 The Radical, fundamental principles of freedom, rational self-interest, and individual rights. This is The Iran Book Show. Hey, everybody. Welcome to the Iran Book Show. And this Friday, the week is over. You know, we made it. We did five shows every morning. This week, I think, that we've done all five episodes. Hopefully you guys enjoyed this. And it is a value to you. I think most days you've expressed that value with the super chat, so I appreciate that. We start all over from you today. So you can ask questions about anything, preferably in these morning shows. If you ask questions about the news, that would be fantastic. But feel free to ask about anything by asking about the news. Bishchak, thank you. Really appreciate the support. By asking about the news, you get to shape the show. You get to shape the shape of the show. What we cover in the show. All right. Let's jump into this. Wow, a lot happened on Twitter yesterday. God. So, you know, I'm having, I posted my previous thing on Twitter where I said basically that Elon Musk was, the new moderating policy on Twitter was in Elon Musk's subjective, you know, whims it seemed like. He was banning people and adding people based on no known, at least no expressly expressed objective criteria. And of course, I've talked about this in the beginning, that the thing really missing from Twitter is objective criteria. And God, the hostility that I got on Facebook to that video, it was truly unbelievable. I haven't got that kind of hostility on a video since the last video I attacked Trump and people were hostile. And it seems like what's going on is that personality worship, that completely non objective, anything this guy does, I can shoot somebody in the middle of Fifth Avenue, it doesn't matter, that kind of personality, a crazy worship has now transferred from Trump, although I think it's still with Trump, to Elon Musk. And this is the kind of attitude that people are expressing that suggests to me that the American people are open to authoritarianism. It's just a matter of finding the right person to love and the right person to admire and the right person who could do no wrong. And then he gets everything. Now I have done shows after shows after shows about the heroism of Musk. I've expressed why I think he's a good guy, when I thought he's a good guy and the positive actions have always been highlighted on the show. And then I dare, God forbid, I dare to criticize him. It's not hero worship. Hero worship in a real world recognizes the flaws of the hero. This is personality worship. This is the precursor to authoritarianism. This is scary stuff. This is blind worship, which obviously some on our chat also have. And, you know, I got this extensively when I criticized Trump. I mean, that was like God. I was criticizing God himself, Jesus Christ himself. And now I'm getting it with Musk, which is really interesting. And then yesterday Musk went on this subjective, non-objective, non-transparent, not, you know, clear what he was doing rampage on Twitter. And it'll be interesting to see if they continue to defend him. I'm sure they will blindly. Anyway, for those of you who have not been following the misadventures of Elon Musk on Twitter yesterday. So for a long time now there's been this account on Twitter called Elon Jet, Elon Jet. And what Elon Jet, what they counted on Jet has done, and this has been known and talked about for the longest time, is it basically tracks Elon Musk's private jet and where it goes, when it arrives, when it leaves. It does so with completely public information. That is, there's nothing, there's no cheating, there's no stealing private information, there's no tracking somebody in a way that's illegitimate to track. This kid, and he's a young, I think he's a young guy, has basically, this is a few years now, has basically figured out how off of the web you can take publicly available information and create a tracker on where Elon Musk's jet is at any given point in time. Anyway, yesterday that account, so Elon Musk is known about this and actually being playful about it and actually told the kid who runs this Twitter account that he has nothing to worry about, that Elon Musk is behind him and will never consider shutting him down. Yesterday Musk shut him down. So yesterday, Elon Jet was accused of doxing, that is providing private information, that can be used to harass a person publicly, and Elon Musk out of nowhere announced a new anti-doxing rule, although the doxing rule is not specific, it's not defined, what constitutes doxing is not made clear. So, you know, so Elon Jet was taking off under the idea that providing the information of the location of Elon Musk's jet is constitutes doxing, again, a complete flip on Elon Musk's Twitter policy before that. As of Thursday night then, as of yesterday night, Musk had suspended the accounts of several reporters who had reported on the story of