Speaker 1: 0:25

Howdy Ben, how are you today, Gene? I'm doing alright. I'm doing alright Yourself.

Speaker 2: 0:31

I'm doing alright too. I need to fulfill an order for a virtual spaceship once we're done here, yeah. Yeah, get you some virtual spaceships right here folks.

Speaker 1: 0:44

For real money Makes total sense.

Speaker 2: 0:49

I know right, seems like a good investment. What's the difference from NFTs, you tell me.

Speaker 1: 0:54

Well, for one, nfts do have the mathematical non-fungible side of you know.

Speaker 2: 1:00

Yeah, but the value is only worth whatever someone's willing to pay for.

Speaker 1: 1:03

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. But my point is an in-game resource like that is not prevented from being copied or whatever. Here's the thing.

Speaker 2: 1:12

Now that we're coming. Actually, it is prevented from being copies because it is tied to my account and when I gift it it'll be tied to the other person's account. Okay, I still just don't understand why people are spending money on.

Speaker 1: 1:29

I don't either, but says the guy yeah, uh-huh however, uh, good tea.

Speaker 2: 1:39

However, um, you know, as long as I'm selling for more than what I paid for it, I'm in good shape, because then I'm making real world money on a virtual commodity yep well, beanie babies and tulips, man, beanie babies and tulips exactly that's exactly it, and uh, it's a, it's a thing. So, um, spaceships aside, uh, I know I I I want to talk about the TV shows that you got me sucked into watching two of them. But, what else is going on politically speaking?

Speaker 1: 2:19

Oh man, Well, you saw about Daniel Penny, right the New York case.

Speaker 2: 2:25

All I saw was that the jury was hung.

Speaker 1: 2:29

Right, uh, all I saw was that the jury was hung right. So the jury was hung and the prosecutor moved to dismiss the first charge because they couldn't consider any of the other charges until they had handled the first charge. So they're moved. The prosecutor has moved to dismiss the first charge so that they can still consider the lesser charges.

Speaker 2: 2:48

Instead of just throwing it out the whole time for everything. What's that? Hopefully they'll be as hung for the other charges as the first one. Maybe We'll see it's retarded to charge a man for self-defense.

Speaker 1: 3:04

Well, in defense of others. Yeah, well, you know it's. It's look, this guy was being belligerent. He's threatening to kill people. He um was obviously drugged up. Daniel penny put him in the show cold and put him in the recovery position.

Speaker 1: 3:28

He had no idea that this guy died. He was just trying to, you know, ameliorate the situation, that's, new york, or closing the asylums down anyway. Well, the point is, look, if daniel penny was hopped up running around doing this you know seeking this then maybe you could make some arguments, but you'd have to have enough evidence to convince a jury to me that he was seeking it, that he wanted to kill someone, and this was his excuse.

Speaker 2: 4:08

The only reason he's in there is because he's white.

Speaker 1: 4:11

Yeah, well, anyway, don't get me started on that bud. I mean, you can say this, you know, because you know, I can say what Because I'm not white?

Speaker 2: 4:27

Okay, exactly, he has. I can say what because I'm not white, okay, exactly, uh-huh, uh-huh, he has uh for the record jeans jewish. So that's the according to csb jew gene. Oh my god, csb such racist. Um, apparently in new york all it takes to actually have a prosecutor go after you is to be white I don't know about that, but look, here's the deal.

Speaker 1: 5:00

This case was so egregious. This is. This is right up there with the written house case on who was white. Charges should have never been brought, sort of thing exactly so. I think it's about time we passed an amendment that says you can't charge white people I okay, no, but what we ought to do is really look at our judiciary and reform it greatly uh, I sent you a podcast.

Speaker 1: 5:27

It was from a month or so ago. It was by Nick Fuertes or whatever his name is up there in Virginia, the representative and he he had on the the father that Is in this court case about his sons that the Texas Supreme Court ruled on and everything else as far as transitioning his son, and it's worth listening to. I know the guy that's relating to Okay, texas Supreme Court ruled on and everything else as far as transitioning his son and it's worth listening to.

Speaker 2: 5:52

I know the guy that's relating to Okay. I mean, I've talked to him. I've tried to get him to be a guest on our podcast, or on my podcast anyway, but he didn't want to do it.

Speaker 1: 6:01

But he's been cool.

Speaker 2: 6:03

He's been on a bunch of shows.

Speaker 1: 6:06

Well, it's worth listening to, because this was they delve into more of the problems with family court and everything else, and it it is our. Our legal system is so fucked up in this country and it is a sad day that there is no such thing as justice. Judges are vigilantes in their own right and any thinking rational man and I use man here in the not referring to any sex but talking about humans, which I hate that I have to explain that, but people don't speak English anymore. Any rational thinking that limits it to men.

Speaker 1: 6:47

Only Any rational thinking man I only any rational thinking man, I mean that's who does not want To see. Let's just say you're, you're of the opinion. I don't want my son to be castrated when he's 12 years old because I think, he needs.

Speaker 1: 7:04

He needs to grow up, and then he can make that decision on his own. Like I, will respect his decision if he makes it at 18. Fine, but right now, no, son, you're too young and dumb, you do not get to make that decision. I get to make that decision for you, and even if you think well, the mom is for it. So why is this a problem? Well, because you should always seek to do less harm, and inaction is the more conservative approach as far as making sure you're not doing any harm. Right, and I? I just yeah, but how do you not become a vigilante over shit like this.

Speaker 2: 7:48

There we go. Now you're talking Exactly yeah, and, incidentally, one of the things that Darren finally got around to doing is putting our Unrelenting Podcast on YouTube Podcast. Okay, within 24 hours there's already two warnings about medical misinformation. Within 24 hours, there's already two warnings about medical misinformation, and so clearly, this podcast is never going to be on YouTube.

Speaker 1: 8:16

Yeah, that's why I never even tried there. But I did put it on rumble for a little bit, but we just no one ever listened to it there, so that's okay. Yeah, not worth the effort.

Speaker 1: 8:48

Clearly Um, but I think this is how you end up, with ceos of companies getting murdered and a lot of people not really thinking it's a bad thing well, I think we've come to a place in our society where the amount of injustice has come to a head and look, I'm not calling for violence, I'm not asking for violence, but I will say and I will recognize that violence is the underlayment of our society. I've talked about this multiple times, I've said it all the time. Ultimately, you can say well, I have authority of you and I'm going to push and do whatever I want to you because I've got this piece of paper. That's legal authority. I'm going to do whatever I want to you, I'm going to do what I can here and I've got this piece of paper that says that I can. And at some point, a man who disagrees with what you're doing is going to say I don't give a fuck about that piece of paper, push me again and I'm coming after you physically, like that is the response.

Speaker 1: 9:57

You get to a point where you can no longer reason, you can no longer use rationale, you can no longer contain yourself to say I will abide by these rules. Right, the Declaration of Independence. You know it is better to tolerate such things as long as they are tolerable. You know we don't do this idly. This is not a first knee-jerk reaction, but it is the ultimate reaction to say no, you've gone too far, I will fight you on this. I'm not going to allow you to do it right. Our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor. You risk it all. But ultimately, that is the basis of our society, and I'm not just talking about the US, I'm talking about all civilized people, all men yes, I get it Anyway.

Speaker 1: 10:51

Just listening to this father and what the mother is doing. Yeah, I, I cannot. So for me. I listened to this story about this child and I hear nothing but a story of abuse and evil and it just hurts my heart and you know, I, I, some people with gender dysphoria may go, oh well, you. You just don't understand. You're right, I don't. But from my perspective, that gender dysphoria is being forced on this kid, it's being, uh, brainwashed into him and it's just, it's heartbreaking and I, like I don't know how a father wouldn't be in a murderous rampage over it.

Speaker 2: 11:46

I really don't oh yeah, I'll, I will. When we post the episode I I will add him on X. If he'll listen, maybe he'll give you an answer, yeah.

Speaker 1: 11:58

All I can say is his Orthodox Christianity must be stronger than mine. Because I don't know, I don't know man, it's Orthodox.

Speaker 2: 12:08

You know, there's strength.

Speaker 1: 12:09

in Orthodoxy, I worship a living God.

Speaker 2: 12:14

Yeah, congratulations. I prefer the old gods than you, odin or Zeus any day, uh-huh, oh. The other bit that you didn't mention, that I hear in this and this is not in casting blame on him, but rather spreading it equally amongst all men is what the hell did you marry this woman for? Again, saying this as a general thing, not a specific thing to him, because there's got to be a friend that warned you dude, this bitch is crazy, don't go through with it. And, like a lot of men, you just said, nah, nah, you just don't know her, like I do, exactly. Uh-huh, uh-huh, exactly. The friend knows her better than you. That's why he's telling you ahead of time don't do it. Man, if I had a buck for every friend that I've told that to, I'd have at least five bucks, uh well, all I can say is.

Speaker 2: 13:23

My dad told that to me about my ex-wife.

Speaker 1: 13:27

Yeah well, and sometimes friends are not as straightforward as they should be right, we're fearful that well, they're getting married. I don't want to say anything bad, I don't want to upset my friend, but sometimes you know, you need to kind of have a strong opinion about something and express it strong opinion about something and express it the.

Speaker 2: 13:56

The female of the species would not have survived if they didn't have the cunning to be able to get men to procreate with them well, the female, the species would survive because we require them for procreation well, that depends. Well, it depends. I mean, are you talking about infinite survival or immediate survival, because they rely on us for an awful lot? Yes, and men have been bending over backwards to satisfy them and getting less and less in every generation.

Speaker 2: 14:36

Like there was a point where it made sense to place the women on a pedestal, but that place is long gone. Thank you feminism, and thank you the 19th, and thank you, uh the 19th. And so, consequently, I think, not only should we not be placing them on a pedestal, uh, you ought to not get attached to one, because she will ruin your life. That is, it is a statistical fact. That does not mean stop having sex by any means, mgtow, I think, includes not having sex no.

Speaker 1: 15:13

Mgtow says the only relationships you should have with a woman is for sex and you should pay for it, so it's transactional. If you want to have kids, you should hire a surrogate which, incidentally, I I think is probably not a bad idea.

Speaker 2: 15:30

Um, because when it's transactional like that, then it's hard for the courts to side with the other side when everything's explicitly defying the contract.

Speaker 1: 15:39

Yeah, well, that's not the reality of people who actually grew up wanting a family and love.

Speaker 2: 15:49

Well, if you grew up with a family, the first thing you need is to build a time machine to go to a place where a family was actually something that not only was promoted, but was somewhat required in the United States, Because today it's not. The government is acting as the father most of the time.

Speaker 1: 16:11

Yeah, how's that going for us?

Speaker 2: 16:14

Yeah, have you. Oh, dude, you know, every time I see these YouTube videos making fun of the Russian army and then I look at videos of shots currently in the US military, with the pink hair, with not doing push-ups or pull-ups at all, with a slew of woke frankly, let's just call it what it is of woke activities that are taking place on military bases with full sanction of the United States government. There's probably few armies in the world that couldn't beat the US military today.

Speaker 1: 16:57

I mean we say that, but we have a lot of advantages.

Speaker 2: 17:02

Our only advantage is weapons. You take the weapons away and we're probably like in the 100th place in the world as far as actual commitment and physical training of military personnel. And once you exclude people over 40, the guys that actually got into the military back when it was a real military, oh we are completely fucked. We're probably in last place. I'm sure someone's going to say, oh, special forces, yeah, forces, yeah, okay, special forces, for sure they still have a much better training regiment. However, special forces don't win wars special that's not their role exactly.

Speaker 2: 17:45

So you can't just simply say, well, four percent of the us military is exactly where they should be, they're in great shape, they know what they're doing, they're well-supplied, they're well-trained and maintained, but you can't throw in the other 96% along with that. You can't pretend like there's no problem. There is a problem, and I don't think we're the only ones that are aware of it. I'm not the only one that's aware of it. I'm not the only ones who are it. I think it's pretty damn obvious, and the fact that there are videos that are shot on tiktok, inside of barracks, showing this happening, I think, is a huge problem in and of itself. Showing what happening, though? Showing this complete lack of military training and discipline, exactly.

