But now to do this I would have to do it on video though because I don't think I could get people to come where I live. It's just not like in LA where people are going to go there anyway. If you had an office in New York you could get everybody because they're in town anyway. But people are not in my town anyway. So I think I'd have to do a video and I might set it up so there's like three videos. Two of the competing people and then me. But I would be live if anybody wanted to be there in the audience. And my model would be heavy interruption. So it wouldn't be a regular debate. It would be a debate in which I interrupted both sides. You're ignoring the question. That sort of thing.

Medical software. More evidence new golden age. Oh and interesting. Julia Shear says corporism is a thrilling useful new open source medical software. Open source medical software. Hello open source medical software. How much do I want that? That's either the worst idea or the best idea. Imagine if you will that everybody who wanted to, I have no idea what this product is so what I'm going to talk about don't assume that has anything to do with this product, but imagine if just people could contribute their experience of what they did. I had this problem. I did this for it. Eventually wouldn't it turn into a giant AI and you wouldn't need doctors anymore except for the physical manipulation of things? I don't know. I think it would go in that direction.

Who would be the first and second debaters? So who, I don't know. I'm not sure that I would bring in necessarily the politicians. So the trouble with politicians debating is that they're professional liars and we don't expect much more from them. Am I right? Like having a debate between two politicians feels like a complete waste of time. Having a debate between experts there I can imagine the model where I could make that work. But any debate between pundits or politicians would be just complete waste of time.

Do both. I just think it's a waste of time to do the politicians. It really is. I mean the only reason to do the politicians is that you get more audience because they're noticeable and you can embarrass somebody and maybe there's a gaffe. But it would be the least useful thing to do. If I did their actual debate on policy nobody would watch probably.

Is Rand Paul a professional liar? Quote yes. Yes. Now I do have a high opinion of Rand Paul and I think he's probably one of the most honest people. But you don't think that he's ever left anything out. Do you think he provides all the context for the other team or maybe just shows his side? I don't feel like you can be in politics and give complete respect to the other team's argument before you state what your opinion is. And without that I'm not sure that's really honest. That's doing a good job as a politician. I love Rand Paul as a politician by the way. I think he's a national asset. There are a few politicians I think have surpassed Congress in terms of who they are. Like there's some people who are just members of Congress you've never even heard their names if they're not from your state. But yeah Tom Cotton's one. He rises above. And Rand Paul's one. So I believe there are some people who have risen above their limited role that they get elected for and he's one in a good way.

Speaker of the House is a special case. Ted Cruz. Now often there's people who have ambition to be president. Ted Cruz I think for sure. And MTG. Some other people. Thomas Massie. Good example. Thomas Massie and I do not agree on everything but whenever we disagree his reasons are good which bothers me frankly. I hate to feel disagreement with people whose reasons on the other side are actually solid. Like oh that's actually a pretty good reason. And Thomas Massie does that to me all the time. I think probably three or four times I've had an immediate disagreement with something I thought he said and then you hear the larger argument you go oh okay maybe I don't agree with it because I'm not quite as, my politics don't line up exactly with some of his stuff. But when he gives his reason I usually say okay that's the reason. He's more libertarian than I am but he's consistent. Being consistent is worth a lot. And there are libertarian arguments that you say to yourself well I don't know that that would work but I can't rule it out. Discuss them. It's got some logic behind it. You'd pay good money to hear that.

Now that's somebody I would debate. I would definitely debate Thomas Massie because like you said he doesn't operate like a traditional politician. Here's the biggest compliment I'll ever give a politician. You ready for this? This is literally the biggest compliment I will ever give a politician. I'm positive that if I had a debate with Thomas Massie on some topic which we disagreed and I made a better argument he would change his mind right in front of you. Now I'm not saying I have the ability to do that or that there's any topic which stands out as the one that I would do that. However it is my opinion that if I gave him a better argument in public that he would have the capability. It's the capability that's important because others would just cowardly retreat to their team. I believe he would actually tell you in public they changed his mind under the unusual condition that I made a better argument and it had some weight. I don't know that anybody else could do that. Do you? Would you trust anybody else to change their mind in public when faced, I would but I'm not a politician. So but a politician I don't know. Name one other person you think would be capable. Forget about willing. Just capable. Joe Rogan would but again not a politician.

What co-punt is that a word? If Trump and DeSantis debated it would be horror. That would be a weird one wouldn't it? Imagine Trump and DeSantis debating. I can't see that ever happening.

I see some support for Dan Crenshaw over on YouTube. Conservatives have a real mixed feeling about him don't they? I forget what the issue is. Crenshaw's interesting because he's smarter than he lets on. I don't know if you know that but Crenshaw is super smart and I think he's smart enough not to let you know just how smart he is because I'm not sure that would play right. So he's very smart. Whether you disagree with him or agree with him. I'm not going to have that conversation right now. Somebody's calling him a RINO. Is that what's happening? Well I don't know about any of that. I did an interview with him and I'll tell you my first impression was all positive. So I had only positive feelings.

So it's mostly the anti-war versus not anti-war enough thing that people have a complaint about. I don't know. I'm not up to date so I don't have anything to disagree with them about but maybe I would. Who knows.

But you like Bill Gates too. Well I think Bill Gates, the shine on Bill Gates is coming off a little bit. Here's what I like about Bill Gates. Unlike you I believe he's operating in the best interest of humanity. I don't know that you could ever talk me out of that because if you think he's operating to get power like there's no indication that he's after power. Like he could have had all the power he wanted. He just, there's no indication he wants it. And there's no indication that he's in there for money. I don't see any indication of that. Now I could be wrong because we're all just reading minds. I can't read his mind but I would say the indication of anything except good intentions. Now does he get everything right? No. Does anybody? No. But if you were to bet consistently on what he predicted versus what other people predicted I think you'd