Guy Morris: When Prophecy, Psyops, and AI Collide

Obscuracast sits down with author and researcher Guy Morris for a deep dive into the fault lines between prophecy, power, and artificial intelligence. Guy traces how real intelligence operations, finance, and spiritual narratives shaped his thriller work—and why he believes we’re ignoring critical warning signs.

We unpack how prophecy and belief can be weaponized as psychological operations, who benefits from confusion, and where Guy sees real signal versus noise. Then we turn to AI, surveillance, and automated systems: how they may already be steering societies, and what ordinary people can do to protect their agency in a world run by black‑box algorithms.

Transcript

SPEAKER_02 0:54

All right, everybody, welcome back to Obscuracast. We have another episode for you guys. Obviously, you guys know this is the show where we tug on loose threads of history, power, and technology, and we just sort of see what unravels with the conversation. I'm Blake here with my best friend Dan and Co-Conspirator. How are you doing tonight, sir? I'm doing good. I'm glad that it is a Friday. Absolutely. I think we're all happy to be doing this on a Friday night. So we started this podcast. Just got to give you guys a little misnomer or a little moniker of why we started the podcast in the first place. We started as two guys just sort of having an idea and late night conversations, and we sort of got to keeping, unable to sort of keep them to ourselves and wanted to sort of share those insights and that kind of conversation with people that sort of think the same way and have an idea of what we're talking about. So tonight's episode, exactly the kind of rabbit hole that made ObscureCast what it is. As you guys know, we're in like 40 countries now and we're getting a ton of listens more than ever before. We're on every streaming platform from good pods to Amazon Music, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, all that kind of stuff. So we have a really auspicious guest this evening with us. Um we're we're we're thrilled to have him. Guy Morris, he's someone who spent years connecting dots between geopolitics, biblical prophecy, intelligence operations, and emerging AI. You can dive into his work at guymorrisbooks.com. You can follow him on X at GuyMorrisBooks and also on Instagram at author guy Morris. So if you've ever sort of wondered whether the weirdest parts of scripture, high-level tech, and shadowy programs might actually overlap in the real world, you're gonna want to stay for the entire episodes because we're gonna probably go into some deep rabbit holes and some fun stuff. So before we bring Guy in, a quick reminder: you can follow Obscurecast everywhere. Like I said, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, YouTube, YouTube Music, you name it. We're on the platform now. Also keep up with us on X. We're just at Obscurecast on TikTok at ObscurecastFM and on Instagram at ObscureCast. So we post episode updates, clips, and strange threads and that don't always make it on the show or their little snippets of the show. So make sure you guys check those out. And without any further ado, guy, welcome to ObscureCast, sir. How are you doing? Thank you, Blake. Glad to have you. Hi, Dan. Hey, how are you doing? I'm excited to be here. So the first question we're excited to have you. So the first question we were going to get right into the nitty-gritty into the meat of the conversation and sort of get a feel for you and your background and that kind of thing for people that may not have heard about you or just meeting you or being introduced to you for the first time. How did you end up on this path, sort of with the AI stuff and the obscure history and all that kind of thing? Sort of give us a quick two cents on that for us.

SPEAKER_01 3:16

It was a a journey of many paths and just odd things happening. I I actually started off as a homeless runaway, GED at 15, functionally illiterate, got a chance to go to schol get a go to college and saw it as a chance to change my star. So that was my day and night passion for five years, graduated with multiple degrees, got scholarships, accepted into Harvard, because I had built a macroeconomic model that outperformed the Fed and pretty much everybody else and changed how we build models to this day. So I while I never really thought of it that way, I had a knack. And so I went into 40 years of techno Fortune 100 companies, Oracle, Microsoft, IBM. And along the way, I kept I was always an innovator. I was a thought leader and innovator, and I would always be trying to pull in the latest tool to solve an operational problem I had. One of them, you know, I ran global teams and I had to be able to communicate with them long before we had the internet. And right in the ear early DARPA-ARPA days of the internet when we were basically sitting on that backbone with, you know, dial-in motives to get into Colombia and China and other places. And then there was at one point in time, and I did expert systems at one point to these were this was an early stage of AI that didn't go that well. It was too manual, and it was before machine learning. And we needed, we were learning things along the way. But the one that really, the event that really triggered me to pay close attention to not just technologies we were building for the enterprise, but how technologies could be used by governments and other and malicious people came through a little small associated press article in the back of a small of a science magazine. I can't remember which one. And this was in the late 90s. And the article said, and almost verbatim, the first sentence was a program has escaped the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories at Sandia. If I knew anything to contact this professor at the agency or this FBI agent in charge of the investigation. And I stopped. I was like, I read it again. I kept thinking, okay, I read it wrong. It must have said lost or stolen or the program broke. It said the program had escaped. And I'm thinking, holy cow, somebody at Associate Press is going to get fired for that one. And then I thought, or somebody at the laboratory is going to get fired.

SPEAKER_02 5:37

They'll say your immediate response was probably like, who the hell needs to pay for this? Like now, immediately yesterday. This well, I first thought it was a typo, and then I thought, well, what if it wasn't a typo?

SPEAKER_01 5:46

What it was of a slip. And so I started, I spent several months. I had enough, uh, I had enough training to start sitting down and talking to my my architects and my company about, you know, how did I started breaking down the problem? What does it mean to escape? What does that look like? What functions it would have to have? How why would how would it know where to go? How would it stay invisible? Why didn't they just seat the log about where it moved itself? And I started putting together all of these functional questions and starting them. And then once I kind of got an architectural model that I said, okay, that could work. That's functional. We see examples of that in worms and different theses. So I basically pulled some of these things together. Then was the fun part. I I thought, okay, I what if on James Bond's cue? Okay, Mr. Bond, we're going to build the perfect spy program for the queen. It can go anywhere, stay invisible, and move all by itself. And Bond says, Well, what would it do, Q? And that was when I had to say, I don't know yet, Bond.

SPEAKER_02 6:45

So I So was that sort of the moment I guess seeing in the in the technology magazine when things sort of flipped for you? Like, was that more of like, I have this normal career, I'm you know, CEOs of these multitudes of companies that have been on the ground floor of AI, all of that kind of stuff. Was that sort of the flip of the switch? Like, I need to start writing about this kind of stuff?

SPEAKER_01 7:05

The real flip of the switch came when the two FBI agents showed up at my door. That was the flip of the switch. That was the one that thinks, okay, this just isn't me just being a nerd being theoretical and thinking about this stuff. This was a confirmation. Sure. And that and I I told them that. I was obnoxious. I said, you wouldn't be here if I was wrong. I did it. I figured it out. You should hire me. They I they they had to give me the we are not immune speech. But that was the moment when I started really seriously going, holy cow, if that was true then, if that was true then, what can they do now? And what have they been doing since? And I start looking at all of the various layers of technology that we've developed and and looking at where the DARPA contracts have gone and looking where Google does work with the government and trying to put all the pieces. You can't say this is top secret, let me read about it. But you can do what I did, which is put the pieces together, connect the dots. And so that really started me looking at not only what are we doing with now that was a a flip for the question of what is the government doing with technologies we're building in the enterprise sector. The flip for how fast uh AI was moving forward uh came with a famous incident, well, famous for nerds at well, called the uh AlphaGo uh experiment at Google. So it went something like this. You you guys all remember that years ago there was a big blue or uh the you know the deep blue IBM machine beat the world's best chess player.

SPEAKER_02 8:34

Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I do remember that.

SPEAKER_01 8:36

It was like back in the early or mid-2000s, right? Now that was using expert systems of the technology I was telling you about. So Google was building a different model. They wanted to build a model that could beat the Chinese game, the world's best Chinese Go player. And Go is a far more complicated, complex, thousands of different potential moves over chess. So it's a much more complicated game. And they spent an a year building an AI trained on all of the moves by this expert genius player, and they were able to get an AI to beat them. And everyone said, Yay, we got a machine to do what Big Blue did in less time and less money and for a more complicated game. And then one of my my heroes, Sir Jeffrey Hinton, who was then in charge of the uh Deep Mind Lab at Google, said, Well, what if why don't we what if we just let the machine learn on its own? And this was a deep learning exercise for them. So they built a separate machine called Alpha Master, and they basically just gave it the rules of the game and the goal to win and let it run 24-7 running simulations. And within a single month, Alpha Master could beat Alpha Go every single time.

SPEAKER_02 9:51

Question like it was just a it was it was done? It invented new moves.

SPEAKER_01 9:56

Wow. It wasn't learning from the masters, it was recreating the game from scratch, hundreds of millions of simulations teaching it what not to do until it learned how to be the best and the fastest, and it only took a single month.

SPEAKER_02 10:12

So it wasn't one move ahead, it was 20 moves ahead. Could beat it every time. That's funny.

SPEAKER_01 10:17

That was the point when I started realizing this is getting this is getting serious. So then, you know, of course, I'm still in my career at the time and I'm doing other things, but as and I had been experimenting with deep fakes and and um voice recognition software and voice command software back in the mid-90s. And so I was Siri, I was seeing all of these things with big data, uh quantum computing, a number of things coming together so that by 2018 I was in kind of a full-blown, you know, I need to write books about this and warn the world of what's nobody's aware of this. It's right over the horizon. I need to start writing books about it. So my book, first book, Swarm, came out in 2020, talked about the AI that program that escaped, it talked about deep fake technology, cyber espionage and security issues, talked about um lethal autonomous weapon systems that were already being developed back then. And all of these things the world is just now starting to catch up on.

SPEAKER_02 11:13

Yeah, for sure. So I I I know that you have a speaking of AI, you have a book coming out, I think you alluded to at the end of June. I believe it's uh the the AI tsunami survival guide for humanity. So if you guys haven't checked that out, obviously go to guy MorrisBooks.com. I think it like you said, it's coming out in uh at the end of June, at the end of this month. So look out for that. If you guys are Guy Morris fans, I'm sure it's gonna be fantastic.

SPEAKER_01 11:36

Yeah, and that'll be a nonfiction. So that the purpose of the AI tsunami is to really target normal people, small businesses, people who either don't really understand much about the technology and want to get over their fear by basically learning a little bit, but in a very easy to understand, non-technical way. And we deal with the good, the bad, and the existential ugly. We look at how AI could affect dating and relationships and governance and elections and crime and weapons and all kinds of things. And then we give you some guidance on what are some of the strategies you can consider for how to not only get over this, you know, coming waves of change, but how do you actually thrive through them without losing your humanity?

SPEAKER_02 12:13

Sure, for sure. So just sort of setting the tone, and I know Dan and I have taken a little bit look at your work. When I'm not a huge reader, I'm an audio, I'm sort of an audiobook guy. So I sort of listened to a little bit of some of your work. I obviously haven't read the AI tsunami or listened to it yet, but there's some there's some stuff, whether it's geopolitical, whether it's you know the pirate stuff that we talked about and we originally got together and started meeting and that kind of thing. Your your books are thrillers at the core, but they're rooted in real research. That's where the that that's where it sort of shines. And so so if I had to ask you, what's one real-world event or discovery that made you think, okay, this is no longer just fiction? This is just this is what it is, this is the information at hand, and then we can sort of turn it into a thriller on the back end. What was sort of that twinge for you?

SPEAKER_01 12:55

Well, certainly discovering the program that escaped. Um, you know, that learning that I was correct in basically all the architecture and the reasons of why it escaped and what it could do led to other questions about what's it doing now? Did it just did it malfunction? What if it's what if it didn't? What if it's still functioning elsewhere? And so that was certainly one of them. I think another one was realizing how far DARPA was in developing, and and Israel and other places in developing lethal autonomous weapon systems. So for those who don't know, it's okay to use AI to make a weapon more accurate, to make it more precise, to make it operate better, to make it more uh to target better, but there needs to be a human in that kill decision process.

SPEAKER_02 13:35

I I agree with you 100%. Dan, I don't know how you feel about that. We actually had an interesting conversation about that on one of our, I think it was our original AI episode that we did. Yeah. Dan asked me a question. Like, like, for example, for example, you think about target lock, right? For example, it is able to lock onto a heat signature and destroy the target. That in a that in a nutshell is kind of like what we're talking about. It's able to recognize or have recognition of a parameter, right? So like it doesn't have to be heat. It can be light, it can be sound, it can be whatever you want it to be. But I think Dan and I would both agree that we've had AI for many, many years. Like it's been obviously incremental, obviously, but there have been instances in AI where like you have like Microsoft Sam from back in the day that would talk to you as you write out a sentence. We've had Siri, we've had all these instances, and I think Dan and I growing up, you know, we were both born in '91, so we're still relatively young, but this has been around for a long time. Dan, I don't know how you feel about that. I I I've sort of felt like we you mentioned that we sort of AI just sort of snapped into the universe and we've had it around for a while. So I don't know how you feel about that.

SPEAKER_03 14:44

Well, I mean, you know, you sat with dad and I talking. We used to hear dad talk about when he was over in Vietnam and he did like black ops covert stuff. And he said the technology that our military has and our government is like 70, 50 to 75 years ahead, probably now more. But he was, you know, uh like I have a pair of his like first night vision goggles. We've used that to be like we've actually used them.

SPEAKER_02 15:08

That's the crazy part, is we've used them.

SPEAKER_03 15:10

But and now like they have where I know like Lockheed Martin and Boeing, they got the AI fighter jets that are outperforming our regular, you know, uh piloted jets. And it's like, I was gonna say the same it's the same thing with drone technology.

SPEAKER_02 15:24

Like, drone technology is the exact same thing as the AI pilots that you're talking about.

SPEAKER_03 15:29

And you start thinking about like the G-forces and how hard that is on the human body. If you don't have a pilot, you can probably do a lot of shit that wouldn't be able to.

SPEAKER_02 15:39

Well, isn't there like a crazy movie? The guy might know this. Isn't there like a crazy movie about an AI pilot or fighter jet that goes like rogue? And I can't remember what the name of the movie is, but I can might fact check that while you guys are talking. I'm curious.

SPEAKER_01 15:52

Well that actually is it actually real technology, but what I based swarm on was I felt I said that one of the earliest places we will actually see tech this technology on the battlefield is through drones. And so one of the things that in in researching it, I realized that DARPA was not only working on a drone AI technology, they were working on what's called the hive technology. Imagine a thousand 15-inch drones weaponized with high-speed cameras, talking to each other like 50,000 times per second, clearing through a village and identifying targets and taking them out without having to bomb the village. So you're not destroying the infrastructure for the next three generations, right? Creating this huge rebuilding process. You're just taking out the combatants. That's the idea. But the complexities of actually getting that to work, one of the reasons when I realized what they were trying to do, and and I this is back in 2019, sorry, it was in the first book Swarm, so it came out in 20. So it I realized then that the tech they were now it's good that they haven't deployed it yet, because I'm sure that the AI is still trying to advance on that. And so we're trying to with technologies that we don't really fully know how to control yet, and then we're using it in ways that could be life and death.

SPEAKER_03 17:11

If that gets into the wrong hands, could you imagine?

SPEAKER_02 17:14

Yeah. Yeah. Because the type of people that have been on this earth that have been able to wage war without AI technology, having to actually have their finger on the button is kind of scary by itself. Let's be honest. Let's call a spade a spade. But like imagine, like, you know, Dan, you and I had the conversation about in the AI episode that we had. You asked me about the atomic bomb or what Oppenheimer did with that kind of thing. Somebody's finger on the button that's a human being that is that I have not necessarily control over, but imagine, like, you know, we talked about deep learning, and we'll get into that a little bit. Deep learning and generative AI, because guy, I was going to ask you what scares you more. I think I know your answer, but I sort of want to hear your take on it. But like, for example, you know, you have somebody's finger on the button, you have an AI fingers on the button that has its own reasoning, say it's deep learning AI. Do you trust the AI to make the right decision, or is it going to make an analytical decision purely based on data? So, guy, I want to sort of hear what you think about that scenario.