Speaker 1: 18:36

Yeah, and you know why do we keep? Why do I keep seeing these videos on X and YouTube and so on of you know? There's a they claim it's a Russian soldier laying there in the field or whatever, and it's a single soldier, out by himself for some reason, which is weird and doesn't make any sense to me, and this drone is dropping a grenade and it's showing him getting blown up. Why is this something that we want to see at all and why are we not sitting there screaming? Okay, one guy by himself running around doesn't appear to be armed in most of these cases?

Speaker 1: 19:15

War crime anyone? No, yeah, you don't believe in war crimes, but you get what I'm saying.

Speaker 2: 19:21

But I get what you're saying and the irony of it being on YouTube while at the same time labeling my podcast as misinformation and racism is hilarious, because they oh, in fact I think I mentioned this last week, or maybe I mentioned it on our own thing is that, according to YouTube's current video policy which I was reading because I've got all the gaming stuff going on um, it is literally against terms of service to have a channel on youtube that does not take the position that the ukrainian war is fair and just or sorry. The other way around, that that'd be a funny one. No, it doesn't take the position that the Ukraine war is. You know, it's unjust, russia bad, like you cannot have a YouTube channel talking about the great military victories that Russia is having.

Speaker 1: 20:26

Well, I don't know that Russia is having great military victories and you?

Speaker 2: 20:30

wouldn't know, because all of that information is banned. But if you look at information coming from other countries, you will see that there's a a steady progression, literally now for a year, of russia advancing forward and pushing the front lines further and deeper into, uh, the territory of ukraine. Okay, I mean, it's like it's not a major 200 mile a day tank drive the way that we had in iraq. Um, it's actual trench warfare. So you might advance one mile over the course of a day or two and, uh, a lot of people dead in the process of doing that, of course, but yeah you literally are not allowed to be.

Speaker 1: 21:16

What trench warfare is not where I ever want to be no, no, um.

Speaker 2: 21:21

And yet youtube literally will say you can't have an account that says that, even if it's true, you can't have an account that says that they've taken a more aggressive position than the us government, in fact, in essentially being the propaganda arm and saying only pro-ukrainian videos are allowed on youtube, everything else is banned. And they started off with initially, because there's a history, history of the various changes to their policy. When the US imposed the initial sanctions, youtube, even though they weren't part of the sanctions, they volunteered and said and any content creators in Russia can no longer be monetized. Well, that seems kind of weird that people making cat videos in Russia now won't be monetized. Well, that that seems kind of weird that people making cat videos in russia now won't be monetized. Um, but okay, let's say that that's actually the case, except that they still run ads, yeah, so that doesn't mean they they won't be monetized, it just means you won't be monetized.

Speaker 2: 22:31

All YouTube is doing is now running the same ads they've always ran on those Russian channels and then just keeping the damn money and not paying it out. And then they went from you can't be monetized to you can't promote anything that's related to war, like that was their in-between step, is that no channels associated from Russia, no Russian channels associated with news that has anything to do with the Ukrainian war, can be on YouTube. And then their final step, which happened last, I think February, was basically saying you cannot have a channel on YouTube, no matter what country of origin that channel is from, that sees the Ukrainian war in a positive light is we need to amend section 230, and what we need to say is any um any company that has anything like this in its terms of service.

Speaker 1: 23:49

Ie you know we're going to censor in any way, shape or form, then that needs to invalidate their Section 230 protections. You are no longer protected under Section 230 because you have editorialized.

Speaker 2: 24:09

And since you've editorialized, well, screw you, and then you're, and then your life opinions that are on there, and then everybody always says, well, you can't do that, because they're going to shut down all videos on youtube and all you're going to get is msm good luck.

Speaker 2: 24:25

Yeah, they can't afford to do that because they would lose advertising money. So they they love being in the gray zone where they get to have editorial control and they get to eat it too. Yeah, I agree. And then, incidentally, I do think they have full rights to do what they're doing, but also they're a fucking monopoly.

Speaker 1: 24:47

Well, yeah, here's the thing. If there were a true marketplace of ideas and we were in a wide open, um, actual capitalist society, then sure, but we're not.

Speaker 2: 25:07

I don't begrudge blue sky having nothing but pro trans, anti-trump content on it, because x exists and so blue sky can be that garbage heap of content, if that's what they choose to be like. They're competing. Let's see which one of them is worth more money. Let's see which one of them gets more advertising dollars. Um, you know, let's see which ideology survives and which ideology tries to castrate his children and, uh, abort the ones that managed to come through. I mean, it's insanity, it is literal insanity. And I think, just to make a round trip back to the beginning of the conversation, the fact that we have vigilantes which one side thinks are absolutely righteous and the other side thinks are horrible. But then you have vigilantes that the other side thinks are completely righteous and the other side thinks are horrible. But then you have vigilantes that the other side thinks are completely righteous and the first side thinks they're horrible. It's like this is the vigilantism, is a natural outcome of the completely separate worlds that Americans are living in today. There's not one America, there are two Americas.

Speaker 2: 26:34

There have been two Americas for a while and, as you've been saying, for a long time, ben, and, as I've certainly been saying, for not quite as long. I think we just need to leave both of those and make Texas great again.

Speaker 1: 26:51

Yes, I am all for it, and you know what I would. How do I put this? We are here. The sad truth is Texas is just as fucked up. It's not some miracle place that's going to survive, but the border wall against California is what we need. Here's the thing. The united states is too big. It's too big in population. It's too big in um, in our government's power. We, we have to come together in smaller communities to solve and create the solutions needed. We can abstract that a little bit to Coalition of the Willing, federation of the Willing, whatever you want to say. Not what the US needs, it's a color revolution. Oh Okay, soros, that's for the other side, george getting along again.

Speaker 2: 27:58

No, because that that's essentially what the color revolutions were.

Speaker 1: 28:01

It's taking countries that we felt were too big for their own britches, and then flipping them or undermining them enough that now there's a civil war right, but I'm just talking about from a governance standpoint and we've talked about this before is you compare a member of congress versus a member of parliament in the uk and the number of people they represent? And it's it's astonishing.

Speaker 2: 28:24

I don't think that'll change without a war. That's all.

Speaker 1: 28:27

I think that you know this country became a country as a result of war yeah, and I and I, you know, hey look, I am all for national divorce and if both sides want to solve it peacefully, that is the way to go. But you know, both sides got to agree to it and let the other one go. That's not probably going to happen and it will probably end in conflict.

Speaker 2: 28:50

So yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1: 28:54

I mean again without.

Speaker 2: 28:54

It's easy for you to say old man with no kids, exactly it's really easy because I I can call it like it is without letting emotions uh taint it yeah, no one's.

Speaker 1: 29:05

I mean people are gonna look at you and not expect you on the front line either.

Speaker 2: 29:08

So I'll be long dead before them on the front line either, so I'll be long dead before them. Hell yeah, I got this all planned out, man. Um no, but I think it's bound to happen. It I I don't.

Speaker 2: 29:19

I don't see like people think oh well, now trump's president, everything's great again. You know, bitcoin's up to a hundred thousand, everything's awesome. Okay, I mean, that's, that's good. But you know, bitcoin being at a hundred thousand doesn't place more value in bitcoin. All it's showing you is that people feel a little more comfortable about spending risky, which happens when their lives don't feel as risky. So trump in a, in a way, without even coming into office yet, just simply by being elected, has mitigated some of the risk, or at least the felt risk, that people had and, as a result, people that were holding on to their money in their bank accounts are now saying well, the economy is going to be great under Trump, so I'll be making more money, things will improve, sales will go up, my bonus for the year will be bigger. So, yeah, I'm going to buy some Bitcoin. I can afford to do that, because Bitcoin, being a limited supply commodity, will only go up in price if it's inherently deflationary in its design?

Speaker 2: 30:38

Yeah, exactly. But go up in price if it's inherently deflationary in its design? Uh, yeah, exactly. Um, but that whole thing is also we've talked about is absolutely worthless if there is no way to trade it because electronics don't work anymore yeah, it is just a protocol for a medium of exchange.

Speaker 1: 30:52

That's all it is and you know, it really, but no, there are definitely some issues. It really bugs me when people say, oh, bitcoin is a store of value. It's this, is that you know it's. No, it's a protocol, and this is why I got rid of Bitcoin very early and I wish I would have held it till now, because I would be very, very wealthy, but I didn't. So yeah, but there is nothing inherently valuable about Bitcoin.

Speaker 2: 31:26

Oh, so one of the things that I find I'm also a Bitcoin maximalist.

Speaker 1: 31:29

So, yeah, one of the things that I find interesting about this entire period of time is I'm around a lot of liberals because of work. I have employees that are transitioning and all sorts of stuff, and I've had two different people that I work with, one of whom is transitioning, talking about how she's trying to get everything done as quickly as possible before yes, so that it's just done and can't be taken away, and then another was talking about where they're going to flee the country to if things get bad in this country, and the fundamentalist takeover it's about that answer?

Speaker 1: 32:25

yeah and oh. We can go to spain or portugal, or this and these are some people.

Speaker 1: 32:30

These are some people. Hold on, hold on, these are some people. These are some people. Hold on hold on. These are some people I know fairly well and I'm on this team's meeting with them and it's like hello, you're talking about this shit in front of me and I just said, well, I think y'all are just, you know, ridiculous for thinking that you can go there and that'd be, that'd be that. And they looked at me and I said, well, you know about extradition treaties, right?

Speaker 1: 32:55

and they they looked at me and, yeah, but we're not talking about leaving because we did something illegal and I said well, if, if trump is going to be the fundamentalist hitler that you think he is, why wouldn't he extradite you? Oh, my god, you're so fanning the flame, you bastard and so so then I said so your real only options are like uae or saudi arabia, and these are two women I'm talking to which I found funny.

Speaker 2: 33:20

I mean, they could make good money there, depending on what they look like, of course, yeah but you get my point I get your. No, I know, I know is funny, but also, what is it with Portugal and Spain? Because I have several friends that are building houses there right now.

Speaker 1: 33:42

First of all, it's beautiful. So there's that. But second of all, I think it's just the communist roots more than anything. I think, when you look at the Spanish Civil War and everything else, there's enough leanings there that they're very hopeful.

Speaker 2: 34:05

Yeah, I think it just reminds me of California, that's my bet.

Speaker 1: 34:10

Oh, you mean weather-wise Mm-hmm, yep. Yeah to an extent.

Speaker 2: 34:19

Yeah, because liberals tend to flee to places that have good climate. Yeah, you don't see liberals fleeing to Alaska.

Speaker 1: 34:25

No, but you know they don't want to be left alone, so there's that too that's true.

Speaker 2: 34:35

That's true. They want to have somebody telling them what to do all the time, so that europe makes more sense for liberals we should have a program. We should have a campaign, uh like a a peace corps type thing of you know, helping send liberals to europe help rid the us of all those who want to leave.

Speaker 2: 34:54

Yeah, exactly Because Europe needs all the help they can get, because the migration right now is all coming from the South. They need more migration coming from the North, and I think all the US liberals will be there. Well, but that's racist Gene.

Speaker 1: 35:11

You can't look at that. I know how dare you, how dare you say that there should be any quotas on what countries are allowed to immigrate into your country?

Speaker 1: 35:21

Well, no, that's my point is, since there are no quotas, then it would make sense to maximize that and have all countries, not just countries in the south, doing that yeah, but remember, I'm reading that book about immigration and tying it to, tying it to, I'm almost done with it and then I, and then I've got a choice and I need your. I need your and the audience's help to make a decision here. But anyway, this guy is just literally trying to tie the eugenics movement in the us to hitler. Which fine, cool, got it?

