 The radical. Fundamental principles of freedom, rational self-interest, and individual rights. This is The Iran Brook Show. All right, everybody. Welcome to the Iran Brook Show on this, what is it, Monday? Monday morning. It's been a while. I thought I would do a lot more shows from Austin when I was there than I ended up doing. I need to adjust my expectations more appropriately to the extent to which I'm busy and to the extent to which I don't sleep well on the road and make more appropriate plans in terms of shows. It was disappointing in that sense. It was a great time in Austin. If you haven't seen my talk, Uniform Ordinary Life, about Iran and the fight for freedom in China and the fight for freedom, then please watch it. I think you'll enjoy it. I think you'll get a lot out of it. Please, it's a kind of a talk that I think can be shared. It's a kind of a talk that I think a lot of people could be interested in. It's not explicitly objectivist in that sense. There's a lot of stuff. Why not just share it, guys? If anybody's objecting to that talk, then you've got other problems with it. If anybody unfriends you because of that, then they've got problems with you. So just share it. Let's get it out there. Let's try to get this. I don't know that it can go viral, but let's try to get a significant viewership of it. There is a version of it that we put out yesterday, I think, or Saturday, that is cleaned up a little bit in terms of the beginning. So the technical issues that happened in the beginning are cleaned up and you get the video directly. So yes, share, share, share. I mean, this is exactly the kind of video where we can get some real visibility, where you can get to people who are not already fans, who are not already familiar. Put tags on it. You run protest tags. Put a variety of different tags on it and let's try to get that prominent. Interestingly enough, the rest of the weekend I spent at Texas at a seminar held by the Salem Center, by Greg Samiri, on racism with a number of objectivist intellectuals. And it was fabulous. It was really interesting. It was an opportunity to really talk about these issues and discuss them and really figure out what I know and what I don't know, what are their blind spots. And anyway, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, that's bad. Okay. I was broadcasting live on the Salem Center YouTube channel and so I'm glad I caught that and turned it off. So anyway, we did a seminar with a bunch of people at the Salem Center at the University of Texas on racism. And I won't say who is there because I don't know that's public. But anyway, on racism and it was really interesting and I learned a lot from it. And I'm sure that will benefit some of my analysis of topics in the future. Starting with, let's talk about right now, let's talk about Tyree and Nicole's. I mean, I don't know if you guys saw the footage of the weekend. I don't generally recommend it. It's brutal. It really is horrific. And it's unexplainable in a sense of the irrationality and the brutality of the police here and just the way they treat this guy. And it's, you know, the way they treat Tyree and it's inexplainable why they stopped him. These guys, the five policemen are all part of a kind of a special police unit, Skopjean, that's been dismantled since. But Skopjean that was put together to reduce violent crime in the city and it was focused on that. It wasn't doing traffic stops. Why were they stopping this guy for unsafe driving or something like that? Why were they two police cars and mock cars doing the stopping? Why was he put to the ground on a traffic stop? He didn't have a weapon. He didn't go for a knife. He didn't go for a gun. It's just unthinkable what happened here. What happened here? And there are questions about race. There are lots of questions about race that this brings up that I don't think one can ignore. One, if you were a white driver, would this have happened, played out exactly the same way? The fact that the cops are black makes no difference. Second, if the cops were white, would there be people all over the media defending them right now? I don't see anybody defending them right now. Anybody. Even the generally poor police people don't seem to be defending them. If there were white cops, would they be defending them? Would they, at the very least, be going out and saying, well, we don't know the facts, maybe this, maybe that? Everybody's pretty uniform. So is this race-free in America? There is no race-free today in America, particularly not when it comes to cops. I'm not saying any of this is related to, I'm not saying what they did to him is related to race. I don't know, but we don't know. And there's very much, you can't ignore the possibility that it is. The way that five policemen can't really subdue one guy, not particularly strong, not particularly, you know, and why is he on the ground? What has he done? And why are they all yelling at him? I mean, I saw one analysis where they said