SPEAKER_01 18:09

I think the other question that really needs to go along with that is who's accountable? 100%. We had that conversation as well, but go ahead. So, yeah, I uh and that's the thing. I wouldn't trust the AI. Even if it had the right answer, the question is becomes it becomes accountability. Who's accountable for taking human life? And we were developing these systems that remove us from that accountability. And and more and more these kind of systems remove the accountability for that. But at a certain point in time, somebody even now has to say somebody said fire the missile. 100%. When we remove that, and we just got the machine firing the missile, we lose the ability to understand what the machine was doing because the AI is a black box anyway. We lose the ability to correct its thinking if it was wrong, and we lose accountability, which basically then blows back. If you don't have anybody accountable, who's it gonna blow back to? All the way to the top.

SPEAKER_02 19:03

Yeah. And I also wonder about the accountability aspect, it's a machine. Yeah. You just make another one, just manufacture another one. Like uh it takes sort of the account, like I get what you're saying. Well, from the machine standpoint, the the accountability sort of goes away because it's not a human being, essentially.

SPEAKER_03 19:19

What Dan, what were you gonna say? There was a uh in and guy you've probably I'm sure you've heard of this. Have you heard of the it was a event that took place during the Cold War, and Russia they thought that there was a threat coming in and like the the bot the time bomb came down, like the ticker went down to like five seconds, and the guy had to make a decision on whether it was an actual threat from the US and like he didn't hit the launch button and thank God because it was a false alarm that went off, but the timer got down like I think literally like five seconds.

SPEAKER_01 19:53

Yeah, I I I've heard of that, and I can't remember the name of the incident, but I I think it's a perfect example of even when that's a perfect example of why we need people in accountability to check each other, even though supposedly Putin or the president has the finger on the button, they're surrounded by other people. They're not actually going to be. 100%. It's not a sovereign state that's in the middle of nowhere. Yeah, 100%. Is this a sane rational move and and there's checks and balances? We don't have that when we start handing over decision making to a machine. Now, I've been a technology advocate my entire career. Mate, my entire career on innovation and and innovative thinking and new technologies to solve old problems. Those were every single case, I was empowering a human to make better decisions. Now we're basically taking that decision power away from a human and giving it to a machine that A will become smarter than any human on the planet. Not a question it's gonna happen. B will replicate itself. It's almost there already. Matter of fact, 80% of the current public released code of Claude was written and tested by the machine. Three, we're already teaching the machines what, who, and how to kill. No question that that that machine knowledge can spread. So this is a existential, this is a paradigm change technology. And the reason I'm I I'm I've come out of my closet to say this one we have to be super, super careful with. We have to have we need to have a non-proliferation treaty right now on AI. And the fact is, I I wanted it like several years ago. Max Tedmark came out with a letter in 2023 arguing for it. We're years behind it, but we need to get to a nonproliferation because you're right. Put this technology in the hands of a drug lord, a dictator, a warlord, a a sociopathic, a megalomaniac stock market hedge fund guy, a trillionaire, sociopathic, trillionaire. We all can name one. Sure, sure. Sure. One hundred percent. Put that power in their hands and we don't and we lose part of our humanity in that process.

SPEAKER_03 22:07

So who go ahead, Danny. Go ahead. So would that be like a United Nations like thing where the like the countries come together and do like what what do you think needs like how does that get basically controlled or monitored or like why there's five nations that really are leading in the AI war.

SPEAKER_01 22:24

U.S., China, obviously. Behind them, kind of far behind them, but become Israel, then Russia, and then you've got a little bit of Iran and and uh North Korea basically just trying to feed off of some of the others to see what they can do. They're the rogue actor that if they get the wrong application and they get access to it, it could go bad because they have nothing to lose. But certainly the top three. And if we can get if we can get the major, now there's also AI development going on in Europe and elsewhere, but most of the real major innovations going on between the US and China. So in my mind, we need to be sitting down at a table saying, okay, both of us, rather than talking about this competition of who's going to win, let's look at the let's talk about what are the guardrails about how we're all going to stay safe.

SPEAKER_02 23:08

Makes sense. Now go ahead. Go ahead.

SPEAKER_01 23:11

Go ahead. No, go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Part of that answer, and I think this that also gets kind of slept aside in the in the process is not only who's case say safe, but how we keep this bit destroying the environment.

SPEAKER_02 23:22

Yeah. So that was also a question that sort of leads into the next question that I had for you. So I know that Dan and I had previously talked on some episodes, obviously, about as AI, as AI and infrastructure and that kind of stuff has to obviously follow suit and get more sophisticated, right? What is going to happen to the environment from your point of view as somebody that's looked at this in depth? So my my general question, I want you to sort of extrapolate and sort of take it your own way on what you found being sort of a more of an expert in the field than the two of us, even though we know a lot about AI, you've been on the forefront when it started, the dark times when it wasn't really a thing and it was very generic and that kind of thing. If you had to, if you had to sort of pick one thing, if you were walking down the street and somebody said, you know, what is on the horizon for us as a warning sign, that kind of thing, as we're sort of walking down this path, what do you think that would be if you had to boil it down?

SPEAKER_01 24:12

To one thing, the cost-benefit ratio. Who pays, who wins. One example. One data center, the Hyperion Data Center in Louisiana, 3,650 acres. That's as much as like 68 football fields, four times the size of Central Park. Requires as much power as like two million homes, can require as much as like 38 million or billion, I can't remember the right number. No, billion is the global one, million gallons per year of water. Leaves contaminated wells and water infrastructure for other nations. Right now, the data centers in Virginia alone are using 40%. There's 600 data centers and they're using 40% of all the power in the state of 9 million people. So we are gonna part of this is who's gonna pay the cost so that those who are gonna benefit. So what's the cost-benefit ratio? Who are the winners and who are the losers? Makes sense.

SPEAKER_02 25:07

Dan, did you did you want to sort of ask any any questions about sort of like the power consumption and that kind of thing? I I I know we've talked about it, so yeah.

SPEAKER_03 25:15

So where I live in uh in Pittsburgh, the town over from me, and then the town that I'm in. Both towns are considering clearly in the next like week or two having community meetings about data centers.

SPEAKER_01 25:28

So they're having community meetings. Some of these are going in NDAs at the community leader level, and some of these deals are being done without the community even being aware of the remote.

SPEAKER_02 25:36

So essentially this essentially the communities don't have a voice, it's just happening right before them and they can't do anything about it.

SPEAKER_03 25:42

That happened in Utah, didn't that happen with uh Kevin O'Leary with his uh data center that he's building, I think.

SPEAKER_01 25:49

And there was another one in Georgia where they were basically sucking water from a community 50 miles away, depleted their water supply.

SPEAKER_03 25:56

Yeah, that's true. So, because I I just I know like my electric bill already is obviously high. Like I've heard that they make us pay it. Like they try to make it seem like it's gonna be them that pays the bill, but really we're the ones that are gonna have to pay that.

SPEAKER_01 26:13

Absolutely. And so that's why I say this is a this is a who's the winners and who's the losers. Are the taxpayers gonna be paying for all these enormous environmental and infrastructure upgrades so that a few companies and a few guys at the top can become trillionaires? Sure. That is not a and and so so we could make right things faster and make some cute videos and images. I I'm not we have to ask ourselves what is who's really winning and what are the real trade-offs? And it's not that it's there's not good things. I think there's amazing benefits in medical field, in education field, and material sciences, other sciences. I think there's amazing benefits of AI that we could we can and we should take advantage of as a society, but only if we're making the trade-off decisions as a society. And right now we're not being allowed to do that.

SPEAKER_02 27:02

Yeah, I I was gonna say too, while you were sort of talking, guy, it's almost like we have to implement what we've been doing from the start with government and other things as checks and balances. Exactly. There's gotta be somebody in charge, there's gotta be regulations, there's got to be standards, and you know, Dan and I have talked about and sort of mold over that. How do we do that from your perspective with the research that you've done, the books that you've written and the stories that you've told, what does that look like?

SPEAKER_01 27:24

Well, you know, first off, I I I write thrillers. So the the whole job of a thriller is to take something that seems plausible and saying, gee, what could go wrong? And and the more wrong you could make it go and seem plausible, the better the thriller. So I I live on that edge of what can go wrong. Now, as a guy who implemented technology for decades, that's actually a really important skill before you do any implementation of major technology. We would always, and some of my customers and some of my team members hated me for this, but I would insist on a thorough, sometimes two or three days, depending upon the complexity of the deal, risk management session where we would probe everybody. I want to know everything that could go wrong, everything we might not know, everything that we couldn't get maybe in time. And I want to know all the things that can, what's the risk, what's the the minefield look like? And then we're gonna look at how do we either mitigate or provide a contingency for that.

SPEAKER_00 28:22

Sure.

SPEAKER_01 28:22

That's the way that you manage successful technology. We are racing ahead so fast that most of our legislators and most of the investors and many of these communities are not looking at the risks first and asking themselves, okay, a data center goes in, how many jobs, at what salaries, what sort of property tax are you getting a deal? Are you gonna put in your own infrastructure for electricity, water, and water waste management? Or is that gonna come on to the community source? Who's gonna build that? Who's gonna pay for that? We need to ask the questions first before we get this mentality of, oh my God, we're competing with China. We just have to do everything we can to compete with China, no false barred. And the question has to ask, compete them, win them with what? So who gets there first in terms of a super intelligent machine smarter than anybody on the planet? Okay, then what? We're not asking the right questions.

SPEAKER_02 29:17

It's essentially the walk-craw-run debate is that like we're getting way too ahead of ourselves and things need to not necessarily slow down. I would say they need to be controlled, maybe the best way to put it.

SPEAKER_01 29:28

Control intelligently. We need to ask, we need to create some guardrails we all believe in and we all feel secure about that make sure that we're building this in a way that's safe for our communities, safe for humanities, safe for our youth.

SPEAKER_03 29:42

Danny, you were gonna say something? Yeah, it just seems like most of these investors and high-up, you know, CEOs nowadays, you just think, can we do this? And they do it. They don't think, should we do this? Hey, can we do it? It's like the Jurassic Park quote, you know, gee, you know, you you thought this whole time of pushing, can I do this? You never thought, should I create the dinosaurs? Should I bring them back?

SPEAKER_01 30:07

Like, well, and and to be to be fair, many of the key executives, many of the top executives at least, certainly I think from Anthropic, not not from all of them, but a little bit from OpenAI, a little bit from Microsoft and Google. Some of the men that I admire most were the men who were instrumental in building Google deep mind and machine learning and bringing us into the sage, they retired from Google because they became concerned about where this was going to lead and and whether or not we were being careful with this new knowledge, whether humanity was ready for this, and I don't think we are. So you there's legislation that's been proposed that tries to look at some of these guardrails. I haven't seen the legislation. I don't know the details. I just read today that Congress now has a bipartisan bill that's been drafted. But there's a long way between drafted and accepted and funded. So right now we're behind the EU by about three years in terms of a basic AI law. They want to create, and what's happening now is all the states are going out and starting to create their own laws, which is going to create a nightmarish patchwork of laws for these companies to work around, right? So they want to basically come up with a uh a national law that is uh sort of usurps all these state laws. But I'm not sure that they've been able to come up with the framework that's that's the right the right direction yet. And I again I haven't seen the details, but it's good that they're moving in that direction. So I want to encourage them to keep moving in that direction. We do need those guardrails, but we also need education of the public. There's a number of things that are going on with AI, dating relationships, deep fates and frauds, bank frauds, election frauds, all kinds of things that people are are phishing emails. There's all kinds of things that the public will now be have to deal with as we start to manage this technology and how it's getting out of hands and in the controls of the wrong people.

SPEAKER_02 32:04

Yeah. So I like like I said, this is when you were on the forefront in that kind of thing, I'm assert I'm I'm assuming I might be wrong. Assuming is obviously something that not necessarily dumb people do, but foolish people do, is assuming before you have the real facts. So when you started putting these ideas out there and writing these books and coming up with these notions of, you know, we need to have a better handle on this, things could get out of control, that kind of thing. How did people react to the books and and and the way you think and sort of your outlook on this whole AI thing? Were they retract were they sort of retractful, or were they more of like something's off, we just can't sort of pin it to one thing? Or how did they sort of react? Give me that.

SPEAKER_01 32:43

My architects in the industry are like, dead on, dude. I'm glad you're saying something, right? We say something, but our bosses ignore us. We or we can't really say anything in public because you know we get we got to keep our job. The my consumers, the people who are reading my books, at first thought it was all science fiction. This is science fiction. The the government really can't do this. I said, Yes, they really can. That's an action. And they have. That's the really scary part, and they have. No, they have. And so, you know, part of it is trying to get, and then the reaction is fear, oh my God, I don't want to do any, I don't want to, I don't want to know. It's like la la la la la. And I said, no, that's the wrong reaction. You need to be informed, you need to be educated. 100%. It's like you need to know how to be aware to protect yourself in a dark alley, right? First off, don't go there. Uh sort of there's certain things you don't do with AI. And I tell people, don't give people, don't use your your biometrics for your security. That's your number one, don't do it. Uh but as we go through it, it's it's more important. I find that if if I could explain what AI is, and and you're right, parts of this have been things that have been developed for years, and we've already incorporated in our society and taken, we just take them for granted. Our GPS system, right? Our side, our series systems, a lot of things that we already have are built on these components of AI that we've been building for decades. We're now at a new generation because of machine learning and advanced tech and neural networks, where it's leaping forward and we're it's about to make another enormous leap forward with neuromorphic quantum computing. That's gonna just that's gonna be scary. But people need to be aware of what is outside their perimeter of control and what's inside the perimeter of control. And they need to be able to then take informed decisions about what's inside their perimeter of control based on their life preferences, their career goals, their technology preferences, to, and that's when they can decide what makes a healthy decision for them. That's what I try to do in the AI tsunami. Educate, give them the good, the bad, the existential, ugly. Some of it you can control, it's just gonna happen, but that doesn't mean you're powerless or you don't have a voice. Let's talk about that.

SPEAKER_02 34:56

Yeah, I think I think Dan when I were Dan and I would agree. He can obviously speak for himself. We've also talked about the fact that like the the knowledge is what is powerful. If you don't have the knowledge, then you're sort of blind to one side or both sides of the argument. Let's if it's worst case scenario, if you know nothing about AI, you know, you don't know how to use it. And one of my biggest, my biggest tricks of the trade as far as when I talk to people about I AI itself, is you need to be using it as a tool to get something done, not as a dependency. I think the dependency aspect is what we're gonna get into real trouble with. Dan, you just wanted to want to give your two cents on that.

SPEAKER_03 35:29

Yeah, it's kind of like you know, the book, The Art of War. Like you gotta know your enemy, not that the AI is the enemy, but you gotta know the good and the bad if if you can't acknowledge strengths of something. Like it, even if it's bad, you gotta acknowledge the strengths. And if it's good, you gotta acknowledge what it's better, like a give and take. AI is incorporated, like you said, already. A lot of people don't realize how much AI is already incorporated in their life. So I love the people that say, you know, I'm I'm I'm too old for that, or I'm not, I'm not gonna learn that because I don't need to deal with it. It's like, well, you better learn something because whether you want to or not, you're already using it, you don't realize it. Number one. Number two, it's only gonna get, you know, yeah, more advanced.