Speaker 2: 35:55

uh, agreed in fact, I don't think there's much there. I think eugenics got a bad rap, and mainly because of hitler and okay, yeah, but hold on margaret's, yeah, but.

Speaker 1: 36:08

But they've got similar ideas. We can argue about lots of things, because I would argue that Hitler and the Nazis were not the eugenicists we paint them to be today. But that's, I'm not going to argue that history. But the problem I have is he's then tying those eugenicists, who were a small minority in the United States, to the immigration acts and limitations on on immigration. And basically his point is any any blocking of immigration or limitation of immigration because some countries are seen more valuable as others is Hitlerian and evil. And oh, by the way, he about how the iq testing is fundamentally flawed. Not right, and I iq testing is just not true. It's not a thing. It's culturally, uh, derivative and like it. There's so many logical leaps and holes in what he's doing and it I I get why he's doing it. He's jewish, his parents survived the holocaust, you're anti-Semitic, so it totally makes sense.

Speaker 1: 37:15

Uh-huh, anyway, yeah.

Speaker 2: 37:21

I think that there's a lot of bad ideas in a lot of books, and just because it's in a book doesn't mean it's a good idea. I agree. I would have probably stopped reading the book after coming across more than two, but I guess you decided to be a completionist.

Speaker 1: 37:37

No, it's not about that. It's about that.

Speaker 2: 37:39

A friend of mine asked me to read this book and tell them what I thought. Yeah, I could have done that from literally two pages.

Speaker 1: 37:47

I understand, I'm a trash.

Speaker 2: 37:49

Why did you tell me to read it? I consider you now less of a friend.

Speaker 1: 37:53

Yeah, well, that's not how that works.

Speaker 2: 37:55

Speaking of recommendations Ben.

Speaker 1: 37:57

Uh-huh, how are you liking B5? You're a bastard okay, why?

Speaker 2: 38:01

Because you got me watching two TV shows that I could have been perfectly happy to have not watched, but now I'm stuck watching them, and one of them is Babylon five, which I know a lot of people would be surprised. I didn't see it but, as I told, ben right but Babylon five, you can't argue as good. I'm not saying that it's bad, I'm just saying it's time you stopped.

Speaker 1: 38:29

You have no idea what you're in for. Like, I just finished season one because I'm rewatching it too. Yeah, and you stopped at episode 15.

Speaker 2: 38:38

You're like texting me. What episode are you on? Oh, I'm one. Oh, hold on, let me get ahead of you. That is hilarious. You're like competitive watching.

Speaker 1: 38:46

No, no, no, no. I'm just wanting to try. I figured you would be plowing through it so I wanted to try and keep up so I could remember the story and talk to you about it.

Speaker 2: 38:57

Actually, I took a couple of days off. I'll probably restart again today and part of the reason I'm off of watching Babylon is because the other TV show, silo, you got watching and now paying for Christ sakes. Watching and now paying for christ sakes. So it's uh, it's not a great show, but it's interesting enough in what they haven't unraveled. I'm paying for the damn thing yeah, no spoilers right now.

Speaker 1: 39:24

I haven't watched the last couple episodes.

Speaker 2: 39:26

I've been busy, yeah, and watching babylon and watching babylon exactly even though they're paying for silo as well say that that that show completely hangs on tin robbins, like he is by far the best actor on that show well, he's the biggest name actor on that show too he, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2: 39:49

Um, but like he's an actual actor, like he actually is acting rather than trying to act. Most of the other actors in that show are what we call d d rate actors. Um, like, they've probably gone to school for acting and they've probably been acting in bit parts here and there, but nobody is a particularly impressive actor that I've seen on there and tim robbins is doing a damn good job playing the villain, and he is.

Speaker 2: 40:23

He is a. Oh, you have. You haven't seen the last two episodes. My friend, you're not gonna have an ish there. Okay, okay, it's, uh. Or? Or should I do like you did and tell me what the season ends? He, he is an ultra liberal and has been forever, but that does not take away from the fact that I've enjoyed damn near every movie I've ever seen him in Like he is. It'd be hard, I'd be hard-pressed, to find a movie that he's in that I didn't like. Yeah, so it's one of those things it's like. This is where you got to just say look, you don't take political advice from him, but you enjoy the movie season.

Speaker 1: 41:12

Well you know, know tom hanks same thing.

Speaker 2: 41:14

Right, exactly. Yeah, although I think tom hanks a little more wishy-washy. I think he's more liberal when the wind's blowing that direction and a little more conservative when it's blowing the other direction, but he was on the first to get jabbed list. Yeah, got COVID when he was filming in Australia and I think he volunteered for COVID shots the day they were announced.

Speaker 1: 41:42

I just don't understand.

Speaker 2: 41:44

I know I'm like here. Please put this experimental substance into my brain. Do it, let's see what happens.

Speaker 1: 41:54

Well, there's just so many things, but yeah, so yeah, anyway, I I have a dilemma that I need help with okay, so we're done with silo and uh babylon. I mean we can talk more. I'd love to talk more because, dude, I forgot how good shit gets so quick in Babylon. Oh my God. If you're not hooked on Babylon by the end of the first season. Something's wrong with you.

Speaker 2: 42:20

Watching the space scenes is borderline painful because the technology back then was so crappy. However, the stories are good. The acting is, I'd say, slightly above star trek, and star trek compared to other sci-fi is kind of meh, but it's um. Compared star trek compared to non-sci-fi is god awful acting, but compared to other sci-fi it's just kind of middle of the road. This is above middle of the road acting, so it's slightly better than star trek. Nothing to write home about, but still not bad.

Speaker 1: 43:01

Well, you haven't really gotten to know ivanova yet, so that her character improves greatly well, I've gotten her face pretty good, uh-huh. I mean, I like the way her face looks oh yeah, and then you know the storylines for londo londo's, one of my favorite characters on those awesome and I here's what I don't understand.

Speaker 2: 43:21

Maybe it's funny why does londo have an east european accent, but nobody else from his planet has that accent?

Speaker 1: 43:31

well, they, they do. He's. They're different accents and he's. He's a old republican patrician and, by the way, the the you. You have to think of the centauri as kind of a conglomerate race, but they're very much like czarist russia in a lot of ways like that's kind of how I uh think of them.

Speaker 1: 43:55

And then you know, the narn, uh, the narn are just any conquered or enslaved people that are suddenly free. The, the narn boy, uh, remind me to tell you what. I just about sent off the podcast at some point okay, all right, no spoilers, man, no spoiler.

Speaker 2: 44:18

But uh yeah, but it's worth watching. I think if somebody is like me and had never seen it, it probably is worth checking out. So I you know I begrudge ben for this the stealing of my free time, not so much for telling me to watch things that are not worth watching. As far as the other show, tim Robbins aside, the whole thing hangs on the mystery of it. So I think once we start understanding a lot of the questions that are being asked of us as viewers in the first season, once we start getting the answers in season two, it becomes progressively less interesting. But right now there's still enough stuff that hasn't really up to the current episode of when this podcast is recorded. They haven't fully revealed the whys behind everything yet, although you definitely get a much better sense of understanding of what happened and why. But it's not fully confirmed.

Speaker 2: 45:25

But it is an interesting idea and the idea of like is 10,000 people living in an enclosed environment sufficient to carry on the human race? Yes, and how many of those groups of 10,000 would you need in order to ensure, for, let's say, a thousand years, that the human race carries on, because obviously there could be natural disasters, there could be political disasters, there could be environmental disasters. I mean, all kinds of things could happen. Let's put it this way it's not that hard to wipe out 10 000 people if you, if something bad happens, but if you have these groups of 10 000 self-sustaining people, um, what, um, how many of them would you need in order to ensure that, statistically, you could get through a thousand year period? So it's an interesting idea. I like it. I don't know if there's a book that was written beforehand about it or not.

Speaker 1: 46:38

There? Yes, so there are books. It starts with wool, it's a trilogy, and so my dilemma? That leads me right into my dilemma. So I'm finishing up the guarded gate and once that's done, I'm going to go to a book that I want to read, and I have a dilemma. I want to read Peterson's new book, we who Wrestle With God, but that's going to be a heavy lift. It's going to be one where, like, I have the Kindle copy, I have the Audible copy and I have a physical copy, and I'm likely to spit like this is going to be. A ben is focused on this book for hours a day until it's oh, we're gonna hear about it, folks, we're gonna hear about a lot anyway. Or do I take a break from, do I not? Do I save that for next year, after the holidays and everything else, and I have more free time and read the wool books? Uh, the silos based off of that's a good question.

Speaker 2: 47:39

So if you do that, you'd basically know all the answers and you wouldn't have to watch a tv show well, I mean, the tv show is going to have variations, it's going to be different but, generally in the right direction.

Speaker 2: 47:53

That's usually how it goes, okay, so that's a good way to get around having to pay for more Apple. It's on the Apple TV, by the way if anyone's wondering, silo is Babylon is on free to watch on Amazon if you have Prime. Unfortunately, with ads. Yeah, babylon is on free to watch on Amazon If you have prime. Uh, which?

Speaker 1: 48:14

unfortunately, with ads what I don't have ads. Well, you must pay the higher, uh, higher amount than all people watch it with ads.

Speaker 2: 48:25

Dude, I don't have ads on YouTube. I don't have ads on anything. I don't have ads on YouTube. Yeah, it's crazy, but there are people that watch them with ads, I guess. So anyway, um, that's a good question because I could like, if you read the peterson book probably means I don't have to because I'll hear all about it from you. That's a, that's a benefit for me. Um, but it also does kind of make sense to read a book like that in, like in january, because you're starting a new leaf, turning the leaf over, or whatever the phrase is. So I don't know, man, that's a tough one. Uh, how thick is the peterson book? Would you finish it this year or not? If you started it?

Speaker 1: 49:17

uh, I'd have to go. I haven't. Uh, so my uh hard copies it's on the way and I haven't even opened it up again, I can't imagine.

Speaker 2: 49:26

It's less than 350 pages uh oh no, it's it.

Speaker 1: 49:31

no, this is a heavy one. This is going to be more like Maps of Meaning.

Speaker 2: 49:37

Which took me probably six months to read when I read it originally.

Speaker 1: 49:42

Yeah, maps of Meaning was definitely hard. Yeah, I mean, this is substantial.

Speaker 2: 49:59

I'm looking at this on A, on audible is 25 hours. That's not that bad, actually, it's less than I would have thought. 25 hours. So you play it on 2x, so it's only 12 and a half.

Speaker 1: 50:05

I would never do that.

Speaker 2: 50:07

No, I don't okay, mr purist no, oh, okay, mr Purist. No, did you listen to all of the EMP books on One X? Yeah, did you really? Oh wow.

Speaker 1: 50:32

Dude, I read and you know listen to stuff and do this for pleasure. I don't speed when I'm actually physically reading or reading on a Kindle. I don't speed read books that I'm interested in. It's not what I do. Not going to happen, I guess I don't know. I guess I don't know and you know. For a book like Peterson's, you know something, like we who wrestle with God, or I'm trying to find it on Kindle, it's not showing up there. Anyway, I want to think about the ideas. I want to go through and argue the points. Think through it and it's 576 pages.

Speaker 2: 51:23

Okay, yeah, yeah, that's kind of what I would envision.

Speaker 1: 51:28

Yeah, anyway, it took me a second to get to this because I didn't have my tablet up here, so I had to go to Amazon's website and then go from there and I don't have the Kindle app on my phone because I can't stand reading on my phone, so I just don't, yeah. But the point is this is speeding through things. You miss stuff, right, like binge watching a tv show. Sometimes you miss things like I would not be binge watching babylon 5 the way I am, except that this is probably the fifth time I've watched them, you know, and okay, but it's, it's fun to remember and to go back through, and especially, the second half of season one it gets so good I think it's the other way around, because if I'm binge watching something, everything is fresh in my mind and I can connect things from one episode to the next very easily.

