really wanted it wouldn't shock you or surprise you that much. That we just need to know what it is. And we don't know which of his several fairly good reasons for doing what he's doing, we don't know which one is the activating one. But if we did I'll bet we could figure out something pretty quickly.

And he's also a practical person, right? The one we think would you say that's a fair characterization? That whatever you think of Putin's breathtaking evil you would also say he's effective. And you know he's the least irrational player. Lex Fridman is going to interview Putin. Is that true? Is that really happening? Now that would be interesting. Was Lex born in Russia? I don't know his background. Somebody mentioned that somewhere.

Your naivety with Putin is terrifying. Let me speak to that. My naivety with Putin is terrifying. Now whoever is saying that I'm naive about Putin, the assumption built into that comment, which by the way is completely correct, I'm not disputing your characterization. If you're saying that I'm completely naive about Putin that's actually my point. That's my point. But I'm saying that we all are. That's the whole point. So if you're saying Scott you don't know anything about Putin, you're following correctly. That's the point. We don't know what he's thinking.

Now if you don't think I could get it out of him then maybe you don't understand the tools of persuasion. But I think somebody with my same type of training and experience probably could get it out of him, right? You would just have the right kind of person with the right training doing it. It's not something that could be done accidentally. I don't think Stephen Colbert could get it out of him. I don't think a typical news person could get it out of him. But I think I could. And I think I could do it in public. And I don't think he would be worse off for it. Not necessarily overconfidence. You say that's my trademark. Overconfidence is exactly where you want to be.

Let me ask you this. This is actually an interesting question. If you had a choice of three choices, show me in the comments. You could be underconfident compared to your actual abilities. You could be exactly the right amount of confident. Or you could be overconfident. Which would be your optimal situation? I see a lot of people saying over. So what's interesting about your criticisms of me this morning is that they're true but they're more like compliments. Or it was more like agreeing with me. But what happened to the real professional trolls? They did disappear, didn't they? Because you're seeing the people who are actually just regular people making comments. This doesn't even sound like trolls. It sounds like actual regular people just making comments. Did something happen with the paid trolls? Because some other people noted it. But I think it might be confirmation bias or it might be what topics I'm talking about on any given day. But it feels like all the trolls just disappeared all at the same time. I went from complete troll infestation that lasted I don't know a month or more, I mean just really high troll content, and then just went to zero. Did Twitter do that? It's possible Twitter did it. It just turned off the trolls. Maybe. I mean they do have the technology that if somebody stays trolling long enough they're going to get flagged, right? So it could be that there was a wave of trolls that signed up and then Twitter wiped them off and it takes a while for them to ramp up again. Could be that. Who knows.

Anyway, another big breakthrough in fusion. We keep hearing these. And this time it's, and by the way I had to predict this and I think I did predict this in my book Loserthink. Can anybody confirm this? A few years ago I was saying that AI, and I didn't make this up, I'd read it somewhere, the AI would be the thing that made fusion energy practical. So it turns out that that's exactly what looks like what's happening. So Google's Alphabet, part of the company there. Is that the right way to say it or is Alphabet its own spin-off now? So how do you say that? But anyway, Alphabet, whatever the hell that is, something about Google. The scientists at DeepMind, which is part of that umbrella organization, they figured out how to use AI to control a fusion reaction which requires thousands of micro corrections per second. So the AI can look at this big complex ball of fusion. And by the way don't let me get too technical here. I know I'm going really deeply. So there's this big ball of fusion that's going in lots of directions and doing lots of things. And a human engineering it could never anticipate all the things t