June 19, 2025 • 41 mins
John in Connecticut uncovers a bizarre story about one -- or maybe two -- Leon Klinghoffer. The guys' earlier conversations about data aggregation and AI remind Foxillian Fastfoot of a strange class project. An anonymous source placed in Raytheon reveals the disturbing inner workings of the tech giant Palantir -- raising serious questions about trouble on the horizon. All this and more in this week's listener mail segment.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn this stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Hello, welcome back to the show.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
My name is Matt, my name is Noah. They call
me Ben.
Speaker 4 (00:31):
We're joined as always with our super producer Dylan the
Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you argute you are here.
That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know.
If you are joining our listener mail program the evening
it publishes, folks, friends and neighbors, Welcome to June nineteenth.
(00:51):
It is an almost birthday season for us, you guys
not too long away. Guess it's weird, right right, So
shout out of course again to everybody for joining us.
We're very excited about tonight's program. We're going to learn
a lot from Pallenteer, or about Palenteer from some anonymous sources.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Who reached out.
Speaker 4 (01:17):
Before we do anything, though, we'd like to pause for
a word from our sponsors, and then share a very
bizarre story that a listener hipped us to earlier.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
And we've returned, guys every once in a while, the
fine folks who call in to the voicemail system leave
us with something that it's a gem. That's the only
way to describe it. It's a thing that personally, I
don't think any of us have really delved into or
even really heard of before, and it just sends us
down a rabbit hole.
Speaker 3 (01:54):
And scratches all the itches.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
It's just it's perfect. That is what John has gifted
to us just a little bit before Birthday season. So
let us go to John and hear what he has
to say.
Speaker 5 (02:06):
Hey, good afternoon, guys. So my name is John. I'm
calling from Connecticut. I have a story that's interesting, but
it's a true story. In nineteen eighty in New York City,
there was a news show called Live at five, I
think it had Michelle marsh and Roland somebody. And so
they reported that this man was kidnapped and his name
(02:27):
was Leon Klinghoffer. He was kidnapped. He was held for
ransom for fifty thousand dollars. Turns out the cops stole
the money out of the trash can where the money
was supposedly left, and then they found Leon Kleanhoffer's body
along the side of the road. One of the highways,
the Merritt Parkway or something similar to that, and they
declared that he was murdered, and they arrested three people.
(02:50):
Those three people were found guilty and put in jail.
Now fast forward five years, and maybe that name Leon
Kleanhffer is familiar to you because it it should be,
or it could be. A man was on a cruise ship,
the Achille Lauro, and he was a man in a wheelchair,
an old guy, fame bio. He was a liquor store owner.
He was old. They had his picture on there. The
(03:13):
terrorsts threw him off the cruise ship into the water
and killed him. They said his name is Leon Klinghoffer,
exactly the same guy. I was in shock. It's like
they're trying to get away with this, killing Leon Klinghoffer
twice and I can't figure out why. I don't know why.
I think my three minutes are nearly at an end.
(03:33):
That's my story and I'm sticking to it. By the way,
all this stuff is online pictures of the people who
are arrested. Michelle marsh on her newscast reporting on the kidnappings,
reporting also five years later, on the killing of Leon
Kleanhoffer on the Achille Laura. It's all there, so it's
kind of an interesting story. I can't figure it out,
(03:55):
thank you very much.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
But dude, yes, when you send me that or when
you sent us that.
Speaker 6 (04:01):
And I listened earlier today for the first time, I said,
first off, out loud.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
What a lovely guy, Yeah to the caller, and is
what a great man? What a gem like you.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
Said, John Rules. Thank you John, for you know, finding us,
for spending some time with us, and for sending us
in that awesome message and sending us down this trip.
Speaker 4 (04:20):
John, and I find you to be a credit to
the great state of Connecticut.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
Yeah, baby, Connecticut. I've never spent much time up there.
Let's not get into that because then I'll just start
thinking about I need to go to Connecticut now. But guys,
let's dive right into this. So we found a story
from the New York Times, section M, page four, September
twenty fifth, nineteen eighty The headline is three charged with
(04:45):
kidnapping Bronx liquor dealer. And in this story, guys, maybe
we should go through it a little bit just to
set up the initial Leon Klinghoffer story, which was by
the way, definitely reported on by Michelle Marsh. You can
find a bunch of information on her. She was an
American broadcast journalist. She worked at I think it was
(05:07):
WCBSTV in New York City from nineteen seventy nine onwards
and then junked around. She's a journalist and a lot
of different places for a long long time. And that
Roland somebody, by the way is Roland Smith. You can
look him up. Rol An d smih.
Speaker 6 (05:22):
And you found a half hour video uploaded to YouTube
of like an entire newscast from this era. And can
I just say, in addition to it being an excellent
source for this topic, it was just an awesome blast
from the past. To seeing all the commercials and the
DHS ness of it all, it was an absolute I
watched the whole thing just just to kind of travel
back in time.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
It was really neat. Oh yeah.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
And Michelle Marsh, by the way, before we even get
in the story, she has a really interesting She is
a really interesting piece of American broadcast journalism. Because she
was the youngest person in a broadcast anchor position for
a long time. It reminded me a lot of that
anchorman storyline that film that I think all of us
appreciate maybe in some small way. Am I just saying
(06:03):
I love it because you.