that in the span of 13 minutes, they, 71 commands from different people. This goes against all the training these guys had. Suppose they have one guy in charge giving the commands. Why is everybody yelling at him different things? He complies with them. They keep yelling at him. He complies. He's saying, I'm doing everything you're telling me to do. And he still gets beaten up. And it's not just beaten up. In order to subdue this guy, they tase him. They pepper spray him. They kick him in the head at least twice. They kick him and beat him everywhere else. I mean, the beating was such that it killed him. I mean, this is completely and utterly messed up. He did comply at every step. They tell him to do something he does it at every step. They say, get on the ground. He gets on the ground. They keep yelling and getting with the guy. Finally, he figures out they want him to lie on the ground. He lies on the ground. They keep yelling at him. So he turns over on his stomach. They keep yelling at him and beating him. It doesn't matter. His compliance was not an issue. You watch this video. He's complying. But if you're getting beaten up for no reason, are you going to just lay there and do nothing? Well, she's fighting with him. Why would he get out of the car on a traffic stop? He's arguing with him. Yes, don't argue with police. That gives you an excuse to beat him up. These are thugs with uniforms. And not only that, again, I go back to what I was arguing. I've been arguing since George Floyd and I've been arguing. They're untrained thugs. They don't know what they're doing. They don't know how to subdue somebody without killing them. There's absolutely no reason to use deadly force here, as there's been no reason to use deadly force in so many of these police beating cases. They should be trained to be able to subdue a guy one-on-one quickly, effectively without killing him. It is absolutely ridiculous that these guys would do what they did. I don't care if you're speaking back to them because they're asking you to do something unreasonable. They put handcuffs on him, taken to police, and say that he didn't follow orders. Why is that difficult? What does that require beating him? What does that require putting him on the ground? What does that require kicking him in the face? What does that require pepper spray and tasers? All of them, not just one of them, all of them, all of the above. Would you just comply with being kicked in the face? Why aren't we training these people? Why aren't we training these people to subdue? I don't know who we're recruiting to be policemen. I don't know why. I guess part of the problem is you give them special designation in a scorpion squad, and suddenly they feel like they're above the law and they're supermen. So, you know, truly horrific. And then how stupid are these cops? I mean, talk about stupid. These cops, you know, they've got body camps. Do they think they can get away with it? Is that the issue here? Is that in spite of the fact that they know they've got body camps, in spite of the fact that they know that their behavior is going to be reported, they continue doing it? And then I don't know if you saw from the video, it takes the medical staff, minutes, to treat Tehvi. They're just hanging out. They're not washing him. I mean, who knows if his life could have been saved if he'd been treated immediately. But there's a nonchalance. There's a disregard for human life, a disregard for an individual's life. This guy is not some murderer on the loose. This guy has not shot anybody and is escaping the police. This guy, according to the police, will stop for a traffic violation, a traffic violation. How many of you have not been stopped for a traffic violation? How many times will you ask to step out of the car at a traffic violation? It's an utter complete disregard for individual human life, for individual, for the individual person. And an arrogance, an arrogance and a stupidity that is just unthinkable and should cause us to really question who accepting as police and then what kind of training are they getting? I've said this before, they should be trained to subdue quickly, effectively. There should be almost no circumstances where a policeman has to beat up somebody. There should be very few circumstances where you have to shoot somebody and only shoot somebody if somebody is pointing a gun at you. But you should be trained in ways to subdue a suspect in any other circumstances without risking life to yourself or to other people. But we kind of hire policemen and we don't really train them and we give them a gun and once in a while they go shooting and maybe we give them these seminars on how to be a nice cop and what to do and what not to do and probably don't test them on a regular basis. And we certainly don't require them to be in physical shape. You can see that across the border and cops. I mean, actually cops all the time and it's stoning to me how they can be in that shape. They couldn't survive