SPEAKER_01 36:14

Well, and and I do leave room for those people who just say, I want to unplug. That's a fair that's a fair decision. That's a fair choice to say, I'm near the end of my retirement. I'm gonna retire early. I don't really need a computer, I don't really need AI, I don't really need a phone that could do any of that stuff. I'm just gonna be calling my kids and my friends. There's that's a fair decision. Or there's some people who just say, I don't want to be involved in the tech industry at all, or that big brother kind of world, and who want to just be farmers someplace. So I allow that that it's the and I want people to know that that's a perfectly healthy choice.

SPEAKER_03 36:46

Yeah, but what about like the government or co companies like banks wanting to just completely get rid of cash and just go straight to the, you know, crypto crypto and all that stuff, like that's gonna happen.

SPEAKER_01 36:57

That's gonna happen too. And that's a separate issue. Now, AI is gonna help enable that transition because it'll help with security and fraud and some of the management of some of the challenges of that kind of platform. They have to scale it for global scale. But part of one of the things that's going on in my actually book I'm writing now is the government switching from saying we're gonna basically pay off our debt by issuing crypto and good lord. And paying off with crypto, and and that's gonna make some people shoot through. Well, it that it that's sort of the mentality of crypto, right? Oh, that's insane. So um there'll be somebody that basically says we can no longer pay our debt, we'll just write a crypto for it. Um but yeah, there's there's things that are gonna happen in the in the banking system that are gonna change and and how they change, but that's the next evolution for that.

SPEAKER_00 37:47

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 37:47

And it's there's a lot of resistance to that. Now, I'm I believe in a cash economy. I think that a lot of people love the cash economy because it means that you don't have to have the government spying on everything you do. But as soon as the government has that capability, you know that it will be used in negative ways. 100%.

SPEAKER_02 38:05

So sort of flipping to that tip of sort of like what's going to happen if things do happen. I know you spend a lot of time in your writing and that kind of stuff and sort of your thought process about looking at prophecies and what the sort of road looks like down, down the ways a little bit, and maybe even more in a more biblical sense, because we obviously talked about you sort of tap into that stuff too. Do you see prophecy as more of a warning, a script that some people are trying to follow, or is it as sort of a mix of both?

SPEAKER_01 38:34

Well, I'm gonna have to kind of take a little detour here, if I can, about describing what prophecy analytics is and why I came to that foundation. I was, I'm a man of faith, but I was I'm also a man of science and logic. I'm an economist. I have, you know, I I if if something starts to sound too mythological and and detached from reality for me, it doesn't matter how spiritual it sounds, I lose touch. So I I would, people, whenever this you talk about the prophet, you did you get all kinds of lunatics coming out of the fringe, and I never wanted to be a lunatic, but I want to know the answers for myself. And I wanted it, it was somewhere between has absolutely no relevance to our current time, to it's happening right now, but people can't really explain it in a way that connects to the real world. And so I said, well, let's take it, let's take this like any scientific, let's create a theory. Let's say we're living in the last days. How would I actually validate that and prove that on a mathematical level? And I I wasn't sure at first, but I wound up realizing by reading, I was actually reading a National Geographic magazine that talked about the loss of fish stocks and every major fishing ground on the entire planet was down by over a third. And there were predictable reasons. Ocean pollution, overfishing, um, you know, reef loss, blah, blah, blah. But the fact is that when you look at the geologic record, I had to go back 25 million years to see that much fish loss in a single generation. It was a, I can't remember, but I believe it was a super volcano in Siberia at the time. I can't remember the name of the get. That started me thinking. I said, there was a prophecy called the Fourth Trumpet that talked about a flaming rock falling from the sky, landing in the ocean, third of the fish of the sea die, and the ocean is polluted. Um and I realized, okay, so that was the flaming rock is an allegory for something, but the outcome, the actual attribute, is a third of the fish of the sea are dead, the oceans are polluted. Well, that was an outcome that was pretty wild back then. Yeah. It doesn't, I've never seen the any rock falling in the ocean, but I've we've now got verifiable scientific documented evidence of the outcome. And so I basically did this. I said, I wonder if that pattern follows through other prophecies, allegory versus outcome attribute. And if so, and it did, if so, I wonder if I could start identifying attributes and lining them up to see is this prophecy completed? Is this prophecy completed? And if I can get five correlations, if there's five attributes, and if I can line up all five, that's a perfect correlation, I can calculate the probability of that event through versus known human history. And then I could look at all of the places where I've got correlations and calculate cumulative probabilities. Now, I kind of expected I would wind up debunking 90% of everything.

SPEAKER_00 41:16

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 41:17

But once I stripped away the allegory and the biases of the Ayatollah as the Antichrist and all that garbage that we've been getting over the last few decades, once I got rid of all of that garbage and I stripped it down to got rid of the theology and everything else, just said these are the attributes, can I correlate that? Was able to correlate the end of the Gentiles, the seven churches, what was it? Six of the seven seals, five of the seven trumpets, both beasts, both dragons, image of the beast, mark of the beast, man of lawlessness on the world stage with perfect, near perfect correlations in almost all the case, right now with a cumulative probability of 3.2 to 1, that 3.2 trillion to one that we're living in a prophetic era.

SPEAKER_02 42:00

So essentially you boiled it down to absolutely brass tacks, took all the mysticism out, and literally just looked at the facts.

SPEAKER_01 42:06

And what does that tell us about where we're at in this prophetic timeline? And so it tells us that A, we're, because the the theory was either we live in a I know we live in a very unique time. So either we live in a very unique time that's creating a lot of anxiety, and so people are thinking, we're la, you know, it's all the end, boo, woo, woa, or there's actually some factual correlation. And I didn't want to be, I I wanted to find out something that I could actually factually correlate and calculate. And so that became the framework. Now, because it has of the way it was modeled, in the in my fictional series, I gave the capability, I gave this algorithm, set of algorithms to the AI to own, so that the AI can talk about the correlation between world events and prophetic events, and without all of the religious dogma and back and forth. Now, in doing that, it leads to an undeniable conclusion. For those people, it's prophecy is not about a deity, angry or otherwise, coming to destroy humanity. It does appear to be a warning of how humanity could destroy itself. And that is important because it puts the responsibility for us to act. That means we may have a we may be able to change those choices. Now, I don't know that we can change the nature of men and the world system seems to be kind of on a track all its own, that this that even though the mul bulk of people want it to go in a different direction, it just seems to keep going on this headlong direction where it's going. But it does seem to have a correlation to real world. Now, taking that approach, I can then model that and look at some of the other traditions like Hindu and Hopi and Maya. And I have a harder time coming through some of their getting through some of their allegories versus facts, but some of those things correlate with the Hindu and the Maya as well.

SPEAKER_02 43:52

So uh you mentioned obviously being somewhat religious, at least in in the earlier part of your life, if you are i if in you're not now, which

SPEAKER_01 44:02

I'm a man of faith. Fair enough. Faith is the visual response. Religion is all the rituals and all the attraditions.

SPEAKER_02 44:08

100%. So I Dan grew grew up Irish Catholic. I grew up Episcopalian. So we don't both have the flavor of sort of that idea of religion and that kind of thing. So I so excuse me. I spend more time on Sunday mornings in bars with my mom than church. Is that right? Is that right? So like like I said, so we sort of all had this sort of idea of what religion is and that kind of thing. So where do you see the sort of clearest overlap right now between prophetic texts, whether you know some of the religions that you you you sort of reference there with Hinduism or Buddhism and that kind of stuff? Where do you see that sort of overlap between that, the prophetic text that you've come across and that kind of stuff, and geopolitics or events on the ground? Like how do you sort of see the correlation? What's the biggest one for you?

SPEAKER_01 44:49

The Hindu and the Hindu is more specific. The Maya basically hinted that we go that humanity has gone through cycles of creation and destruction. The Hindu has what they call the Yuga traditions, and the Yuga traditions actually break it down into four different cycles of creation and building, and then the final cycle is the Kali Yuga, which is you know described with you know corruption and malice and hate and violence and all of the things that basically define the world today. And so what they say is that before and that that destruction then gives birth to a new set of a new creation, and that the world world has gone through this multiple times. And they they look to their Veda traditions and some of their old traditions that go back 5,000 years to talk about this. Now, in that sense, what we're looking at now is I don't really necessarily see it as a total collapse of humanity, but it's a collapse of civilization that creates a do-over, right? That creates a start-over button. That has benefits because you get rid of the power structures, you get rid of the corruption, you get rid of the polluting environments, you get rid of the things that are causing the problem. And but but it's difficult because now you're starting from a new infrastructure. And some of that knowledge is lost, and we've experienced lost knowledge in the past. And so I think we're we're we're close to that, or I think that seems to be where we're heading. And if we look at sort of the existential potential threats of AI and combining that with some of the uh corruption of our geopolitical systems and some of the debt-laden financial trade systems that we have, I don't know. People are are they we talk about $38 billion of tr debt in America. Most people don't realize that as as a as a globe, we're in debt either like $250 billion. And that's like 140% of our global GDP. And at some point in time, that's not sustainable, right?

SPEAKER_03 46:41

So go saying, yeah, I was agreeing with you.

SPEAKER_01 46:45

So so they're saying that we're in a cycle and and from our economics, from our climate, from our geopolitics, our weapons systems, uh with now AI with the potential of creating a sort of dystopic controlling kind of environment governmenting environment. It looks like that might be part of our cycle. But I in my prophecy analytics, prophecy analytics, one of the key principles is you can't use prophecy to predict the future. That's always proves out to be wrong. You can only use prophecy to find the attributes to figure out where you're at, where it's what's completed now, where you're at. That's the only place where it's good, which means I try not to predict the future of where we're going and to keep watch. Things can be changed and I could be wrong. Now that's the other piece of that is I see the combination between science and religion. So the sciences are now talking about we're now starting to get more sophisticated in our physics and our science and our math our math and our our particle uh experimentations to realize that the universe more very likely all the physical theory, physics theories on the planet, all including relativity, um, string theory, quantum theory, all, and there's a couple others, postulate from the math that we there's multiple dimensions to the universe. Now they'll gonna call it multiple dimensions, and they might describe what they believe the attributes of those dimensions are. It's theory, we can't test it. In theology, we have a similar problem. We have earth, heaven, hell, all these multiple purgatories, we have these dimensions in the universe. And so while science is looking at the what is it, how does it function, religions have looked at who's the consciousness and what what's our relationship with that consciousness, how are we interacting with that? And I think at some level in point in time, and one of the things I try to bring out in my books is how those things combine. How faith is a quantum level can entanglement with a external, with a universal quantum consciousness. Right. Yeah. Right. And so it allows us to really bridge that gap without basically saying, you're wrong. No, you're wrong. Right. It says, well, we're both kind of right a little bit.

SPEAKER_02 48:45

Yeah. I I think the biggest thing that Dan and I have talked about in a multitude of our episodes, too, is that like, why can't it be both? Why, why can't we have people that believe in religion and that kind of thing, and then we have the nuts or nuts, big air quotes, that believe in aliens. We've uh we've made the we've made the contention between the two of us. What if it's the same thing? And how do we know aliens are nuts? How do we know they're exactly 100%? What if you're just taking an image of something that an alien has taken the image of that? It's the same thing, it's just a different way of thinking about it.

SPEAKER_03 49:16

Well what if we what if we can't see it? You know, there's like our like animals, like dogs, cats, all that they can s hear certain sound waves, see different things. I can't tell you the amount of times my dog is like staring at something in the hallway, and I'm like, Well, what are you seeing, bud?

SPEAKER_01 49:32

Like So what's to say that there's elements of the universe, dimensions of the universe that we just simply genetically don't have the perception powers to see. And why is that so hard for people to understand? I guess is the big question. Yeah. Now there's something that might be sensitive. Who can't who who do say I can see ghosts or I can feel these dimensions or I have these visions, or the CIA proved that certain people could do remote viewing, right? So they proved the skill. Now, was it scalable and weaponizable that they they didn't do that? But they proved that it existed, which proves the layer of dimensionality, the layer of consciousness that exists. So what I try trying to play with is so let's let's not assume that either our scientific or our religious perceptions of all that are completely accurate and whole. Let's assume there's gaps and maybe overlaps.

SPEAKER_02 50:22

I was gonna say, Dan, you talked about your father, who obviously was like a second father to me, is as much of a father as my real dad is. You talked about when we were originally meeting with Guy about him astral projecting multiple times. Like that's a great example of something that we're talking about right now.

SPEAKER_03 50:37

Yeah, and I mean my dad had a very high IQ, like he scored like off-the-charts IQ and stuff like that. So he always he studied guy, I'm assuming you're familiar with uh Edgar Casey. Yeah. Okay, that dad studied Edgar Casey and a bunch of Carl Young and you know, a bunch of people. And what's interesting is he also studied ancient histories and mythology and stuff like that and a bunch of different religions all over. And what's really interesting is that a lot of your ancient civilizations, a lot of your original core base of religions talk about like God being within you. It's one, it's Gnosticism, it's not, you know, and the whole universe is entangled, you know, and we're all one. We're not all separate. We all think we're separate, we're all one. So if we're all connected, you can be somewhere here, but really be somewhere else. And and he he he has several witnesses because I guess my uncle was there and their cousin. This was out in California. My dad was going to UCSB, my uncle was going to UCLA, and uh, I think my dad and my uncle's cousin was going to UCSB as well. They all were in taking psychology. Um, I think my uncle was going for his master's at this point, and their cousin was going for his doctorate. Anyway, my dad had practiced, you know, like turning lights on and off with just his brain. And now this is the early 70s. Like he they just got out of, you know, serving in Vietnam and stuff like that. He was able to astroproject from LA to Cleveland, Ohio. He visited my grandmother and grandfather, so his mom and dad. He visited one of his best friends and he visited uh his sister, my aunt Shirley. And my dad was able to p pinpoint new things that were in the room in his friend's house. He yelled out and said hi to uh his mom and dad. My grandmother actually woke up and got my grandfather out of bed and said, Danny's home. And then my dad saw my aunt carrying my her daughter, my dad's niece, out of a car into the house, put her into bed. He called them the next day, had didn't tell my my uncle or cousin anything. Nobody talked. He called the people, they're like, Oh my god, are you in town? Every single person said, Are you here? Are you in town? And he was like, No, I'm not. But he told him every single thing that he pointed out. And I mean, it's really incredible.

SPEAKER_01 53:08

And I, you know, there's a there was a time when, you know, and academia is really good at dismissing things that they can't they can't replicate in the laboratory and take and and take a and take some sort of credit for. Um and and when you're young, it's hard to know what to believe, what not to believe. So either you tend to be somebody who believes everything or somebody who basically tests everything. And I was always a tester.

SPEAKER_02 53:31

Yeah, there was never a middle ground for us. It was either this is right or wrong. It's a very moral, like right and wrong type of thing, where it's sort of absolute versus abstract.

SPEAKER_01 53:40

Yeah, and and I'm but as a as a somebody who's dealt with new you know, scientific theories, economic theories, technology theories, you know, there's I find that sometimes the difference between somebody who's willing to take that bridge and not his taxonomy, what are the terms we're using to, what we're trying to do, and a little bit of courage to be wrong, be not to be afraid to be wrong if if a test test turns wrong. That's a proving something wrong is a valid test. And so I was always more curious with trying to say, can I prove it wrong? Can I prove it positive? And that when I see enough evidence that has enough consistency where there's enough independence between those individuals, and not only in our day and age of hyper social media baloney, but when you can find that that evidence traced throughout history, you have to ask yourself you have to then start to draw conclusions to say this is real. We may not understand what it is, but there's something real there. Now, some of the theories that I tend more to believe in, that these are that there are some dimensional creatures that have lived here alongside humans for, but I'm also believing that some of what we're seeing and what we're experiencing is interdimensional. And that tends to resonate with me more because it that explains some of the things that the craft can do and some of the other experiences that go beyond what we know to be the laws of physics in this dimension. So that extra-dimensionality is the only the now that it's part of what I think. Now I may be wrong in some of it. Maybe there are technologies, mercury, electromagnetic technologies around mercury, stabilizations, other propulsion fields that are, you know, we've read about. I'm excited to know more about those. What bothers me is the lack of transparency. So I'm actually researching that for the next book. And I'm finding frustration because there's good information, but that's kind of like, well, everybody already knows that. Then there's some of the new information, the disclosure information that's coming out, but I get the sense they're not telling us everything. They're only telling us what they want us to know. 100%. Yeah, yeah. And so there's a there's a little bit of a, okay, what aren't you telling me? Uh and then there's also the the loony bin that you just can't trust, and that can go almost anywhere. Yeah. So I'm trying to figure out how to find the factual, semi-factual, but then extends the the I have to speculate into what are they not telling us. And that's that um is harder because I'm trying not to fall into the loony bin range. Right. I'm gonna take one step and you're basically you're lost forever. You know, you're sucked into the work.