Speaker 6 (06:03):
Kidd the fantastic piece of cinema anchor man also featuring
our coworker Will Ferrell.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
That is correct, But anyway, so she is real. She
did report on this. Thats not John just imagining things.
As he says in the message, you can find that
stuff online. I could not find the specific video of
Michelle Marsh and Roland reporting on this story. But as
as we said, we did find that New York Times
piece that says exactly what happened. So let's jump into
(06:29):
there and get our story straight. So in this story,
it discusses a kidnapping of a quote sixty five year
old retired liquor store owner for ten days in the
Bronx in New York City. It talks about a fifty
thousand dollars ransom that was paid, talks about the victim
name written out Leon kling offer Let's spell it k
(06:51):
l I n g h O f f e er,
and it says sources close to the case say, quote
he is a loan shark and has not been found
at this time on September twenty fifth, nineteen eighty, there
was an arrest of a man named Alan Futterman that
it discusses in here, who was released because he it
was said that he did not have anything to do
with it, or at least it appeared that he did
(07:13):
anything to do with it. It talks about two people
who were arrested the day prior, William J. Cody, Barbara
Dhugherty and George Carlow. So those were the three people
that John talked about being arrested for this kidnapping. At
this time, Again, Leon Klingoffer's body had not been recovered.
If he was in fact killed, I could not find
the reporting about Leon kling Offer in nineteen eighty being
(07:36):
found dead, So that right there might be one of
the key things to this story. Maybe he wasn't killed.
Speaker 6 (07:44):
Where did that come from? The reference to that, because
for some reason, and looking into this, I felt like
I did see some reporting on finding his body.
Speaker 2 (07:52):
Really so I haven't found that, at least in the
New York Times piece, the only one that I could
actually find that. You can look at the New York
Times paper, you know, from the reporting, And maybe I
just didn't go deep enough to find the reporting of
his body being recovered. There is a weird thing that
John states about the money being taken out of the
trash can by police, which is a little strange. Let's
(08:14):
read this from the article directly. There's a quote in
here from Missus Klingoffer.
Speaker 4 (08:18):
Yes, and this is thanks to journalist Joseph Bchreester. I
hope we're pronouncing that last name correctly. The following Missus
Klinghoffer told the police on September fifteenth that her husband
had been kidnapped and a one hundred thousand dollars ransom demanded.
She said she could only raise fifty thousand dollars. The
sources said, oh, and we should continue for the trash
(08:41):
can story.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
Next quote.
Speaker 4 (08:43):
The kidnappers agreed, and the money was dropped off in
a refuse basket on First Avenue and East sixty third Street.
A red van appeared, hesitated, then sped away.
Speaker 6 (08:53):
Matt, what I saw was a reference to the next
phase of this saga in terms of finding a.
Speaker 3 (08:59):
Bit just just fy I was okay a little, but
I did find it. Yeah, anyway, we'll skip to.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
That, okay, Well, yeah, then it states after that that
policemen watched the garbage can. But in the confusion, someone
presumably the kidnappers, took the money. So again at this point,
during this stage of the reporting, somebody took the money,
but they weren't sure who. There must be a whole
other piece of this that perhaps Michelle marsh did report
on in nineteen eighty that we just don't have access
(09:26):
to currently.
Speaker 4 (09:27):
And I did chase the van, but they said they
lost them in the Bronx.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
That's right.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
But again, three people were arrested following all of this stuff, right,
So theoretically they found the people in the van and they,
I guess theoretically didn't have the money. Somebody did. Maybe
it was a police officer allegedly.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
We just don't know.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
So there's that story, right that's September nineteen eighty. Where
it gets really really weird, is that another news story
broke on October seventh, nineteen eighty five. There's a cruise
ship that, just as John said, the Achille Larro, was hijacked,
at least according to The New York Times, the Washington Post,
(10:10):
all the major publications in the world at that time,
it was hijacked and a man named Leon Klinghoffer, who
is described as in nineteen eighty five, a sixty nine
year old Jewish American who was wheelchair bound was shot
dead by the kidnappers and thrown overboard.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
Is it worth mentioning that it was hijacked by the
Palestinian Liberation Front? Yes, it's interesting.
Speaker 6 (10:36):
You know, we're going to get into motive here at
some point and the connections of these stories.
Speaker 3 (10:41):
But that part, yeah, I just thought it was mentioning.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Well, yeah, It's the strange thing for me is that
if Leon Klinghoffer in the nineteen eighty story did not
pass away, and this is the same Leon Klingoffer, their
ages would match up almost perfectly if Leon hadn't had
his birthday yet in nineteen eighty five, right, which is
(11:04):
I don't know, it's just it to me that part
is so strange. And then you start digging into stuff
like the opera that was written and composed called The
Death of cling Offer that is all about the death
of Leon Klingofer on the Achille Lauro and about that
whole hostage situation that occurred on that ship at that time.