in the military that way. And police is about force and therefore they should be world experts in wielding force. They should be the best in the community at wielding force effectively while minimizing damage. Anyway, it's just a horror story. And you know, it's I think for most reasonable people this is now it's scary because again, this is just a traffic stop. And you know, I'm the kind of person who if the cop is asking me to do something completely unreasonable, I'm likely to tell him to argue with him to debate him while complying but to give him a little lip because I don't like injustice and I don't like stupidity. So I need to be careful, I guess is the answer. It's just I mean, the video is just horrific. So don't watch it. Watch it if you feel the need to if you need to see a concrete, a real visual of it, you can just read the accounts on how horrific it really is was. All right, I mean, we'll keep watching this. We'll keep watching this and monitoring it and seeing what happens. As I said, I definitely do think I'm glad they're being prosecuted for second degree murder. I think it's definitely definitely second degree murder. You know, from what we've seen, we'll see what the court says, what the trial shows. And I do think I do think race is an issue. I don't think you could ignore the fact that he is black. And I don't think you can ignore the fact that nobody is coming to the policemen's defense. But if they were white, would they be? I think there would be people coming to the defense anyway. My sense of this. But as we say, it's still a lot of holes in it. So a lot of stuff we don't exactly know. Let's see what happens. Let's see what comes out in the trial, of course. All right. Over the weekend, there was a drone attack on an Iranian military facility. An interesting military facility in that this military facility is right in the smack of the center of, I think, a big city in Iran, Isfahan. Isfahan, I think, has about two million people in it. It's a big city. Right smack in the middle of the city is a military facility. It's a facility that supposedly is responsible for both research and development and building of missiles for the Iranian military. These are missiles that potentially could be targeted at Israel. Glenn, thank you, really appreciate the support. Could be, that's $100 from Glenn. It could be targeted at Israel. But these are some missiles that there is some talk about the fact that these missiles might be sold or given to the Russians with regard to the war in Ukraine. The attack is almost certainly the result of the Israelis, almost certainly this was an assault by the Israeli intelligence, I assume, the Mossad. It's interesting, the drones that attacked this facility, the Iranians said they knocked them all down, but there was a large explosion in the middle of, large explosion in the middle of, what do you call it, Isfahan. So it appears that they achieved their target. These were done by quadcopters. These are drones with four of these, what do you call it, like a helicopter. There's no way these drones could be launched from Israel and travel hundreds and hundreds of miles all the way to Isfahan. You know, you could imagine they could be navigated by satellite, but it's hard to believe that they can go all the way, propellers. Thank you, Rob, that's the word I was looking for, propellers. Nobody's talking about this. None of the stories I read, they talked about this, but these must have been likely launched in Iran by Israeli operatives in Iran or maybe from neighboring Iraq or some way neighboring, but almost certainly not from all the way, flown all the way from Israel. That would be, I think, impossible. So it is interesting. It's also true that this is not the first attack by drones on Iranian facilities, by what we believe is Israel. In August 2019, Israel sent an exploding quadcopter into the heart of a Hezbollah-dominated neighborhood in Beirut, Lebanon, and to destroy a machinery vital for the production of precision missiles. So they literally brought it into a room and blew it up. I mean, that's pretty cool. And that was in 2019. In June 2021, quadcopters exploded at one of Iran's main manufacturing centers for centrifuges, which purify uranium at the country's two major uranium enrichment facilities. A year ago, six quadcopters exploded in another Iranian manufacturing and storage plant for military drones. So they were already attacking the Iranian capacity to produce drones, although it seems like they're still producing huge numbers of drones that are primarily going at this point to Russia. And then in May 2022, a drone strike targeted a highly sensitive military site outside Tehran, where it is assumed Iran develops missiles, nuclear, and drone technologies. Israel has been using drones pretty regularly to attack sites and targets within Iran. I mean, this is pretty cool. You know, drone technology allows Israel to do this at relatively low risk. It doesn't involve flying jets into