The Great AI Lie: Misallocating Trillions While Ignoring Real Innovation | 3/27/26

Politics without the soap opera with unfiltered constitutional conservative truth, the conservative

review with Daniel Burns.

And welcome back, fellow American patriots and Minutemen standing at the ready to fight

a new for the issues that matter on this Friday, your host, Daniel Harwitz back here today.

Now that Speaker Johnson and John Thune and President Trump have all given Democrats everything

they wanted, DHS funding, reward them for holding up the bill for 40 days minus new ice

funding.

Well, what are they focused on?

What are they clearing the decks for?

What are they in a rush for?

Well, Speaker Johnson said earlier this week, inaction is unacceptable on an AI bill.

And what they mean by that, and I want to today define definitions, not all AI is created

equal.

AI is a tool.

It's like saying search engines.

And computing, okay, it's the LLM cloud-based chatslop surveillance state that cannot sustain

itself in a true free market and needs government favors to demand and mandate that it potentially

be placed in any unnatural zoning area of favor we don't do for any other industry, including

the power that is needed to power it in ourselves.

In order to create AGI general intelligence, which clearly is a fallacy, so that they

can continue juicing up their stock valuations, having not just a revolving door, but the

very CEOs that are pushing this venture socialist model, working off of state-based tax subsidies

and federal land favors and federal regulatory favors, that they could work in government

simultaneously, get appointed to the science council and continue to misallocate resources

from edge computing, narrow low latency AI that is needed to produce weapons, to produce

mechanized farms and seaports and things that actually will bring back manufacturing, actually

will bring back real jobs and real productivity.

They are the ones that are against true AI.

They are the ones that are against productivity and industrial revolution and progress.

In fact, the version of AGI that they are pushing is not to be clear.

This is not the new printing press, the new industrial revolution.

This is the new or same old wind solar carbon capture EV mRNA.

Something that in a free market would not exist, but government is able to gas light it into

existence through the monopolization of the public square, through subsidies, through special

favors, through actually partnering with stock valuations and stock buyouts and pump-and-dump

schemes.

Remember, this is all built off of a Ponzi scheme of stock valuations, not actual revenue

and productivity.

It's already in a massive bubble.

That's what it is akin to, those things, and that's how you have a product that produces

a lot more harm than good, and the worst ROI in American history relative to trillions

and capex, unproductive debt spending.

I know that doesn't fit on the bumper staker, but that is the summation of what I want

to get into today, the real AI that they're boxing out through this misallocation of capital

versus what's going on.

I want to give you the political state of play with the AI legislation that they want to

push, the purpose behind it, the messaging that I think conservatives need to use that

is somewhat distinguished from this sort of fake opposition you're seeing from Bernie

Sanders and AOC.

I call it fake because if Democrats weren't charged, they would fold like cheap suits,

so they're not really opposed to it.

Maybe I'm consistent in that I oppose this whoever is present and then we'll get to anything

else that we have time for.

First off, just want to get into the news of the day, so we woke up to the news that

three in the morning, they by unanimous consent in the Senate went and passed a DHS funding

bill, minus ICE and Border Patrol funding.

The first they give the Democrats everything they wanted on every spending bill like HUD

and education, minus DHS 40 days ago, that leads to the shutdown, the cast, the airports,

and then now they're going to give them within DHS, everything including TSA, minus ICE

and Border Patrol.

Now obviously, yes, we know that ICE is getting paid because of the mandatory spending

they passed in the BBB last year, but the point is for Democrats with control of zero

branches to be able to hold up airports on behalf of sanctuary cities and illegal aliens

and get what they want and get away with it and keep this going to isolate ICE funding.

When in fact, what should have happened is Trump using the bully pulpit to demand even

more immigration reform to juice up deportations to defund sanctuary cities for Democrats who

have accomplished that is simply astounding and that is because the GOP is one big controlled

opposition, but there are two things my colleagues will not tell you today, they're all yelling

about all the rhinos, the rhinos, number one, this comes from the man at the top.

We have not passed a single good budget bill in either of Trump's two terms.

That is a fact.

In fact, every single budget bill that Trump has ever signed had more conservative opposition

than Democrat opposition, which tells you everything you need to know about it.

And this is no different.

This is actually the worst form of it.

Trump originally told Johnson that I think any deal they make, I'm pretty much, you know,

not happy with it, but he didn't oppose it.

So there's very degrees of Trump, sometimes he'll demand something, sometimes he'll be

okay with it, but the point is they cannot and do not do anything that he is downright

opposed to.

That's what you need to understand.

He is fine with this.

His goal is not mass deportations and in fact, we've seen numerous sources already indicate

that he is against it and fighting anyone who wants to push for that, which is why Bovino

the the CBP commissioner was pushed out and he himself has been, you know, saying that

home is an empty suit and it's all fake.

So you don't have to take my word for it, you know, that is not his priority.

His priority is the pay for play with big tech, big crypto, big cutter, Saudi Arabia.

He's having an event speaking at their sovereign, wealth fund dinner in Miami over the weekend.