Speaker 2: 52:33

When there's a week break between every single episode, or longer sometimes um you, you have to start using long-term memory and you know connecting things, it still happens, especially if it's a good show, like Game of thrones is a good example, other than the last season, which let's just pretend it never happened. But you know you can go back three, four seasons, even not just episodes, and connect events from here to there. But when you're binge watching it like that happens subconsciously. There there's nothing to remember, it's just right there, it's on the plate in front of you. So, like I watched the whole first season of the silo, not planning to do it, it just sort of happened because I kept hitting the play next button and while complaining about the acting in the TV show well, yeah, okay.

Speaker 2: 53:30

So I took slight breaks while watching it to text Ben, that it's got shitty acting. I did do that, but especially by the main character. But you know, it's like again, I'm not watching that show for the characters. I'm not even watching it necessarily for the well, certainly not for the acting, because Tim Robbins is the only good actor in it, but I am watching it for the reveal. It's like any other story that uses mystery. That's what captivates you, that's what keeps you coming back. It's not all the things around the mystery, all the actual events happening, it's the, the revelation itself. I don't know, do you feel the same way or do you look at these things differently?

Speaker 1: 54:28

I mean so far. I'm finding it entertaining and liking it. I pay less attention, so in if acting is just absolutely terrible. It can take me out of the story, but otherwise I don't focus on how good or bad someone's acting is, unless it's just absolutely egregious, because I'm focused on the story.

Speaker 2: 54:49

But that's me and how are you taking the story so far?

Speaker 1: 54:56

uh, I'm interested enough that I want to read the book and find out more. Like I think the conceit and a lot of the things about the story are interesting.

Speaker 2: 55:04

So I want to read the book so that I can, you know, understand it and get deeper in it and I, although you do realize that the book may actually have more mystery in it than the tv show, correct, which is not a bad thing, yeah no mystery, because it's also a complete story brings you back. Yeah, yeah, it's. It's interesting and I think right now any tv show that has a kind of a doomsday theme is going to be pretty popular, given how close we are to nuclear war.

Speaker 1: 55:34

Well, and that's the other thing, by the way, is, did you see that MGM came out with a serialized version of the Earth Abides?

Speaker 2: 55:44

No.

Speaker 1: 55:45

Yeah. So have you ever read the Earth Abides? No, oh, my God. So the Earth Abides is one of the first of the dystopian novels. It was written in the late 40s, early 50s. It is absolutely an excellent book. It's one of my favorites. Uh, oh, jesus christ, I'm gonna have to google that.

Speaker 2: 56:09

But a famous writer.

Speaker 1: 56:11

Or sci-fi, no, no all right, the earth abides. Book is george r stewart is he the author?

Speaker 2: 56:24

okay, but what else has he written? That's what I mean.

Speaker 1: 56:27

Nothing that I've read oh okay, it's still a good book. You love the book, but you know okay got it like let's see what else has he written. Oh my gosh, let me go, let me google that for you?

Speaker 2: 56:42

You don't if you're not. I mean, I'm more interested in like is this somebody that you know has written a bunch of stuff or not? Not that if you can Google them, I can Google myself here, it's not a problem.

Speaker 1: 56:52

Yeah, so the the only book that I know of his is, um, the earth abides. It's the only one I've ever written. Um, you know, I I need to look at some of these others and maybe read some more of them, but I just haven't. So, uh, the, the apparently uh, his two famous novels are the earth abides and the Storm which became, huh, storm Called Maria, yeah, yeah Anyway. So we'll see, but I'm just not. I haven't read those. But anyway, the Earth Abides is a good book.

Speaker 2: 57:35

Yeah, he hasn't read a lot much. I'm looking through his bibliography here.

Speaker 1: 57:40

Anyway, but the point is, mgm has come out with a TV show now, okay, based off of this book from the 40s, and you like the book, so the TV show you're hoping is good. I haven't watched it yet because it's just now coming out, but yeah, it would be great if they actually told the story well, but I based off some of their casting decisions.

Speaker 2: 58:05

I'm already like I don't know about this his occupation is listed as a eponymous, as a what eponymous? I don't know what that is. Can you spell it? Huh, can you?

Speaker 1: 58:26

spell it no, because I can't really understand what you're saying for a while.

Speaker 2: 58:31

Toponomist T-O-P-O-N-Y-M-Y. Toponomist. Okay, and the meaning of toponomist is Toponomist Meaning study of toponymist is meaning study of toponymy thank you, captain oh, my god, oh god, oh, it's too funny. Oh. God.

Speaker 1: 59:05

And this is why Gene has guns, because he did shit like this as a child and got beat up a lot. So what is the study of toponomy Too?

Speaker 2: 59:18

funny. So toponyms can be divided into two principal groups Genomes and cosmonomes. You think you're funny, don't you Cronums, dromonums, drimonums, econums, hydronums, commonums, astionumums, helionums, limnums, oceanums, peliagonums and putagonums.

Speaker 1: 59:55

So I'll tell you. So it's title, it's the study of names.

Speaker 2: 59:59

Yeah, it's the Study of Names. So apparently this guy's job, his career, was in the field of studying of names. Now, having read his book, does that make sense to you? Yes, okay, see, that's where I was going with this.

Speaker 1: 1:00:18

I took a very winding, long it's path to get there yeah, so the main character in the earth abides is named isherwood um and the the entire point of that. And, by the way, anyone who wants to say spoilers, ben or something, fuck you.

Speaker 1: 1:00:38

This book came out in 1949 um that right anyway, um, so the main character's name is isherwood and it's really a call to ishi, which was the name of uh, the last wild man. If you go look up the story of ishi, and, uh, the idea of you know um, someone coming out of the woods and you know as, as an homage to this tribal indian that came out in the 1920s of ishi, I think is an interesting tie yeah, you know, that was on purpose, obviously yeah, very much so, especially given what you said he does.

Speaker 1: 1:01:39

Yes, wow, that is yeah, and you know it's interesting because this is just funny in one sentence here, uh-huh.

Speaker 2: 1:01:48

So this is in the Wikipedia on toponomy. Is toponomy not to be confused with toponomics?

Speaker 3: 1:01:58

It's like what the fuck? Now I have to look up toponomics. What the fuck.

Speaker 2: 1:02:02

Now I have to look up Toponomics, see what the hell that is. Anyway, sorry, go ahead.

Speaker 1: 1:02:12

Yeah, anyway, yeah, anyway, it's just interesting. So you're glad this thing's coming out cool. What channels? Yeah, I mean. So the. The book explores a lot of really interesting things, uh, including it was a very early um, it was a book that had interracial marriage in it very early like the 1949 and the main character marries a mulatto woman. Um, you know which is in 1949, you know, just horrible and unthinkable. How dare you?

Speaker 2: 1:02:48

you know that sort of thing which is somebody who appears white, but it has black uh genetics no, that's not the meaning at all kind of no, it has nothing to do with look.

Speaker 1: 1:03:02

It means mixed race well, just mixed race any race anyway. Black and white okay there we go anyway, it doesn't matter, it's whatever. So the whole point is it's a, it's a good thing. And you know emma uh is the main character there and you know it there's. If you go like now that you tell me his study of names and everything, you look at the meaning of the names of all the characters, it's very interesting.

Speaker 2: 1:03:37

Yeah, yeah, that's. I'm sure you'll enjoy the book more that way If you reread it, which you tend to.

Speaker 1: 1:03:42

One of the things that I found most interesting is the grandchildren of the survivors don't use guns. They use bows and arrows because the guns are toys, because the ammo has become unreliable. That makes sense well, especially if you're thinking corrosive ammo from the 1940s. Yes, modern ammo, it should still be good, but anyway, for how long though?

Speaker 2: 1:04:10

oh dude, 50, 60 years is no problem for modern that's not that long 50, 60 years. What about hundreds of years?

Speaker 1: 1:04:18

well, we don't know because you know, but issue is still alive at this point in time, so it can't be more than that oh you know corrosive ammo, corrosive ammo, the the. What ends up happening is you know it's corrosive, so stuff breaks down and fails versus non-corrosive ammo, as long as as it's sealed, packed and tight, should not go bad. Like, theoretically, there is no upper limit to the lifespan of non-corrosive ammo. Really, yep, theoretically you could store ammo for 100 years. Pick it up and shoot it.

Speaker 2: 1:04:54

Yes, so that base of Yugoslavian ammo that I have might still work.

Speaker 1: 1:05:04

When was it made and is it corrosive or not? Because the Russians still use corrosive ammo, so I don't know. It's probably definitely corrosive and who knows, Hit or miss, my friend, Hit or miss.

Speaker 2: 1:05:16

I don't own a gun to shoot it, so I've never been able to test it, but I bought the m1 caliber, isn't it's? Uh, it's the old, uh, russian long cartridge rifle ammo oh, 54r something like that yeah, yeah, which I don't know yeah, so like the mosen yeah, yeah, exactly exactly see. I know guns what I know you know guns, everybody knows you know guns.

Speaker 1: 1:05:48

You won't stop talking about them first, you know guns oh I, I came so close to buying a oh thank god you didn't why.

Speaker 2: 1:05:59

Well, I mean, okay, maybe I shouldn't say that, but most people I'm assuming you're talking about the 50 caliber, right? No, no, no, no, oh okay. Well, I was gonna say thank god you didn't buy the 50 cal no, I, I, I.

Speaker 1: 1:06:12

I don't want to pay the ammo bill for that. Yeah, but I would love to have a 50 cal, but I, I really want to bear it right. That's the 50 cal I want out. Of everything I want to bear it you want?

Speaker 2: 1:06:25

do you want this, the uh?

Speaker 1: 1:06:27

semi-auto one. I want the semi-auto three round magazine or better, and yes, I want the bear. I couldn't name video games, uh, no, like the first one I ever shot.

Speaker 2: 1:06:38

So the first one you ever shot. Oh, you mean you were living up in montana on the idaho there yeah idaho, but like I'm united, whole same difference yeah anyway.

Speaker 1: 1:06:52

Um no, I I damn near almost bought a, uh the flex Raider 365 the Flex Raider.

Speaker 2: 1:07:04

Is that a SIG?

Speaker 1: 1:07:06

so it is a chassis. So they have it for the, the P320, so the M17 that I have, and they have it for the 365. Now, the 365 is holsterable and somewhat concealable and it's a pdw like it's oh, yeah, that thing. Okay, I see what you're saying it is really cool it looks really nice too yeah, yeah and and the way they handle it with the barrel shroud and everything else it's. There's a lot of really cool things there.

Speaker 2: 1:07:41

My only concern would be just how well it's manufactured.

Speaker 1: 1:07:46

Oh well that everybody says that Flex has great, great quality control. Ok, anyway, and it's all aluminum for the 365 version. Mm, hmm. I'm very tempted, but it's like seven hundred dollars and I wouldn't want to put my daily carry in there, so I'm buying another gun. So we're talking over a thousand dollars here. Just done, right.

Speaker 2: 1:08:11

Yeah, so I didn't, but oh, it was tempting so I I looked at the pricing on the one of the guns they had marked off as being interested in, popped up on my radar, which I'm not going to buy. What was it? I was surprised by the price. It is a Galil with a 8.7-inch barrel, which was originally the one I was trying to get.

Speaker 1: 1:08:39

Okay.

Speaker 2: 1:08:40

Why are you?

Speaker 1: 1:08:41

wanting SBR.

Speaker 2: 1:08:45

No, it's a pistol, Sorry, not a Galil. No wait, I gotta look it up now.

Speaker 1: 1:08:59

I'm confused.

Speaker 2: 1:09:04

So, many fucking Israeli guns here. Yeah, um let me look.