Iranian airspace, which is, again, hundreds and hundreds of miles away. You'd have to travel over Jordan, over Iraq, or over Saudi Arabia in order to get there. It's been done. Israel, of course, bombed a nuclear facility outside of Baghdad, but Iran is even further than that. And they would have to fly in some kind of stealth mode to avoid detection. It would be a very, very complicated operation to fly actual airplane in drones, allow them to use, I guess, local agents or local special forces units in order to do all this stuff. And if you think about it from the perspective of special operations, when you think about it from the perspective of what is needed and kind of intelligence that they have to have in order to launch this, it's pretty amazing. A lot of these installations, remember, are secret. A lot of these installations are not known. Generally, the Iranians don't advertise that the Israelis not only have the intelligence to know where these installations are and to know what exactly to attack, but they also have the intelligence and the resources and the personnel to actually be able to deploy within Iran and actually be able to destroy targets within Iran. All I can say is good for the Israelis in doing this. I think this is something the whole world benefits from. I think the Ukrainians must be happy, but mainly this is an act of self-defense of Israel, Israel defending itself. I mean, if you consider this plus all the attacks on Iranian targets in Syria, Israel is an ongoing sustained nonstop war against the Iranians on Iranian soil on an any way Iran sends its troops, its military and its equipment. And this is a way to just degrade the Iranian capacity for significant, for war with Israel. So again, I think these are all pretty impressive from a military strategic intelligence perspective and pretty important from a self-defense perspective. All right. Yeah, there's a story again over the weekend, over the last couple of weeks really about Ukrainian corruption. I'm not going to get into a lot of details here, but Ukraine before the war was a very corrupt country. It has been corrupt since its separation of the Soviet Union. I'm sure it was corrupt before then too. But recently, I think before the war, it was ranked 122nd in the world in terms of corruption. The only country in all of Europe listed as more corrupt than Ukraine was Russia. But this is the difference. First, I think Zelensky was taking steps to eradicate corruption in Ukraine. They were slow. They were partial. They were not very effective. They were far from ideal. They were far from ideal. But this is the difference. Over the last couple of weeks, there's been breaking stories in Ukrainian media about corruption in a number of different places within the Ukrainian government. Some of it having to do with deployment of the money and the resources being provided Ukraine by the European Union and by the United States. And corrupt individuals were named. Immediately, an investigation was launched. Those people were fired. They're going to be prosecuted. And there was outrage within Ukraine. And there's clearly, at least in this segment, a cleaning of the house. And indeed, I think this just provides Zelensky with an opportunity to get rid of people he might have wanted to get rid of anyway because of corruption. But now, because it's kind of an international story, he can do it more freely. Imagine if this story had broken in Russia. But corruption within Russia, one of the oligarchs or something like that. Does anybody think, or Putin himself, does anybody think that actions would have been taken to address this, that people would have been arrested? There would be courts, that people would be fired? No. I mean, quite the contrary, the reporter would be arrested and put in jail. That is, the people complaining about the regime would have been punished. And that's really one of the many differences between Ukraine and Russia. Ukraine is not a Western good country when it comes to its political regime. It is indeed corrupt, and it does have significant problems. And it does have problems of political corruption, economic corruption. And also, it has problems of massive cronyism and so on. The differences that there are forces in Ukraine trying to fix it, and there is a relatively independent media, and when the media reports on a occurrence, something is actually done about it. Something is actually done about it, whereas in Russia, there is no independent media, none whatsoever. Indeed, the last fragment of independent media last week, the last fragment of independent media in Moscow was shut down last week, and anybody linking to, referring to an article by that media will be tried for treason in Russia. There is no independent media. It's gone, finished, kaput, completely. But it's just as corrupt, actually more corrupt than Ukraine, and yet there's nothing. And nobody complains about that. Very little complaining about Russian corruption. So a big difference in