And then of course, this obsession with government favors for this insolvent form of harmful

no ROI LLM based AI boxing out the AI we actually need.

Okay, that is the truth of it.

You could not get a more dystopian week in Republican politics.

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot.

So I said two things, my colleagues won't mention.

One is that Trump supports this too is that, okay, are you going to have on the primary

challengers to these rhinos that I've always had on?

While Trump, by the way, is endorsing the very rhinos you fain outrage over?

No, you're not because it's all a game.

This has been going on for over a decade, the rhinos, the rhinos and then every time the

balls in play not only are they out to lunch, but they're men and their, you know, friends

are supporting the very senators that that are part of the problem.

So give me a break, give me a freaking break.

So one other thing just just on this point before we go to AI, I got to say this.

So right now it looks like the Republicans are crushed and Trump is crushed and no one's

listening.

I made it clear at the beginning of this term.

I said, look, nobody has a greater platform than Trump.

Trump and his allies, if they wanted to stay on message and message what I do every

day, they could have gotten the public on their side, they could have done that.

The entire time Trump could have been nailing home the point that they are shutting down

your air travel in order to protect illegal aliens and even criminal aliens in sanctuary

cities.

I said that instead, it was all AI fires the section 702, other sophistry.

He's now looking at renovating the treaty room in the White House.

And then of course, I ran war that he pulled the plug on Israel when they had to upper hand,

then dives into it at the most bizarre time, which again, you got to wonder how much of

this is the Saudi sovereign wealth on by the way, everyone's blaming Israel, but the

reality is, if you look open source, just type into the search engine, it's all over

the media that NBS of Saudi Arabia was the one who pushed him into this.

This is my thing.

Broadly I support being strong on Iran, but the timing of this at a time when we're so

economically weak, you know, I'm sorry, but I just like, you can't trust this guy.

And that's that's part of why it's making it unpopular because you don't know, do you

really want to get tough on Iran or is this a pay for play like everything else is anyway,

Trump is adding his signature to the US dollar, how appropriate that the main that turned

our money into monopoly money.

And I'm sorry, it is Trump that did that, Biden continued it.

And now he's continuing that.

So yeah, I mean, let his name be signed on worthless paper.

So I want to get into, I want to give you for the next 45 minutes or so.

An in depth view on AI, the politics of it, the policy where this is headed, where it

should be headed, that issues all these false dichotomies, false choices, bumper stick

roller language.

Oh, I'm for progress, I'm for competing with China and you're against it.

No, we're going to cut through all that grease today and give over the case that unfortunately,

nobody is giving over.

Even the opponents of it, I, my view, are focused largely on the wrong issues.

Some of the harms I agree to with harms to children, whatever, but it's, I believe strategically

it's the wrong focus on this.

And certainly with Bernie and AOC, they're obviously not going to message this right and

they have their own agenda.

So I'm going to give you the conservative case against the LLM cloud based general intelligence

generative AI built upon the most painful costly and solvent business model that has the

most damage both in terms of the land and resource use and the mental illness it creates

in the least ROI, crowding out investment in the forms of AI and computing that we actually

need to be focused on first, just a public service announcement.

We had a terrific show yesterday on Obamacare, healthcare, a vision healthcare with Twila

braze.

If you haven't heard it, look at yesterday, Thursday show, just want to pass on a message

from Twila, her integrity is impeccable.

So at the end of the show, we talked about there's people pushing the Trump administration

to mandate that people that seniors automatically enroll in Medicare advantage.

And she named dropped heritage and the Paragon Institute.

So that was the, the, the heritage is true, but Paragon, that was a mistake.

We've actually had on Brian from Paragon a number of times.

And I just want to clarify, she was, you know, mortified, she misread some things.

There's a very, very minor point, but Paragon is not supporting that.

So if you took that to heart, they absolutely do not support that.

And we're certainly going to have their folks back on the show to talk about healthcare.

They're certainly an ally on that issue.

Okay, AI.

So Mike Johnson is saying that an AI framework is the priority in action is unacceptable.

So mind you, we're not saying in action is unacceptable on dealing with farms and

ranches, repeal of Obamacare, inflation, healthcare, solvency, immigration, moratorium,

Muslim immigration, Muslim brotherhood taking over.

No, no, no, we don't say in action is unacceptable.

The one thing we're staking out the presidency on is this AI framework.

So first, I want to explain the politics and the legislative maneuvering of what is going

on, what they're trying to do, add some of the news of the day into that.

And then give you, we've said this before, but I want to do it in one show, the difference

between different types of AI so you could understand the false choices that are being presented

to you today.

So the way this thing developed is, obviously, a lot of people started complaining.

This issue turned to mud, both the data centers, but also the chatbot slop has become very

unpopular.

And you pull it and it really pulls across different age groups, although the younger

people hated even more and, you know, right and left.

So you'll have the environmental groups, you'll have the Bernie people, but then you'll

have all the rural Trump voters showing up at town halls against the data centers.

And that's what's happening.

