my impression of Newsom standing next to the sign language interpreter. The sign language interpreter was signing as he was talking. But what's funny is that Newsom talks with his hands. So when Newsom stands next to the sign language interpreter, it looks like they're competing with jazz hands because the sign language interpreter looked, if you imagined that Newsom's words were coming out of his mouth, he would talk just like he was doing all the weird things like milking the cow and this stuff. And I don't know sign language, so I'm positive those were real words. I don't think he was pranking. I think he was a real sign language interpreter.

But then right next to him is Newsom and he's just talking in his normal way, but it looks like he's milking the cow and wrestling with an invisible person. Anyway, you had to see it. You had to be there. Sorry, I'm sorry I started with that one.

Well, according to Breitbart News, Lucas Nolan is writing that libraries are getting lots of requests for books that don't exist because AI apparently hallucinated some books and put them in newspapers as recommended books. So you thought the news was fake. When you read the newspaper, you're like, you're looking at the world news and you think, "Huh, that might be fake." You look at the political news, you think, I think that's fake. Then you look at the economic news and you think that might be fake. But at least when you look at the list of recommended books, at least the books are real, right? Am I right? At least the books are real. And no, they're not real.

How bad was it? In a recent blunder, the Chicago Times published a summer reading list for 2025 that had, out of 15 recommended books, only five of them were real books. Only five out of 15 were even real books. All data is fake.

Well, just about every single day there's new video where somebody is trying to show you how AI can make you a movie just by talking to it. But it's always like a little bit of a clip or it looks like you couldn't make a full movie out of it. But maybe it's very impressive. But there's a new one that really takes it to the next level.

However, as I've often been telling you, if you believe you can use one AI to make yourself a movie, like just ChatGPT and you just talk to it and then it forms a movie, that doesn't look like it's ever going to happen because this particular movie called Skyland, it's an AI short film. I saw this on a post by Dinda Preettio who used, I believe, six different AI and non-AI apps. So if you think you can just talk to your computer and make yourself a movie, long way away. Probably it will always be multiple apps and you'll have to be an expert in each of the apps and know how each of the apps talk to the other apps and those apps will be getting updated faster than you can make your movies. So you're continually going to have to say, "Oh, should I use the other app? Maybe I should use that instead." So if you believe that non-experts will be able to make movies, I don't think so. I think it will always require a human expert, maybe several. But it might make good movies and it might be a lot cheaper than regular movies and it might require no actors whatsoever, but it won't be talent free. Yeah, you're going to have to have, you would have to be massively talented to make a movie with or without AI.

Well, Gateway Pundit is reporting that there's a former Texas Democrat House candidate charged with election fraud. Apparently he was doing harvesting or something, doing something with ballots. The interesting thing about this is not that it's this one smallish politician. The interesting thing is I thought you couldn't cheat. How did this one person cheat if cheating's not possible? And did they cheat in a way, I don't know the answer to this, in which they were definitely guaranteed to get caught because we have the kind of system that catches anybody cheating? I don't think so. I'll bet you if you looked into it, you would find that the way he got caught had nothing to do with the design of the system. Probably somebody dropped a dime on him or something happened. But I'll bet you there was nothing in the system that could have caught him. All right. If I'm wrong, let me know.

Okay, that's, I'm putting my stick in the... We got a cat visiting. Come here. Down to this level.

Well, I saw a post by Zion Lights. That's a human being's name in case you wondered. Zion Lights, who is a big activist in the nuclear space, and points out that China and South Korea can both now build nuclear power plants in five years. Now, you know, the US, we're like 25 years, so not really competitive. However, the big thing seems to be the idea of building a new power plant on the same site as the old power plant because once it's approved for a nuclear power plant, probably it makes more sense to just put another one right next to it if you need another one. So I believe we're looking at that in the US as well. So that's going to be a huge thing. So can we get the building of nukes down to five years? I'll bet we can get it less if they're small and modular. The modulars should be under two years once they're standardized and approved. We should be able to just knock them out in a year or two.

Well, here's the latest news on the sale o