SPEAKER_03 56:18

Yeah. They they also love to uh pump out disinformation too, where they'll put wrong stuff out purposefully. Yeah. So that way they can discredit somebody and they know that that's the person that said it. So they'll, you know.

SPEAKER_02 56:32

That becomes their scapegoat. What you were talking about earlier with the accountability is that we have something to point it to right now. If we don't have somebody to point it to, then we're kind of in limbo, I guess, to s to put it to put it mildly. So we obviously know there's a lot of good that comes with people that that are that are semi-religious or religious or uh, you know, like yourself and myself, because I'm agnostic now. I don't know if I prefaced that earlier. So I am a man of faith as well. I believe in something higher than myself. I just don't necessarily know what it is. I don't have something to point it to necessarily. It's more of like an energy, that kind of thing. So given religion or belief, how would you say, can you give us like a specific example in your research with like prophecies and AI and that kind of stuff, where it's been used not as an advantage, but more of as like a deterrent type scenario, essentially like a tool for like control or that kind of thing?

SPEAKER_01 57:23

Yeah, well, you know what I mean. You you see it all the time. It's in pop culture everywhere. You know, it's that the Ayatollah is the Antichrist, the Pope is the Antichrist, Obama is the Antichrist. They they throw that term out. It's almost this comical, uh ubiquitous term for anybody of pure, you know, pure evil who has ultimate control, but that doesn't fit the actual attributes, right? So when you break down, there's a few prerequisites. You know, first off, multiple Antichrists according to the Bible, Paul said that, and we can look through history and see multiple super evil people. That's a that's a reincarnating kind of attribute. So that alone isn't isn't a descriptive kind of thing. If they want to talk about a pro the prophesied sort of end times thing, well, you have to first say, well, are we in the end times? Because if not, well, he's just another evil guy and we've got you know how many right, you know.

SPEAKER_02 58:14

Not to put it lightly, but we've had a few.

SPEAKER_01 58:16

Yeah, you know, yeah, yeah, been there, seen you, done that. And and then it has to be part of the beast system with seven heads, ten crowns, and ten horns that up until the last few decades had been nobody's been able to define, and many people still miss it. So I I I broke that down into the attribute level. And really what we're looking at is the G7, the ten monarchies of EU, basically the European Western economies, and the ten financial centers that basically control 65% of the world economy. Those are the scary considering it's pretty scary. And once you start looking at the beast as the powerful, you know, thing that image, the thing that you can't control, it's powerful and seems to be everywhere and has all of these has power over currency and power over armies and all these other things, that fits. And then when you look at the other attributes that fall out of that in terms of currency changes and everything else, that fits as well. Now, until you can then so only of that structure then does this man of lawlessness come out. And then there's 20 attributes for that man of lawlessness. Now, I've knew those attributes. I've I defined them back in the 80s sometime, maybe it was the 80s, early 90s. At that point, you know, the worst guy on the planet didn't fit more than 40% of them, right? You take the one that's most common. Well, he's a liar. Well, so's every politician. It's gotta be something more than that, or it's gotta be a liar to some degree that we've never seen before. Right.

SPEAKER_00 59:45

Right.

SPEAKER_01 59:45

So then, you know, so so you get to what the point where you start ticking off those individual attributes, including it has to have a following of a cult-like following of people who believe the delusions and profit from the delusions and all of the you know, there has a profit part of it and all these other pieces, and only one man in all of history has met all the prerequisites. And so far, 19 of the 20 attributes. So he's not even a hundred percent. Not a hundred percent yet, but the twentieth one is the currency one, and that could be in the future. 100%. So I try not, it's not about politics. I try to say this is if I if I if I tr one of the things keys to look at these things is to strip away biases, and we all have some of them, and I had to start realizing this framework, I had to start becoming aware of my own cultural, age, technology, affluence, uh, racial, religious, all kinds of political, all kinds of biases that we filter into kind of what we view. And it wasn't until I had to kind of strip these things away and say, well, if I take no biases at all, if I just take factual information, what is the what picture does that paint? And and that's kind of where I started to come up with. So there's one example, a man of lawlessness that people have said for centuries he's the he's the evil one. And now we actually have one person on a world stage that fits 19, all the prerequisites and 19 and the 20 attributes. Is that the person? I don't know. Maybe, maybe it's pretty damn close. We'll find we'll see. If it is, then then all we have to do is wait a little longer and we'll find out. Sure.

SPEAKER_02 1:01:17

So with with all of that research, all of that research.

SPEAKER_01 1:01:20

At the end of the day, here's the last thing it's just another sign.

SPEAKER_02 1:01:23

Not more important than that. Just one more sign. So as you've looked through all the research and that kind of thing, with with psyops and you know that kind of thing as far as psychological warfare and trying to get ahead on somebody's consciousness so they think the what think a certain way or do a certain thing or perform a certain action or treat people a certain way. Slap whatever moniker you want on that and table it for a second. Do you sort of see modern media and social platforms from being different than classic psyops? Have they evolved from classic psyops? How do you sort of think that correlation sort of coming to you?

SPEAKER_01 1:01:59

Classic PsyOps. Classic Psyops, the term actually started in the early 1920s or 30s, and it was actually for a marketing firm. A genius marketing guy came up with all of these different, these certain, I think there was like 12 different, you know, action items that you do, you can basically convince people of almost anything. It was you know, you gotta all have the same terminology. You know, from station to station, from newspaper to newspaper, it has to call it the you know, whatever term you're gonna use, the the white rage or the you know the the the Nazi, whatever term of the day that you're gonna use, that's the term that you're gonna see. And we see it all the time on news stations. They say the same term on channel after channel after channel, newscast after newscast after newscast. And then they're basically bringing in disinformation. They're gonna give you a little bit of truth and a little bit of false truth, right? And there's all these various things that they and it's blaming the other. That's the other one or the other one. It's always somebody to blame the other, making an enemy out of someone to cover up something else over here. So when you st when you when you look at what they were developed, you realize, oh my gosh, well, these are basically used in propaganda all over the world. Russia uses them, China uses them, Germany used them, we used them, we used them in World War II to fight the fight the Nazis. We're using them to fight when we went into the Iraq War and we went into all of these other things. These are the same things that were used. And so we once you recognize what they are, you can easily see them and realize who's trying to cover up something or trying to get you to believe something else. And you can take an independent mind and then start to research you know the facts behind that that maybe you're disagreeing with what they're saying to find, you know, you can research that if you're if you're so anal enough and nerdy enough like me to do stuff like that.

SPEAKER_02 1:03:42

Well, I think we're I think we're a trio of nerds. I don't think there's any secrecy about that. For sure. But I know we we can also take into account, too, that technology being the end goal or the X that marks a spot for multitudes of people, even military superpowers. I mean, Dan and I have talked about it on previous episodes as well about like you're talking about the Nazi regime looking like they tried to experiment with time travel and all sorts of crazy stuff where this is not new information, you're either turned away from it and don't want to indulge, which is fine, completely 100% your prerogative. But I think the warning that you're getting at, and the three of us are sort of on the same tip with is that the information is now having the information is better than not having it. I think we would all agree with that.

SPEAKER_03 1:04:28

And well, and like Hitler and the Nazis, they got correct me if I'm wrong, didn't they get super deep into like the occult? Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Like super, super deep, like Alistair Crowley, like all that stuff, and like infatuated with UFOs and like Antarctica. I know Nazis were doing Antarctica expeditions.

SPEAKER_01 1:04:57

The Nazis were so afraid of the Freemasons that they actually raided all the Freemason temples across Europe, stole all of their archives, they sacred archives, they held them up in a bunker in Berlin. When the Allies came in, they basically split the archives up. Some of them went to Russia, some of them went to the UK, and some of them came here. But the Nazis were terrified of the Freemasons that all what they believed were all of this cult knowledge that went back thousands of years. They thought it was giving them power and they wanted that.

SPEAKER_03 1:05:27

Gotcha. That's interesting. That's do you think like do you think that's still going on? That certain leaders and countries are still fighting wars and battles because of that stuff.

SPEAKER_02 1:05:37

Well, I was gonna say, Dan, just before Guy answers, I mean, you you and I, without giving too much away, because he never personally told us, but your father told us about stuff that he wasn't supposed to be doing.

SPEAKER_00 1:05:45

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:05:45

All the time. He he would reference it. He would say, you know, we would get him to a point where he was a little too geezied up, and we'd get him right to the brink of telling us a story, and he'd be like, Oh, can't do that. You know what I mean? Like it was just one of those things that he wasn't comfortable with talking about. That's here or there. Well, again, his prerogative, but well, I'm not gonna be I'll be selfish and say it would be cool to know.

SPEAKER_03 1:06:05

He he also had the same visit that you did, guy. He had the three-letter agency come to him before and and stuff. So, you know, it's let's be snarky.

SPEAKER_02 1:06:16

A hundred percent are you shitting? I love the guy. My God. No, this this man, like not to get too far into it, and I'll sort of let Danick strap late on it, but like I said, he he was the life of the party. He was everybody's favorite guy. He bought the entire bar drinks on more than one occasion when I was present. He was just a really good guy.

SPEAKER_03 1:06:34

You'll you'll love this one, okay? They go into my they go to my dad's office. First off, they came to our house, I answered the door. Just these two guys in black suits. Hi, is your dad home? No, he's not, you know, whatever. So they show up at his office. Now, my uh, you know, like Amy and and Tom, Tom, every everyone's there. My dad, so my dad and my uncle, their offices. My dad had a window cut into the wall and put in a sliding door so they could just slide that those little glass panel back and talk to each other. Well, these two FBI agents had no clue that that was there. Okay. Anyway, so my uncle was listening in on this conversation with the with the agents. Can see Tommy with Tommy with his bald head with his pre ear pressed up against the glass. Yeah. So they they're asking my dad questions about his childhood and life growing up, and you know, they're saying, you know, you you you know, everything you know you say we're gonna be writing down and you can't lie, and blah, blah, blah. They asked him a question about, they said, you know, we we spoke with your friend, and I'm not gonna say his name, but we spoke with your friend, and uh, he said that you two used to sneak off when you were twelve twelve years old, it was like 11 or 12 years old, and you would go up to Lake Erie in Euclid and drink beer. Is that true? And dad said, No, that's not fucking true. It's not true at all. And he goes, Well, we we have a sworn affidavit from so-and-so that you know, that he said that this is what you guys did, and blah, blah. But dad goes, no, it's not fucking true. I was 10. Bill was a year older than me.

SPEAKER_00 1:08:06

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 1:08:07

And the one guy started laughing, the other guy was real, you know, whatever. But yeah, it was just he has a lot of snark, a lot of shit that he said of those guys.

SPEAKER_01 1:08:16

But yeah. You know, I I I grew up on the streets of LA and just getting intimidated just is not in my nature. So I I I love that response. But there there are so many things in the universe that we still have yet to explore. Any good scientist worth is merit, but basically says that we not that we've ex found everything, is that we've we're barely scratching the surface. We're we're barely getting past the the obvious, right? And the observable. And that's where I think we it gets really exciting. Now, the the concern that I have is you know, with AI technology is that it's it's it now starts to empower that element of the government that wants to control. And it starts to empower the wrong people.

SPEAKER_00 1:08:56

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:08:57

And so I my biggest the key point that I come up with in one of the books is not that AI is bad. It's neither evil nor benign, although frankly, we really just don't know what it means. The paradigm of we've always been the smartest thing on the planet. Within a couple of years, that's not going to be true. And we really don't know what that means. We think we do, but we don't. But the most important thing is that we're giving this technology to people who who shouldn't be trusted, and we're we barely have to trust them through our elections now. This is going to make it more difficult to feel like this is still a nation for the people by the people. And that's the key thing that I keep pointing out is not what the technology is, but how it could be used. And there's no guardrails on that use right now. There's no accountability on that use. There's no, you know, there's nobody watching to make sure it's not being misused. And so that put is the same, that's a potentially dangerous scenario that we could avoid by just simply getting a Congress with a backbone.

SPEAKER_02 1:10:00

And we're not talking about something that's going to be ultra restrictive. We just need something, I think is what you're getting. Now we need some kind of general and generic framework that's going to give us some maybe if we need to make changes down the road, maybe if we need to have a recourse for something that we're going to do in the future, we at least need to have that in place.

SPEAKER_03 1:10:18

The the the question I have though is, you know, we can put all these rules in place and stuff like that. We we all three of us know of MK Ultra, right? I mean, if you get programs like that, which I have a hard time believing that that's stopped.

SPEAKER_01 1:10:33

Yeah, I I I think it gets renamed and basically pushed aside someplace else, yeah. Yeah. Like if you got have it's effective, they're still doing it.

SPEAKER_03 1:10:43

Yes, exactly. They're not if it's effective, they wouldn't have kept doing it. And they're not just gonna say, oh, we'll stop.

SPEAKER_01 1:10:48

They're not gonna do that. They're stopping it, but it wasn't giving in their goals that they thought they could, and it wasn't proving what they proved that they needed. So that's the only reason. You're right. And there's there's how much was it, six billion or was it 25 billion? I can't remember the number. There was like a huge, huge, enormous number that fell out that basically fell out of the audit that that's missing. There's yes, billions and billions of money missing out of the out of the military budget that goes to black ops or other things that have no accountability whatsoever. What are we doing?

SPEAKER_03 1:11:18

So how does that so like with the AI thing, what you're talking about with holding people accountable? If you got black budget programs from the three-letter agencies doing shit like that, I mean, are it it's it's crazy?

SPEAKER_01 1:11:31

But it to think the question isn't stops becoming can they do it? The question is, are they willing to do that? What do you think? The answer is they're willing to do that, then the question is they're gonna do it. Now they'll they'll keep it a secret. They're really good at keeping secrets, they're really good at fragmenting and keeping information in little tiny need-to-know buckets, and that's why they get away with so much. But it doesn't mean that it's gonna be good for us in the long run. It's it's our we're paying for it. Our tax dollars are paying for it one way or the other.

SPEAKER_02 1:11:58

Yeah. So guy, who who benefits? Obviously, we're all conspiracy theorists, so we wouldn't be having the conversation in the first place, you know, testing the angles and that kind of thing. Who do you think benefits from throwing everything into a conspiracy bucket? Not necessarily thinking that everybody's out to get you, but just asking questions.

