. Right. One not a single other Republican is willing to say that through the conduct and his words from election night forward, inciting people and insisting that the election was stolen when it wasn't. Through his speech that day, when he attacked directly his own vice president and incited those people to be angry at Mike Pence, who was just performing his

constitutional duty, and he had no choice. And every lawyer, good lawyer, had told people that, that he couldn't do anything different than that. And then while the event was going on, while the riot was going on on Capitol Hill, we know that Donald Trump was watching it and was being urged by even members of his own family to get out there and say something. And he refused because he was enjoying watching people yell,

scream, and destroy things in his name. This is all undeniably true. And Trump will never admit it and insist that it's fake news. Chris Christie holding steady at two point five percent in the Republican primary. The only guy willing to tell these what should be uncontroversial truths. And if I had to choose from the current Republican slate, who is the next president? Without a doubt, it would be Chris Christie. Let's now go to someone very different than Chris Christie. And I'm talking about Ron DeSantis. Ron DeSantis put forth a plan yesterday on Fox News. So insane, so ridiculous and so deranged that even Fox News host Martha McCallum is visibly skeptical and obviously doesn't buy it.

DeSantis was asked whether he wants to eliminate any agencies. And he mentioned not only three entire agencies, departments, commerce, energy and education, but he said he would eliminate the IRS, which is so ridiculous. But then the thing he says after that is almost worse. Take a listen. Are you in favor of eliminating any agencies? I know conservatives in the past have talked about closing the Department of Education.

Would you do that? So we would do education, we would do commerce, we do energy, and we would do IRS. And so if Congress will work with me on doing that, we'll be able to reduce the size and scope of government. But what I'm also gonna do, Martha, is be prepared if Congress won't go that far, I'm gonna use those agencies to push back against woke ideology and against the leftism that we see creeping into all institutions of American life. So, for example, with Department of Education, we reverse all the transgender sports stuff. Women's sports should be protected. We reverse

policies trying to inject the curriculum into our schools. That will all be gone. We will make sure we have an accreditation system for higher ed, which is not trying to foment more things like D.I. and CRT. So we'll be prepared to do both. Either way, it'll be a win for conservatives. Imagine for a second if a Democratic presidential candidate said, I will be using the IRS, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Education and the Department of Energy to destroy conservatism. Imagine for a second if a Democratic president ever said something like that, they would be calling for their head. They would be saying, lock him or her up. Rick Wilson tweeted, I'll either eliminate these agencies or use them to destroy my political enemies, said every authoritarian in the history of ever.

This is outrageous. This is a dangerous extremist. And by the way, give me a break, dude. This is in the style of the Trump promises. Anyone with any common sense knows it will never happen. He's not going to get rid. Certainly, he's not going to get rid. Certainly he's not going to get rid of the IRS. And I don't think if he was president, he would get rid of the

Department of Education or the Department of Commerce or the Department of Energy, which was the other one. This is sort of like Mexico is going to build pay to build our wall across the entire US Mexico border. And I will solve the Israeli Palestinian conflict in my first term. We all know you're not doing any of that. And after the fact, some people defend it by saying, well, it was aspirational. It's what he wanted to do. Don't we want to hold our presidential candidates in terms of the promises they make, at least to some degree, to things that are remotely possible? So this reminds me of the classic moment where Rick Perry, during his failed bid for the

Republican presidential nomination, also wanted to remove a bunch of departments but forgot which ones. This is a classic. Speaker 4 And I will tell you, it's three agencies of government when I get there that are gone. Is it commerce, education and the what's the third one there? Let's see. Oh, five. and the uh... i was a third one that was a

commerce education and uh... the uh... uh... uh... ppa seriously now so we're talking about that uh... agencies and government. EPA needs to be rebuilt. I don't know. Remove them all. You can't name the third one. The third agency of government. I would I would do away with the education, the

commerce and let's see. I can't. The third. Sorry. Yeah. Listen, they're not getting rid of any of these things, but they are extraordinarily dangerous people. And the fact that DeSantis is willing to say, I'll get rid of the IRS. What if what we, of course, need to do if you actually want to take seriously the idea of people who are not paying their fair share and you actually need to you need to scale up the IRS, need to give the IRS the resources to actually conduct audits. And we know that the multiplier effect, the return on IRS audit agents to target extraordinarily high income individuals is an extremely profitable thing. And as I've said before, if you hire an IRA IRS agent for 70 grand and they're mostly auditing people making 30 grand, even if those people underpaid their taxes by 10 or 15 percent,

you're not going to recover very much money. But we know that the very rich underpaid. I don't mean underpay from a political or moral standpoint. I just mean they're not paying what the law currently says they should pay based on the tax code. It's not legal loopholes. They're not paying what the law currently says they should pay based on the tax code. It's not legal loopholes. They're just they're just putting in the wrong information. They're not paying what they should pay under current law. It's extremely profitable from the standpoint of what you pay the IRS agents versus what you end up recovering and people who didn't pay what they're supposed to pay. That's the direction we should go.

Not getting rid of the IRS, but again, it's another one of these virtue signals. IRS is now bad. It's political. It's it's, you know, armed agents, blah, blah, blah. Ron DeSantis, even if he becomes president, is not getting rid of the IRS. We have a voicemail number. That number is two one nine two. David P. This is a heartwarming voicemail.

It's very rare. Usually the voicemails are like you Jew bastard. I hate you, etc. This is a heartwarming voicemail from not a grandmother, a great grandmother that loves the show. I'm a 77 year old great grandma and I love your show. I watch it every single day. You have such a wonderful take on what is going on in our world and especially the political world. And keep up the good work. I absolutely love it. Thank you. Thank you, folks. This is what we're trying to build. Everyone is welcome here. I hear

from 15 year olds when we take live calls that say they are engaged in politics thanks to the show. And then we hear from great grandmothers, sweet great grandmothers who also like what is going on. Everybody's welcome here. That's the great thing about it. Unless you're a neo Nazi, then get the hell out unless you're going to change your views. Thanks to me. In which case you're no longer a neo Nazi and you're welcome again.

All right. We have a great bonus show for you today. Extraordinary bonus show. David Pakman membership costs six bucks a month. OK, Bill Cosby has been sued by nine more women. Are these also just made up charges? OK, now we're going to talk about the latest allegations against Bill Cosby. Joe Biden said something very interesting. He says that personally, he's not big on abortion because he's Catholic, but he believes we should have Roe v. Wade and that abortion should be legal. This is interesting because there are so many layers to it that I want to discuss. And lastly, I love this.

You all know I hate tipping. I tip and I tip. Well, I hate that tipping is a thing. OK, just price it and pay everybody a fair wage. And let's forget about tipping. A new Denver restaurant has eliminated tipping, has adjusted prices and is paying everybody a living wage. This is the model. OK, this is the model. We'll talk about all of it on the bonus show. Sign up at join Pacman dot com. I'll see you then.