So Trump comes in and, you know, I didn't see this coming, but in retrospect, it makes

sense big tech through through the election to him.

He comes in and is inaugural address and in the first week in office.

And we thought it would be peddled to the medal on the priorities in inflation and

invasion, but he made it very clear that operation stargate was the number one thing.

That AI and data centers and infrastructure and sovereign wealth and foreign investments.

And there's about $500 billion program.

And if you remember, I was asking that week, I said, wait a minute.

Don't we have to cut spending?

I thought we were in debt.

What's with this 500 billion?

And then it turned out they're saying, no, no, don't worry.

It's not we're not spending 500 billion.

This is just this is all private.

It's all private investment.

And then I said, okay, well, if it's private, then then how is that?

I mean, Hatton project, a whole of government approach, the crown jewel of your economic

agenda.

What does government have to do with it?

So if it's a juggernaut technology that has all these willing investors and it's the

way of the future and anyone opposed to it is a luddite and backwards and impermative.

So let it let it go.

I mean, we didn't need in any other technology.

I don't remember in my lifetime with the internet and digital and wireless and the iPhone,

the smartphone.

I didn't remember all the CEOs coming in and working out deals.

And I don't remember any of that.

And we need to pass all this stuff to grease the skids for it.

And we need to have all the 50 states give 30-year tax abatements and we need to allow

them to construct their places in any place, any how, agricultural land, residential

land, any way, any how, we never saw that.

So obviously what was happening and we now see clearly is that they were giving them

special favors.

The Department of Commerce and Treasury are literally engaged in multiple partnerships

and this is the stuff we see out in the open appointing the various CEOs of these companies

to all sorts of boards and on White House councils and setting policy, okay?

And this is literally the monopolization of the public square that led to the growth

of wind, solar, EVs, carbon capture and mRNA, okay?

That is the big lie here.

The big lie here is they want to say that this is the next printing press.

But in fact, what their version of cloud-based LLM chatslop, agentic, you know, AGI with

this pursuit of a Zeus-like Oracle, which is just fictitious, that is not the next printing

press, the next industrial revolution.

It's insolvent, but government does have the ability to make insolvent things solvent

and gas like them into existence, like we see with wind solar, carbon capture, EVs and

mRNA, that wouldn't otherwise work in a free market and they don't really work ultimately,

but they're there enough to cause way too much harm than good and are not worth to ROI

unless government keeps it afloat.

They want to get all these projects started when they don't have the power, frankly, even

without the power, they don't have the ability to fill them right now, much less the ones

that they want to build, but they figure if they can start them now, they enshrine it

as too big to fail, and then they're like, look, we got to be China, it's national security,

what are you going to do?

Manhattan Project, that's where this came from.

So over the last year, it reached a boiling point, this has been going on for a few

years, but obviously last year, Trump really took it to the next level and reached a boiling

point and a bunch of people started speaking out and groups and it became like mud.

So whereas they started out shut up, it doesn't take any water and power, it doesn't do

anything.

This is the way of the future.

Your backwards, it doesn't cause harm, it doesn't do this.

Now, as I warned last year, they're employing a rope a dope, they're doing the opposite.

They're shoving a regulatory framework down our rear ends in a way to sort of jujitsu the

issue and outflank the opposition and say, oh, you want regulation, we're going to give

it to you.

And then stick in there, a preemption of states that they have to allow a data center anywhere

anyhow.

And then they'll be like, oh, you oppose protecting children and copyright, IP, right?

You oppose it now.

This is the game that they're doing.

They want to frame this in a way and unfortunately some of the opponents and obviously with Bernie

Sanders and AOC making this about bands and moratoriums and regulations.

So it easily plays into their hands that, no, you're the anti-technology, anti-progress,

you're to regulate or not regulate.

That is not the question.

The question is to subsidize and gas light and give a special favors or not to buy argument.

I'm not even for much regulation, I'm not into that stuff.

I mean, I think certain things obviously you can't have porn, the deep fakes, stealing

the harming people, IP theft, obviously.

We always protect that.

I'm all for a lot of this stuff in a vacuum.

But I don't think there's an urgency to pass any AI bill.

I think the urgency is to pull the plugs on the affirmative government favors that without

which it could not persist.

Do not give tax abatements.

Do not have Jensen Zuckerberg and Ellison setting national policy on this.

That's not even a revolving door that's having to fit one foot planted in each world at

the same time.

It's the biggest corruption I've ever seen.

And stop giving them the land favors.

We don't give to any other industry and let them work harmoniously within society that

any industry has to do.

And if it's solvent, go do it.

I'm not here to stop you.

But I think we all know the answer.

It's the same thing with green energy.

Gas lit into existence.

Its insolvency is made solvent, but not in a free market way that's beneficial to society.

When something is done through ingenuity and free markets, it might have some harms

inevitably, things have harms, but it has a net benefit, you know, to a large degree.

That is what we're not seeing here with with the LLMAGI, you know, nonsense.

So anyway, what they're trying to do is say, look, whatever you want, you're right.

We need to protect the children, IP stuff.