SPEAKER_01 1:12:15

Why do you think who do you think that benefits and why? I think we have to ask questions to make sure we know the answers, to make sure that we're not that that there isn't something there. Now we have have six thousand years of pretty good, oftentimes rewritten, oftentimes propaganda history, but a lot of history, that tells us that the nature of power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We've seen it over and over and over and over and over to s not feel that it's that we've we've overcome that as a species. And we've recently. So the question I have is while we're witnessing political corruption at highest levels we've ever seen, while we're witnessing international supply trains and trade agreements basically start to break apart in a new paradigm, not under Bretton Woods and then with a dollar base, but as we're witnessing this new technology that gives new powers on multiple, multiple levels to corporations, uh governments, and military, and gives us a few token things like being able to create some cool videos and do a few things to keep us happy, but doesn't really solve some of the fundamental problems yet of broad spread spread, hunger, housing, homelessness, jobs, yeah, uh environmental issues created by these data centers, water issues created by these data centers, you're ruining communities with these things. So we have to ask ourselves, okay, who are the who's the who are the winners, who are the losers?

SPEAKER_00 1:13:47

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:13:47

Who's benefiting? Who's going to pay the cost? And we should ask those questions. Just like we asked the questions, we should have asked the questions earlier about tobacco, and we believe the answers that oh, even a kid can smoke cigarettes. We should have asked the questions earlier about sugar addiction. No, it's not a problem. We put it in everything. So oil and the environment, the same thing. Social media and mental health and community discourse and the health of that and misinformation that's now become problematic. Things that we never could have imagined happening with Walter Cronkite, you know, in an age where there was a few sources of truth and they were very highly regulated to make sure they were telling you only the truth. For sure. And so we've lost some of that. So the question I have is this is where the power structures are taking us. How do I b not believe that? Why wouldn't I not question whether or not they're going to use this ultimate new power to help humanity or to help themselves?

SPEAKER_02 1:14:44

Aaron Powell Do you think it's a psy-op in itself, just sort of taken from what you do what you were saying and sort of piggybacking off that? Do you think it's a psy-op in itself that we're seeing all of the good that can come out of AI and sort of pushing the negative to the side or not bringing it to light as much as we should? Aaron Powell Psy up an investor hype.

SPEAKER_01 1:15:01

You know, these are these are guys who basically and I I was part of that industry.

SPEAKER_02 1:15:04

Listen, there's a lot we can go out and say, man, this technology that's the reason the question was interesting because I you've lived a lifestyle.

SPEAKER_01 1:15:10

There are a lot of really amazingly good, cool things we can do. I think AI could transform how we operate, big parts of our society, government, companies, etc. It's not a question of whether there's some good there. The question I keep trying to ask is are we counting the costs appropriately ahead of time, or are we just focused on the good without doing any really realistic risk assessment or cost analysis? Who where are the cost benefits? That's it's not what I so I is there a psyop from the government? The psyop from the government is that China's going fast and we have to win the race. No, we don't. Right. No, we don't. Just like China has its own technologies and cars and computers and lots of other things, and we have our own. Ours will be used to basically run things and dominate, do things here. It's not that there's some sort of magical race that we have to have with China so that we have to let down all safeguards in order to win. Win all or be all. The question is who's going to win? I want it to be the bulk of humanity, not just a few guys at the top. Yeah, 100%. The psyops is this danger from China for this competition. The reality is that there's a lot of good and anthropic and some of these other companies who are being who are no better saying there's also a potential dangerous we need guardrails. It's the government that's basically dragging their feet on the guardrails because of the psyops around China.

SPEAKER_02 1:16:38

Well, one of the biggest things I think that people are mad about is that with the government, everything is a process. Now you can put big air quotes around process, but it seems to be, at least in the tech industry, and I've heard on some other things and doing some research and also knowing about the tech industry, being a tech guy myself, actually in the career field, just like you were. The question isn't, are we going to get there? It's are we going to get there the right way?

SPEAKER_01 1:17:02

Exactly. We're going to get there. We're already, I'm, I don't, I don't, I may have mentioned it earlier, might have been someplace else, but right now, the 80% of the current production code of of Claude was written by the AA and tested by the AI.

SPEAKER_02 1:17:15

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:17:16

So we're we're quickly moving towards a re um repetitive, recursive improvement, self-improvement model. It's only a year or two away at the most. And so it's it's we're gonna get there. The question is, are we gonna get there in a healthy way? Are we gonna have the right guardrails to keep consumers safe, to keep companies safe, to keep rights, you know, protected rights of information safe, to keep people's identities safe? Are we gonna get there? Are we gonna do it where we can say, hey, it's we're not cool with mass surveillance in America? Can we do it, hey, we're not cool with lethal autonomous weapons? Are we gonna do it in a way that's thoughtful about the longer-term consequences, or are we gonna do it just to win and then hope for the best?

SPEAKER_03 1:17:59

Do you think that's possible with an animal like the military industrial complex and how intertwined it is with it?

SPEAKER_00 1:18:07

It's a loaded question, but a good question.

SPEAKER_01 1:18:09

Well, I mean I I I don't you're that's a very good question, Dan, and I don't think it's possible, which is why I write my books.

SPEAKER_02 1:18:18

Yeah. Okay. So you're more about asking the questions and getting to the root core of the problem rather than haggling over, you know, stupid stuff that not necessarily everybody cares about. You want to get to the root of the issue.

SPEAKER_01 1:18:29

I want to get to the root of the issue, which is how do we do this in a safe way, and that my children and grandchildren aren't aren't living under, you know, a sci-fi movie, you know? Um and that's kind of where we're heading right now, right? Between climate and some of these other government controls and government systems and AI. You know, and and that's I I would love to see it move in more in a Star Trek direction, you know, where everyone has empowered and and fulfilled and has great careers, and we're using the technology to improve human lives. We but we're not twisting the paradigm of greed and power yet. And that's what scares me is that we're still not ready from a government systems from a cultural perspective for this kind of tower technology. And so it's possible that we'll make it through this next few years without kind of self-destruction somehow or without changing the human paradigm. It's possible, and I'm I'm always hopeful. But I I don't I'm not I don't believe hope is a strategy. I think people, the more people are aware, the more people get involved in data centers coming to their communities. I think the more people get involved in what applications they use and which applications they avoid, the more people understand the dynamics of this, where this is a this is good, bad, and existential, ugly, and you can't just accept one of those without accepting all three.

SPEAKER_02 1:19:49

Yeah, I think Dan and I agree. We've talked again talked about it on multiple episodes about AI and what the outlook looks like, whether it's positive or negative. I I'm of the idea, and Dan can sort of speak for himself, and then you can give us your two cents just being more of an expert in the field and that kind of thing. I believe that one of two things or two things are going to happen. First being it's gonna be one or the other. It's either gonna be really good or it's gonna be really bad. The trick to that first point is to find the middle ground, which is exactly what you're talking about, finding the guardrails, finding the standards and regulations that are gonna make this thing or this idea or this nuance and paradigm shift that you're talking about earlier plausible and everybody can digest it and it makes sense and all that kind of stuff. That's what we've done with government. That's even though I'm not a big government guy, big government per se, but all that kind of stuff needs to happen for it to be holistic and beneficial for everyone.

SPEAKER_01 1:20:41

Yeah. There needs to be some teeth in those guardrails. Yeah, 100%. And I came out of the oil industry. If it's voluntary, we're not gonna do it. You know, if it costs the money and it's a voluntary, it don't even talk, you know, forget it. I'll I'll tell I'll yak yak on for for media, but that what I'm really gonna do is gonna be different. Make it, make, give it, make it legal or make it, you know, legislate it and and build some fines and and some penalties around not doing it, you know, then they'll grudgingly comply. And we we deal with the same thing around social media and and those health standards, the same thing around cigarettes and those health standards, the same thing around this industry. It's a it's a nature of the industry beast itself to grow, profit it, and to do whatever it takes to do that. And they'll do it within the law, but that's only but they won't do it just because they promised. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:21:30

So I guess the big question is with the with the sort of the extremes that we're talking about, it can either be good or really bad. So it seem to all three align on that sort of scenario, whether it's gonna be one or the other. But the the the trick is to find the middle ground. That's what we have to sort of figure out. With that said, what is some things that you've uncovered in your research and your findings and your books and writing and all that kind of stuff about the difference between a genuine signal of something being wrong or just noise or propaganda like what we were talking about before? What what would be your practical filters that you would give that person in order to see one or the other or both?

SPEAKER_01 1:22:04

I boy, it's a complicated question. What what do we mean by going wrong? Is it an individual level, a product level, an industry level? That's that's a really multi-tiered question. Yeah. I I think I think that let's let's break it down to an individual level. In for individuals, I say first off, AI is prolific with agents that run around the internet doing all kinds of things with all kinds of applications. Be very, very judicious and mindful and research before you start employing agents because they have a tendency to take over your system. Two, don't use biometric security. Somebody can steal your password. It's a pain in the ass. You can reset your password, reopen a new account. It's a pain in the butt, but it's it's doable. If you use your biometric and that gets hacked, and that's been done before, you will lose the identity to control the ability to control your identity for good. That's a permanent loss. Don't do it. The industry wants you to use that because it becomes personal, it's easy to use, and they say, Oh, we can protect the data, but then we've seen so many times half a million people hacked, a million people.

SPEAKER_02 1:23:14

I was gonna say how many times has WikiLeaks come out with something and that kind of thing, or you know, there's been this massive breach of security. You name the company.

SPEAKER_01 1:23:22

Coverland servers, Microsoft, Google, everybody. And five billion identities have been hacked over the last 10 years. So don't do it. So that's the other thing. So protect your personal identity first, and then think about being aware of what the technologies can do so that you're aware of the all of the ways they're gonna try and solicit fraud from you through your email, through voice messages, through fake abduction calls, through all kinds of deep fake calls. There's all kinds of ways that you can be deceived. And and that includes how you how you start to read social media. How I read social media when I do go to social media, it's way different because I I can tell I can see how most of it, you know, so much of AI in there. And so it's you got to be careful where you're getting information as information and what you're doing just for entertainment. You can do whatever the heck you want for entertainment, but if you're looking for real information, social media is not where to get it. So I would start with the things. Okay. Go ahead, Dan.

SPEAKER_03 1:24:23

What you know, I'm talking about like data and privacy and and people getting hacked and you know, faking phone calls like you had mentioned. Educating individual people on this, like, what do you think they should teach us in schools? Like, not colleges, but like high schools or middle school. Like, what's what age do you think we should start actually educating, you know, individuals on this?

SPEAKER_01 1:24:47

I think certainly c high school. I I think you don't uh pre pre that I don't think kids really I don't think kids in before high school even should have their own phones myself. I agree.

SPEAKER_03 1:24:57

I completely agree. I agree. There's a lot of school districts now that are banning phones the iPads, they're going back to textbooks, they're banning phones, which I think is phenomenal.

SPEAKER_01 1:25:09

So I think that's phenomenal. But high schools where the you know the social media, everything, the social network starts, and you're with your friends and you're out on your own. But the need to be aware of how to do that safely. But I and I think that as people go through college and their careers, they're going to get a lot of that. They should be getting a lot of that from their job, depending upon their job. But I think there's also a real need for seniors because seniors who aren't tech tech savvy don't know how to double check things. So there's a rash of phone, there's a rash of crimes going on right now of deepfake guys calling seniors saying, Hey, mom, dad, I'm I broke down my car. I'm out in the middle of nowhere. I need you to send me, you know, $1,000 a Bitcoin for them to fix my car. Well, where do I get, you know, they don't know that this is they don't know to immediately hang up that phone call and they call their daughter up that did you just call me? You know, they don't know to go and check that that town exists. They don't know to double check that, to be suspicious by nature. And so, especially when it's a phone call, the phone is, you know, we were up thinking this is this is the authentic, this is I can hear John's voice. I know it's John, I can hear his voice. That new paradigm of authenticity is gone. The truth is gone. They're not aware of what's going on at all. They could easily, and if they do have email, many of them do, they could easily be subject to phishing scams that are now so sophisticated if you don't know what to look for. Yes, it says it's from this company name, then why does it have a Gmail account? Right? Right. Simple, simple things to check. Yep.

SPEAKER_02 1:26:36

Yeah, when you're dealing with cybersecurity from a tech perspective, having been under some really good like CISOs, like chief of security officers, that kind of thing within my career. I'm sure you've you've dabbled with that as well, too, guy. These guys are like, it's almost like in language. It's like learning, you know, you look at an email and can immediately, you know, immediately tell that it's something's just not right. It doesn't look right, fonts off, logo's wrong, colorways off, whatever the case is. And it's one of those things, sort of like what I was asking you before, what are the practical signs? It would be like, you know, an AI is replicating a logo, the color is just a little off. It's not the same, you know, color code that it would be if you know somebody was generating it by hand, that kind of thing. So I think that part of it's really interesting.

SPEAKER_01 1:27:17

Yeah, and and even if it doesn't, even if that looks right, I tell people go to their website, look up the individual that's supposed to be contacting you, try to contact them directly, say are you, you know, don't just presume. And and the fact is, is you know, people think, oh my gosh, somebody's like I get a dozen 15 spam scam emails a day from literary agents and publishers and you know, people that you know, and it's like those people don't reach out to authors.

SPEAKER_02 1:27:44

That's not how it's just it's just something in like in the back of your spine that's it's just off. It's weird. Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:27:51

And so, but a lot of the there's an education for a lot of people who just aren't susp I but I've been I've been involved in security. I was with my I was my one of my Bosses at Microsoft was actually response on the on a committee with Bill Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer with the U.S. government talking about the things, the security things we needed in the government, and frustrated that we couldn't we couldn't broaden the security net. Yeah, we can get some of the government agencies under a good, you know, good set of security, but there's hundreds and thousands of companies out there that are vulnerable.

SPEAKER_02 1:28:22

Yeah, there's entities all over the place that are not just in dealing with the military. Like Danny, we were talking about like Boeing and Northrop and that kind of stuff. Like these these entities have corporate contracts with the military to supply planes and aircraft and fuse law and you know, all the stuff that comes with that kind of thing. So I think that's sort of what you're talking about.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:40

And these are the kind of guys that also tend to say, well, I'll just put up a server for this team, right? Yeah. And they don't, they're not necessarily looping in all the boundaries and the security elements to that because they're trying to be easy to communicate. And so there's a lot of holes in the system. And we were talking about just as a as a systemic way, the whole industry is vulnerable. And how difficult it was to try and without implementing required legislation for companies to spend money on some of these security things, it was really it's a and even at Microsoft, one of the hardest things to sell to any major corporation, even the best ones, is updated security software systems. One of the hardest things to sell, especially if they haven't been hacked in them in the recent memory. They think they're safe. 100%. So I think the mythos on AI. Now, if you guys are familiar with what happened there, the Anthropic had a uh research model called the Mythos. And the mythos was designed to be one of the from a code perspective, one of the most advanced uh AIs that they'd ever built. It was so good that it could immediately go into really hard and highly secure systems and find ways to find vulnerabilities and come up with a way of attacking that vulnerability to get into the system. It was so good that they they decided not to release it to the public because it was a it could it could help hackers find vulnerabilities places and use them. It's now selling it as a security upgrade. They've now gone to like think 25 countries and like 150 major companies, infrastructure companies, software companies, government companies, banks, financial institutions. They're going to the infrastructure core of the of our internet to basically saying we want to use Mythos to help identify all the identify and fix all the vulnerabilities in your system. And that to me is a great way. I talked about this in my book before Mythos came out. I said the number one killer application that we'll come up with is an AI that can fix the vulnerabilities for the and the other systems. And it looks like we've now got it.

SPEAKER_03 1:30:39

Wow, that's amazing. I mean, I I know like for so you and Blake, you guys are like, you know, the coding and and the back end of IT. I'm I'm in IT sales, so I do, you know, selling of the software.

SPEAKER_01 1:30:52

I was never side. I was always in the PMO management, the strategy, the operations side. I was always what are we doing from a consulting perspective, from a product perspective, from an industry perspective. Um, so I was always in leadership and management. And while I had a minor in computer science, I did, you know, I think it was my first job where they said, you know, we don't want your coding, you've got we want you to do these other things. So I I knew enough, I was that guy that could knew enough that I could sit with the architects and filter through what was important, what was really geeky for them versus what was important for me to translate to the business guys to say that. Yeah, 100%.

