is was Djokovic. And Djokovic is famous for what besides tennis? Famous for rejecting vaccinations to the point where, was it last year, he was not even allowed to play in the U.S. Open because he was unvaccinated. Well he came back, he won the damn tournament. And he was not only the winner but the sponsor of the tournament. Let's see, one of them was Moderna. Moderna. And so he was featured in the Moderna shot of the day. That's right. They showed a highlight of Djokovic, the most famous denier of vaccinations, and it was labeled the shot of the day. Moderna. Yeah. Yep. Yep.

That's almost as bad as TikTok advertising on Fox News. As soon as you hear the advertiser you go, oh man, what's going on here?

So that's happened. There's a company called Voyager Labs who theoretically, hypothetically can predict a crime before it happens. Now New York City is using the software but not in that way. So that's not the only thing it does. So they say New York City is not using it to predict crime, but it could do it. There's a thought that it could do it. But here's my question.

As much as I'm not sure I want the government to be able to predict crime, because you know that that's going to go terribly wrong, right? If the government can predict crime this is not a good, not a good predictive sort of thing. But here's a question I ask you. What if citizens could use it to protect themselves? Would that be wrong?

Suppose you could run it against everybody that AI knows is living in your neighborhood. And even if you could check the police that are your local police that are on your streets. Suppose you got stopped by a police for speeding or something. Suppose you could tell immediately if your police officer was going to be dangerous to people like you. Yeah, wouldn't that be useful? If as soon as you saw the police officer come up and you saw the name, if somehow you had some way to know, oh this one's a bad one. You know this one's been accused of five different abuses already so you better keep it under wraps. Or suppose it would tell you to move. Suppose you ran this offer and said you're a single woman living in this neighborhood. Your odds of being abused are 80 percent. You better get the hell out of here.

I don't know. I feel like something that was predictive of crime would be useful to citizens. Because you could even know if your own friends are likely to steal from you. Wouldn't that be handy to know if the people you're working with or the people you want to deal with are likely to rob you? That's an interesting question. I don't know if the software could actually identify that kind of risk. But if it could, if it could, would you use it? It's kind of creepy. It would definitely discriminate but it would also keep you safe.

Well, Joe Biden. Can anybody confirm that this really happened? I saw it on a tweet but I did not see a source. Is it true that Joe Biden said, I guess yesterday maybe, that China has become too weak to invade Taiwan because their economy is so bad? He actually said that. What do you think of that? Do you think that's true?

You know what's interesting is it might be a little bit true. It's certainly not true enough, right? It's not 100 percent true and it's probably not 50 percent true. But it's an interesting point that their economy is a little bit sketchy. But I would be surprised if they couldn't mount a war with their existing assets. So I think that's an overstatement but it's a variable. It might be a variable that's making Xi have second thoughts.

Imagine if you are President Xi. And sure you're a dictator so you got a lot of control but you still need to keep other people happy, right? Because the other elites could gang up on you if you were just totally out of control. So even the head of China needs to make other people happy. Imagine if you're the head of China, President Xi, and you see that you've got all these other economic woes. And the really big ones like demographic problems, things you can't really easily fix. So let's say you see manufacturing is leaving. You're maybe losing some of your access to some high-tech stuff. Yeah, you're a little bit pressured by everybody. You got to spend a lot on social services. You've got 50 percent unemployment among the youth. Suppose you've got all those problems. And at the moment they're sort of a little bit under wraps, meaning that the average Chinese citizen is probably not thinking about them every moment of the day. So you're kind of stable. But there's a lot of stuff, a lot of big stuff that could be a problem and fairly soon.

Under those conditions would you want to take the chance of your economy imploding coincidentally at the same time that you started a war? Because the problem is if it looked like you made a mistake starting a war at the same time it looked like you made a mistake managing the economy, that might be too many mistakes. So if you're a Chinese leader, could you stand the internal national pressure of having a failed economy and a war that's not maybe going too smoothly? Because who knows what would happen.

I feel like Biden is on to something. I feel like if China's economy were 100 percent solid, President Xi could take a chance of screwing up a war and still stay in power. But if the economy is bad and there's a war, the Chinese public are going to say why are we spending money on a war when we've got these other problems. You know, just like the American public. So it could be that the best thing to reduce the chance of war in the world is bad economies. Because wars make economies worse, especially if you lose.

All right. So maybe Biden's onto something a little bit there.

So Biden was in Vietnam embarrassing the country. But he picked the right country to do it. You know if you're going to send Biden onto the international stage, wouldn't you want to send him to a country that values the elderly? Yeah, I don't think we should send Biden anywhere where they don't have a real strong cultural preference for showing respect to the elderly. Because can you imagine the face of the Vietnamese leaders who were greeting him? Yeah, you're totally all right. Uh-huh. The things coming out of your mouth totally makes sense. Oh we respect you, you elder. Yeah, I got a feeling that they could fake it better than other countries.

Can you imagine the Russians? Imagine Biden taking this performance to Russia. You know as if he would travel to Russia. But imagine the Russians watching Biden flustered and mumbling around and wandering off. They would literally be drinking and laughing. But you take him to Vietnam and everybody's like we respect the elderly. Let's just let him be.

So I don't know. The fact that there's sort of a cats on the roof quality to the old Biden experience. You know what I mean? Biden is failing right in front of us. But because every day is sort of similar to the day before but you know half a percent worse every day, you say ah today, well it's not that much worse than it was yesterday. And then the next day it's just not that much worse than yesterday. But if you start adding it up, you know at least half of one percent worse every day, things are looking pretty bad in six months if you know what I mean. Compounding. Compounding interest.

So that's how we got here to this absurd ridiculous situation.

I guess Kamala Harris was sent to the 9/11 event today and Biden said he was going back to bed after he talked to the people in Vietnam. Now to be fair the time change must be brutal. You know beyond a certain age traveling and time changes and tough schedules, it's got to be brutal. I have to admit. But maybe you shouldn't say it out loud. I'm going back to bed.

All right. California is kind of quietly looking to reverse a California law that would punish doctors for spreading COVID misinformation. Now in all of the, can we call it, of the pandemic somehow I'd forgotten that California had a law that doctors who are doing their best to help their customers, but if they happen to say something that was not the approved orthodoxy of what you can say, they could be punished for being wrong according to other people. Not for being wrong. We're not talking about punishing the doctors for being wrong. No that's not even the topic. It's not about being wrong. It's that they can't even say it if it's against the standard interpretation.

So the fact that it's not about being right or wrong should be the scariest thing in the world. It's really just about not being with the government's allowed interpretation. So there's slowly, it looks like they're sticking it in some other legislation, kind of slowly walk it back. But at least as we walk back, however, you can't be too happy about it because it existed in the first place in modern times. In our lifetime that existed. That was a real thing. That was a real law. And still is by the way. They just haven't reversed it yet.

I mean the level of wrongness that we've experienced in less than five years or so, I think it's unprecedented.

Now I saw a scientific study that is being questioned so we don't know if it's true. That the human brain has shrunk in the past, I don't know, however many thousands of years. And that we used to have bigger brains, you know right before the ice age or something. So our brains used to be bigger than ours now. Smaller. Do you know what that would explain? What would that explain if our brains in fact got smaller? Now the answer is everything. It would explain everything. Yeah. You know how we couldn't understand how the ancients could build pyramids but we wouldn't know how to do it today using their technology. What if they were just smarter? That's the whole story. It's like well if you're as smart as we used to be you could have built a pyramid too. Maybe that's the whole answer. Maybe the answer to what's wrong with everything is that we're dumber. And maybe there's nothing else to it.

I don't think so. And the other scientists who