aine doesn't join NATO. But as it's shaping up, I think I'm going to bet against any kind of a peace deal. I wouldn't bet that we'll necessarily stay supporting Ukraine, which maybe isn't the worst thing that could happen. So I'm going to say that there's not going to be a Ukraine peace deal. And I don't think Putin wants it. I don't think Zelensky wants it. I don't think the European Union wants it, but the US wants it. So I think we'll just bow out. I think maybe we might sell weapons to people who want to buy them, but I think Europe's going to have to cash the check. So yes, no peace deal in my opinion. It doesn't look like anything's pointing in that direction.

According to Tech Explorer, there's this new EV battery breakthrough that you could charge 500% faster even in sub-zero weather. University of Michigan engineers have it. And apparently it's working so well that it's already being commercialized. So we might see that. If battery-driven cars didn't have the cold weather problem and you could also charge them 500% faster, that's a big deal. Now, I will tell you that I do see a battery breakthrough story every single day, but they all start sounding the same, so I stopped reporting on all of them. But the battery stuff is really interesting. Is really interesting.

All right, here's on Andrew Huberman's show, Huberman Lab, he had an expert on who said that if a mom has diabetes, the risk of an autistic child doubles. If the mom has obesity, the risk of having an autistic child doubles. And if the mom has diabetes and obesity, which often go together, it would quadruple the risk of the autistic child. Now, I don't know if I'm fully believing that yet because that would fall into the somebody did a study, but I don't know. But you first of all it doesn't match any of my anecdotal experience because every time I think of somebody who had an autistic kid I don't really think of them as being overweight and so and I don't know that they had diabetes so I haven't really seen it. It's not like something I've noticed or anything like that. So I'm a little skeptical of this one, but if it's true, it might be at least part of the puzzle of why there's so much of it lately. And it wouldn't surprise me if diabetes and obesity created a whole bunch of health problems that you didn't see coming. So that part sort of makes sense. But I don't know if I'm quite buying into that. It might be a big part of the answer. I don't know. I'm a little skeptical, but it could be that there are multiple reasons and they're all environmental and or health and it'll be hard to untangle it.

Meanwhile, according to HR Dive, Emily Shinn is writing that a judge says that IBM must face the discrimination claim from the white male worker who believes that he was fired because he was white so that the bosses could make room for their diversity goals. And here, let me just read this part. The plaintiff alleged that IBM CEO set specific percentage targets for the racial and gender composition of IBM's workforce. Now, I know that's true because I've seen video of the CEO saying exactly that. And then IBM implemented a system of financial incentives to reward executives who worked to achieve those targets, the DEI targets according to the lawsuit. And the IBM CEO suggested that executives who did not make progress on getting that diversity they wanted could be penalized or be fired or have their pay reduced.

Now, this is the goal versus system problem. As a goal, a little extra diversity might be just positive as a goal, but you have to develop a system to make it happen. The system that he developed, IBM CEO guarantees that there would be massive discrimination against white people. Why? Follow the money. He created a massive financial interest in discriminating against white people and trying to make it look like it didn't happen. So suddenly this guy who had been getting good reviews suddenly gets put on a performance improvement plan, which is sort of the last thing they do before they fire you. So that they would have some paperwork. Allegedly, they would have some paperwork that would support the firing the white guy because every time you fired a white guy and replaced them with a non-white guy, you would make more money. Or to put it the other way, the more successful you were discriminating against your white workforce, the less risk ther