him suspending the account of Elon Jet, and in reporting it, I guess, linked to Elon Jet's account and maybe to an account on Masterdown, which is the competitor to Twitter, and that got them all suspended and their accounts bumped off of Twitter. So, we've got New York Times reporters, the Post reporters, Keith Oberman, and the accounts of the Twitter competitor, Masterdown, the account of the actual social media company, Masterdown, that was dumped from Twitter, again, because Masterdown, I think, was carrying the remnants of Elon Jet. It was kicked off of Twitter, so it went to Masterdown, and then Masterdown was kicked off of Twitter as well. All under the idea that everybody who touched Elon Jet in one way or another was committing doxing and therefore was bumped and kicked off of Twitter. All based on a brand new rule that Elon Musk put into place on Thursday afternoon and imposed on the entire Twitter universe on Thursday afternoon. Even Barry Weiss' publication, Barry Weiss has been close to Twitter and been close to Elon Musk, was one of the people who published the Elon Musk papers just a few days ago. It seems like weeks and weeks ago, but it's just a few days ago. In her sub-stack today, I don't think this is actually Barry Weiss writing, but this is Barry Weiss' publication, The Free Pass. This is Nellie Bowles, who writes every Friday. She writes Musk's Twitter reign, and in parentheses of terror, question mark, is a developing story. I'm working on something longer, so nobody's happy. Elon Musk is showing himself to be, you know, whim-driven, emotionalist, and subjectivist doing what he feels like doing. Indeed, what is the latest poll he's running? Oh, the poll is. So he's running a poll now, and the poll will decide how long these journalists will be kicked off of Twitter for, and he's doing that a poll on Twitter to decide the punishment of those journalists who he's accusing of doxing. Without any, by the way, I mean the whole promise of Elon Musk is we're going to have objective standards for who is going to be on and who is going to be off. We were going to have mechanisms for appeal. That is, if we got kicked off of Twitter, there would be an appeal mechanism. There's zero appeal mechanism right now. Elon Musk basically, now it's his company. I'm not challenging his right to do this. This is, I mean, unfortunately Barry Weiss is, but I'm not challenging his right to do it. He can do whatever he wants. He can burn the whole place down. Ban me arbitrarily. It's his company. He owns it outright. He owes nobody anything. But by the standards of his own presentation, by the standards of how he's presented, what he wants to do with Twitter, this is a complete and utter mess. This is anything, this is far removed from the kind of place for open speech that he has claimed that he wants. Again, we have no clear objective standards to what is permissible and what is not permissible. It is arbitrary and random and some of it is just damn childish. So I don't know. I really do hope again that Elon Musk is successful with Twitter. I want a great Twitter. I wish Elon Musk stepped away from the moderation side of Twitter and managed the engineering side of Twitter and made Twitter an unbelievable platform for communicating and maybe gave somebody else the ability to figure out some real standards, objective standards for how to manage content on Twitter. I think Elon Musk needs to step away from it. He needs to stop tweeting as much as he does. Again, I think the more you tweet, the more the more the sillier you get, the more engaged you get in arguments, the more you feel like you have to comment on everything. Go focus on the real engineering challenges that exist at Twitter and that you promised us that to make this app the best social media app in the world, we got a long way to go. And I have to also wonder, and this shows his commitment to this, so this is I guess a good thing, Musk sold $3.8 billion of his Tesla stock. It was revealed when that news came out, Tesla stock took another beating. One wonders if he needs that $3 billion to keep, if he's using his own personal money now to keep Twitter afloat. And probably is. And I would suggest that if he really wants to make Twitter into a profit-making business, he needs to focus on improving it and he needs to focus on letting some professionals come in to clean up moderation so as to attract the advertisers back. He needs to maybe strategize on how to use that blue check mark to generate more revenue or maybe to allow us to customize the ads that we're going to see. I don't know. I'm not a business genius who knows how to fix Twitter, but Elon Musk is. So I suggest he focus on that rather than the childish pursuits of who to add and who to get off of Twitter and running polls on Twitter and making decisions about moderation policies on Twitter based on poll numbers, which I think is absurd and ridiculous, and