the level of freedom between the two countries. Ukraine is more free than Russia and is moving in the right direction. Russia, before the war, was less free than Ukraine and moving in the wrong direction. And then after that, the fact that Russia invaded Ukraine, and you've got the bad guys and the good guys in this conflict, pretty well sorted out and pretty clear cut without much ambiguity. All right, anonymous user. Thank you, Jeff Bannister. Thank you. Appreciate the support, guys. We're about $60 short of our goal, but you know, should be pretty easy to get there. Let's see. Finally, just an update on the chips and China story that I am monitoring on a regular basis. The United States, as you know, has placed severe restrictions on the export of technology to China and not just the export of technology, but also the export of microprocessors themselves, particularly the advanced variants of the advanced microprocessors. For a while now, it has been the case that the ASML in the Netherlands has never really sent to China the extreme ultraviolet lithography machines that cost, I think, what do they cost, $10 million a piece or something like that. Those machines have not been sent to China and ASML is committed not to sending them to China. But again, over the weekend, further development is the Boat Japan, which also produces equipment for the manufacturer of semiconductors and ASML, have now agreed not to send to China even the one generation less advanced equipment than extreme ultraviolet lithography. So that would cause China to be even further backwards. Japan's Nikon, which competes with ASML in supplying parts and technology processes that are deep ultraviolet lithography, which is one step less sophisticated than the extreme ultraviolet lithology. Again, Boat Japan and the Netherlands have agreed to deny China even that technology, which makes it very, very difficult if not impossible for the Chinese to catch up in terms of chip manufacturing. The best the Chinese can do, and another story that broke this week, the best that the Chinese can do is basically steal the chips themselves. They can't produce them, but they can steal the chips. Indeed, the story that broke last week is that chips that have been illegal to export to China for a couple of decades now, I think they were first made illegal in 1999 or something like that, have been, you know, it's come out that the Chinese are using those chips in various military equipment. So China is finding ways to get their hands on American chips. Just like China and Iran, Iran drones, Iranian drones are using American chips. Russia and China are finding ways to get around in the black market. There's a massive black market, it turns out, in advanced chips. It's still not the same. Smuggling chips in is just not going to be as effective, certainly in terms of quantity. And then it's, you know, as long as China does not have the capacity to develop the most advanced chips in-house, and as long as it is difficult for them to access the most advanced chips in the world market, they can access them in the black market, I guess, but not more than that. It does retort their progress. It does make their weapons systems at least at some level less effective than American weapons systems, potentially. And it certainly makes it impossible for them to achieve what they sought to achieve, which is technological independence from the West by 2025. That's not happening. It's been extended to 2030, but that, it's just not going to happen. The China is going to achieve technological parity with the U.S. or with the West by 2030 if these kind of technologies are denied. It just, I mean, once you understand it, it's impossible for them to basically develop extreme ultraviolet lithography in 10 years. It might be impossible for them to develop in 20 years. 20 years, it might be impossible for them to ever develop it, given the expertise that has to go into it, and the amount of subcontracting that has to go into it. In ASML's case, the company in Holland, the expertise, they get to access companies all over the West, and companies that are world-class at a little, tiny little thing. That expertise is not available to the Chinese. All right, so that was the news. That was the update of the news. Thank you. We've reached our goal. I really appreciate that. Thank you, Maria. I really appreciate the support. Thank you. $50 got us over the top. Vladimir, thank you. Friend Hopper, thank you. Anonymous user, thank you. All right, let's quickly do some super chats, and we'll call it a day. Martin, by the way, if you want to support The One Book Show, if you particularly like these morning shows, like regular morning shows, somebody texted me today said, oh, I want to become a monthly supporter of The One Book Show. I really like the morning shows. I want to support the morning shows in particular. How much should I give? And I said, 25 bucks a month is good. Anything above 25 bucks a month is fantastic. If you can