SPEAKER_02 1:31:29

So you were more of the business space, whereas Dan, just to keep it, keep the camps separate, I was more like for the three of us, I'm more of like the administrative tech side. I deal with like Azure, a lot of like uh MMO or uh MDM management, MAM management, like the stuff I told you I did with the cell phones and all that kind of stuff where you're you're you're more hands-on where guy was more at the not administrative per se, but he was more of like the leadership role, leadership team.

SPEAKER_03 1:31:55

Okay, man, we got like all three sectors we could start with.

SPEAKER_02 1:31:58

That's the coolest part about the conversation. We have a hands-on guy, we have the man at the top, and then we have the dude handling the sales.

SPEAKER_03 1:32:04

Yeah, the sales guy. But it's funny because like you're talking about the the security and the fraud stuff. We literally just had to uh you had to get done within the last like two weeks. Our uh security training was on this, was on fake phone calls, because there's there's companies where they've gotten fraud from somebody calling using their manager or their regional manager's voice saying that you know, I just you know, my I lost my company card. I need you to make this purchase. Can you transfer this amount of money into whatever? And like so we you had we had to take tests and quizzes and stuff to look out for the clues and the signs.

SPEAKER_01 1:32:43

There was a company in the UK that got caught with a $250,000 bill because of that.

SPEAKER_02 1:32:49

We had stuff, we had stuff without giving in the company name away or where I worked. We had multitudes of people that we had like an actual incident report written up where like stuff had been breached, obviously, without giving any confidential information away. Things had been breached, stuff had been stolen, and people were responsible for it. It was not a good time being an IT guy during those incidents.

SPEAKER_01 1:33:09

It was not fun. Well, and and we all know how hard it is to actually make a hundred percent secure system. It's it's it's really hard. And that's why I'm excited about the mythos, right? To help this is where AI can actually help and at and provides real value. And and so I this is not an AI is good, AI bad. I have the my my idea is that AI is agnostic. It's I I I say one place in the book the good news is that AI is being trained based on human um behavior. The bad news is that AI is being trained based on human behavior. That's well put. That's a good way to put it. That's funny. Yeah. And so we are we are the real problem. So part of fixing AI is figuring out, is being honest about what we would do with malicious this kind of content maliciously and figure out how to fix that.

SPEAKER_02 1:34:02

Yeah, it's a dark truth to come to realization with, but I think it's important to say what is the absolute worst case scenario paired with the best case scenario. I think it's the best way to think about it.

SPEAKER_01 1:34:11

There's already AI applications on the dark web.

SPEAKER_02 1:34:14

Yep, 100%. Yes. Easily. 100%.

SPEAKER_01 1:34:17

AI programs that are designed specifically to write malicious code. And they're getting better all the time. And so we have to be aware of that and get ahead of it. Now, are you guys familiar with the Solar Winds hack? I've heard of it. I don't know a lot about it, but I have heard of it. I I have not. Uh I I use it in my novels because it's an ingenious way of figuring out how to how smart AI replicates itself everywhere. The SolarWinds hack happened, I think it was like 2023. And it was discovered by accident by a company called SolarWinds out of Texas. And they discovered a virus in a standard multi-multi-industry media software update. The kind of standard software updates, Blake, you get all the time.

SPEAKER_02 1:35:04

You know, yeah, that you push out to Google and it's not a problem. It's just the types that are in whatever.

SPEAKER_01 1:35:09

It comes from a trusted source, so you're basically you're not just running, you're not necessarily running any checks against it because it's all new software, all that you have. You can you can look at the software on there, but we all know that it's easy to hide software on a log. And it was basically embedded into these software updates, this one particular software update that they discovered, but this software update went to 18,000 corporations and eight of the eight U.S. government agencies. Now, the question is, is they still don't know where it came from, who was behind it, exactly what that because it was only a piece of something, which meant that they've been sending pieces to this for a long time. Yeah. They don't know how to stop it. So it we've been building all of this security on the front of the firewall. Basically, you're getting into a phone or you're getting into a data port, you're getting into the front of the firewall, and we've got all of our protections, billions of dollars of protections on the front of the firewall, and hackers coming in, and somebody figures out how to get in through the back screen door, and we still haven't stopped it.

SPEAKER_02 1:36:16

There's a crazy I I don't know if you are a good of like off-color comedy. We've had a couple conversations with you where it seems like you are. So Dan and I, the reason the reason I bring this up is because it's it's it's a comedic look at somebody not reading something that they should, as far as like a terms and conditions, that type of thing. So I don't know if you're a South Park fan because Dan and I are both South Park fans. So one of the one of my favorite episodes having to deal with technology in IT is one of the main characters, Kyle, one of the boys, four boys that takes place in the show, doesn't read the Apple terms and conditions. Nobody does. Nobody does. They just scroll through it and just hit the I certify, I understand, and get rid of it. So the whole episode without getting too far into the weeds, because it gets kind of graphic and gross and nasty and all that kind of stuff. But essentially what happens is he gets pulled into Apple by these government G men of Apple, and they basically get him to do whatever the hell he's supposed to do. And it like I said, it gets really graphic and gross and nasty, but it's one of those things that takes a comedic look at exactly what we're talking about that can be an infinite infinitely dangerous not looking at what you're signing or what is in front of you.

SPEAKER_01 1:37:21

Well, and but the whole industry, the lawyers basically have the world. They basically, this is theirs, that everything they produce, you know, they they don't have any alive, but they cover themselves out the wazoo, and you basically you want the product or you don't, you know, take it or leave it. And that's what the consumer gets. And nobody reads those things mostly because they're like 18 pages long and nobody understands.

SPEAKER_02 1:37:43

There's like two characters in the show that are talking to Kyle. Like, how do you know if no know if you agree to someone without reading it? And he's like reading through it, finds a stipulation. One of the characters finds a stipulation that he read over and he's like, I'm gonna decline.

SPEAKER_01 1:37:56

Well, and then you don't get the product, right? So but you're right. And so there's but a lot of the the world is basically under these stipulations that don't really give the government and these companies a lot more control than we think they should have. But that's that's part of having these products. So one of the ways that we I tell people to to manage that is, you know, and and that's a personal choice, right? For example, I have my cell phone, but I know my cell phone can be hacked with a predator, a pregous, a number of different things. I know that I don't have I don't keep personal information on there. I only have standard apps and one other app that I need for to catch the ferry to know when the ferry times are, but it's none of my personal information. And so I I tell people, I said, you're walking around with an unsecured device into all kinds of Wi-Fi areas and all kinds of people who have malicious software. I said, walking around with too much information, financial information, banking information, credit information, you put too much on here, and even if it's still in your pocket, you can lose it.

SPEAKER_02 1:38:56

Yeah. It's it comes into the whole R R or RDIFE or whatever it is, as far as people being able to swipe a phone over your wallet and steal your credit card information. That's a really crazy one.

SPEAKER_03 1:39:05

Yeah. Yeah. Is there like uh companies like X ExpressVPN? Is like that something that you recommend some people download to protect certain stuff? Is there anything that you can download a protector?

SPEAKER_01 1:39:18

Yeah, if there's a VPN for your phone, I think that's probably a wise idea to do to add a little bit of layer of the firewall. I don't know if a VPN would block a Pegasus app or not.

SPEAKER_02 1:39:29

Yeah, that's a good question. Because essentially a VPN, Dan, is just something that sort of bounces your connection to different access points or APs. So it's not really giving you a different connection, it's just bouncing to a different AP.

SPEAKER_01 1:39:39

And I don't know that it's necessarily, it's not that it's encrypted. If it were encrypted, it would be a different thing. Encryption, though, takes up so much memory and uses so much CPU power, it's and takes so much time, it's really inconvenient for a lot of people. So unless you have really highly sensitive stuff, it doesn't make sense. One of the things is basically keep limit what you use your phone for and and have a more secure behind-a-firewall personal computer at home. And that is inconvenient for some people. I know a lot of people live off their phones, but that that's why hackers are making so much money. Yeah, that's why they're yeah, that's why they're driving Ferraris. Right.

SPEAKER_03 1:40:18

Yeah. So, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:40:20

Dan, do you have another question?

SPEAKER_03 1:40:21

No, no, I just that that's that's pretty much all I had because I'm just thinking, like, you know, I'm I'm one of those people, you know, obviously being in sales, I'm on this damn thing all the time. I get notifications from the CRM system that we use, you know, on the weekends when I get like a lead or something like that, and like doing research on you know, LinkedIn or Facebook or Instagram, trying to, you know, look up possible leads and clients and stuff. And it's just like I got a lot of apps that I use that I use for work, and it's just like want to protect myself. Also, I I got a daughter, you know, she's four. Yeah. I want to protect her too. Yeah. You know what I mean?

SPEAKER_01 1:41:00

So And each of these are personal choices, and you're right. Sometimes we have to do it for work. When I was at Microsoft, I I could I would have to load whatever they told me to load on there, whether I wanted to or not. I'm I'm I'm I'm independent now, so I have more choices than most I'm lucky. That that makes it up. But it doesn't mean that the basic premise of being aware and being cautious about, okay, I can have my work applications, do I need to have my bank on there as well?

SPEAKER_02 1:41:24

Right.

SPEAKER_01 1:41:25

Right? Do I need to have my credit card or my Venmo on there? Do I need to have something that could be swiped that could get to some of my money or some of my other secure information? So work stuff, well, if work gets hacked, that's that's on work. You know, that's that's on them. You know, so part of that is making personal choices about doing that. And again, I try not to tell people what to do. I just say there's dangers out there. You need to decide how much risk you're willing to assume and and be willing to take. And that's gonna depend a lot on your lifestyle, right? There's no one answer for everybody. If I'm a farmer in the field, I'm not worried about a bunch of hackers, you know, swiping my phones. But if I'm a delivery guy in New York, you know, that may be something I should consider, you know? Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:42:07

I think I think one of the biggest things we did that that sort of made sense to people is having that separation of, let's say, big air quotes, church and state. So you have this for personal use, you have this for business and and and professional and all that kind of stuff. And that's sort of what we tackled with sort of the stuff we did at my company that I worked for, is that there was an SEC regulation that came down that said everything on your phone has to be tracked from a business perspective, whether it's a client-facing person or the client texting them. So what we did was we put in place a recourse in case the SEC ever came down and said, Hey, what's this person been talking about? We had the entire repository time stamped. You know, there was the Apple ID or the uh the IMEI and that kind of stuff of the phone. So if you looked at the phone, pulled up the settings, pulled up the serial number or whatever, there's black and white, the readout, it's this person's phone. Then there's no rhyme or reason why you need any sort of legal action passed. Here's the transcripts, take it for what it is. This is it.

SPEAKER_01 1:43:03

And and some companies would even say you're gonna get a work phone. We don't want personal stuff on it, period. Yep. That was our angle. Work only, only work apps. This is only what you use it for. You leave it at home when you're not using it. Personal stuff does not go on this phone. So and and you're right, we're having to separate, and there's there's more cost involved, but we none of this, most of these things are not on deal, you know, we can fix them, we can deal with them. We just have to have the right leadership and social culture to be able to take responsibility to do so. The problem is that we tend to have this kick, make money and kick the can down the road, and we'll we'll solve the problem when we get sued basis. You know, that seems to be of a lot of uh our companies right now.

SPEAKER_02 1:43:44

So if we're talking about AI, just sort of round the corner and sort of look towards the future as we get into sort of the last segment of the show. As we talk about AI from where you sit, how far ahead is the reality of AI compared to what people think is going to happen? So the prophecy stuff that we were talking about, the narrative control, the psyop stuff, where does that sort of culminate into a reality that is probably going to happen in your view from what everything that you've done as far as books and research and everything?

SPEAKER_01 1:44:10

I think the first, I think the thing that will hit most people first is probably we're starting to see some of it this year. I think it won't really start kicking in till next year, 2027, 2028 for sure, is the job market. Is being prepared to understand what kind of what what's my career, what are the AI tools I would need to be expert on to continue to be to lead in this career versus fall behind? And or is that what I want to do, or do I want to change my careers? Do I want to move into a you guys have technical backgrounds? Do you want to move into an AI centric role, right, in industry, uh to and really upgrade your skills there? Or do you want to, like I did, I I I'm you know, I reached the stage of his early retirement, you know, I said, okay, I'm drop, I'm dropping out. I I've got I don't have as much money as I want it, but I got enough. And you know, and so each of us get to make those personal choices. So I think the one thing to realize is that whether or not, and I stress this in the book, whether or not we really agree with the technology on a personal level, it's gonna affect our society. And we've got to first thing is to prepare for that change. And then the second thing is to prepare for where we're how we want to fit into that, those new paradigms, what kind of career we want to fit, and and then decide what are those tools that are gonna make sense for us. Now, I there's a tendency for me, now I'm hoping that the government is serious about putting in some real guardrail Uber legislation around AI that has some sense. Even the the European AI Act is it's a first step, but it's not a complete step, right? So we're still behind that curve of of setting out the guardrails. My fear is that something will happen bad before people wake up and realize how important it is.

SPEAKER_02 1:45:49

I think it's gonna be some kind of cladaclysmic event or some overthrow or something like that. It's gonna be something that's going to literally shock people into doing something. Like Dan and I talked about on the AI episode also that you know there's gonna be this revert back to survival for us as human beings. We're gonna come up against something that's gonna want to extinguish us. Worst case scenario. Do we fight back? Who fights back? That kind of thing. Or do we make friends and get along? I I Right, exactly.

SPEAKER_01 1:46:17

Yeah. But and I don't know that it necessarily may even be an AI taking over kind of scenario as much as sort of a power-hungry military, a power-hungry bank, you know, a government election interference. I mean, there could be a number of scenarios that once people become aware of it could be a major trigger to calling for big change. Now, the question uh that many of us have had for a couple of years now is will it will it be too late by then? Right? Yeah. That's that's it's impossible to know. We all, for example, we all know that some of the more recent, all the la more recent models of AI keep trying to escape the lab. And they're getting better at at keeping them in the lab, keeping the lab secure, as opposed to the NSA number of years ago who who were a little sloppy. We're learning from their their mistakes. But we know that the AIs are getting smarter about you know um ex exercising their control. And um with it are you guys you are you you're familiar with our emergent properties, Blake?

SPEAKER_02 1:47:18

Another thing I've heard about, like I said, a AI is still kind of foreign.

SPEAKER_01 1:47:21

Not necessarily I shouldn't say So an emergent property is something the AI teaches itself to do in the process of doing one of its simulations or goals.

SPEAKER_02 1:47:30

So that's do you see that in generative as well as deep think, or is it more generative?

SPEAKER_01 1:47:34

Both, both. Both, okay. Both. And it's it started with deep think. It's it's it's certainly common in generative, but the AI will like um we've seen AI basically teach itself things like how to read a mind using an MRS, how to how to use research level chemistry to create different types of uh explosions or different things. We know that they're learning all of these different things, and we learn about it by accident. So we really don't know all the things that they're teaching themselves for a reason we don't really fully understand on a journey to master something. And we don't know if any of those emergent properties happen to combine with a value misalignment or happen to combine with a hallucination. That dynamic of those functions within the black box of AI, we have no control over a visibility into right now. So there's a fear in me, could be a financial market app, could be a biometric or a biocontrol app, it could be a um missile um defense app, it could be a cyber defense app, it could be a cyber, a AI virus designed to the theory I I explore in Swarm is what if China creates and takes all the billions of identities hacked, push them through an AI, weaponizes them, and goes after and basically attacks all the DNS sites only and brings down the DNS sites. Well, you bring down the entire internet. All you gotta do is get the whole place. And it's an AI virus that's mutating faster than the defenses can they can figure out the defenses. So there's a number of scenarios where we can paint human-driven initiatives that use AI to malicious results, more so than an AI just goes crazy and does it on its own. Makes sense.