not going to give us a sense that, yes, Twitter is now a superior product and a superior place to engage in ideas. Wes, thank you for the support. We really, really appreciate it. Thank you for the rest of the Super Chatters. We'll get to the Super Chat in a little while. Talking about childish. I'm going to, I guess we've got two more children to talk about. This actually, I should have called this the children's hour. That's what this news briefing is about before we get to serious stuff. Everything in the title is about children or at least people, adults behaving like children. All right, let's do child number one, and that's SBF Sam, Sam, something freed, right? And Sam Bankman freed. Sam Bankman freed, as you know, was arrested for the FTX fraud. He is being indicted in the U.S. on four different counts of different levels of fraud. I want to talk about one of them in particular in a minute. That is the political giving in a minute. But just to, I want to focus for a minute on the childishness of Sam. Sam was in court yesterday trying to get free, to get bail so he could, to pay a bail so he could be released. I think the judge said no, he is going to stay in custody. The reason that he gave is that he's depressed. He's depressed and he is a vegan and, and the food is, there's no vegan food in the, in the, in the Bahamas jail. I think the Bahamas are now making an effort to find him vegan food. So he pleaded with the judge based on the fact that he is a, he's depressed. Wouldn't you be if you've just defrauded people from at least $8 billion maybe more and have been caught and are probably going to spend a significant amount of time in jail. And all the bribing you did of all those politicians is not going to help you on IOTA. His parents were there, both Stanford professors. It turns out both of his parents or at least his father was on the payroll of FTX and actually received money as a consultant. I think that's going to be looked at by the prosecutors as in terms of what was exactly going on there. It looks like his father will not be teaching his class on tax, on the tax code next year. I mean, yeah, you want to teach people how to minimize their taxes, but you don't want to teach them how to, you want to do it, you want to teach them how to do it without getting caught. The fact that he was a consultant and his son got caught, maybe suggest, maybe he shouldn't be teaching a tax course. Anyway, this is, it's going to be interesting to see how this all plays out. At what point did the Bahamas transfer him to the U.S. if they do, or whether he'd be tried in the Bahamas under what jurisdiction? That's the jurisdiction. I think the Bahamas will file fraud cases against him as well. But it'll be interesting. The whole thing is going to be interesting. By the way, the charges are being accused of mail and wire fraud, money laundering, conspiracy to avoid campaign finance regulation, and much more. So let's talk a little bit about the campaign financing stuff. This is kind of interesting. So again, childish. I'm depressed. Let me out. Nobody's going to give him bail. The guy's got money stashed away in all kinds of places. His flight risk is obvious. There's no way they're going to give him bail to get out of there, given the scope of the fraud that's involved. SBF is known as the second largest contributor to Democratic politicians. It turns out he also gave quite a few Republicans. He kind of diversified because he was trying to get various committees on the Hill with regard to regulations. But who knows why he was actually giving these contributions? But he gave a lot of contributions to a lot of politicians, mostly Democratic, but also Republican. Second largest after Joe Soros to the Democratic Party, so that party has taken a hit from this. But it turns out that much of that was given fraudulently, that it was given in the name of individual donors, whereas the money was actually coming from Alameda Research and the money being used to give these contributions to politicians was probably money taken from investors. That is, it's probably money that Alameda was borrowing from banks and funds. It's money that Alameda got from FTX, which was deposited as money that should have never gone to Alameda, but certainly Alameda had no right to use it for politics. But then it wasn't disclosed as coming from Alameda. It was disclosed as coming from particular people. So there are real campaign finance violations here that are quite significant in terms of the law. Again, whether these laws are all legit and whether this is how it should be run, I'm not going to get into that. A lot of times financiers accuse of things like male fraud and all these other things and they're innocent. It's all BS. It's all trumped up charges. That was the case with Michael Milken. It was the case of many people in the 1980s that Giuliani was particularly good at accusing financiers of doing