afford more, 25 is great. Of course, if you can't afford 25, any amount. But those monthly contributions are super beneficial, again, because they give me predictability of income into the future. And it's steady, it's regular. So please consider doing that at whatever level you can afford and find a value in terms of the value for value exchange that's going on here. So if you want to support The One Book Show, just write Morning Show and do it. You can do it on Patreon. Subscribe, star, and you're on bookshow.com slash support, which is PayPal. All right, Martin, Martin, 50 euro. Thank you, Martin. I visited Bratislava on Thursday last week to see Nikos' talk about the anti-liberal right. He was brilliant as usual, excited to attend more upcoming live events in Europe. Also, Discord server sounds like a cool idea. Yes, there is a Discord server. I'll get you more information about that once I figure out what a hell the Discord server is. I don't know. But there is now a Discord server for The One Book Show, I think. It's either here or it's about to be launched. Miroslav can fill you in on the chat. I don't have a Discord server. You guys have a Discord server. How about that? Martin, I will be in Bratislava. Let me pull up the calendar so I can tell you exactly when I'm going to be in Bratislava. I mean, I've got this killer schedule that they put me on. We've got a new coordinator for AERA Europe who's just, you know, he's trying to really work me. Okay, so on the 21st of February, I will be doing two talks in Prague. One at Severeau and one at another university. What university is that? That is at Anglo-American University. So I want the Anglo-American University and one at Severeau. That'll be on the 21st of February, on the 22nd of February, at 10 a.m. in the morning, and I have to drive to this place. I'll be at Bruno, I think I'm pronouncing that, at the University of Bruno, at 10 a.m. giving a talk. And then in the evening at 6 p.m., on Wednesday at 22nd, I will be in Bratislava giving a talk. So stay tuned, all those talks out there. I think there's information. If there isn't, there will be going up on my website. There'll be information on the Einren Institute website. Yes, Miroslav, you're going to have to take a vacation. Actually, you should come with me to Bruno at Bratislava. Just take the whole week off. So Martin, I hope we have an opportunity to see you in some of those talks. I'll be, right now I'm planning to drive from Prague to Bruno to Bratislava and then to Vienna the next day to fly to Belize. All right, thanks Martin. Appreciate the support. Michael says, thank God for YouTube and bodycams. God knows how many killing police have gotten away with. Also, are you doing a show Tuesday evening? I have a ton of super chat questions I've been thinking about. Yes, I will be doing a show Tuesday evening. I don't have a theme yet, but it will be at 7 p.m. eastern time. I don't know what the theme will be. There's a bunch of stuff I want to do. I want to do a show debunking the vaccine nonsense or presenting evidence clearly the vaccines are not killing people. I want to do, which is plentiful and gushing over. But there's so many graphs. I can probably do a whole show just showing you graphs. And then I want to do a show on Tate and Andrew Tate. I think I was way too nice in my comments before on Andrew Tate. Andrew Tate is much worse of a human being than I thought he was after doing a little bit of research. It didn't take long to discover what a scumbag he is. So I'm thinking of doing a show on Andrew Tate and maybe touching on issues of masculinity. But those are some of the issues. Those are two issues that I want to do shows on before I leave for Europe. But we'll see what I do it on tomorrow. Jeff wants stats on Vax. I've got Amish coming on. And I have to ask Amish if he wants to do the show with me on the vaccines or whether I should do it and then have him on to kind of give more of the background and more of the higher level stuff. I'm going to strategize with Amish before I figure out because Amish is coming on maybe in the early March. I don't have, let me just see. Yeah, he's coming on in early March. Just to give you a quick update, we have Gina Gorlin on Thursday. The second of February. We have Jason Crawford coming in on February 9th. He runs the Progress Studies Institute. We're going to be talking about progress and progress studies and what he's doing and what the institute is doing. But generally we'll talk about progress and some of the work he's doing. I think he's writing a book. We'll talk about his book and everything else. And then we have Alex Epstein on the 16th of February, obviously to talk about everything that's been happening since the publication of the book. We had him on just when the public was published, I think, that was it. And now we'll have him on like a few months later to kind of see what's been achieved, where we are, what can still be, you know, where he's seeing progress. So