Speaker 1: 1:09:07

By the way, I almost sent you a picture on twitter last night. There was a guy who had a jericho, which is not an iwi gun gene would buy. But he was like, hey, look at my new pickup. And so jericho, I, iwi, jericho, and you know, it's just a hammer fired gun, whatever. But I had to zoom into the picture and this guy holding it, ok, cool, but he had toenails that were just insane in the picture, ok, like long and like I almost said it to you, like Jean, what the fuck's going on with your toenails.

Speaker 2: 1:09:41

But anyway, Okay, no, I was right, it is a Galil. So it is a Galil, uh, in a seven, 62 by 39, uh with the uh 8.9 inch barrel.

Speaker 1: 1:09:57

I would never have seven 62x39 in a short barrel.

Speaker 2: 1:10:02

Well, you say that. However, if you look at Brandon Herrera's videos, he actually talks about how that gun or that ammo, rather with a short barrel performs way better than our .223 ammo does.

Speaker 1: 1:10:20

Sure, because the powder burns faster and more completely Agreed.

Speaker 2: 1:10:24

And it's a heavier round that travels slower, so it doesn't have to accelerate as much in that short barrel, agreed. So while generally speaking, longer barrels are better, well, it depends on what your purpose is but yes.

Speaker 2: 1:10:42

Well, so I actually shot this gun. Um. Max uh has one of these uh and it shoots pretty well. There's more smoke coming out of it than out of mine. For sure more unburned powder, um, but I don't know. I just wanted it in that size and I couldn't get it in that size so I ended up buying the 13-inch version. This is back like two years ago, but literally in the last year, you know you can just replace a barrel.

Speaker 2: 1:11:17

Yeah, probably I don't know, I've never looked into it enough I'd have to replace the handguard and a bunch of other stuff too. Um, but it just popped up and I got a you know notification saying it's in stock.

Speaker 1: 1:11:32

Well, here it. I got you one even better. Here's an IWI Galeel Shit Did my computer just fork.

Speaker 2: 1:11:42

Fuck, fuck, windows man, I'll be on anyway.

Speaker 1: 1:11:47

So here's a iwi glial ace 8.3 uh sbr chambered in 762 nato.

Speaker 2: 1:11:58

Oh yeah, that's a crazy thing to do, dude you do okay, why is that crazy?

Speaker 2: 1:12:04

available doesn't mean you want one oh, come on a 308 pistol yeah, yeah, you might as well get a 50 cal while you're at it. Hey, hey, I want one. Yeah, that's not a particularly good idea, but I mean it's. I liked the one that I've got, which is the Galil Ace 2nd Gen with the 13-inch barrel. I think it's a good gun. But I will say, um, and I although technically I actually still haven't shot the brand new gun, but I will say, the cleaner, like it's a more, it's not just parts bin gun, it's actually a designed and then all the parts are just more.

Speaker 1: 1:13:10

Is the charging handle reciprocating on the no Caramel, on the camel?

Speaker 2: 1:13:17

No On the caramel. No, camel Camel. Okay, it is not. I think, other than AK clones, mouse guns don't have reciprocating these days.

Speaker 1: 1:13:33

Unfortunately you're wrong. Like the scar is reciprocating.

Speaker 2: 1:13:41

The scar is also a 20-year-old design. I mean older guns, do for sure yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:13:53

Yeah, oh man. What do you need?

Speaker 2: 1:13:58

another .308 non-hunting gun for, I'm sorry, what do you need? Another .308 non-hunting gun? You already got a Tavor.

Speaker 1: 1:14:08

I have a Tavor, I have an AR-10. I have an M1A. There are several guns that I would like. I wouldn't mind building out another AR-10. Ooh, dude, uh-huh, oh shit, I wouldn't mind building out another AR-10 that's.

Speaker 2: 1:14:23

Oh shit, oh crap. Hold on. It's today, god damn it. Okay, I just noticed that we're missing something right now that I didn't know about, otherwise I would have told you sooner. An IWI level 3, tavor class. Oh, where Texas? Where Dilley Texas?

Speaker 1: 1:14:52

This weekend, right now.

Speaker 2: 1:14:53

It's happening literally right now.

Speaker 1: 1:14:55

Well shit, I don't know where Dilley is.

Speaker 2: 1:14:59

But, it's at a place called the Ranch LLC.

Speaker 1: 1:15:04

You don't know where Dilly is. No, I don't know where Dilly is. Well, it's about four hours from me, which is about what I figured, but it's south of San Antoniotonio oh, so it's actually probably three hours then, or even less for me oh yeah, it's way closer to you than it is to me interesting.

Speaker 2: 1:15:28

I need to keep an eye out on this stuff more. It would be fun. Yeah, like that would be fun absolutely well, anyway, other than guns and that fun stuff, guns there's one other video series you started watching and I haven't heard you say much about it, which was the fallout well, I finished the first season you did okay it. What do you think?

Speaker 1: 1:16:02

it's campy. It is cute though, isn't it?

Speaker 2: 1:16:05

yeah, and you know, big eyes is interesting um, big guys is a good way to describe her you know the the storyline is interesting and this is.

Speaker 1: 1:16:18

You gotta realize I'm someone who never really played Fallout, mainly because I was more of a shooter fan than like the only mission based game I really really, really played, other than like some space games. But for first person stuff was like the postal series and that's mainly because of my sense of humor and that I find it hilarious, right was that that game that you really liked, that came out back then what do you mean?

Speaker 2: 1:16:57

uh, half-life, yeah, half-life yeah so isn't that first person shooter following missions?

Speaker 1: 1:17:04

yeah, yeah, but it's much more of a you know, a shooter puzzle game than, oh, go collect all of this. You've got to go talk to these people like the fallout always struck me as more of a role-playing game, and then that's just where I differentiate myself.

Speaker 2: 1:17:22

I think they're fairly similar. I think that fallout just adds a few bits in between the places you go shoot. But yeah, either way, um and half-life was just on sale. I I texted you the steam right, but I have all them okay, well, I wasn't sure.

Speaker 1: 1:17:41

So if you were missing anyone, any of them, you could get them for like 80 off yeah, I've got all of them all, except like the virtual reality ones that I can't support, and and you have them on pc or on xbox or on sony or on steam.

Speaker 2: 1:17:58

I well, first of all, I have the physical discs from when they came out okay second of all I have repurchased them on steam already okay, but you were playing them on pc or on a? Oh, of course yes I don't know. I don't know if you were a console guy before. Who the hell knows?

Speaker 1: 1:18:18

uh, I the I. I grew up with nintendos and segas and then n64s, which I still. I have all of these still, by the way. Super nintendo still have it. Um, I've had the original xbox. I had the xbox 360 365 or whatever it was, and then that's when I stopped with consoles. You never got the Xbox One. No, I didn't. I modded my original Xbox consoles and set up streaming servers and stuff like that on them. I did all sorts of stuff. The original hacking of the original Xbox was a lot of fun. Upgraded hard drives did all sorts of stuff like the original hacking of the original xboxes was a lot of fun. Um, upgraded hard drives, did all sorts of stuff with them.

Speaker 2: 1:19:06

I think I still have both my original 360 and the xbox one first generation that I got. That was where I stopped, is I just I realized that I was missing too much compared to PC. Yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:19:20

I was never a PlayStation fan and I'm sitting in my office right now On the TV that's in my office. On the back of it I have a Roku or not a Roku A Raspberry Pi that is running RetroPie on it, loaded with ROMs from everything from like Atari through PS1.

Speaker 2: 1:19:50

Which apparently there's a big brouhaha going on in the old game collectors circle because there's a I don't know if it was Supreme Court or one of the upper courts basically ruled that preservation is not sufficient grounds for owning copyrighted video games. Yeah, yeah, yeah, some version of that. So basically the argument was look, these companies are out of business, they're not making the games anymore. Technically, somebody bought the assets to this, but they're not published. Like, you can't buy a lot of these games at all, and so therefore, we are preserving them by having collections of them, of the roms, and and then having people don't know and, uh, the the court said no, somebody still has copyright on them and you're stealing their product yeah, and this is where, quite frankly, we need to revisit copyright law.

Speaker 2: 1:20:43

I agree, I agree I think the solution is super simple, and that is just to make it uniform and with all all these carve outs and extensions, just say, look, the idea of having a copyright in order to promote people engaging in longer-term research and activities that lead to newfangled ways of doing things makes sense. But here's what you get. You get three years of complete protection, followed by four years of partial protection, and then it's out of copyright. That's it.

Speaker 1: 1:21:23

Seven years max total amount of time yeah, I mean you could do it like a patent, you know 15 years or whatever, but but you can't but the patent, yeah, yeah, um, but it's a.

Speaker 2: 1:21:40

There have to be reasonable limits on these things and you know, Disney's been one of the forces most they're evil in a lot of different ways, but one of the forces responsible for changing laws, copyright laws, to enable extensions longer and longer. So we finally got to the 100th anniversary of Thank you, Disney Mouse cartoon. Yeah, 100 years. They had that stupid mouse and you couldn't knock it off.

Speaker 1: 1:22:12

Well, and now the only thing is that Steamboat Willie is out of copyright, not any other version of Mickey, which, by the way, making the original copyright should be the only copyright. The derivative works should be covered under the original copyright, not a new copyright. Sorry, I just yeah.

Speaker 2: 1:22:34

Well, either way, I think seven years long enough for everything. Patents, copyrights, any kind of intellectual property rights shouldn't extend past seven years. Seven years was good enough for the Bible. Should be good enough for the courts.

Speaker 1: 1:22:52

Okay, what? Okay, I don't get it. Fabergast yeah, I don't get fabergast. Yeah, I, I don't. I look at 15 years, 20 years, who cares? But something reasonable, not what we've done.

Speaker 2: 1:23:11

that that's the entire point yeah yeah, and just, I mean, we've kind of gotten around that somewhat in music now by taking all these works that are out of copyright and then using them to feed the algorithm to create AI music.

Speaker 1: 1:23:30

Yeah.

Speaker 2: 1:23:32

Which you're a fan of, which I'm a fan of. I've been using it quite a bit. I actually they have a feature to just like play random stuff and I've started using that just as background music on my gaming channel. Uh, so that there's, you know, something playing, but it's totally random and it's shouldn't at least be copyrighted, so it shouldn't get flagged. Any of my videos shouldn't get flagged for music well, you know something that you uh did.

Speaker 1: 1:24:01

You see that woodworking video?

Speaker 2: 1:24:02

I sent you on the secret door or whatever yeah, I, I watched that video about a month ago okay, well, you know, he does copyright free music, so I didn't know that, no well, he says it in that video.

Speaker 1: 1:24:17

Oh well, I didn't pay, didn't pay attention.

Speaker 2: 1:24:19

I just looked at doors. It's kind of a thin door Might be hard to get through, but shut up.

Speaker 1: 1:24:28

Well for you, yes.

Speaker 2: 1:24:31

But it's not a door-sized door, damn it. But that also adds to the secretiveness of it. Yeah, yeah, so I will. Next time you're in Austin, I'll take you out to a castle that has a secret door with my name on it.

Speaker 1: 1:24:53

Alright. Well, anyway, I was actually thinking of spots where I could put a secret room in my house watching that. Well, I mean you can turn.

Speaker 2: 1:25:00

Any could put a secret room in my house watching that. Well, I mean you turn any closet into a secret room yes, I know, but that's not what I'm anyway, have you seen the video of the australian?

Speaker 1: 1:25:24

uh, yeah, the basement, yes, with the indoor shooting range and everything else, and I, I just I don't understand why he has over 100 rounds. Why did he go peacefully? Why did he go? Okay, you got me well, I just thought.

Speaker 2: 1:25:33

I don't know man, I think he was probably here's my guess I don't care and turned him in yeah, of course she did.

Speaker 2: 1:25:41

Um, I thought it was his wife, but yeah, I think this is a. This is an example of a guy that started off with an idea of like I want to kind of keep this on the down low, and then quickly turned into like oh man, this is going to impress my friends. And he just kept building in. And I mean, I'm sure he didn't have a gun range in there initially, he just had a safe, and then it turned into more of a secret gun room, and the secret part being that it was on a hinged uh hatch that had a sofa on top yeah so it looked like it's just like.