all kinds of things where they basically did no wrong and often his prosecutions were reversed on appeal. In this case, it's legit. In this case, I'm pretty sure based on everything we know to date that Sam Bank would feed is a crook and violated the law. Again, it's probably going to go away for a long time. Anyway, so the campaign finance breaking the law is going to add to that and going to add to the complications in his life. We've got a Stanford University story, but I'm going to wait for that a little bit so I can get to the third child. There is a third child and of course the third child is a former president, Trump. I don't know if you saw this yesterday. This is kind of a funny Christmas story. Trump announced on Wednesday a major announcement on Thursday. He was going to make a major announcement. Now, people are speculating what's going on. Has he got some dirt on the Santas? Is he going to not run for president? Who knows what the major announcer is going to be? People will allow the place of speculation about what it could be. It turns out that the major announcement was the release and selling of Trump branded trading cards. You can get Trump branded trading cards for $99 a set. I've seen some of these trading cards. They would be ridiculous and absurd for any human being to have these kind of trading cards. For somebody who claims that he wants to be president of the United States, this is a unique joke. This is kind of ludicrous and pathetic. Childish is, I don't know, a compliment. They've got him in super hero uniform with a big T, Trump man. Ripping his clothes apart, this muscular, amazing, ripped Donald Trump. That hyper butch, these glorifying Trump drawings, I'd say fascist-like musculature and imagery and face. It's really gross. I mean, Jennifer's absolutely right. Gross is the right word. Gross completely. Then the funny thing about all this is they're not even cards that you actually get. You're not going to get any cards. They're not trading cards. They're not game cards. I mean, these are NFTs. These are actually NFTs. They are JPEGs. You get a JPEG. Unbelievable. Unbelievable. This is so childish. This is so pathetic that this man was president of the United States, says a lot about our country and about what it was and what it is. The fact that he's still as popular as he is in the Republican Party, and the people are going to rush to buy this. I have no question that these are going to sell a lot of them. He's going to make a fortune on these cards, on these NFTs. I still think it's right of the poll showing DeSantis way ahead of Trump. You still have to assume Trump is the front runner. First of all, because DeSantis is not declared. Secondly, because, I mean, who knows? DeSantis could crumble after Trump's brutal attacks on him. I mean, no one can only imagine what Trump is going to say about DeSantis. And who knows how DeSantis will handle him? DeSantis is not exactly being tested under fire from a character like Trump. So I don't know. He's still the front runner. You've got to watch this video of this announcement. I wonder if I can... Let's do this, because this is just fun. I'm committed to anything that will disqualify Trump from being president of the United States. I might as well show you this. Maybe it'll help some of you decide... See if we can find it. Some of you decide to now vote for him. This time, here it is. All right. All right. Well, all right. Have to change that. There we go. How do you like that? That's pretty cool. Let's watch the video together. I haven't watched this yet. Oh, I'm clicking on it. Nothing happens. Okay, I guess it's just an image. But are you going to vote for that guy? Good luck. All right. That image I don't want you to see. All right. So there we have it. Maybe we can turn the presidential race into a mud wrestling contest or a generally a wrestling conference. Okay. Let's see. What else did I have here? Yeah, we had this story. I'm going to ditch this story for a while. I've got two other stories, I think. Let me just see if I've covered everything. Yeah, we'll do that another time. We'll do that another time. All right. Two stories quickly. One is going back to Stanford. We talked about Stanford and SMF contacts. Stanford University, I don't know if this has made the news in a big way, but there is another case of scientific fraud that has been brought to the surface over the last few weeks. And this one affects the president of Stanford University, Mark Tezia Lavigne, L-A-V-I-G-N-E. And it turns out that he is a well-known, famous, what is it? He's a neuroscientist who made his name in a series of publications in 1999 and the early 2000s. And published them in very prestigious journals and really gained a huge reputation and won prizes, the equivalent of the Nobel Prize for these studies, and built a reputation as today based on their reputation is the president of one of our leading universities