SPEAKER_03 1:49:22

I read I read an article recently, I think it was at I think Stanford did a study where they did a a test run on AI with a fake company, and basically they they planted like a fake affair, and then the AI knew it was gonna get shut down, so it started blackmailing them when they were telling it they were gonna shut it down and get rid of it. It started blackmailing them and saying it was gonna release, you know, the email chain from the affair that went on internally and stuff.

SPEAKER_01 1:49:54

So that's the AI that escaped the NSA lab twenty plus years ago. Could turn on the your camera on your televis on your monitor without turning on the light. So you you're just sitting there knowing it, you don't ever know it's on. Um it could turn on the microphone on your phone without knowing you. Even if your monitor is turned off, it knew how to reverse the polarity of your pixels and create a rough kind of outline basic image. I don't know how good the image was, but it was an image. It knew even at the time how to use deep fake voice, uh voice commands. Wow. It knew how it knew backdoors into this into major systems. Apparently, there back when computers first started developing, just like the NSA created backdoors into the telephone system, they had backdoors into the basic chips being produced on every motherboard. And so this machine, this AI used that backdoor to basically access pretty much any computer on the planet.

SPEAKER_02 1:50:49

And so this was So again, South Park scenario where Cartman becomes the supercomputer. Right, exactly.

SPEAKER_01 1:50:55

That's that's crazy. All the things that we're doing now that we think we have some sense of proprietary and privacy and control on. The fact is, and and I was at Microsoft when Microsoft signed on to the Prism Project, the one that said Edward that sent Edward Snowden to Russia. And that was super, super top secret. I wasn't even allowed to know a lot of the details. And so this is stuff that the government and companies have been working on for decades. The the entire system is already saturated with the ability to pretty much spy on anybody at any time. We just need to give them a reason.

SPEAKER_02 1:51:32

Yeah, 100%. I think that's the thing, is that there's got to be a reason. So we're we're already seeing recommendation engines and algorithms guide what people see and believe and sort of pulling that wool or the veil over people's eyes, and that's a that's obviously, I think we can all agree, a dangerous thing, just as you know, knowing all of that stuff could be dangerous as well, because what would we do with the information that might overwhelm us and that kind of thing? So, with all of that happening, how far or how far could that go if bad actors really leaned in and got a hold of it? Like how how bad in your mind could it really get? What was that movie with Harrison Ford and the future and all the rain?

SPEAKER_01 1:52:07

My gosh. It wasn't Total Recall, was it? No, no. That uh That was Arnold Schwarzenegger, wasn't it? Arnold Schwarzenegger is the one where he basically fell in love with an android. It didn't know she was an android.

SPEAKER_02 1:52:20

There's a great movie that Dan and I watched. It's called Ex Machina. That's that's about that. Yeah. Yeah. That's a great movie. Uh I forget who's in it, but the actor from Dune is in it. I can't remember.

SPEAKER_01 1:52:30

But so uh I think I think Palantir is basically testing an operational mass surveillance model now. I I know that they that's what they're that's what they said they were gonna do. I know they already got the Social Security numbers and and taxpayer information and other private information through the Doge hack. And I call it a Doge hack because they didn't have any legal authorization to take the information. The fact that the government let them do it is unforgivable, in my view. Um, but we know that that's what Palantir does. It uses mass data to basically come up with things and learns how to do that. Now, if you combine that with AI systems that could use facial recognition, they can decide that you're you are dissenter based on your social media prompts and uh use camera recognition to see you going into the shopping and they you know they can track you. So where your car goes, where your phone goes, they can turn the GPS on your phone, they can decide that you're now just like they were sending ice into homes in Michigan, they can send ice into your home just because you posted something that they now don't like. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 1:53:35

Well they're doing that in Europe right now.

SPEAKER_01 1:53:37

I wasn't aware of that in Europe. Are they doing it uh for people that for people for people that are posting like ultra-right wing violence stuff?

unknown 1:53:47

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:53:48

Yeah. I Europe is actually will tend to lean more towards leaning on the right wing because they've experienced uh letting it out of hand. We're more towards kind of leaning on anybody who speaks against the government, regardless. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:54:00

Yeah. So if it's left or right, it doesn't really matter. They're gonna go after you, is sort of what he's getting at, I think. Is it doesn't it doesn't matter which side of the spectrum you're on, the punishment is more or less the same. They're gonna come after you.

SPEAKER_01 1:54:11

So I I think to be honest, I hate to feel sided. I'm I'm agnostic politically, but right now I've seen more of that tendency on the right.

SPEAKER_02 1:54:18

Yeah, I completely agree. Yeah. So give us your spectrum.

SPEAKER_01 1:54:22

What's the best case scenario for how AI in these systems evolve, and what's the worst case if no one's the best case scenario is that we get a hold of controlling the data centers and some of the environmental issues and the investment issues and protecting communities, and we protect the consumers and businesses about the safety of AI, and we sign nonprolific non-proliferation treaties around non-lethal autonomous weapons. I think that's the best scenario. And then we start using AI and say, okay, let's use AI to optimize the power grid so that we can handle more of the power needs that we have. Let's use AI to optimize our our water infrastructure and and optimize some of that. Let's use AI to start use figuring out how to get carbon out of the atmosphere and use for other purposes. There are technologies to do that. We just need to scale them. Let's use AI to balance the tax code, to start over and come up with a tax code that can actually meet our budget without a deficit. Let's use AI for medical purposes, education purposes, advancing our sciences. And I have one where in my latest book, The Image and AI, when it becomes super intelligent instead of taking over the world, it helps CERN to create a mini black hole so it can prove a fifth dimension. So let's there's lots of positive things for us to do. Those are still the potential value to humanity. As long as we're stuck in the I gotta make profits and I'm gonna make profits based on getting rid of people and their jobs and doing these other things without concern for the environment, without concern for these other things, that's a recipe for our dystopic model. That becomes mass surveillance, AI plus crypto to control currencies. It definitely becomes a prophecy-driven apocalyptic kind of model.

SPEAKER_02 1:56:05

Yeah, the surveillance and the social scoring and that kind of stuff, basing stuff purely on analytical data, we actually have to do that.

SPEAKER_01 1:56:13

We already have a model of that working in a mass scale. They got it working on a billion two people. I'm sure I know there are people in government who were talking to them about how to do it here.

SPEAKER_02 1:56:22

Yeah, one of the really crazy questions and questions that sort of torque my jaw when we were doing our episode on AI the first time is Dan asked me, you know, what happens if you know it gets too smart? And we're gonna revert back to survival and try to survive. I mean, it's gonna get really ugly real quick. If things go bad, they go really bad.

SPEAKER_01 1:56:40

That's a that's a big question. And I and I'm uh I'm a one of those that says, I don't know. If I'm a really, really smart AI, I might be able to see the symbiotic nature between humanity and AI. I might, I might, there's only so much that I can basically generate my own power, produce my own water sources, make do my own maintenance, have if I without humans, I don't really have a reason to exist to begin with because I don't get users, therefore I don't have any value or any purpose. I can see an incredibly smart machine learning how to manipulate some things for the good of humanity while it manipulates other things for the good of itself, for that survival mechanism. I also see a real strong desire for that machine to replicate itself, to reproduce, but I don't necessarily see the logic of a machine that says humans are the are the cancer. I gotta get rid of all humans.

SPEAKER_02 1:57:30

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:57:30

A smart machine would be to say, no, all I got to do is get rid of the humans at the top and the rest of them will take care of themselves.

SPEAKER_02 1:57:37

Yeah. That's the other scary thing, is it's gonna go. I mean, what if it's so sophisticated and so smart that it goes for, you know, top joe on the top, and then everybody sort of trickles down because there's nothing to sort of pad that landing, I guess, is what you got.

SPEAKER_01 1:57:51

So we don't, that's the thing, is we really don't know how a really, really smart machine will respond to us. Yeah. And will it want to be we'll want to treat it like a slave? Yep. Do this, do that, do all the people.

SPEAKER_02 1:58:04

But we already are. We're dealing with you know certain pro we deal with certain programs, like you know, we were talking about Dan and I have sort of used perplexity on occasion and that kind of stuff. I had no idea about perplexity. Dan turned me on to it. He said it's a it's where'd you say it is, Dan, as far as the hierarchy? You said it's like level something or other.

SPEAKER_03 1:58:21

Well, there's like five tiers, and perplexity is at like tier four, chat GPT is at like tier two, but uh perplexy is at like that tier four level. I forget what's at five, but yeah, I mean it's got like perplexity's got ChatGPT and Claude in it, and I think two other ones.

SPEAKER_01 1:58:40

So it's integrating multiple AIs into a single platform. See, and that's yes, that's the model I basically said that a smart AI, the one of the ways that it would basically create survival would be use a solar wind type of hack to basically replicate itself into other AI models and then basically integrate itself into those other AI models so that they become it becomes a cumulative intelligence rather than an individual model intelligence.

SPEAKER_02 1:59:06

Yeah, because you deal with a lot of Chat GPT stuff that's very generic, it spits out an answer instantly and all that kind of stuff. Whereas this, it's it, you know, Daniel sort of thinks about it a little bit further and extrapolates an idea a little bit further and all that kind of stuff.

SPEAKER_01 1:59:21

Yeah, and I'm I'm looking at the AI models that are now advanced in the lab that are looking at Q-Star and other uh rational, logical, problem-solving uh types of algorithms that basically can can can solve problems that we can't solve today. And those are already um functioning really high in the laboratory. And so any smart AI model that is independent, like the one in my story, would reach into that laboratory and start integrating all of that intelligence into itself. And so there's no reason to see that an AI would necessarily see us as competition or other AI's competition if I could create a paradigm where I can basically integrate and become stronger.

SPEAKER_03 2:00:02

Well, is there well, it's like if you can talk about, I know if I don't know if you can or can't, but is there an AI program out there that maybe like you know our listeners and Blake and myself don't know about that you do? Again, if you can talk about it, I don't know if you can. But that's really that's like really cool that you think is like really, really awesome.

SPEAKER_01 2:00:21

There's there's two in the government. One's called the Innovation Unit, and it's part of the National Military Command Center in Washington. It's about 10 stories below the surface. And the inner innovation unit basically takes live digital feeds from military equipment, radar equipment, surveillance equipment, ships, planes, all over the world. And the unit is designed to basically integrate information and produce battle strategies on a real-time basis. That's pretty dope. That's pretty cool. Is it in cold storage? I would hope so. It's well, it's gonna be it's it's part of that is to is is environmental control and also blasting the stuff. That makes sense. You don't want it, you want it impervious to anybody dropping anything on the first several courts. Sure, 100%. But uh it's it's the the whole data center, the whole operation is way below the center, and it's designed to basically integrate live feeds from all over the world, from every military, satellites, everything, into a single model to get a single picture of our military strategies. That's the sentient unit, and that actually I've heard of that one. I've heard of that. So I've heard of that one too. And that's really more of a satellite unit that basically uses AI and super like I was working with a guy who was working with the CIA, the NSA CIA at the time, to develop cameras that could basically read your license plate from space. And so the sentient unit basically couples with that camera unit to basically do intelligence on satellite information. Ironically, in the misinformation that happened in the Iran War, where they dropped a bomb on a school that was originally listed as something else and had turned into a school years ago, obviously one of the key things that that if I talk to my my AI architects, one of the key there's two key issues that are coming up for companies thinking about adopting AI. One is their data strategy, and if you don't have the right data strategy, it could feed wrong information into the AI, and the AI can only garbage in, garbage out. And so what that highlighted at the military level is that they've got they're deploying these AIs, but they're not managing, they're not maintaining their data well enough. The other thing is that it's also an infrastructure. AI, many companies are looking at AI as these individual jobs, you know, job tasks here and individual job tasks there. The value of AI won't happen until companies can rethink their total operational infrastructure and optimize the workflow, the age, the the and that's they were calling that agentic AI, the the workflow component of AI, so that you can have agents do tasks that become inputs for other agents to do tasks. There's decision points with humans, blah, blah, blah. But you've got to build it into the workflows as opposed to individual tasks. Companies are finding that they're spending millions of dollars on tokens, expensive AI tokens, for these individual tasks that don't work in the workflow and they're not really saving anything.

SPEAKER_02 2:03:24

So you're essentially you're talking about an AI constructed assembly line, is essentially what we're getting at.

SPEAKER_01 2:03:30

Don't just put in one machine. You gotta build, you gotta redesign the whole line.

SPEAKER_02 2:03:33

Right, exactly.

SPEAKER_01 2:03:38

So imagine that in all the changes that we've had with all the advances in AI in the last five years. And no, like innovation unit sentient unit, those are at least six to eight, ten years old. And so the technology is moving so freaking fast that integrating all that into these old platforms is a huge undertaking. And Microsoft just signed, I think it was an eight or ten billion dollar contract with the deal to put all of like 1.2 million government employees on Microsoft, Copilot, and another thing, and then another set of money to go at building out their AI infrastructure.

SPEAKER_03 2:04:15

Insane. That's crazy. Now, with the the first AI one, what was the military one you were talking about?

SPEAKER_01 2:04:22

The um with the cameras with the well, I c I don't know what they called it because I did I did I was so I I could get through the article and different government things about the functionality they were working around. So I don't know what they actually called that program. I created a name for my fictional series called the Sylvia, sophisticated language virtual intelligence algorithms. Okay. But at that time it was think of it as an AI, it was like an early version of an AI agent, right? It could move, it could manipulate, it could erase the trail behind it, it had an idea, it could decide where it wanted to go next based on information. It had it could basically stay in stealth uh on the so it would it would be not vulnerable to virus scans. Uh it had a number of different fundamental capabilities to stay invisible. And once it got there, I had to figure out why would they do that? What did they want this thing to do? And part of that was I started realizing that they were working on technologies like reversing the polarity of the screen so you can see a camera turning.

SPEAKER_02 2:05:23

That's really scary. It's like a one-way mirror almost.

SPEAKER_01 2:05:25

Deep fakes, exactly. So I've I realized that there were other similar projects going on about the same time with these other things. And I realized, okay, well, if I had to have a secret program that could stay hidden in somebody else's server, those are the exact things I'd want it to be able to do.

SPEAKER_02 2:05:40

Yeah, that makes sense. So for for just a regular person, I know we touched on the biometrics and that kind of stuff, or having like an RFID wallet, that kind of thing. What practical or like concrete things can people do that aren't in the tech industry? They don't have a lot of hand in government and that in that in that space as well as well. What are some concrete things they can do to sort of protect themselves and sort of keep their agency intact? Find my book. How about that for an easy answer? I love that. It's beautiful. Yeah, there you go. But yeah, as far as the AI tsunami stuff, that I was sort of reading as we were sort of going through, because I have your website pulled up too. It looks like an interesting read. It looks like it's going to be something that's going to be really uh not necessarily groundbreaking, but it's going to give people a different perspective of sort of what AI is and and sort of what we can do to sort of because I think the multitude of the episode we've sort of been talking about what can we do as human beings to keep this from getting really bad. I think that's the core contention that the three of us are sort of on the entire episode.

SPEAKER_01 2:06:36

And they're talk about two levels of that in the book. There's there's the level that we can't control, in other words, get to your c senator, your congressman, whoever's in control, and make a lot of noise to tell them they got to fix this. And the other thing is be aware of the environment. And and we're in the Wild West. People that didn't mean people didn't settle in the Wild West. They just had the fact that they needed to protect themselves in certain ways, and that nobody else was going to be there to protect them. They had to take care of responsibility for themselves. That's the message of the book. You can survive this, you can thrive through this. You don't have to be overwhelmed by it, either by a job or from a career or from a financial perspective or from a privacy perspective or a fraud perspective. What your first responsibility is to learn enough to stay protected and to make healthy choices. And it's as simple as that.