Speaker 2: 1:26:19

Well, obviously it's furniture, it's nothing, you know there's nothing here, but then you could actually lift the sofa.

Speaker 1: 1:26:29

You imagine the motor that guy had to get well, I think he probably didn't have looking at it. I don't think it was on a motor, I think it was just on struts.

Speaker 2: 1:26:42

Really Just struts. I thought it was a motorized thing, but okay.

Speaker 1: 1:26:47

Struts to me.

Speaker 2: 1:26:49

Yeah, I guess you could use a smaller motor with struts as well. But it was pretty interesting. It was definitely a neat thing. If a buddy of mine had one of those, I would definitely think that that was very, very creative and a cool thing to do. But but it does kind of defeat the purpose. Everybody knows about it well, again it.

Speaker 1: 1:27:16

I just don't know why he, if he defied the australian gun laws for as long as he did and went the route he did, why? Why capitulate? I just don't understand yeah, yeah, I hear you yeah, but I did see that that came out a while ago and it was interesting. So what's your take on Tim and the Kamala campaign, apparently settling?

Speaker 2: 1:27:48

Didn't know that was the case. I don't watch Tim every day. I watch him if something interesting happens. So if they say settle, that means there's money exchanged.

Speaker 1: 1:27:59

Well, he has said that it has been resolved to his satisfaction. That's all, which means he's not allowed to disclose.

Speaker 2: 1:28:07

Maybe there aren't any, Because she doesn't really have money, is my understanding? Isn't the campaign totally broke and that's the entity that was being sued? Yeah, so if you're suing somebody that has negative funds, you're probably not going to get anything. And he probably just reached out and said look guys, we're not going to have any funds.

Speaker 1: 1:28:34

Well, they removed the tweet, but hopefully he got more satisfaction than that At least pay his legal bills or something like that.

Speaker 2: 1:28:42

All right, they don't have any money and they're not going to do shit. Uh, and the campaign entities typically dissolved after the campaign's over. So even if he goes after him and wins, the entities dissolved yeah, not going to get anything. That's why you need to make sure you go after people and not entities.

Speaker 1: 1:29:09

I don't know what he could go after until he did Discovery, though at the same time.

Speaker 2: 1:29:17

Yeah, but I mean it's yeah. I guess technically there used to be a thing where every ad had a and I approve this ad message from the person running, which I don't think is the case anymore.

Speaker 1: 1:29:31

Right, but this was tweets.

Speaker 2: 1:29:34

I thought it was an actual campaign video they had I don't remember like far-right extremists like tim pool, who's about as liberal, you know, as lefties used to be 20 years ago yeah, so we kind of go ahead? No, I don't know, go ahead. I got nothing, so we kind of Go ahead. No, I don't know.

Speaker 1: 1:29:59

Go ahead. I got nothing, so we kind of glossed over it at the beginning of the show. But what's your take on the assassination of the United Healthcare Seats?

Speaker 2: 1:30:07

Well, yeah, so I will never go on record as saying that I approve of assassinations.

Speaker 1: 1:30:17

Okay.

Speaker 2: 1:30:21

What else you got, so Would you like to provide your take?

Speaker 1: 1:30:30

Well, everybody knows the way I feel, but I don't think assassinating CEOs of companies is not necessarily the right use of your time as you often say, when, when somebody's pushed far enough and they feel like they run out of every other option.

Speaker 2: 1:30:54

Yeah, and do you?

Speaker 1: 1:30:55

think it was a professional hit or do you think it was? Uh, okay, someone who this is the interesting question, right? Yeah, was it was it a angry dad, boyfriend, whatever, uh, or was it a professional hit? Because people have been flipping out about the gun, the way he handles the gun and cycles the gun. Oh, it's a professional, because if it's jamming and he's doing what he's doing, well, professional wouldn't have a gun that would jam. But anyway, well, he hasn't been caught, right?

Speaker 2: 1:31:26

No, he has not. Well, that makes it a professional hit. Why? Because amateurs get caught. Okay, I mean, I don't know if, or you're saying this is not the first person that person has killed. Um, I don't know. We're obviously there's no way to know that without knowing who it is.

Speaker 2: 1:31:54

But, generally speaking, something I've talked about previously is that we have a very biased view, not just in America but in every country. We have a very biased view as law-abiding citizens of the criminal class, and that biased view is based on an assumption that all criminals act the way we see criminals acting and people don't take into consideration the fact that you're only seeing about half the criminals. You're seeing the shittiest ones, the ones that get caught in their criminal acts. You're missing. Caught in their criminal acts, you're missing.

Speaker 2: 1:32:39

You you're like not seeing any information about, um, the good criminals and I don't mean good as in, like good for society, I mean good as in, good in that at their trade people that that engage in criminal activities for years and years and years and just don't get caught, like they're because they don't get caught. There's no tv or radio or news stories about them. There are a lot of reinforcing elements on media and in movies and tv shows about police eventually always finding their man. The reality is actually the opposite of that. The reality is that police departments, sheriff's departments, are filled with files that are closed without any resolution. So statistically we know that there's a huge underground economy and a large criminal class that has both people that get caught but also a professional hit. If the guy hasn't been caught, than that it was a, an amateur that managed to carry out a in broad daylight crime like this and then well, not really broad daylight, but yeah well, broad enough daylight.

Speaker 1: 1:34:14

Yeah, but OK, so let's talk about this. So suppressed nine millimeter that Failed to cycle, or even after I, after it cycles he's because he's manually cycling the gun, which makes no sense unless he really had some low power squib loads or something trying to make it as quiet as possible. But even then you can have boosters, you can do certain things to ensure the gun cycles like it. Just it doesn't. I don't see a professional having to cycle a gun manually so here's the other thing.

Speaker 1: 1:34:57

That makes no sense to me, we'll find this out.

Speaker 2: 1:35:00

It makes some sense to me. We'll find this out if they find the gun, because a professional hitman he may reuse the same long-range rifle, but he is not going to reuse the same small-caliber pistol. So that gun likely had a handmade or a not-commercially-purchased suppressor on it, which is probably why there was a cycling issue, and that gun likely was also not purchased from a licensed dealer, and so that combination could absolutely lead to bad cycling, even if it was tested beforehand. Yeah, in this scenario you're you're there to carry out a very specific task and everything about how that happens is secondary to it actually happening. So if this was in fact a professional hit meaning it was somebody paid somebody else to do this and the person did accomplish their goal and got away I mean, how do you, how do you argue?

Speaker 1: 1:36:21

this is not a professional okay, well, so then the question becomes what's the motivation? If it's a professional, why is the easiest question to answer his wife?

Speaker 2: 1:36:32

no, no, no, although that's the easiest question to answer his wife. No, no, no Although that's probably another answer, but I mean, I don't know how many people are happy with their insurance right now.

Speaker 1: 1:36:44

I'm not yeah, but are you at?

Speaker 2: 1:36:50

the point of hiring a hit man to take out a CEO, but I haven't had cancer and I haven't, you know, had things that might've killed family members. And and the fact that this happens right after they announced that they are no longer covering full duration of anesthesia during Okay, no, no, no, no, no.

Speaker 1: 1:37:09

All right, that is such a skewed headline bullshit thing.

Speaker 2: 1:37:12

But it's a good headline, though you got to admit that.

Speaker 1: 1:37:14

Yeah. But so first of all, no one's gonna say, oh, there's insurance ran out, turn off the anesthesia no they're not. You're just gonna get a bill for a hundred thousand dollars at the end and what the companies did in the cover they have and this is why you don't have socialized medicine is they're covering what medicare covers? Yeah, they're using the government's tables on how long surgery should take and, therefore, what they should pay which is sometimes you run into complications, jackass. But anyway.

Speaker 2: 1:37:48

Well, the problem with that is that the government does have a monopoly on that, and so they can get away with paying less. But the whole point of having a private insurance company that is competitive is that you can have better insurance theoretically in this country than what the government provides the people who have no insurance the problem is, though, that medicine is very individualized.

Speaker 1: 1:38:16

It cannot be. If you're providing the type of healthcare that we should be, actuary tables go out the window, because medicine should be individualized. If medicine is individualized, then your actuary tables are fucking useless. Anyway, I just think health insurance is a scam. Get rid of all of it. Go to HSAs and let doctors negotiate cash transactions with patients.

Speaker 2: 1:38:48

I kind of agree with that. The obvious argument is like okay, ben, so basically you only want the rich elites to have medicine and everybody else just dies at 55. Not my problem. I mean, yeah, you're not 55 yet, not your problem and I'm not poor. Well, you know, that can change very quickly. Uh yeah, it can it's much easier to go in the direction of poor than to go in the direction of rich.

Speaker 1: 1:39:19

Fair enough, fair enough.

Speaker 2: 1:39:23

I don't know that there's a good solution, and I'm honest enough to say that.

Speaker 1: 1:39:29

I think if you look at LASIK surgery, that's a perfect example where LASIK was not covered by insurance, not covered by insurance, not covered by insurance, and it got fucking cheap and good, yeah, yeah yeah, and it is elective and it is not life threatening.

Speaker 2: 1:39:47

You're not preventing anything, you're just making somebody temporarily because eventually everybody that has LASIK will once again have bad vision and of course this will be labeled as misinformation if this ever goes on youtube. But uh, in my experience, everybody that ever got lasik, including my ex-wife, my sister, my mom, everybody had eventually got bad vision again. But, um, you know, I think that the the thing that happens at some point I'm not sure what year is we went from having actual insurance, meaning the thing that covers the just in case something bad happens, kind of like car insurance. Right, if something bad happens, whether it's your fault or somebody else's fault, but it's, it happens very rarely, maybe once in a lifetime you have insurance to cover that. It went from that to just like oh, all my medical costs are now paid by a third party and why do I have to have this copay?

Speaker 1: 1:40:53

oh my god, shouldn't I have a lower copay? What the heck?

Speaker 2: 1:40:57

this insurance is crap because I have a high copay yeah, now, having said that, hospitals also, at some point along this game, started creating completely fictitious retarded pricing oh yeah, I mean, it's insane like my mom's, you know dealing with some medical stuff and looking at what insurance is what the hospital is billing and then what insurance is paying, and everything else it's, it's just, it's all jokes it.

Speaker 1: 1:41:26

It's alex jones level.

Speaker 2: 1:41:29

Uh, judgment, judgment level, just insanity it is, but no one's actually paying that either.

Speaker 1: 1:41:36

The insurance doesn't pay that, medicare doesn't pay that right, but we're gonna throw around fictitious numbers just to make it exactly like this is something we're gonna charge you a billion dollars but we'll give you a 98 discount if you pay today.

Speaker 2: 1:41:48

Yeah, it's that kind of stuff, so and that's. But your, you know, mom, stuff is like that's serious shit. But for me, you know, when I went in to get my um, my angiogram, my my uh nuclear heart scan right, the procedure itself took literally 10 minutes.

Speaker 2: 1:42:08

I was there for about three hours because it took that long for the drugs to kick in to lower my blood pressure and my heart rate yeah, but you know, let's say somebody in great shape came in there, they would only be there probably half an hour total time because they wouldn't need uh the, uh the drugs to do that. Um, but that procedure, that process, which is again all you're doing, is you're taking a screenshot of, or making a little video of, my heart beating. Okay, literally 10 minutes. That cost $14,000. $14,000.

Speaker 2: 1:43:11

Now, out of that, I had to pay for $1,000 right there and then out of my pocket, like before this thing happened. So I had to, you know, give him a check for a grand or a credit card for $1,000. And then insurance is supposed to cover the rest of it. Except now I'm getting bills from the hospital for another $1,200 because the insurance decided not to cover something. So I called the insurance company and I said, hey, what up the fuck? It's not covered. And he said, oh, it totally will be. Um, but they haven't provided sufficient documentation for us to pay on that. And I called the hospital and they they say, oh well, we've provided them everything that they're required to have and meanwhile I'm just getting bills where it's throwing me 30 days, 60 days, 120 days late and paying this off.

