e how you can do both. Do you? How in the world could you do both?

And do you imagine that New Zealand got a good job out of her? I mean, maybe it was good enough. I don't know. But it doesn't matter what the external competition for the leader's time is, whether it's a baby or they've got lawsuit problems or they're having troubles at home. It matters. It all matters. So if we're being open-minded about this, I guess the right place to land is everybody should have the opportunity to try anything they want. And if it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out. So yeah, I don't think there's any judgment to put on this. Do you? I wouldn't put any judgment on it. It's just a thing that happened.

Well, the New York Times has a story. And because it's in the New York Times, that's actually the big part of the story. If this were some obscure publication who had the following story I'm going to tell you about, it wouldn't mean much. But because it's in the New York Times, that means it's reaching a common understanding. And it goes like this: hacking the simulation. So there are some serious people, and one in particular, I guess it was a professor or a true scientist, computer scientist David Anderson. And during the pandemic he did some noodling on if we're in a simulation. So if our so-called reality is a computer simulation, could you hack it from the inside?

Now I don't think the article is very interesting so I'm not going to get into the details. But do you think if we're a simulation that we could hack it from the inside? Because here's my take on that. If that's not true that we're a simulation and you can hack it from the inside, I can't explain my life experience. Because I've been using this thing called affirmations that apparently hacks the simulation. And the list of things that I've affirmed that actually happened in the real world is so wild. And you only know some of them. You know, there's some that are just private. The private ones are crazy. Crazy. Like you wouldn't even... and even recently, like I'm not even talking about in the distant past. You know, something worked out for me. Once I'm talking right up to this week. Crazy.

And I'll just put this out there. If we live in a simulation, and that's not guaranteed, and if we can hack it, and that's certainly not guaranteed, my best instinct is that the affirmations or the amount of basically the amount of focus you put on the things you want to happen might make reality fork in that direction. So one possibility is that all possibilities exist and they're all here at the same time.

Do you know how animation works? Animation is a series of still pictures that if you were to put them together in, let's say, pages of a book and then you flip through the pages, it would look like the animation is moving, which is how you do movie TV animation. Now I've always imagined that our reality is a three-dimensional cube in which conceptually, let's say you're somewhere in the middle of the cube and your direction of the future is every direction. So you have infinite directions from where you are and each of those directions looks exactly like our reality with a small change. And the small change is based on whatever path you take.

Now my understanding of reality, or let's say the standard understanding of reality, is that you're a conscious being and you're in this big moving machine. Reality is moving all around you and you're also moving. So it's a bunch of moving stuff. What if the only thing that moves is your point of view? That's how I see the universe. That it all exists and always has and there's no time. It just sits there, all of the possibilities as a solid cube. And the only thing that's changing is your point of perception and which path you follow. And nothing else changes. The universe is static and always has been. And that the Big Bang, the Big Bang is simply a location within the cube. It might be the middle. Imagine the Big Bang is the middle of the cube and from that middle all the possibilities, and they just sit there as a solid. And it's only your mind or your soul or whatever is passing through it. And as you pass through it, it appears to be moving. But that's because your consciousness went through a series of still frames.

Now the reason that I mention that frame is not because I think it's necessarily true, but it would perfectly explain how you could hack reality. Because you wouldn't be changing anything except your direction. And how hard it would be to change the direction of a mind that is not bound by physical laws? Maybe easy, right? And it might be as easy as dreaming. It might be almost something we do automatically. So I just put that weird possibility out there to spin your brains around a little bit.

All right, it's going to get weirder. This is going to be one of the most interesting live streams you've ever seen. And we're going to get to Trump persuasion, my sweet spot. So wait for that.

All right, let's talk about Ukraine persuasion. Question number one. Remember I said that I believe that Ukrainians would outperform expectations at the beginning of the invasion. And I said primarily because of modern equipment that they would get from NATO and the U.S., and that drones in particular would be the things that made the difference. But then other people said drones? Really, Scott? It's really the HIMARS. It's the HIMARS that are making the difference. And then they're introducing these new kinds of missiles called GLSDB, so precise it can hit the radius of a car tire and it can hit a moving object within 150 miles. And it can go around and come back in another direction so it can evade radar. It can do anything you want. And it can hit something under a bridge, right? You could hit something hiding under a bridge from the air. So these apparently are good weapons. And apparently these are heading toward Ukraine and that they would be especially good for taking out supply lines.

Now remember I told you that I feel like Russia has a real problem because they won't be able to supply as long as Ukraine can drone their supply chains from the air. So that's what they're doing. They're doing exactly what would be obvious. But here's my question to you. What is the definition of a drone? And would you call a HIMARS, the rocket that comes out of it, and the GLSDB systems, would you call those drones? Here's a definition of a drone: any unmanned aircraft or ship that is guided remotely or it could be autonomous. So in other words, you can control it directly or you can give it some instructions to do something and it goes and does