Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive May 24, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas
Episodes Episode #2866 Segments
MainContent Politics as Persuasion

Back to episode — Episode 2866 CWSA 06/12/25

Context —

to solve that problem right now? All right. Okay. If you demand it, I will. All you need is to have three AIs. You know, three, not three models, but three completely different AIs. And you have one AI that's in charge of speaking, but you have everything it says tested first on the other AIs. So you have two AIs that fact check the third AI, and the third AI is the only one that gets to talk. No…

← Previous segment →

y of you AI experts? When you hear my idea, do you say to yourself, you idiot? You forgot the most important thing about AI. I don't know. Did I? I might have. But doesn't it seem to you like that would work like every time? I don't see how it wouldn't work. But anyway, so if you wanted AI to be solved, there you go. I just fixed it maybe.

All right. The Trump administration, according to RSBN, is evacuating the Middle East embassies, at least the non-critical people, over concerns about Iran. Now here's my question. If we're evacuating our Middle East embassies, the only reason is we think there's too much risk that Iran will attack them. Now what would make Iran attack a US embassy? Well the only thing I can think of is if Israel attacked Iran. So didn't we always have that risk for months and months and months if not years? Why are we drawing down the staff now?

I can only think of one reason. Well two. One, we know that an attack is coming. That would be the most obvious. Or two, it's part of negotiations because it suggests that an attack is imminent and maybe that's what we need to get Iran to agree. But I've been watching Iran for much of my adult life and they don't seem really susceptible to threats. It's sort of the opposite. Very much the opposite actually.

So are we being told that there's a military action that's imminent? And how imminent? Would we be evacuating a week before it happens? Or maybe we did it months before it happens because we don't want to give away too much. I don't know. It looks to me like there's going to be some military action.

Speaking of Iran, according to the Wall Street Journal, the IAEA board, so the weird thing about Iran is that we're having all these nuclear energy, nuclear weapon negotiations. But at the same time this IAEA has been monitoring their activity. Now it's not enough of a monitor to make a difference. It doesn't stop them from doing what they're doing, apparently. But the IAEA just found that Iran is in non-compliance for the first time in 20 years. First time in 20 years. Really? There's nothing non-compliant they've done in the nuclear category for 20 years. What's all this talk about then?

Well, so apparently it has to do with something unexplained that Iran is not explaining. So this board is saying if you can't explain this then you're in non-compliance. So what did Iran do being in non-compliance? Well, it said it would open a new uranium enrichment facility. So it's going to do more of whatever we don't like.

According to experts, Iran is already producing enough highly enriched uranium for one nuclear weapon's worth a month. That doesn't mean they're making weapons. It means they ha

Context —

ve enough enriched uranium. Anyway, so the IAEA might lead to some kind of UN Security Council action and there could be some repercussions there but things are heating up and so my question is this. Iran's entire approach is saying oh no we don't want a nuclear weapon. No, no, no. We need all this uranium enrichment for peaceful purposes for medical devices and just ordinary business. But why wo…

Next segment → →