amazing how useful he is in pushing energy toward one point of view. Because certainly it would be good if everybody started thinking oh wokeness is the funny stuff. Like it's just a joke. And Musk is saying it directly. Yeah it's basically a joke. So that helps. Thank you for alerting me to that.

Anyway, Hunter's agreed to testify and allow it to be a public hearing. And so his lawyers have said on the 13th of December he'll be in a closed door deposition. Now you probably ask yourself why would Hunter want it to be public? Like wouldn't you think that everything about that he would want to be low key? So there are two possibilities. One possibility is that his defense or whatever he plans to say is so strong that it would be better to put that out there than to have people wonder what happened. That might be. But I have another theory.

I think that Hunter was high and his lawyer called him and they had a bad connection. And the lawyer said, Hunter, the committee is asking about a closed door, closed door. You want to be closed door, closed meeting or an unclosed meeting? And Hunter thought he said clothed. And so Hunter said well no I don't want clothes. I don't want to wear any clothes. Have you seen his selfies? It's funny. If you've seen the selfies he doesn't like clothes when he's with a group of people. You put several people in a room with Hunter, the first thing he does is take off his clothes, right? I mean Marjorie Taylor Greene's going to be in the room. The guy's going to start stripping. He's going to be, Lauren Boebert, wow, right? He's just going to start shedding those clothes. So I think it was just a misunderstanding between closed and clothed. I think that's all it was. That's just a guess. It's just a guess.

Well Biden is apparently going to use or talking about using the Defense Production Act to make sure that our pharma products get made in the US, which is a big problem because it's hard for us. First of all it's hard for the United States to do manufacturing apparently. But it would take a long time to bring everything back and then we'd still be dependent on maybe the base materials. Even if we manufactured here we still have to get our base materials from a potentially unfriendly country. So he's going to use the Defense Production Act which gives the president extra powers and money to force things to happen quickly.

I'm going to surprise you on this one. I'm 100% behind this. Anybody disagree? I'm 100% behind it. And I think Trump would have done it. I think Vivek Ramaswamy might have done it. I don't know. But this feels right to me. 100%. And for those of you who wonder would I ever say anything good about a Democrat or Biden if they did something that clearly made sense? Yes. This clearly makes sense in my opinion. Now the execution could be botched because it's a government. But yeah I back this 100%. This should not even be about politics.

Well there's a story I saw in a Joe Pompliano post about Sports Illustrated. Apparently Sports Illustrated bought or created these AI generated headshots so it looked like real human beings were writing articles that in fact were written by AI. But Sports Illustrated was trying to pass them off with a fake picture as if a human had done it. Now when they got called out about it they just deleted the content.

But here's the interesting part of the story. Two parts that are interesting. Number one it's kind of interesting that they tried to get away with it because imagine how much money they could save if they ran opinion pieces by robots and people thought they were human and they're like oh okay good opinion. But here's what I think. They had to get rid of it immediately upon realizing it was fake even though they could have said you caught us so we're going to label these as AI but we're still going to keep the pictures and we think it's fun to do AI opinions. That's if people had liked the AI opinions.

I believe this is more of what I'm going to call the Adams rule of AI art. If you're the first one to say it you get to name it after yourself. That's how it works. The Adams law of AI art. And it goes like this. AI generated art, which would include writing and include opinion, that's art, will not be interesting to humans if they know it's AI generated. And I've said this before but just summarizing, I believe our appreciation of art has a little bit to do with the quality of the art but a lot to do with what you assume about the talent of the person who created it. Meaning that the art and the artist are the same. Your triggering of what makes you say whoa look at that art is not the art. That's not what triggers you. So art by itself is just dead. It just sits there no matter how well it's done. No matter how well it's done it's just dead and it sits there until your brain says how did a human make that? Wow a human made that. And what you're reacting to is the artist. You're reacting to the talent of the artist which is an extension of your mating instinct because we're attracted to talent because that's a tell for somebody with good genes. Any kind of talent. And art is the way you express your talent.

So the Adams rule of AI art states that as soon as the audience knows it's AI they will lose interest via the mating instinct being taken out of the conversation. You think I'm wrong? Do you think I'm wrong?

Here's my summary of that argument. You ready? Here's the summary. If AI had created the Mona Lisa and you knew it was AI, the Mona Lisa's total value would be a nickel. Nobody would buy the Mona Lisa. Everything about the Mona Lisa is about the artist, right? It's all about the artist. How about a Van Gogh? Who would buy a Van Gogh if they thought it had been randomly generated by AI? The thing that makes Van Gogh so interesting is probably because he had mental problems. But when you look at it you say how did that come out of a human mind? Like what extra is going on in there? In this case it wasn't an advantage maybe. Yeah all right.

And then imagine modern art. You know we all laugh about the modern art. It's like it'll be a big white canvas and a pickle or a soup can and you'll say that's not art. I don't love looking at that. That's just you put something in the middle. Now and yet people pay a lot of money for it. But imagine that AI made that art. Imagine if AI did the soup cans that Andy Warhol did. How many AI generated soup cans would you buy? How about zero? Yeah zero. Because there's no artist involved. So just watch for that. And I believe it will be in every form of art from opinion writing, visual art, musical, every form. I think it will be the same.

Now when I said this online another user of the X platform asked me the following question which is a pretty good question. Says well if you believe that it's all about the mating instinct and that people aren't going to be attracted to AI, Scott, how do you explain that there are AI models within the, what's it called, OnlyFans? Did you see how I pretended I didn't know what it was called? What's it called? It's like OnlyFans or something. Yeah never heard of it. So actually I don't use it believe it or not. But so how could it be true the Adams rule of AI art if in fact people are making money with AI generated porn? Is that a good question?

Here was my response. Porn is not art. Porn is not exactly art. And here's what I mean. Yeah and you're going to say to yourself but Scott it is. It is a form of art. Here's where the art happens. The art happens in your head. Losing connection here. Do you think YouTube's sending me like a warning shot or something? Might be a warning shot like don't talk about this topic. Oh because kids are watching or something. Maybe it's because kids could watch. Is that why? Or did Locals glitch too? When Locals glitches I can't see it on my end because it was continuous so maybe it was the internet.

All right but my point was that the art happens in your imagination, right? Because there's actually not much art involved in watching two people do the same thing that you watched two other people do the day before and two other people the day before. It's kind of the same. You know half dozen things they're doing. It's not exactly art but in your head it is. So the art's in your head.

But I would also argue that it's there's a good chance that the AI generated porn may disappear. I think there's a novelty effect. If I were in the AI business like a techie and I heard that OnlyFans had