So they're going to form a framework, but that's all fake.

Oh, and they have to pay for their own energy, which is it, it's impossible.

So this is the framework.

Remember, this is not a piece of legislation yet.

This is a press release from the White House.

And then on the bottom, oh, and then now that we have a national standard, we took care

of the regulations.

Now it's time to say states you're out of it.

These things are built anywhere.

Now folks, if you're fighting us viscerally and saying you're wrong, it doesn't do this,

it doesn't do this.

And then it becomes unpopular.

And then suddenly you come to us, yeah, yeah, you're right, we'll give you, yeah, we

need to do this, we absolutely need to rush into this, oh, and then trust me.

We got it.

You're right.

You're right.

It's like, imagine if you have a group of, you know, you have a town that's being attacked

by martyring bands of roving, you know, robbers.

And you have a, you know, certain, you have your weapons, your guns and your, your, your

self-defense.

And a bunch of people come and rebuke you.

What are you doing?

I want you to give up all your weapons, lay them down and I'm going to get you a much

better product.

I'm going to get you something so much better.

And you're like, what the hell?

I got to fight these guys and look, look at this.

What are you talking about?

There's no problem.

I don't see a problem here.

And then eventually they turn around like, you know, it's kind of like a skit of a play

where the curtain goes down and then the curtain gets raised up and they come in with

a new attitude.

Oh my gosh, these guys are such a security risk.

You are so right.

Guys, you are right.

They are a big danger to you, but you know, we got it, trust me, we got it.

Lay down your weapons and we're going to create something amazing for you to protect

you and do amazing things for you.

Well, if three seconds ago, you infatically dismissed our concerns and now you're coming

in and saying, you're so right about your concerns, but lay down your weapons and we'll

take care of it for you.

I mean, dude, talk about the scorpion taking a ride on the frogs back.

Oh, yeah, just give us the ride and we won't sting you in the middle of the ocean.

That's what's happening here politically.

So they're trying to make it, they're trying to shove a regulatory bill, but it's not really

for the regulatory, whether I don't know what it will have or not have, but the main point

is to continue gaslighting this stuff into existence, which is why I don't like this messaging

that I'm seeing from some people about, oh, you know, you know, obviously Bernie, we need

a moratorium.

We need this.

We don't need anything.

We just need to stop giving it governmental favors.

It's insolvent.

My point is now that a lot of the tax breaks are really state-based, but stop that.

And I got to reiterate, I know I've said this a thousand times, but to say that localities

have to accept and redo farmland and residential neighborhoods.

To accept something that's going to suck out the water, the power, make a bunch of

noise, a lot of people are complaining about this.

That is not free market and that is that intersects with normal zoning, where now the civilization

has a right to say, wait a minute, wait a minute.

Our model is insolvent.

Three years into this, the AGI thing was proven to fraud.

The ROI is not there.

We don't need to affirmatively sacrifice in order to gaslight your thing into existence.

And now is the time to pull the plug on this and make you sink or swim on your own

religion.

And that would force a reallocation of resources to where it needs to go.

Okay, that is the reality.

Trump appointed Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison and Jensen hang to the Presidential Council of

Advisors on Science and Technology.

They're literally setting the policy.

Do you understand?

I don't need to regulate that much.

I mean, I don't oppose certain things we need.

But just don't have the very guys that are neck deep in a trillion dollar capex that

it cannot fail.

They're setting the national policy on this.

And these bastards fake conservatives on the right are calling me, oh Bernie Sanders,

you're this, you're a socialist.

When they're, they're the ones who are both socialist venture socialist and transhumanist.

Because the reality is that this, this technology that they're pushing with a greater degree

of investment than railroads, highways, power plants, anything, and it's all built on speculation.

It's only contingent upon government favors.

That's the reality.

It can't work on its own.

They're the socialists.

They're the one, see, let's say I pass a national bill and I say, you know, I want to open

up a car repair shop on my residential block.

So I get appointed to a council, get in the White House, and then I get them to pass a bill

and say, no state or locality could block my car repair shop.

So they're cleverly framing themselves as pro innovation, anti-regulation, and us as

pro regulation.

But is that regulation?

No, you're the one regulating neighborhoods out of natural, natural zoning and violating

their rights.

Again, it's a balance.

You can have zoning that's too overzealous, but to go and say that things, we don't even

offer this stuff to power plants.

Not to this degree.

We don't have a bill.

It's anywhere, anywhere they get their, they're, they're built.

No.

And also they have it both ways.

You can't say, oh, it's socialism to oppose this.

And then at the same time say that this is the new Manhattan project, whole of government

approach.

Say what you want about the Manhattan project, you might have been necessary, but that

wasn't free market.

The government gas level, it's like a military, military is not free market by definition.

It's a necessity.

Certain things aren't necessity.

So that's a different argument.

If it's the next innovation and where the ones are naturally coming in and blocking it,

so then you're blocking innovation.

But if it's built upon government subsidies, land use favors, and literally the industry

people running the policy, so then they're the ones that are socialist.