Speaker 1: 1:44:00

Yeah, yeah and ruin your credit, and declaring bankruptcy is not really an option.

Speaker 2: 1:44:08

So when you ask me, why would a CEO get shot of an insurance company, my question is why aren't more of them getting shot?

Speaker 1: 1:44:19

But my question is why CEOs and not judges?

Speaker 2: 1:44:23

Oh I think it'll get to that.

Speaker 1: 1:44:28

The left has certainly gone full on, you know, calling for additional violence.

Speaker 2: 1:44:37

I think it won't be long before the left gets off the the band, the guns bandwagon, and starts being very program, because if you look at the most recent shooters out there all lefties.

Speaker 1: 1:44:52

Well, again, it guns are not the problem. Exactly, it's a tool tool.

Speaker 2: 1:44:59

Yep, anyone can use the tool yeah, and, and I think that we're at a point in politics and uh, you know, oligopolism, frankly, in country where it's surprising that more people haven't been gone after that are running large companies, well, oligopolies aside For what the companies are doing or not doing. It's really no different than what would have happened 300 years ago with Pitchforks and your local you know your local. What would it be like? A minor royalty type thing, your regents? I?

Speaker 2: 1:45:53

don't know like governor like your at least governor. I mean, this did happen 300 years ago with a governor, right or 250 years ago. Governor of Massachusetts. Oh, I don't know this story. The the uh dumping of the tea oh yeah, yeah, that's different, but yes is it though?

Speaker 3: 1:46:17

look man I think public tarring and feathering should be a thing again well, that may happen too, maybe.

Speaker 2: 1:46:25

And look, that's already been a thing, dude how many, how many times have bill gates gotten hide hide in the face?

Speaker 1: 1:46:33

yeah, that's same thing which is what drove him to destroy all of humanity according to the internet.

Speaker 2: 1:46:39

Yes, Exactly Not enough would be the correct answer on that, but you get the idea. So I think not only is this expected, but it's kind of natural and somewhat surprising that we have not had more violence against corporate greed. And I use the greed very broadly. I don't just mean financial. I mean like you can take actions that result in financial gains that people won't consider greedy. That people won't consider greedy. Or you could take actions that may not even result in a financial gain but just make the company extremely greedy on what their actions are.

Speaker 1: 1:47:31

And it's the same old fuck around find out.

Speaker 2: 1:47:32

Well, yes, and I'm not condoning it, I'm just saying that if you push people far enough, you shouldn't be surprised they start pushing back.

Speaker 1: 1:47:42

And yes, agreed. And that goes back to what I said.

Speaker 2: 1:47:49

Well, you say that quite a bit actually, I think what I mean like every episode, yeah, well, violence, dude.

Speaker 1: 1:48:01

So here's the thing, and this this actually goes back to a conversation I had with a friend of mine. Yeah, on the, the world can tell me I am wrong, but when I can see that I am right with my own eyes and my own discernment and my own judgment, it doesn't matter how many people tell me I'm wrong when I look out and I see the world as it is and you're telling me to not believe my lying eyes. Sorry, I'm not going to fall for that. I'm not going to be gaslit into just capitulating my ideals, right?

Speaker 2: 1:48:37

I was just telling somebody about the allegory of the cave just recently here, yeah, there are four lights.

Speaker 1: 1:48:44

So anyway, I, I just I don't get it but, you know some people, oh no, no, like there, there was a guy I interacted with on Twitter who was you know, stop, stop abusing your children by spanking them.

Speaker 2: 1:48:59

Oh my God, it's not.

Speaker 1: 1:49:01

Yeah, first of all, there's a difference between abuse and spanking. There's a difference between hitting and spanking. And you know you obviously do not understand the role this plays and you know you spank your kids when they're young so that you can talk to them later like it's just.

Speaker 2: 1:49:26

It is a thing anyway, did you see the south park episode where cartman was treated like a dog by? Um, yeah, yeah the dog, whispered that guy caesar or whatever, yeah yeah, caesar something.

Speaker 2: 1:49:42

Yeah, yeah, uh and uh he I watched the thing with where he talked about it. He thought it was hilarious, he loved it. Uh, he said they got. They got it right, like they. They, you know, correctly interpreted what he was doing. Um, but that's the thing is. I think it is idiotic to treat young children as though they are. They have fully formed, functioning, logically based brains that you can simply use language to convince them to not do something that they shouldn't be doing. That is never going to work, dude. If it does, consider yourself a miracle, because in the other 99 kids that would not have worked. So if you get lucky with the one kid who, at a young age, can be reasoned with and you will win those arguments, man, then you lucked out on the uh, on the kid bandwagon because most kids are not like that. Did you see the?

Speaker 2: 1:50:48

video recently that was going around x of a kid in walmart that was pissed off at something probably that he, his parents, wouldn't buy, that he started knocking over like different uh displays of food items yeah, and the parents immediately went up, grabbed him, jerked him around and popped the shit out of him.

Speaker 1: 1:51:11

Right?

Speaker 2: 1:51:11

no, not at all. No, nothing. The parents stood by idly. Everybody standing around from walmart is afraid to put their hands on the kid. The kid walks up, it starts throwing glass bottles and breaking them on the floor this is not doing your kids any favors and everyone's just standing around going what do we do?

Speaker 2: 1:51:30

we don't know what to do. If we touch the kid, we're gonna have, we're gonna be charged by the police for, uh, you know, some kind of made-up crime. Uh kid's just going apeshit crazy, throwing shit on the floor and now that he switched to glass bottles, actually endangering other people forget about even the mess he's making. But now he's actually putting broken glass uh on the ground. And then when somebody finally comes up to some you know older black dude comes up to just not even grab the kid but like, put his hands around them so the kid can't be grabbing the bottles. I don't know if it was a parent. Somebody was like I'm gonna call the police if you touch that kid.

Speaker 2: 1:52:16

Well, the fucking police should have been called the minute the kid started throwing anything on the ground no, the parents shouldn't be called to go beat the shit out of the kid and, and if you follow my logic, as you and I have talked about, the police ought to put the parents in prison for not properly educating their child yeah, I I don't agree with that, but what you should do in. Walmart should send the parents a bill for a thousand dollars, absolutely, absolutely.

Speaker 1: 1:52:45

But what you should do is enable the parents to actually parent and you should chastise them for not parenting, ie letting their child run amok and do what he's doing. You know, public shaming works Well it used to.

Speaker 2: 1:53:00

I don't know if it does anymore.

Speaker 1: 1:53:03

Well, it's not done anymore.

Speaker 2: 1:53:04

People used to give a shit about what the other people thought. Not anymore.

Speaker 1: 1:53:10

Oh, bullshit. People are all about opinions and likes and everything else.

Speaker 2: 1:53:14

I guess that's true. Yeah, they are about likes. That's a good point, yeah, yeah, I have a model.

Speaker 1: 1:53:20

By the way, I'm sitting in my office and you and I were talking about this earlier. I have a model of a star fury that I built as a kid sitting in my office. That's great, and you're sitting there saying that it's not a realistic spaceship it's not at all wrong, it's no.

Speaker 2: 1:53:35

No, I'm right here it is a a goofy design? It is not.

Speaker 1: 1:53:42

It is absolutely a goofy design no, the x-wing from star wars is a stupid design yeah, also a stupid design yeah, the, the star fury from babylon 5 is one of the most realistic space fighters ever made nobody ever, except people who don't understand anything about actual space mechanics.

Speaker 2: 1:53:59

Yeah, it is. It is not at all realistic and people always point out that, well, look at, look at all the thrusters it has. Congratulations, you have thrusters. That does not make it automatically a realistic looking spacecraft oh, my god, I.

Speaker 1: 1:54:16

There's so much of the internet that disagrees with you and so much the internet.

Speaker 2: 1:54:20

That is stupid. They're morons. They don't understand this shit. Dude, this is not a good design. Okay, I I disagree. You're perfectly welcome to be on that side of the internet. Yeah, physics you know.

Speaker 1: 1:54:38

Yeah, exactly, I understand it.

Speaker 2: 1:54:39

No, you don't. No, you don't Not. If you think that that's a good design, man, you're showing your lack of understanding of physics at that point.

Speaker 1: 1:54:48

First of all, you're making assumptions around lots of things, but let's assume the cockpit is the center of gravity.

Speaker 2: 1:54:55

Well, I'm making assumptions based on 15 episodes of watching the show.

Speaker 1: 1:55:02

I disagree with some of your assertions on how uh, you know things work. Um, if you lose one engine, that doesn't mean you're going to go totally out of control. You would just shut down the opposite engine and you could still maneuver and do whatever. If you lost one half of your engines, then yes, it would be difficult to maneuver. But again, this is a fighter, not your. Arguments are all about survivability, not actually how the vessel would maneuver and be a very maneuverable craft.

Speaker 2: 1:55:36

It would it would not be a very maneuverable craft. It would not be a very maneuverable craft. It would be a fairly maneuverable craft.

Speaker 1: 1:55:42

It would be uber maneuverable.

Speaker 2: 1:55:44

No, not at all, because having that much mass sitting that far out makes it less maneuverable, not more maneuverable.

Speaker 1: 1:55:51

Well, first of all, you're assuming how much mass there is.

Speaker 2: 1:55:54

But second, of all, I see four engine pods that are roughly the same size as the main body of the ship no, no, no, they're not, they're smaller well, how much smaller they're like.

Speaker 1: 1:56:06

Okay, they're half the size of the main yeah, yeah, but the again the point is enormous compared to what they should be I mean again, it depends on how much thrust they're producing and what they should be. I mean again, it depends on how much thrust they're producing and what they're doing. But let's just say that the engine configuration, as in where the thrusters are pointing, the fact that you have forward-facing thrusters, rearward-facing, thrusters and everything else they are very correct, those are correct.

Speaker 1: 1:56:40

everything else, they, they're very correct, those are and they the the. Having the engines where they're at, on the nacelles where they're at you would be a very maneuverable ship, so yeah, I mean, all you're saying is because it has thrusters pointing in six different directions it is in the right directions and scaled correctly for maneuverability and scaled.

Speaker 2: 1:57:04

I don't agree with pointing in the right direction, absolutely yeah, they're pointing in all six directions. Yeah, so that that is fine anyway, I like it also.

Speaker 1: 1:57:15

I don't think there's much better in sci-fi. You know you could name one, but go for it.

Speaker 2: 1:57:22

I think the biggest issue with sci-fi on TV at least is artificial gravity, because it's inconvenient to shoot things that don't have artificial gravity, so they always invent artificial gravity, which also makes ships look the way they look in sci-fi is because of artificial gravity. Would you agree with that?

Speaker 1: 1:57:48

Yeah and that, and they want something that looks cool and they really don't care about. You know, they're more about the aesthetic than reality. And this is one of the areas where I think b5 really does pretty well, because I would say that the star fury is pretty ugly in a lot of ways, but I would say that I think it's fairly realistic in you know, its configuration and it's that that is a plausible spaceship to me. I think when you you're not there yet, but when you get to the earth alliance, um, you know, heavy cruiser hyperion, that shows up the first alliance, uh, you the first, uh the first earth alliance ship. You see the hyperion, it's a very plausible ship design in a lot of ways and they are in zero g constantly in the hyperion. They have no artificial gravity except thrust yeah, it doesn't spin doesn't do anything.

Speaker 1: 1:58:46

When you get to the omega class, like the agamemnon and so on, you know it's got a rotating section that spins to generate gravity. B5 spins to generate gravity, yeah, which is good, and the space station isn't exactly pretty. But if you look at the station it actually makes sense and you know those arms at the top that stick out is a zero-g loading area.