in the world, and particularly when it comes to STEM. This is a major place. Anyway, it has turned out that the images used on those papers, the images used in these papers that describe, I don't understand what it describes, it describes some functioning of cells, was doctored. That is that there's evidence now being released to show that the images that they provide of the images and this doctrine is important to the presentation of the results in the paper. That is without these images and without now the doctored images, it's unlikely that these papers stand on scientific grounds. Now, this is not the same story. I don't think this is the same story. As the story I covered a few months ago of a similar story where images had been doctored in the past, for the Alzheimer's disease where that had been done for Alzheimer's, this is something different. This is about cell, I mean Alzheimer's is also cell, but this is something about how cell functions. This is about neurons. I think this is different. All this comes out of the work of Elizabeth Bick. Elizabeth Bick is this amazing, she calls herself a scientific integrity expert. And she's a woman, I did a show on her, I think during COVID in 2020, Elizabeth Bick is this amazing scientist that specializes in finding doctored questionable stuff in scientific papers. People refer stuff to her, she finds it herself. She then investigates, hires experts and this is her job. This is what she does. And she's been amazing. As I said, I read up about her and did a segment on my show a couple of years ago about her. And she's truly amazing. By the way, one of the reasons I am skeptical about, very skeptical, super skeptical, is maybe choose to, you know, a weaker word about all this stuff about, oh, they're hiding the real results of the vaccines, they're hiding all these people dying, people dying left and right all over the place from the vaccines is because of people like Elizabeth Bick. Like these are people that have dedicated their life to the integrity of science. These are people that have dedicated their life to making sure that papers are true. These are people dedicated their life to making sure that scientists and pharmaceutical companies don't get away with junk. And she's not the only one, she's just the premier example of this. And we're talking about thousands of scientists, particularly with COVID, interested in COVID. If there was really a there-there, it would be coming from Elizabeth Bick, not from marginal characters in the healthcare world as the people presenting the so-called evidence about the harm and the disaster that is the COVID vaccine. So just as an aside. Anyway, this guy published five papers around basically all dependent on these images that have now turned into something that they've been doctored. Because said, just a quote, I would have to find quote that these are being digitally altered. This actually changes everything. It's more, you know, it's several level of digital altering, right? So this is substantial. Now, what the president of Stanford is saying is, look, even if this is true, I wasn't involved in the images. I had nothing to do with the images. And indeed, his co-authors on the paper have all confirmed that he was not involved in the actual site of the images. He could very well be ignorant of the doctrine of the images. He, you know, he was well, he was the senior author, but not the lead author, I think, on those papers. He provided other contributions. I mean, these are kind of papers that have a lot of co-authors associated with them. So it would have been one of his other co-authors that did this. The same argument was made about the Alzheimer's papers that the lead authors didn't realize that somebody down the chain had doctored the images. But this is a question. Was it a question about? There was a question about this. Anyway, interesting thing is that the story about the president of Stanford was broken by the student newspaper. It was the mainstream media when they want them. The Stanford Daily, and it's been the one breaking new news as it happens. And they keep finding more about the story. See, he's getting into deeper and deeper water. They just found a new image this week that is more serious than the previous images that they had found. The doctrine is more serious. So there's real issues here. Stanford has just created a committee to look into this and to decide what to do. My guess is this guy's not going to survive as president of Stanford, even if he can prove that he didn't know any of this. I mean, this is scientific malpractice at the very least, if not scientific fraud. It's sad to see when wonders how often this happens. But it also is great to see self-correcting mechanisms. So you have a self-correcting mechanism. One is peer review. And I know peer review has come at a huge attack. But peer review is a mechanism to try to catch things that are