They're the ones that are gaslighting something that cannot work into existence.

You can't both say this is a juggernaut and we need them in the Manhattan project.

A Manhattan project is something that naturally is not going to come and you have to use a whole

of government approach that's very much against the free market to, to create it into existence.

So then that's a different argument.

Now you have to make the argument that it rises to the level of something that requires

government subsidies, regulatory favors, land use favors, a whole of government approach,

which there are things that you need to do.

Like for example, Keystone pipeline, inevitably you're going to have to use eminent domain

for it.

But we all understand that that will bring in a degree of not just any oil, but actually

the light, sweet crude oil that works for our oil refineries, and that will lower the

price of everything, benefit everyone.

That's not speculation, that's not anything new, okay?

And it's a one-dimensional project.

Here is where the rubber meets the road.

Here's where the rubber meets the road.

Here is a huge difference between generative LLM cloud-based general AI that requires endless

data centers, endless land use, ripping up farms and ranches, power, water, noise.

And then there's an exponential factor because LLMs constantly have to scale in an exponential

way.

It's literally in solid, it's literally like carbon capture.

Remember how we talked about this with carbon capture, it's all a lie because it's built

upon the fact that carbon is a problem.

So we're going to go and build pipelines to suck out carbon for no reason, doesn't give

you anything, doesn't do anything, and then store it in underground cavern.

So Robert Bryce once said, quote, we would need to find an underground location able to swallow

a volume equal to the contents of 41 oil super tankers each day 365 days a year.

You're setting up a modality of something that even if global warming were true and carbon

were causing it, that's an unsustainable business model.

There's no way you can deal with that.

You would have to turn the entire earth eventually into an underground carbon cavern.

It's retarded.

That thought slop LLM cloud-based data center version of AI, focus of AI is very similar

to that because you're building it upon something that it will net folks, it's never going

to happen because one of two things happens, either you're wrong and this whole thing is

the bubble, which I believe is right, or if it really is such an innovation, it will

go the way of conventional computing, super computing that is that it will go from, you know,

from computers or the size of a building to becoming micro.

There's never a scenario where you need to build 41 gigawatt hyperscales in just one

half of Indiana alone, that's just not a thing.

That's ridiculous.

And also, why is there never, it's a sense of proportionality, why is there never discussion

that we need a Manhattan project to deal with the loss of farms and branches?

Don't we need food?

Don't humans matter?

It's all like, this is the thing, okay, but the sense of proportionality makes no sense.

And again, if something is totally free market, let it go, let it go, I'm not here to judge

it.

You're a CEO, you want to invest in it?

That's fine.

But when you're coming to us and saying that you have to re-zone because that's what

it's doing, then it's the right of the people to say, okay, wait a minute, where's the

ROI?

Open up your books.

You know, three years ago, chat GPT seemed cool, but now it's turning out.

As we all knew, LLMs are statistical regressions.

They're not sentient, they're not going to, you know, be able to do what they're saying.

They have their uses, but not enough to justify trillions in CapEx.

All that use of power and land, it makes no sense.

They're the ones.

You can't say we're socialist blocking innovation, oh, and then in the other press, we need a Manhattan

project.

You could make that argument, but you can't make both arguments at the same time.

It's not.

By the way, just in general, just so you understand how to begin with none of this is a free market.

And you have a company that could come to you and offer you $25 million for your land.

Okay.

The reason they have this cash is because of the years of zero interest rates.

Peter Earl has a great piece at zero hedge explaining this case.

He says, quote, the problem is not that AI must be fake.

It is that a very real technological advance can be finance, price, and physically built

in ways that are wildly uneconomic.

That distinction matters because AI is about as rounded out as modern capitalism gets.

The Fed cut the federal funds target range to zero to a quarter point in March 2020 and

kept it there until the lift off began in March 2022.

The relevant Austrian point, meaning Austrian economics, is that the seedbed for this boom

was years of money priced as if capital were infinite, patient, and nearly free precisely

the sort of signal that makes entrepreneurs think that the economy has more real savings

available for long gestation projects than it actually does.

So that's at a baseline before we get to the targeted favors.

That in general is why we don't have a free market anymore.

And it's something that we need to really grapple with when you have companies do things

that are anti-human that a free market would not have sustained.

But now they have market share.

How do you deal with that?

You have to deal with it carefully with limiting principles.

Folks, I am an Austrian economist.

I mean, I'm not an economist.

I'm of the school of the Austrian economists and on the opposite of Bernie Sanders.

But what happens when you have years of policies that are anti-thetical to the free market?

So if I just keep it there, I'm actually keeping Bernie's model in place.

But then we have the micropoint, and this is the main takeaway if there's nothing else

I want you guys to understand this.

The big lie that the AI cartel is giving over to you is that they are pushing some sort

of innovation called AI, anyone who opposes their insolvent venture socialist government

gas lit, unsustainable, much more harm than good for an ROI for a capex that's greater

than anything we've ever done before by a mile exponentially.

What they're lying to you about is that AI is not singular.