that's exciting. And then so I'm just giving you a quick update on the interviews coming up. And then we've got Amish coming on on the 9th of March. So Amish will be on on the 9th of March. And let's see if I've got anybody else. Yeah. Well, no, I'm not sure if it's the 9th of March. Wait, I've got Amish on two dates. Either the 9th of March or the 16th of March. I've got him on twice. And those will be Amish. Anyway, so I'm looking forward to all those shows. Hopefully you guys are too. All right. Michael, thank you. Paul, Ayn Rand's essay for the New Intellectual is one of the best essays of historical analysis ever written. Yet it is really referenced by objectivist intellectuals. Can you please devote some time on your program to analyzing this essay at some point in the future? Yeah, absolutely. And I don't think it's true that we don't. I mean, we haven't analyzed the essay qua essay, but we refer to it all the time. I mean, every time we talk about a witch doctor and a tiller and the world of intellectuals and in changing the world. And I mean, I think it is inspired and inspired a lot of how we talk about history and a lot of how we talk about the world and in particular a lot of how we talk about how to change the world and certainly has inspired the Ayn Rand Institute's strategy about trying to change the world. So I wouldn't say it's been ignored or hasn't been referenced, but I do think we could focus more on the essay itself and talk more about it in more detail. J.J. Jigby's, I'm excited for your debate with Brian Kaplan. You're both among my favorites. Could you invite him on YBS for more casual conversation afterwards? I might. I'm particularly interested in talking to Brian about immigration. I think he is one of the best people out there on immigration. Let's see how the debate goes. Let's see how friendly he is. I don't know exactly what to expect from him because I don't know Brian. But, you know, is he hostile towards me or not? I just don't know. He is friendly towards some objectivist. Obviously Alex Epstein and others, but I don't know. I have a reputation among libertarians and so I don't want to invite him on the show if he lands up being hostile. But if the debate goes well in terms of just our relationship, then I'll definitely invite him on to talk about immigration. I mean, him and the guy at Kato are the two best people in immigration today anyway in terms of arguments. A large YouTuber lost his channel. This is Bree. A large YouTuber lost his channel to an email phishing attack. The attack defeated the two-step verification. The email claims to be about a copyright issue. Wow. Wow. That's scary. That's scary. These phishing attacks. I noticed they're getting more and more sophisticated. I got one by text the other day and I almost fell for it until I dug a little bit deeper. But they can get really, really, really, really, you need to watch yourself. Speka1223, hey, Johan, I was on vacation at Serbia. What do you think about Serbia, past, present, and future? I've been to Serbia several times over the years, over the last, I'd say, eight years or so. I've spoken there on several occasions. The problem with Serbia, as is the problem with much of that region, is the extent to which they are tribal and to the extent to which their identity all tied up in the particular tribe from which they are is particularly bad. Obviously, as we saw in much of the Civil War in former Yugoslavia during the breakup of Yugoslavia, they are brutal. They are brutal. But that brutality really comes from that tribalism, tribalists are brutal because they dehumanize the other. Others stop being human and therefore they can be treated in the most horrific, horrible conditions. They are, of course, in a position today where there is the risk of real war in Serbia between Serbia and Kosovo, which I think is horrible, but again, the Kosovo and the pretty tribal as well. So it's often hard to tell who's to blame, but everybody there is tribal and the Serbs are among the worst of it and the most aggressive about it. I think they still resent the breakup of Yugoslavia. They would have liked to rule over all of it. I think they really view it that way, that it's theirs, that land is all theirs and they should be the rulers over the entire territory. Again, there are all kinds of people, but there's also a real liberty movement in Serbia. There's a pretty good think tank there that is pro-liberty. There were a lot of objectivists who came out of Serbia. I've spoken there many times and the people who hosted me and the people I spoke to were amazing. So there is also, at the certain level, a real rejection of that tribalism and a real rejection of that militancy and a real embrace and a real fight for liberty and freedom. I think there's some politicians, if I remember right, people explaining it to me, that there is a force for better and freedom within Serbia. I think Belgrade is kind of an interesting city. It's really got potential to be a