completely inappropriate wrong that don't make any sense. There is a bias towards status quo with peer review. So that is something that the scientific community has to deal with. But it is also inspiring to me that there are people who are looking, finding, and publicizing fraud when they see it in bad scientific papers. By the way, these papers are some of the most cited papers in your biology. And one of the papers was cited like, or maybe all the papers were cited like 850 times. So now a lot of the people building on this research have to question whether how their research has affected. You see how this all stacks up and becomes super complicated for the scientific community. All right. I have one final quick story, and then we'll go to the super chat questions. We are a little less than halfway to our $250 goal. I think we made it pretty much every morning or almost every morning. So hopefully we can make it this morning as well as we go into the weekend. All right. Let me see. We did this. Okay. Let's do this. This is a farm policy story. So a little different than the others. No, no children involved and no childish behavior involved. This is a story about Japan. Again, I don't think this is getting enough press. I don't, I think this is an important story and that I have consequences on the decade to come. This is kind of a long term type of story. Japan is committed now in its latest budget to raising military spending dramatically over the next few years and raising a 22% of GDP by 2027 and then maintaining it at 2% of GDP going beyond that. Japan, this is very popular among the Japanese people. So polling suggests that this is something Japanese people want. It is now a real commitment of the Japanese government. The Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has told journalists that this is something this government is committed to. They already are starting to increase the budget this budget year. What's also interesting is, you know, the Constitution of Japan written by MacArthur was committed to Japan being pacifist and the military playing a minor role given Japan's history and given what it did during World War II. This is really a change to that and whether they'll have to change the Constitution or not is not clear. But one of the things that's going to happen as far as this is that Japan is going to buy long-range missiles to be able to target missile launch sites in China and in North Korea. It's going to present this, of course, as a self-defense mechanism, but these are the kind of missiles that they've never had. They're going to buy land-to-land missiles from the United States, I think, to provide this kind of capacity to defend themselves. They are really worried about China and Hong Kong. And I think it is assumed out in the world that Japan would be one of the countries that would actually come to the defense of Taiwan. I don't know how many of you know this, but there was a period in which Taiwan was actually part of Japan. That is, I think after early 20th century war as part of the victory, you know, Japan, China ceded Taiwan for a few years to Japan. So Japan has some interest in the preservation of independent Taiwan. I think they're committed to it. It's in their part of the world. Japan probably has today the second most powerful navy in the world after the United States. Borderline more powerful than the Chinese, maybe not. What China has way ahead of Japan are ground-to-ground missiles. China has massive numbers of missiles. Of course, China has nukes. Japan does not. But even in conventional, China has the ability to just decimate Japan with these missiles, including targeting Japan's fleet. This is why the focus is going to be, I think, for Japan on ground-to-ground missiles so they can attack the launch sites in China and in North Korea. I also think Japan will beef up its navy. I think at the end of the day, Japan wants to have the second largest and most significant and powerful navy in the world. And it will beef its anti-missile capacity. It will beef up its own version of kind of an iron dome to protect itself from missiles coming in from North Korea or from China and to protect its chips. There's no point in having an amazing navy if that navy is sunk by ground-to-sea missiles from Japan. All right. So I think that's going to play out significantly. I think it's a huge geopolitical kind of move. I think it bolsters the United States. I think this is not something the Chinese wanted to hear. The Chinese worry about this partially because of a history they have with the Japanese, but also partially because it suggests that they're going to have to face even greater difficulties and challenges and odds if they want to take Taiwan militarily. Japan, of course, is much closer to Taiwan. And I don't think China wants a war with Japan. Japan has the manufacturing capacity to leverage up. And, of course, China and Japan have