There's multiple forms of it and uses of it, and there's multiple forms of computation

of computers.

Now before anyone says, well, you're not a computer scientist, well, the same way I'm

not a meteorologist, but I think I know the difference between a storm cloud and a

non-storm cloud, okay?

They're also like a cumulonimbus cloud and a serious cloud.

I know the difference between cloud-based computing and edge-based computing between AGI, this

general AI used with the generative AI, the prompts, the LLMs, okay?

That require endless data churning versus narrow AI low latency working off of local networking

edge computing living on the edge, not cloud-based.

And the difference between the two is the difference between a dystopia that is fiscally

insolvent, causes all the harm with the data centers, the land, the power, the water,

the noise, and the outcome of it.

It's good for three things.

Chatslop rotting your brain, a surveillance state, and the pursuit of AGI, which is a transhumanist

thing and is not even going to happen.

So anyone who actually supports innovation, to the extent you support government gaslighting,

government monopolization of the public square, government tax subsidies, government landfavours,

to the extent you support that, it should be in pursuit of edge computing, narrow low latency

AI, to create weaponry, to create narrow singular tasks, like mechanizing farms, which

Trump actually is on the other side of that, for all of his AI stuff, he actually wants

to bring an endless slave labor for that and moving us away and on inviating the need

to innovate, because you have a constant slave labor, no, I'm all for mechanizing.

And by the way, I'm a conservative, I'm an Austrian economic sky.

I'm not worried about creative destruction and loss of jobs.

Notice I don't make that argument.

Now there is an argument to be made that's a little bit more nuanced that their gaslighting

companies into thinking they don't need people, then these LLMs make a bunch of mistakes

and they have to rehire them.

But the problem is that it's not actually achieving what they want.

I'm okay with achieving it, because if it's really achieving it, it's going to cause

more good than harm.

You might not have the same exact jobs, but on net you'll create more jobs.

This is not because it's not a free market, it's gaslighting.

Let's let's drill down into the two types.

I want to vividly explain this, LLMs are a magic eight ball or a fortune cookie.

It's written with statistical regressions.

It has zero cognition or thought artificial or otherwise.

It memorizes what's put into it.

And actually there's a bunch of studies I have on my substack, liberating truths.

I don't have time to get into this, but that's why I put it in my substack every weekend.

I have, I'm doing what I did on COVID.

This is the new COVID by the way.

There's endless studies showing that the efficacy is very elusive.

That it actually memorizes even more than you think, which is why it's so prone to plagiarism.

It's monkey see monkey do.

But Stanford has produced a bunch of this stuff on sycophancy.

The algorithms reward answers that sound right to a person, not the answers that are

actually right because it can't think.

This is what they call supervised learning algorithms as the final layer of these neural

networks and prompt injection, you know, where you were subject to prompts in a chat interface.

That's the sort of AI that they're working on.

Now conveniently, everything they want to do is good for one purpose, the surveillance state.

So we need to constantly put every living organism under surveillance, get people addicted

and put all of your life on a chat.

So now it has access to all this information, which is a huge security problem.

It's a surveillance problem, but let's just talk about just economically.

It doesn't do anything for you.

Let's talk about what narrow low latency edge computing is.

So basically, oh, and by the way, I'm sorry, before I get to that, there's a diminishing

return because over time, in order to improve the its capability, the models have to go

and and basically take an exponential amount of data to further train it.

So it creates an exponential scaling problem.

And that's where you get this unsustainable model.

Now we're told that we're going to throw in all this data and then we're going to spit

it up like like a Zeus God, the Greek Oracle of Delphi, and out is going to pop general intelligence,

not narrow tasks and efficiencies and manufacturing and productivity, but we're going to be the

best doctor.

I'm going to be able to cure cancer, I'm going to be able to do this.

You ask it a question.

That's what they're gaslighting people about that somehow it's sort of like, let's say

I want to get from point, here's a difference between edge computing and cloud based and

LLM's.

Let's say I want to get from here to point 20 miles away, edge computing identifies it

and will take you from here to 20 miles in a straight line.

What they're trying to get us to believe is, is the equivalent of, so I want to get from

here to 20 miles, I'm going to circle around the earth, around the equator horizontally,

around I'll go vertically, you know, and then in the hopes that somehow I'm going to

hit that point, I'll reach it at some point I'll find it.

It's going to find it.

It's going to pop out.

Imagine if I had the, you know, I compared to you the difference of the amount of fuel

and resources and hardware you would need to do all that, you know, trillions of miles

of traveling versus 20 miles of traveling.

Edge computing, when we talk, when I talk about low latency, narrow tailored AI, it's training

a single type of algorithm to plot the trajectories, for example, of a drone flying around.

So an iron dome missile can shoot it down.

It takes far less data storage and computing, plus instead of a data center, which by

the way can be hit by a drone, it's, it's a huge security risk.

If you put everything in these big buildings, you tactically use what's called a mesh network.

Palmer lucky of Andrew is really leading on this issue.

And, you know, he's trying to get in with Trump, and he's the one, he's the one vendor.