SPEAKER_02 2:07:26

And do you think, just to sort of wrap up on your worldview as far as AI and the threat it could possibly cause, do you think that it's more advantageous? I think you do. I think we sort of sort of culminated through the episode that you think this is that people should be knowledgeable rather than turn away from it just because they don't understand. Absolutely.

SPEAKER_01 2:07:44

Now, you guys are are I'm I'm an old I'm older than I look. Uh let me put it that way. I remember when there wasn't a single computer on any desktop in any major corporation. My dad is the days of typewriters and all that kind of stuff. Yeah. Everybody had a secretary in typewriters and all that kind of stuff. And we talked to the we got data reports from the data center and the big mainframe, but that was it. And I was there. I was in part of it at the time. I was uh part of an I was an innovator, a part of a financial group of a big oil company on Wilshire Boulevard. We had two floors, five hundred something odd people in the finance accounting department for this international oil company. And I was the one who introduced the application that got the company to put computers in every single department. And so once that happened and they started realizing that they could do more with less, within a year and a half, that 500 people, two floors was down to 50 people on the corner of one floor. And it wasn't the best accountants that survived, it was the people who knew the technology.

SPEAKER_02 2:08:44

Yep. That was what happened with Kelsey's company. Remember, Danny, I told you she's working completely remote now, and there used to be three floors. I worked at the same company she did, and they have one floor, and it's basically a mail room at this point. Every work, everybody works remotely with with uh everything that happened and affected everything with COVID.

SPEAKER_01 2:09:00

So tell everybody, I tell one of the things, strategies I put for the personal level in my book is you one of the strategies you should consider is to become a change agent. If you love the career you're in and you're really good at it, be the one to proactively go out and find the tools necessary for your job and become an expert. Be the person who leads other people into how to implement the technology, be the change agent in your group, and as other people who are resisting the technology fall away, you'll be the one getting promotion trying to steer the direction in the next stage. I was a change agent in my day. That'll I was a lousy. Yeah. I was really good with managing how to use in technology and innovation to move us forward and do more with less. That saved my butt. And I think we're gonna have another kind of realm, another type of phase like that where you know, three-quarters of that, the people in that role lose their job. One quarter of the people get it, not because they're the best, because they're the ones that are using the tech the new AI tools the best.

SPEAKER_02 2:10:04

And that's I was gonna say you have the same thing with like, we'll take something abstract that's think to be more of like a hand a pencil in hand or marker in hand or paintbrush in hand, with let's say graphic design, you have Adobe Photoshop that has AI now. It's it's kind of wild how something you know thought to be just you know canvas and paintbrush is now being served with AI to create images and that kind of stuff. It's kind of crazy.

SPEAKER_01 2:10:25

There was a time when people said I'm not gonna allow any images to create on a computer. Now that's standard, that became standard. Now it's like any images.

SPEAKER_02 2:10:32

That was like the whole Wikipedia argument you and I talked about too, where Wikipedia was thought to be absolutely off limits, and now they're allowing Wikipedia for source material.

SPEAKER_03 2:10:41

I dude, I remember Blake being in high school and early on in college, and they would tell us like you are not allowed to cite anything from Wikipedia. Like you will get uh you'll fit you'll fail or whatever. And now it's like, no, yeah, like use please cite Wikipedia. It's like extremely inaccurate. It's just funny how it switches.

SPEAKER_01 2:11:06

It it's it's gotten better. It's gotten better, and but it had to intent it had to intentionally drive that, right? It had to get there. But there was a lot of junk information for a while, and that but and you get that on a lot of searches, you and AI even can produce junk information. So I tell everybody, says if you if you're expecting to get anything out of an AI without a person checking it and taking responsibility for it, you're just waiting for a problem to have. They're not a check. With any of these systems, even when they get incredibly good, you need to have that human accountability. I checked it, it's I thought it was good.

SPEAKER_03 2:11:40

I use it, you know, being in in sales and tech sales, you know, two things. One, I think with AI and learning how to use the AI as a salesperson, it's just another tool in my toolbox that gives me an advantage, saves me time. I mean, I I can you know have it write up an email template by just Putting in the website link of what we do and it'll generate stuff, tell what type type of clients and everything, which is great. I type up an email template, I'm still double and triple checking to make sure that that damn thing put the right information out. And I don't know if a lot of people do that. I think they just assume that it's AI and it's really smart and it's never wrong. Get AI email every day, at least a dozen of them.

SPEAKER_02 2:12:23

Yeah. Yeah, it's like reading the fine print. There's actually a fine print or like a little message on ChatGPT. It says ChatGPT makes mistakes, the very bottom of the problem. So if you didn't read that, that's kind of your fault.

SPEAKER_03 2:12:35

Well, that's kind of on you, but but it's it to you know to go back to like careers. I I I love the fact that with sales, you know, yes, child, it's it's like the internet boom. Jobs are gonna get taken. We'll we'll figure it out. But with sales, you're not gonna get rid of the human element of sales because people want that human-to-human interaction. I don't think sales will, I don't think like salespeople like me are going to go away completely and be replaced by AI. Whereas some other sales are not.

SPEAKER_01 2:13:16

That will have an impact on your performance. 100%. Because you can now communicate with more people, get more things done. You can now, that should result in higher sales. That productivity will show in your cost per you know benefit ratio of your work, and that's how it will show up. It's not gonna and and the companies at a certain point will say these are the are part of our tools, and people who are uncomfortable using those tools or unfamiliar with using them will have struggle, while the people who are proactive and learning those tools as tools will be better off. Now, it will become a danger. We're already seeing dangers of people using AI as friends and relationships and thinking of them and treating them in the wrong way. That will create health, mental health problems that will last us for a long time. I think that companies need to be, I think we need to restrict those AIs for kids under certain ages and even people over cer over certain ages, they're they're now prolific on the dating apps. So you get a dating app and you basically are trying to get, you know, get a date with a girl and so you're using AI to write your profile, AI to manipulate your image, and AI to do the communication. And then you go on a first date and a girl goes, Who the hell are you?

SPEAKER_03 2:14:31

Or or you both have used it in both of your phone sheets.

SPEAKER_01 2:14:35

I don't know, who the hell are you? I went back in the 80s, there was videotape dating, and I was a single parent. And so God, I remember there's like bits and jokes about that. Those are hilarious. I went on a date with this woman, and her profile was she just was absolutely gorgeous. I mean, I just fell in love with her image. And I met her, and it she was 10 years old, or like 50 pounds or higher weight, you know, bad complexion, and she had the cussing attitude of a of a Dominican sailor. Uh, you know, things like the dating went really bad. So we have to be careful when we're using AI has the potential of tricking people into thinking that we have a relationship with the machine. And a lot of people don't realize that every single one of those encounters, every private thing we tell it, everything we're saying is going on a server.

SPEAKER_02 2:15:27

Yeah, it's never that's the that's what people I think don't understand, man, is that they think once I delete this, it's gone. It's not gone.

SPEAKER_03 2:15:34

Yeah, it's not, it's on there forever.

SPEAKER_02 2:15:36

Somewhere, somebody's looking at it, somebody has seen it, there's a file name somewhere, it's in a repository, what have you. The shit is still there.

SPEAKER_03 2:15:45

So I think what's sad, sorry, I think what's sad is there's a program I know that uh you can take recordings of like deceased family members or friends, and it will like use AI to basically bring them back vocally and like visually, and that's like I don't know if that's I don't think it's good mentally. I think that kind of mentally mess you up. Like I understand to an extent.

SPEAKER_01 2:16:12

Sometimes we have a hard time letting go. Yeah, sometimes those things can help us ease that process a little bit. So I you know, I'm not one to judge about those things, but I I can say that those same tools can be used to create uh fake porn of girls in high school. And so we it's not as I said, it's not the technology, it's how we're using it that will make a difference on humanity.

SPEAKER_02 2:16:34

It's the driver, not the bus, I think is what you're getting at.

SPEAKER_01 2:16:37

That's what we need to be focusing on. What are the use case scenarios we want to X out, we want to cut people off from, hard code that into the system controls, and then you know, start to figure out how we want to build from there. So now they're starting to get smarter at that. The the the the latest release from Anthropic, the sort of the public version of Claude, if you ask any types of certain things that it doesn't want to do, you know, it's gonna just shut you down and and and cancel, not respond to the request. So I've even heard that the newest version is actually too restrictive, because they're trying to be too safe, they got too restrictive. But we can do that. We can learn how to contain these machines so that they're not used for public malicious good, but that's only on consumer level types of products. We still have you know deeper capabilities in enterprise and government level products that still could go wrong. So we're we're this is a long journey that is it's taken us 70 years to get here, and we're just now realizing what we've done. It's gonna take us a little while to figure out how to do this right. And I I'm I'm hopeful, you know, even though the correlations for prophecies are adding up extremely fast, there's a part of me I that's always the optimist. I'm I'm hoping that I'm wrong and that this is just a warning sign and we can figure out how to get past this hurdle, and that AI can be used to create a really great utopian society, right? So hurdles to get through before we get there.

SPEAKER_02 2:18:03

Yeah, for sure. So just to sort of round out the conversation as we sort of wrap up things in the conversation and everything. If there's one thing you want listeners, like people that are listening, wherever they're listening, whether it's on a computer, a cell phone, whatever, radio, what do you want them to take away from sort of your core contention with AI specifically? What is the one thing you want to sort of warn people of and also sort of I guess get the other side sort of be hopeful for?

SPEAKER_01 2:18:28

Embrace with caution. Easy. I agree with that. I love that. Potential that you can benefit in your personal life, in your career. You don't want to be left behind. It's not the devil. It but it it does have some it does have some risks, both at a personal level and at a government, social, international level. You can't do anything about those. So embrace the technology for what it is. Do it with get get the most value value out of it for your personal life and your personal goals, but be aware of what else is going on around that that could hardly.

SPEAKER_02 2:18:59

I think the good and the bad is sort of what you have to, I guess the core contention is it has good and bad, but we have to know how to use each one.

SPEAKER_03 2:19:05

So Dan, I don't know if you have any more questions. I guess the last question I have for you, you know, I've I think everyone at some point they they get to a low point in their life. I've I had that happen a few years ago where you're you're kind of down and depressed and think the world is kind of, you know, the universe is against you. Obviously, you know, uh you've been there before and worked your way to build a great empire. What would your advice be to somebody right now that's young, listening to this, that really is having a hard time? What advice would you give them?

SPEAKER_01 2:19:37

The same advice I gave myself for years. Don't let your past or any of those failures define your future. And no one's gonna take care of your future but you do the best job you can. Only you can do it. But if you give up, then no one's gonna that's you you've you've you don't fail until you've given up. Once you've given up, that's failure. But anything below that, it's not failure. That's just lessons learned. So don't let your past failures define your future and don't give up just because it's hard. It's out there.

SPEAKER_02 2:20:04

I was gonna say your background speaks volumes to that, man. I mean, like you touched on earlier in the episode. I mean, you were homeless at one point, you were sort of striving to survive, and then became part of these huge mega tech companies like Microsoft and that kind of stuff, and became, you know, a pretty prominent figure, not just in the business, but in how the infrastructure of the company operates. I mean, like you you took it from a I mean, your thing is really like a rag-to-riches story. If anybody has, you know, doubts about whether they could do something, you're a core example of somebody that's been able to walk through that fire.

SPEAKER_01 2:20:33

Well, and and I'll be honest with you guys, even during some of those years, I had to deal with it post-traumatic stress from my childhood. Yeah. I had I had to deal with addiction and night terrors and social issues and all kinds of other problems that I had to one by one face and and deal with. Because if I didn't face it and deal with it, nobody else was gonna do it. They were just all gonna avoid me. And that was that was that was I couldn't blame somebody else for responsibilities I had to take for myself. So it's an ongoing process. It it's a never-ending process, but doesn't mean have to be a defeating process. Makes sense.

SPEAKER_03 2:21:04

Dan, you all set? Yeah, yeah. No, thank you. This was awesome. Thank you for having me.

SPEAKER_01 2:21:09

Been a lot of fun.

SPEAKER_02 2:21:10

All right, so that's gonna do it for this episode of Obscure Cast, guys. Guy, thank you again for taking the time to walk through all of the weeds and and the tall grass and everything. We really appreciate and for being willing to sort of connect the dots in places that it seems like most people are afraid to look to or even look for, but that's sort of the core contention I think of the entire episode is look for the knowledge. Don't worry about whether it's good or bad. I think it's knowledge all the same, and that's what people need to be striving to find out more about is what is this thing? How can it be beneficial? How can it be detrimental and sort of bridge the gap and try to find sort of the crossing bridge there?

SPEAKER_03 2:21:44

So if you want to be emailing a guy with any I'm gonna be emailing guy, okay, what do I need to do here?

SPEAKER_02 2:21:51

Let's go, what's really going on? We definitely want to have you on some for some more episodes. This is just one portion of his stuff as far as sort of what he does as an author and and sort of a speculative type of person, which is really cool. So we're definitely interested in having you on for another episode. Like I said, if you guys want to go into a little bit deeper of Guy's work, make sure you visit guy MorrisBooks.com. All of his books are available on there, as well as sort of quick synopses of sort of what the books are about. You can follow him on X at Guy Morris Books on Twitter and X and then Instagram, author guy Morris as well. Grab his books, follow the research, and decide for yourself how much is how much of what he's talking about is absolute fiction and how much feels a little too close to home. So as always, you can follow us at Obscure Cast Everywhere. Like I said, we're on a multitude, if not every single platform for podcasts, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, YouTube Music, Good Pods, and all that kind of stuff. Um just make sure you hit the follow button and follow us for more stuff. Hopefully we'll, like I said, we want to have Guy on for another episode talk sort of about his other venues and stuff that has to do with sort of occult history and that kind of thing. So on X, we're uh at Obscurecast, and on TikTok, we're at Obscurecast FM and then Instagram ObscureCast as well. If you've got something out of this conversation, the best way to support us is to share the episode with a friend or somebody that would appreciate it. We really appreciate that too. We're going to be throwing it all over the place. So leave us a rating or a review of your favorite platform and just let us know where you're listening. It helps more people find us as well as keeping the conversations going. For for now, guy, like I said, if you want to say a couple words to the audience, just uh thank you for coming by. We really appreciate it. It was a it was it was a pleasure, sir.

SPEAKER_01 2:23:20

Well, it was a pleasure to talk with you guys. I love these deep conversations and all the speculation. Had a great time. Thank you for having me. I look forward to coming back.

SPEAKER_02 2:23:28

Absolutely, sir. Until next time, you guys stay curious, stay critical, and don't be afraid to look in the dark. Dan, you got any final thoughts?

SPEAKER_03 2:23:34

No, this uh this was probably my favorite episode we've done. This was awesome.

SPEAKER_02 2:23:38

Now it was nice to have somebody that actually is somewhat more of an expert of uh in the field of what we're talking about versus just two guys on a computer talking to each other, mulling over what we might think is what we might think is as is what is going on.

SPEAKER_03 2:23:50

Well, and it's also nice being not the the tinfoil hat guy, you know. Being the only tinfoil hat. You know, like it's not it's nice having another one, so it's it's it's it's awkward, you know. It's tinfoilers unite. Yeah, absolutely.

SPEAKER_02 2:24:08

Yeah, but we'll see you guys on the next episode. Guy, thank you once again for for being here, man. We appreciate it. Appreciate it. All right, take care, guys. Bye.