massive trade between the two Japanese companies, have manufacturing plants all over China. That codependency, and if Japan would get involved in a war in Taiwan, is another reason why China will probably avoid fighting, would avoid a war in Taiwan anytime soon. I will add to that that one of the arguments the Japanese made in increasing the budget is what Russia did, and they find what Russia did as this offensive, and they need to protect themselves from something like this happening in the Pacific. All right. Went over too long. At least eight minutes too long. All right. We'll slowly get to Krish, $200 Australian dollars. Thank you. Krish also got us over the $250 goal. Really, really appreciate that. It's amazing how many supporters we have in Australia and how generous they have been over the last few years. So thank you. Thank you, Krish. Really appreciate that. Okay. Let's run through the $20 questions and then through the other questions and call it a day. Shazba, Shazba's back. All right. Hopefully, in spite of my review of idiocracy, he's still here. Good. Question for Trump supporters. If you were to transfer your loyalty from person Trump to an idea, what idea would that be? Well, I mean, I think, I mean, I'm going to voice my Trump supporter. I think that idea is ultimately, you know, some form of authoritarianism. It's some form of fascism or some form of admiring a leader above all else. And because I think that's the most similar to the way they treat a Trump in the way they were loyal to him. All right. Mark Banana. All right. This is new. That's a new name to me. That's great. Mark says, thanks for the show, Iran, as 27-year-old guy, single objectivist. Where do you suggest meeting a young single objectivist partner? I'm losing hope with the amount of irrational young people out there. Iran, the love guru. I don't know if I'm a good love guru. You know, last time I dated was 30-something years ago. Actually, actually more than 40 years ago. There you go. Scary. I would say the best place is objectives conferences. Ocon come to Athens to the Athens to the Athens conference. But Ocon, I know so many couples, objectivist couples who met at Ocon, who had a romance while at Ocon, who had a romance right after Ocon, and several of them got married afterwards and lived happily ever after. You know, it's competitive because there are more guys and girls at Ocon. But what the hell? Life's competitive. You've got to take a shot at it. So I would definitely come to Ocon, go to the Greece conference. I don't know where you live, but maybe there's an objectivist community around where you live that you can go to. Travel a little bit, go to other places, see if, like Austin, Texas has a huge number of objectivists. Maybe if you know there's going to be an event in Austin, Texas, like there will be next month. I'll be speaking there. On-call will be speaking, I think. Then come to Austin, Texas and see are there any goals out here. You just have to go. You're going to have to make an effort. It's going to take some money. It's going to take some travel. It's going to take some going places to where they are and then figuring it out. Now you could also meet somebody young who's not ideologically committed yet and help turn them into an objectivist, or at least, you know, give them the font, like I did with my wife, give them the font and head to read and see how they respond. So I think there are a lot of options out there, but certainly if you're looking for an objectivist, the objectivist conferences are the best place. Objectivist events are a great place. There's so many events going on. Yeah, you should be able to find, you should be able to find a goal at these. Again, it's going to be competitive. A lot of guys are doing this, but I think you got to put yourself out there. Alright, Diman, with all the fraud recently, why can't members of the government be charged with it? So many times people get elected saying one thing, then blatantly they're going against it. If a biz sold me something over false statements, I would sue. Yeah, you can't sue unfortunately, you can't sue unfortunately a politician for false statements, otherwise they'd all go to jail, every single one of them. But you can't. You can sue, you can go after them when they commit real fraud. Now I think we don't do enough of that. I think the FBI or whoever monitors this is way too lax. I think we don't pay enough attention to things like the kind of jobs people get afterwards or the kind of money they get. Hunter Biden's an example, but also as I've said, so is what do you call it, Trump's son-in-law who got the four billion from the Saudis. And, you know, we don't think about those as fraud partially because you can't, it's very difficult to prove in a quote of law that could quote, or whatever you pronounce it, that they got something in return and what the action was. So, yeah, that's the problem. At