I would actually support if he if Trump develops a corony relationship with him.

So the data and processing is distributed across redundant tactical platforms, local, local

edge computing is local networks, okay.

That's what edge computing is.

The AI would be narrow using just a few machine learning algorithms, which were initially

trained trained with supervised learning, meaning a human expert helped answer what right

looks like.

And then they adjust it with real time, real time sensors.

And I'm giving an example of weapons of war, but you could use it for any manufacturing

process.

Again, I don't care what you think about Israel, the war, this or that, I'm just making

a point.

The iron dome is pretty cool, okay, it's pretty cool.

Israel is fighting a war where they're targeting military targets.

And I ran target civilians, okay, and it's Israel's a tiny country.

So they're firing, you know, fired over a thousand missiles, a lot of them cluster munitions

as well.

So it would be devastating.

Now yeah, inevitably it's not 100%, there have been a few people killed, but this past

go around that's maybe 15, I don't know exact 15, 20 people killed.

Generally speaking, it's been, it's been quiet now.

The main issue is obviously the straight of Hormuz will maybe talk about that next week.

But the point is the iron dome is a pretty spectacular thing.

These are the sorts of technologies we're going to want to compete with China, right?

You understand that there's no data centers for that.

That is an example of age computing working on local networks harnessing narrow low latency

AI.

And that is what they're, that is the sort of investment that this is crowding out.

It's not that it doesn't exist, but that should be our Manhattan project.

I would argue if we had a even playing field, you wouldn't need the government to get involved

in that.

That is what China is developing, both economically and militarily and manufacturing.

They're not doing the data centers.

I know some people will say, well, Daniel, that's because they don't have the Nvidia chips.

That is true at the same time, but it's also true that they have the power for the data

centers that we don't have.

And yet they're not even building them and they're achieving quicker LLM's even without

it and they're focusing on edge computing.

And that we're going backwards.

You can agree or disagree with me, but I am contesting the premise.

They're trying to give over and unfortunately, Bernie and AOC and some of these other organizations

that are bipartisan are a little bit playing into this notion that look.

The premise is AI is one thing, it's it's works off of data centers, it's chat slop,

it's we need the chat GPT stuff, all this stuff.

And this is the way of the future and you're a lot out if you oppose it.

And this is natural juggernaut free market, although we have to give it a lot of favors.

And yeah, there might be a couple of regulatory things we have to deal with it.

So let's deal with it and then let's get on to preempting the states.

And then other people like, no, it causes all this harm.

We need to regulate.

So the problem is the Trump administration is like, yeah, you're right.

We need to regulate it and then stick in there to provision that they want.

I'm not my point is like, I don't even care about the regulation.

I mean, if this ultimately persists, certain things need to be protected.

But my argument is it's just like green energy that without these government favors, it wouldn't exist.

Let me make the point even clearer here to understand free markets in the context of this data center issue.

Okay, everyone seems to understand not everyone, but most people on the right,

except for the red state Republicans that actually love solar and wind and all this stuff.

But if I told you that nothing about solar and wind is free market, it's ripping up our land,

the ROI is not there.

And maybe I even went so far as to say we should put a moratorium on that.

Most conservatives would support it because they understand the issue.

Now, let me ask you something, don't you support a free market?

You can't deny we had the, you know, we talked about this within the end of last week.

That if you want to sell a parcel of farmland or I'm sorry rent a parcel of farmland in Indiana for solar farms versus crops,

it goes for four times higher with solar, huh?

You're against the free market, they're willing to pay for it.

EVs, they're everywhere.

A lot of, at least until Trump pulled the plug on them, you know,

a lot of dealerships were boxing out normal cars for EVs.

Well, Daniel, that's just the will of the free market.

No, I think we all understand that government gas lit that into existence.

The free market would have never pushed that.

So you can't just say like, oh, yeah, EVs are free market wind and solar front.

No, they're not.

That is exactly what data centers are.

And in fact, the cap X is a million times more unsustainable.

It would not work, especially with the depreciation.

That's why they need the 30 year sales tax abayments.

Okay, that's why they need all these government favors.

Let's say I say I have an amazing product, but I'm going to have to place a hundred of them in each county in each residential neighborhood.

Make a bunch of noise, use up all the power and water.

Well, what you're against free markets.

Well, no, if that's what your thing needs to do, it's unsustainable and it doesn't work.

Like, let's say I could only afford to put my car, my car repair shop on a residential street,

because I don't want to pay for rent on the commercial street.

I want to just use my property.

It's my property free market.

I bought it.

I could afford it.

No, that's not free market.

You're impeding upon other people's freedom.

There needs to be a give and take.

It has to work within the equilibrium of an economy and society.

You're the socialist if you believe otherwise.

This is exactly like MRNA.

See, people think any company that announces the product,

oh, you're against innovation.

That's a no.

MRNA was a product.

Carbon capture is a product.

Wind and solar and EVs are a product.

You see them?

It must mean that they're free market.