Speaker 2: 1:59:11

It's not generating gravity, I would say. No, you're right, it's generating centripetal force yeah, to simulate gravity, uh, yeah, uh, but I'm not you, so I wouldn't say that. But you know, I think I think a ship that is realistic looking uh, is something like the like discovery one, for example, like that's a very, very much a ship that makes sense, what?

Speaker 1: 1:59:44

what ship is this?

Speaker 2: 1:59:45

discovery, one.

Speaker 2: 1:59:46

That's the ship from 2001 space odyssey yeah, agreed yeah, and there's, um, I think what's the other show that they had. Well, I mean, obviously a number of ships, but not all out of uh expanse were designed properly. Yeah, but they also had a guy that used to work at nasa on that show, and so that would make sense. Um, the the main thing is, when you have no artificial gravity, you have to remember that your floor is always in the same uh, or should I say opposite plane as your thrust. So you're, you're 90 degrees yeah, it's 90 degrees.

Speaker 2: 2:00:37

So you can't have a spaceship that has the floor, like the, the stress trek ones, like the enterprise, where the up and down is.

Speaker 1: 2:00:47

You know well not only do you need artificial gravity, but you also need inertial dampeners because, yeah, you know, as you're accelerating, if you don't have something to remove that, now star trek gets around that. Because you know warp and the alcubierre drive, they're not technically moving right, this is an uh abstract of relativity where you know it's a train car experiment. The train is moving, but you on the train or not? So therefore, you, if you are not accelerating, but this bubble of space is accelerating, but you on the train or not. So therefore, you, if you are not accelerating, but this bubble of space is accelerating around you.

Speaker 1: 2:01:21

You don't feel it right that that's their way around it.

Speaker 2: 2:01:24

So you know you, you can poo-poo it all you want, but there is some real physics behind that yeah, but without artificial gravity you you may not feel the movement of the ship, but you'd still be floating around in space, correct? I mean, there has to be something that pushes you to the ground, to the floor. So you know, the gravity is one aspect of it. This ship, I will say, while it does have what they did for people who don't know what the ship in Babylon 5 looks like- You're talking about the Star Fury again.

Speaker 1: 2:01:58

The Star Fury, yeah.

Speaker 2: 2:02:00

If you can imagine a ship that has a cockpit and then they have four arms going away from the cockpit with these giant engine nacelles on each arm, and this is my problem with it is like this. I think was done by somebody that that wanted to have realism in this but didn't understand what those dimensions and uh placements would actually entail. It's like they're like well, you know, that's what they should have, well, yes, but uh, much closer to the ship, and if you're going to have something on a long arm in order to require less thrust, in order to be able to generate the angular momentum, then you have something that is light on a long, thin stick, something where you're just literally the engine is in the actual body of the ship, but well, but then you have a torque problem where you're

Speaker 1: 2:03:06

piping then you have a material science and torque problem, um, and also the, the length of the wings and things like that. The, the nacelles sticking out like that are used later for you'll find additional weapon loadouts, different things. So there's multiple things there. But just from an engine configuration item again, the ability for it to spin 360, do a lot of zero-G maneuvering is there.

Speaker 1: 2:03:40

You could do that with any ship, by having thrusters on it, sure, but like, okay, they're just, there's no need to have on there's no need to have four large engines in the cell that, far away from the body of the ship, it creates more problems, more risks than it doesn't.

Speaker 2: 2:03:56

If everything is flying fine and it's, it's like a tour ship where you have zero chance of getting attacked. I would probably not even mention anything because it'd be like, okay. I mean, yeah, they've got thrusters, they can go any direction, as long as yeah, I disagree with you on this but that's fine, you're good to go. So and and I've literally built stuff like this in a spaceship simulator and seen what actually happens to it if it's yes, in the simulator you have, you have built well, that's better than what you've done.

Speaker 1: 2:04:27

You haven't built one in the simulator, so yeah I, I just have thought about it a lot and no physics, but anyway know, the interesting thing here is you realize that right now the way I picture Gene during this conversation is wearing really boxy 1950s glasses with a pocket protector and tape over the bridge of his nose on his glasses. Hey man.

Speaker 2: 2:04:52

Actually, actually. So you're thinking of a Redditor? Okay, 100%, some people don't realize that being called a. Redditor is a huge insult, but it is. Yes, look, it's all pedantic, it's all kind of bullshit, but also I realize.

Speaker 1: 2:05:14

And, by the way, you really stopped at the wrong time in the show. What do you mean? Exactly what I said.

Speaker 2: 2:05:23

We stopped at the wrong time.

Speaker 1: 2:05:25

You stopped at the wrong time in the Babylon 5. I don't know why you stopped at episode 15. You screwed up.

Speaker 2: 2:05:34

That's when I fell asleep, dude, and I haven't watched it for a couple days. That's why, yeah, well, I'll get to the rest of it. You know, hey, if I, if I made it through like 14 seasons of house, uh-huh, you think there's any danger that I'm not gonna watch the rest of babylon? Uh, no, I don't know but you know, and and again, the criticisms I have aren't even so much with what they're doing in the show, it's more with ben thinking that this is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Speaker 1: 2:06:05

As far as spaceship design, I that's not the case, though I don't think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Speaker 2: 2:06:12

I just think it is a reasonable design.

Speaker 1: 2:06:15

I think it's better than most it is absolutely better than most.

Speaker 2: 2:06:19

I totally agree with you. The placement of the thrusters themselves in three planes for full six degrees is correct, but there's definitely some choices that they made that are aesthetic over practical, and that that's all I'm saying.

Speaker 1: 2:06:38

Dude, that happens with the F-22. That happens with everything Speaking of which, have you seen I sent you an article on it but Russia's new MiG, that they're working on.

Speaker 2: 2:06:49

I have not no.

Speaker 1: 2:06:51

Dude, you need to go look at this, the MiG-40, whatever it is.

Speaker 2: 2:06:55

I thought they were up to 57 by now.

Speaker 1: 2:07:03

I don't think so, uh. But whatever the name, whatever the new, the new version of the mig this was a military times article talking about its capabilities and what they're working on.

Speaker 2: 2:07:09

Oh yeah, it's not a big, so sorry, the su 57 is the one I was thinking right, but I'm talking about the new mig.

Speaker 1: 2:07:15

That it itself, according to the Russian. What Russia's putting out there? They're talking about Mach 4.5 cruising speed. Mig-35? Mach 4.5. That's crazy. They're talking about near-space flight envelope to be able to carry hypersonic missiles and anti-satellite weaponry on it. Yep, so literally a fighter that could fly up to the edge of space and take out a satellite or a text link, because I don't see it.

Speaker 2: 2:07:53

It was on signal. Yeah, I'm looking at Signal. I mean, I see a picture of Marissa Torme for some reason, but okay, it was her birthday recently. What are you?

Speaker 1: 2:08:05

talking about.

Speaker 2: 2:08:06

Uh-huh, I see a picture of a giant turd. Let's see what else we got here.

Speaker 1: 2:08:13

What picture of a giant turd are you looking at?

Speaker 2: 2:08:15

Mama's wife guy here.

Speaker 1: 2:08:22

What?

Speaker 2: 2:08:22

what picture of a giant turd, are you looking at mama's wife? Uh, yeah, the one.

Speaker 1: 2:08:24

All right, so the uh here let me find it so, the mig-41 just 41? Okay, good, let me look that up so it's their six generation mock, a new mock 4 plus fighter. It's pretty interesting, so it hasn't flown yet.

Speaker 2: 2:08:39

Okay, so this is pure PR we're looking at.

Speaker 1: 2:08:42

Yes, yeah, yeah, but it's interesting to see where that's going, so I do love the naming convention, though it's called Izdeliya Sorokadyan, so it's literally called um product 41 yeah, anyway, it's interesting to see where people are going with what uh, we don't know what the you know sixth generation fighter program is going to look like here in the us. It's interesting, that's's all. Hmm, do we have at least their promo video of it Sure, the dark star that's about it Hmm.

Speaker 2: 2:09:30

Yeah, six generation. Oh wow, it does look cool. Yeah, it looks like a pointy thing, like a dart, yeah, anyway.

Speaker 3: 2:09:38

Well, I yeah, it looks like a pointy thing, like a dart.

Speaker 1: 2:09:39

Yeah, anyway. Well, I mean, if you're traveling that fast, air resistance is actually.

Speaker 2: 2:09:44

It's kind of like if an SR-71 had a baby with a Like a, what were those stealth bombers that we had One of those F-117s?

Speaker 1: 2:09:59

Like the B-1? No, no, no.

Speaker 2: 2:10:02

Lancer, or what are you talking about? The 117s?

Speaker 1: 2:10:06

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Speaker 2: 2:10:09

The F-117 bomber.

Speaker 1: 2:10:12

I do not know of an F-117.

Speaker 2: 2:10:16

Let me pull it up for you. It's the Lockheed F-117. Let me pull it up for you. It's the Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk.

Speaker 1: 2:10:22

Oh, okay, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, no, no, so first of all, that's a stealth fighter. It was classified as a fighter because it was capable of air-to-air yeah.

Speaker 2: 2:10:32

It was a shitty fighter. It was a pretty good bomber, though Okay. It was a shitty fighter. It was a pretty good bomber, though Okay, and currently only uses a training aircraft.

Speaker 1: 2:10:43

Yeah, yeah, right. Uh-huh.

Speaker 2: 2:10:48

I mean it was supposed to be retired, but yeah, it's a neat design. Holy shit, did you know it's 41 years old now?

Speaker 1: 2:10:56

Yeah, it was built in the 70s and the reason why it's so blocky is because they lacked the computer technology to be able to really do what they needed to do with the curves.

Speaker 2: 2:11:04

But I always thought that was one of the prettiest planes because that sort of ugly it looks like a Tesla truck.

Speaker 1: 2:11:12

Yes, which is hideous.

Speaker 2: 2:11:14

You can imagine a flying black colored Tesla truck with a couple of wings stuck on it.

Speaker 1: 2:11:21

Yeah, that's one of the most ugly things ever.

Speaker 2: 2:11:23

Yes, Well, I agree to disagree.

Speaker 1: 2:11:29

Anyone who thinks the Cybertruck is pretty. I mean, you definitely have been affected by communism in your life.

Speaker 2: 2:11:37

So you got to look at the signal and tell me how you think that's ugly.

Speaker 1: 2:11:41

How do I think what's ugly.

Speaker 2: 2:11:43

Picture of the century. Okay, I think it's cool looking, but it's not pretty Like Batman would be flying one of these things. Yes, sure, okay, alright, we agree. Then you think Batman's ugly, I guess, okay.

Speaker 1: 2:12:05

I'm not attracted to Batman, but okay, that says a lot about you there, gene.

Speaker 2: 2:12:14

You don't think Batman's attractive at all?

Speaker 1: 2:12:28

Oh, Jesus Christ. No, I don't think batman's uh attractive at all.

Speaker 2: 2:12:30

Ah, jesus christ, no, I don't. Pointy ears on top of the head, bat girl, maybe you know. Uh, poison ivy, you know, maybe I don't, harley quinn, definitely. Well, harley quinn is fucking hot.

Speaker 1: 2:12:34

Okay, we can stop on that one isn't Harley Quinn the quintessential of what is wrong with all of mankind?

Speaker 2: 2:12:43

because she's clearly batshit crazy batshit crazy, hot as hell and smart enough to get men to do what she wants exactly this is a problem.

Speaker 1: 2:12:55

This is what is wrong with society. This is this is why men are failing but?

Speaker 2: 2:13:00

but, as correctly pointed out, in the comic books, she clearly is a villain. All women, well, there you go. I mean, did they all used to be, or did that just start with Eve? And on that note.

Speaker 1: 2:13:19

Gene, I think. I think that's a good place to wrap it all.

Speaker 2: 2:13:22

Right, sounds good guys. Oh, this is a long one. We'll catch you all next time.