beautiful city. I think as they get richer, it could be a beautiful city. There's still a long way for them to go to get richer. It's still a very corrupt country. It's up there in the corruption index. It also has made, I think, the strategic error of aligning itself with Russia versus aligning itself with the European Union. I think it would be much better for Serbia from an economic perspective to align itself with the European Union and along as there was aligned primarily with Russia that will hurt them economically. A place like Croatia and I think Slovenia are joining the European Union. Croatia is actually adopting the euro and I think that will benefit Croatia enormously whereas I think that Serbia, to a large extent, is going to be left behind by not joining the trade union as the European Union as leftist and as corrupt as the European Union is. Serbia is worse. Croatia is worse. That's why for them, entering the European Union is a step forward, not a step backward. And suddenly, after we think there are lines with Russia, the fact that there are Slavs is part of the tribalism involved. Racism, right? This is all racism. The hatred of other people because they belong to a different tribe, the judging of other people because of what tribe they belong to. All just aspects of racism. Unfortunately, Europeans are quite racist to the extent that they are tribalists. Anonymous user says, why doesn't the US produce the most advanced chips? For a variety of business errors, business mistakes, we don't. So Chang, who is the founder of... Actually, the first and best way to get the answer to this is to go back and listen to my Chip War show, the episode I did on the micro-processing wars. I think I discussed this in great detail but just a quick answer is that when Texas Instruments... When Chang, he was the number two, I think, at Texas Instruments, proposed Texas Instruments move to a business model where they specialize in the production of chips without designing them. That is producing other people's designs. TI turned him down and he couldn't really find any interest in the United States to build such a factory, a factory that only producers doesn't design the chips. And to really realize his dream, he went to Taiwan. He's not from Taiwan. He has no real connections to Taiwan other than he was born in China and raised in Hong Kong. But he went to Taiwan where they were interested in this idea. And what happened is that that is an idea, the revolutionized chip making. It allowed for specialization. It allowed TSMC to specialize in the production of chips and other companies to specialize in the design of chips or even to the level of specialization design. There are three U.S. companies that produce all the software to design chips, but the actual manufacture of chips happens in Taiwan. The other challenge the U.S. has in producing chips is a workforce. We just don't have enough people with the skill set to be able to compete on the production of chips. You have a lot of such people with that kind of skill set and that kind of education in Taiwan, in China, and in South Korea. And that's why chip manufacturing is gravitating over there, although there's probably less of that in China. And of course, low in chip manufacturing is also being done in a place like Malaysia. There it's cost of labor because of these very simple chips. So cost of labor matters, but also skill set. Most of our engineers do different things and we don't have enough people with the right kind of skill set for chip manufacturing. And then the other aspect of that, and I'll end with this, is the fact that Intel screwed up, Intel did not keep up with the latest technology. In spite of the fact that Intel was the one who really came up with the idea of extreme ultraviolet lithography, they ended up not being able to use, to be the most advanced user of that lithography. They messed up, they didn't invest enough, they focused on the wrong things, they didn't put enough into R&D onto the right things, and they lost out, a competition. And other American chip manufacturers like AMD and Micron all landed up being chip designers and couldn't compete on the chip manufacturing with TSMC and with Samsung. So yeah, division of labor, competition, markets, basically the United States was not the best in the world at this particular thing. Taiwan was, in South Korea. All right, let's see. One of the famous says Intel finally put out a chip with 7 nano-meter technology. It beat AMD apart, but no, they're putting out 3 nano-meter soon. But the reality is that none of that is Intel. You know, ultimately TSMC, at least the 3 nano-meter chip are going to be all TSMC. I think the 4 nano-meter is also all TSMC. So TSMC is actually the one producing those kind of chips. The only ones who are capable are producing those kind of chips. All right, thanks everybody. I will see you tomorrow morning and tomorrow evening. And have a great week. Thanks everybody. Don't forget support to show you.