be better, actually.

Well, Meta has introduced an AI-based dating app, but it won't work like regular dating apps. I guess it's sort of chat-based and you can tell it exactly what you're looking for and it'll go off into the internet, probably just on Facebook, and look for somebody who meets all those qualifications.

Wouldn't that be amazing that you'd have AI being like a real matchmaker? So it wouldn't be like Tinder or Hinge or OkCupid or any of those. It would be more like a person that just happens to be AI and knows a lot about a lot of people.

So we got that. My suggestion is to cut out the middleman and just date the AI directly. I mean, it sounds funny, but let me ask you this. If you had to compare spending time with whoever the AI decided you should spend time with or spending time with the AI, which one would you do? Well, it's pretty close to a tossup at the moment. So I think the real win for AI would be to cut out the middleman and become the date.

Well, you've probably already heard that ABC and Jimmy Kimmel have agreed that he will be coming back on the air tonight. Now not all of the affiliates, that would be the local stations, they're not all going to automatically run it, although that could change by tonight. But the Sinclair Group and Nexstar, they may not. But they are also not the majority of the stations. So they would still have plenty of stations, but they would lose maybe 20 percent or something if Sinclair doesn't participate.

It doesn't seem to me that there's any possibility that they could make money on Kimmel since they weren't making money anyway. But if they lose another 20 percent of their local affiliates, I don't think there's any chance that they could make money. So I don't know what they're up to.

Here's my final take on it. I doubt it'll be final. I'm glad that he's going to be back on the air. Now I know you don't like it. I know what I'm saying and I know you don't like it, but this was uncomfortably close to something in the free speech domain.

It was never a question of free speech because the FCC has a mandate to police the speech of the three networks. It's actually their lawful legal job to make sure that the three broadcast networks don't do something that is bad for the public. That means that it's their job to censor them. So you can't say, "Hey, the government censored me," when that's actually specifically their job for those three limited resources that not everybody could have at the same time.

So it was never really a free speech question, but it was uncomfortably similar to one or reminded you of one or made you feel like you were living in one. And anytime there's a gray area, I would default to free speech. But remember, it was a business decision ultimately. So my opinion about it doesn't matter. Your opinion doesn't matter.

But I'm going to give you the kill shot on this topic. Are you ready? Here's the kill shot. If I have not changed your mind that it should be appropriate or at least allowable that Jimmy Kimmel goes back on the air, here is the thing that ends the debate. You ready?

What would Charlie Kirk have wanted? If he could tell you what he wanted, would he want Jimmy Kimmel to be off the air because of what he said? I don't know. We can't know for sure, but I would say 99 percent chance that Charlie Kirk would have said, "You know what? I forgive him. It was one little slip and I think he took enough heat that he learned his lesson. Maybe I should go on his show."

I think if Charlie Kirk were here, I mean obviously that's logically impossible as well as actually impossible, but if he were here he would say, "Can I go on your show and we'll talk about it?" Because that's who he was, right?

So does it make sense that you or I should be opposed to it when you're probably pretty sure he would not have been because in many ways he's better than us. I hate to admit it, but you know that the reason that he's so beloved, Charlie Kirk, he's just better than us in a whole bunch of ways. That's probably one of them.

So if you can tell me that you honestly believe that Charlie Kirk would be happier if Jimmy Kimmel got destroyed career-wise and all the people who work on his show lose their jobs, I don't think that was Charlie Kirk. Was it?

You know, if you disagree with me, I'd love to hear the counterargument, but I feel that if you believe that Charlie would have handled it differently, kept him on the air and engaged him in conversation, which is what I think he would have done, if you disagree I'm open to the argument.

But if you don't disagree, then I think that the respectful play, the way that you could most respect the memory and legacy of Charlie, is to do what you think he would have done, right? I'll bet you hate how much that convinced you.

And also, I don't want to see the staff lose their jobs. The staff didn't do anything. There are a few dozen people on the staff and I was thinking about, you know, I have an empathy problem sometimes like too much of it. I was imagining how Jimmy Kimmel felt when he knew that he wouldn't personally be that affected by it because he's made his money by now but the staff would be struggling.

Imagine knowing that you're the reason your own stubbornness or stupidity, you probab