the EU right now, they're actually catching the most suitcases full of cash, those people are going to be prosecuted, those people are going to go to the jail, but again, they're going to have to find proof of the actual transaction and that's going to be harder than just finding the cash and assuming it's fraud. I assume they have some of that, but we will see. I wish they did that more in the US. Shazmat says, the way I see it, if you liked all the movies, you would review them for free. Yeah, I mean, I'm asking somebody to pay me to review James Cameron's early movies. I could do a show on the philosophy embedded in the young James Cameron movies. I think it would be fascinating and it would make you even sicker of how bad he's become since then. Alright, John DeMarco, no question, just value for value on a rainy New York City Friday, hoping for better weather. Weather here in Puerto Rico, you should come amazing. It's California summer, it's warm outside, not hot, warm, 83 degrees, sun is shining, not humid. This is the period of time. December, January, February, into March is the best weather in Puerto Rico. It's truly amazing, so you've got to leave all those cold, wet places and come down here. Daniel says, how many Trump trading cards do you want me to get you? I want the whole set. The whole set, 99 bucks, it's NTF, so you don't even have to do any shipping. I guess you can just email them to me. I don't know how that works, but yes. Thank you, Daniel. That's such a considerate gift. Gail says, you really can't make this stuff up. I assume you're talking about Trump. You cannot. And this was an important announcement, an important announcement. Noel says, $5, the price of a good cup of coffee in the morning, everyone would be nice and easy to keep this cup of news in the morning going. Thank you, Noel. I really appreciate it. And yeah, we made our target again, so I am motivated to keep these going. I do want to keep thinking creatively about how to restructure the Iran bookshows to make them. I don't know. Doing aid a week is going to be tough, but anyway, we'll see. Going to next year, I want to be creative. This is an experiment, and then we'll keep experimenting and figure out how to do this best. Sean says, not sure you've covered this already, but thoughts on EU laws forcing Apple to open up their apps ecosystem. I covered this vaguely, but it's horrible. This is the same. This is laws that are going to force Apple to actually do what Elon Musk wants them to do, I guess. But this is by law, and that is to allow third party app stores to sell Apple apps for the iPhone, to sell apps for the iPhone. That way Apple won't be able to charge. I don't think the 30% that it charges right now or the 15% that it charges right now. It looks like the EU is forcing Apple to do that and allow it. Whether it will just be in Europe, I think it'll have to be global. I don't think they can wall it off just for Europe. But look, this is the same coercive mechanism by which they're forcing Apple to give up on the lightning cables, which I have like 25 of them because from all the years and go to USB-C. So the next iPhones in 2024 by law, by European law have to be USB-C hookup because it turns out that bureaucrats in Brussels know what the best way to connect our electronics is, and they know how to do it in a way that will not suppress future technological advancements. Yes, I've talked about that. I could talk about it more and I probably will at some point. It is absolutely abusive state power. It's absolutely none of the government's business. What cables a company uses or how it sells its apps. You don't like Apple's app store? Don't buy an Apple. There are plenty of competitors. I mean, there's only one competitor for the operating system, but plenty of competitors for phones. And Google is a much more open platform so you could use an Android phone and do your thing. EU is authoritarian and fascist in its attempts to tell business how to run their lives, how to run their business. Jacken. Have a nice weekend. Greetings from Norway. Thank you. Great to hear from you in Norway. Waldmer, thank you for the support. Really, really appreciate it. Great guys. Rana Lovis of our 50-minute show today. I will see you all, I think, tomorrow. Not exactly what time I have to manage this weekend and figure out what the times are going to be, but there will be a show tomorrow. And then I also have to figure out and I'll be announcing it soon when the members-only show will be. And I have to get a topic for the members-only show. So a few ideas for a topic for a members-only show. Send them over. All right, everybody, have a great weekend. Have a great Friday and a great weekend. And I will see you all sometime tomorrow. Bye, everybody. Marilyn, thank you for excellent analysis. Commentary on a wide range of topics. Definitely value for value. Thank you, Marilyn. Really appreciate it.