No, government has the ability, unfortunately, to gaslight an insolvent product onto the market

in a very weak and harmful way, but it could sort of sustain it.

That's what you're seeing.

In that sense, data centers is the new COVID and the new green energy and once.

The digital mental part of it is the new COVID, the physical part,

with the data centers is the new green energy.

That is my point.

So I'm not into, oh, my gosh, we need to regulate it.

I'm into we need to keep the same local zoning that if people protest a rezoning,

because that's a, they're the ones who want to rezone.

We're not the ones trying to rezone.

The same process that we would go through for anything else should be done here.

That's all I'm saying.

If you want to work within those confines and you can make it work, God bless you.

But again, I think we both know the truth.

We both know where this is headed.

We both know that it's a farce.

And I want to give you a vivid example of what I support.

And what the backwards primitive venture socialist and technocratic transhumanists are boxing out.

This is it from two months ago in Ohio, NBC for news, Columbus, Ohio.

One year after Andrewl announced its two billion pickaway county project.

The company is offering a glimpse into progress at arsenal one.

Andrewl is building a five million square foot facility near Rickenbacher and international

airport called arsenal one.

So notice it's near an airport that's kind of usually wide open.

And you know, you don't have houses.

The site is the largest single job creation project in Ohio history

with 4,000 eight employees promised by 2035.

Remember how these guys with the data centers are getting 30 year tax abatements for 15 jobs.

This is 4,000 jobs.

What does it do?

Is it going to suck out water and power like a data center?

No.

Is it going to create a 90 decibel level humming that Fairfax and Loudoun County news just discovered?

No.

Now, what they do is they build special military weapons, military technology.

The facility will not include ammunition or explosives.

Instead, it will produce autonomous and semi autonomous drones and planes.

Folks, this is the future of human list fighter jets.

You know, obviously you see the risk of them getting shot down.

You could do certain maneuvers that a human can't do because a human would just die from them.

I am all for that.

I'm actually a fan of Palmer Lucky.

He's the CEO because what he's trying to do is his whole thesis is what we're talking about.

We're using $30 million munitions to blow up $10,000 targets.

He's actually trying to streamline the military industrial complex.

He, that is an example, the fighter, the pilotless fighter jets is an example of single type algorithm plots

with low latency edge computing.

That is what we need.

And by the way, it's not just the military to compete with China,

but if you want to use that technology, that is what is going to juice up our manufacturing.

That's going to bring manufacturing.

Ohio has been turned into a parking lot for data centers.

Cloud-based nonsense to do nothing but transhumanist slop,

make people mentally ill, and create a surveillance state.

The notion that you need to do all of that for a million times more

the cost, liability, and harm to society that somehow there's going to be enough ROI to create manufacturing is bull.

And what they're doing is they're sucking away from edge computing.

This is an hour show that nobody else will give to you, but it's the reality.

I want to end off with one more point.

I've like pages worth of notes here that I didn't get to, I didn't get to any of my video clips.

We'll have to keep this going.

I'm already out of the voice, but one more thing.

Do you know who agrees with me with this dichotomy?

You won't believe who agrees with me.

Open AI itself.

Now, ultimately, they're frauds, but they put out a statement.

There was big news this week that literally proves the veracity of everything I'm saying

and proves all my fake Republican chamber-cratch transhumanist detractors wrong.

Sora.

Sora was ChatGPT's video slot machine.

OK, so basically that is what was generating the insinification of the Internet.

It's not the only thing, but it was probably the single biggest factory.

It was a slot factory and a copyright theft sewer.

That's what it was.

Disney promised a billion in investment, yet open AI announced because it's insolvent,

done, gone, shut down.

They put out a statement, quote, as we focus and compute demand grows, the Sora research

team continues to focus on world simulation research to advance robotics that will help

people solve real world physical tasks.

So notice the difference here, rather than this cognitive LLM to basically attempt but

fail to take over and supplant people's brains on just prompt-based question and answer

chat slot to actually solve physical manufacturing.

Now, I don't think they plan on following through, but their messaging is exactly what I'm

talking about.

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

Now, I want to be very clear, when we say robotics, not all robotics are critical.

So when Melania Trump came out with her dystopian press conference this week with that stupid

robot and said, we're going to have human noise, human noise are going to replace teachers.

That's transhumanism because that's not replacing a dangerous repetitive task and manufacturing.

There is something that you need human to human interaction, you know, you could harness

AI technology as a tool in the process of teaching, but to say that we want to replace human

teachers with some programmed robot is retarded.

That's see, they want to say we're backwards, they're the ones that are backwards.

Transhumanism, surveillance, and mentally ill chat slot.

Imagine if I told you you could you could destroy all of our land, power, water, surveillance

state, all for chat slot, that's going to cost trillions of dollars, or for a fraction

of that, you could turbo charge, manufacturing, wars of weapons of war, synergize, seaports,

farms, who's the backwards, Luddite now, buddy.

And we're about out of time.

Let me know your comments, questions, and concerns.

Hope you guys have a terrific weekend.

Till Monday, God bless y'all.

And thank you for listening.