Back to episode — Episode 2749 CWSA 02/13/25
Context —
at's going to happen in 10 years, more like five years. But I don't see how this works. To me it's been looking for a while like the amount that Trump wants to add to the budget, because they want to add 300 billion a year for border security and national defense. No, I understand that, the border security especially. But you're going to add that expense and then you're going to cut taxes, and the…
← Previous segment →this works. Because I'm getting a little mad about it.
I mean, maybe the public doesn't follow these things closely enough to know that this can't work. They're basically presenting us a doom scenario in which we all die for sure. Can you give me any hope? Because this budget just tells me we're going to let you all die. That's the budget. The budget is you're all dead. Because the whole reason that DOGE exists is because our budget is out of control. Our debt is out of control. So if you're going to give us another plan that says oh, you're going to be dead in a few years, and that's for the Trump administration, you, because that's not what we signed up for. We signed up for less debt. Give us less debt however you have to do it. Whatever you need to do, give us less debt. Because this looks like you've planned to kill us. You've planned to kill us. That's what the news is telling me.
Now if I'm reading it wrong and I'm doing the numbers wrong, I would love to be corrected. But it doesn't look like it. It looks like they plan to kill us. And we didn't fight this hard to get a Republican administration so the Republican administration can kill us. Figure it out. Figure it out. Don't do this. Yeah, I am so out if they don't balance the budget or make a good try. It's got to be at least a good try. We're not seeing anything that looks like a good try. It looks like they're screwing DOGE. Looks like they're screwing Musk by giving him a no-win situation. Not cool. Not cool anyway.
I would love to know that my rant was completely embarrassing and shameful and that I'm just getting the numbers wrong. But I don't think I am. So we need some answers.
According to Brett Adcock, I can't believe there's a guy who owns the Figure robot company. These are humanoid-looking robots that don't have genitalia. But the founder of the company is named Adcock. I mean, come on. Humanoid robots with no genitalia made by somebody called Adcock. Somebody's going to add a few. Maybe it's aftermarket. But anyway.
So what Adcock says, he says, quote, "In our lifetime you will see more humanoid robots than humans when you're out and about." Trying to resist. Try to resist. I wake up every morning trying to resist making any reference to Skynet. No, only NPCs say Skynet. When you say the robots will outnumber the humans, don't do it, Scott. Don't do it. Try to resist. Don't say Skynet or else you're an NPC. Skynet. Skynet. Skynet. I couldn't resist. I'm sorry. I'm weak.
I don't have much else to say about that story except stop making me think of Skynet. Because as soon as I read this, that there will be more robots out and about than humans, my first question is, is that because we made more robots? That'd be the best-case scenario. Or are there just fewer humans? There are a couple different ways you can get there.
Well, how could there be fewer humans? Well, here's one way, even without Skynet. Turns out, according to The Conversation, and May Dwayne is writing that teenagers are using AI companions and they're saying it's easier than dating humans. AI companions. So teenagers are falling in love with chatbots.
Well, who was it who told you 20 years ago that when the AI got good enough that people would prefer the AI? I did. Yeah, I told you that people would prefer it. But I'll be more specific. Here's my calculation. I believe that the top 10 percent of attractive people will have options of being with the other attractive people. But the bottom 90 percent of attractive people, which I'm certainly in the bottom 90 percent, but the bottom 90 percent are going to just prefer AI because the AI will not disappoint them. It really is, we really do, no joke, have a situation that we're not quite ready for.
I don't even know if it's bad. I mean, if the bottom 90 percent are happier, well, okay, you know, maybe that is a good solution. But no, I think we're already at a point where only the top 10 percent are likely to reproduce, and everybody else is just going to be roboting up. That's what I think.
So speaking of AI, Thomson Reuters won their first majo
Context —
r AI copyright case, according to Wired. So I guess they found that there was some specific AI company, what is it, not one of the big ones, doesn't matter, a smaller AI company you never heard of. Apparently there's evidence that they may have trained their model using some proprietary stuff from Thomson Reuters. And it looks like the judge ruled in Thomson Reuters' favor, said the AI company's c…
Next segment → →