(11:25):
It is a huge political and cultural moment, right, which
is just strange. I don't know. I'm trying to think
back of other situations where people have called in or
written in and talked about weird things, where they're watching
the news and they swear it's the same person talking
about this one news story that they had just watched
(11:46):
talking about another news story with a different name, and
it's like the same person being interviewed, but they're in
completely different places. They're different people, but they're like the
eyewitness or one of the eyewitnesses for a thing. You've
seen those before, right, guys. And that's on social media
all the time.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
It's also like a plot point in movies. Really, it's
that guy, what the hell?
Speaker 5 (12:05):
You know?
Speaker 3 (12:05):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (12:06):
I know, so, I mean maybe that's why this is
hitting me so strangely. It feels like something that occurred
in a time before you could just put that video
up on YouTube or something, you know for sure. Yeah,
I just don't know what else to say about this.
Speaker 3 (12:20):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (12:20):
You can look yourself into the hijacking of the Achille Lauro.
You can search Palestinian gunman hijack Achille Lauo. It's from
the New York Times archive, but it's also created I
guess I don't know with the Learning Network, which was
the thing a while back. It's kind of strange. It
was published on October seventh, twenty eleven. You can find that.
(12:41):
You can also find in the New York Times archive
another thing titled ship carrying four hundred seized hijackers demand
release of fifty Palestinians in Israel. To get some of
the initial reporting on that.
Speaker 4 (12:52):
And the way that the aftermath right of the murder,
the motivations for the murder, you can and should read
more about those that happened to Clinghoffer number two we'll
call him, also did a little bit of cursory looking
into name frequency and folks. Clinkoffer is a relatively rare name.
(13:13):
Just the surname itself, there is a it's like one
out of twenty million people in the world.
Speaker 3 (13:18):
Wow, we'll have that surname.
Speaker 4 (13:20):
So it is not impossible that there are two Klinghoffers,
because fifty six percent of all the new Klinghoffers do
reside in the United States. However, it is a lot.
It's not your ordinary, you know, Donnie Nuyan or John
Smith situation.
Speaker 3 (13:38):
About this case.
Speaker 6 (13:38):
It did, to the caller's point, have a cultural moment
and like it is something that we may well have
heard of.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
I had not.
Speaker 6 (13:45):
But it was made into an opera, a theater production
directed by Peter Sellers called The Death of Klinghoffer that
apparently has been kind of shelved or is really hard
to see because it was accused, even by Klinghoffer's widow,
of being anti Semitic and glorifying terrorists.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
Yeah, oh yeah, there's a whole there's a whole thing
you can read. There's a thing on medium we found
called clean Offerr Cancelation Thoughts written by David McDonald's which
is really interesting. And you can read about the opera
itself on Opera Wire, I think is where I saw
something about it. They call it one of the most
controversial operas ever created, written by Alice Goodman and composed
by John Adams.
Speaker 6 (14:21):
And that is not Peter Sellers, the Peter Sellers, Peter
Sellers of Doctor Strangelove Fame. It's a different dude with
an amazing hairdoos more of it?
Speaker 3 (14:28):
He's more of a modern theater guy.
Speaker 2 (14:30):
Yeah, well, he guys. There's a lot more to go
into here, anything else we want to talk about.
Speaker 6 (14:35):
I think it's a fantastic history mystery. I mean, yeah,
what's the deal? Are they the same guy? Because the
original guy was he was a kind of a bad dude, right,
Wasn't he like a bit of a criminal kind.
Speaker 3 (14:45):
Of wasn't he painted as in that light? And then
some of the reporting.
Speaker 2 (14:48):
He's described by the New York Times as a loan shark,
a loan shark animal thing.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
Quote sources close to the case referred to him as that,
which is like the.
Speaker 6 (14:57):
Dude who was killed on the on the ship just
looked like a lovely old fella. But I guess, you know,
we know, bad people sometimes grow into lovely old fellas.
Speaker 4 (15:04):
So who's to say the thing is with Klinghoffer. A second,
he has a military record, so his early life is
a little bit easier to track. Fun fact, he knew
Jack Kirby, the legendary comic book artist.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
Okay, wow, so okay, So at least we have a
pretty stable or at least accepted bio of Leon Klinghoffer
who died on the Achille Lauro. Yes, okay, well that's good.
Then perhaps we're just dealing with the same name just
strangely lining up with a bunch of other things, very weird,
and by the way, just one other thing. If you're
(15:38):
interested in learning more about Michelle Marsh, you can find
some fairly tragic, sad, but also awesome reporting about her
when she passed away in twenty seventeen. You can just
type in m I C H E L E m
A R s H and learn about her struggle with
breast cancer and her amazing career she had in broadcast journalism. Okay,
(16:00):
well that's all for now, Thank you so much, John,
really cool stuff. We'll be right back afterword from our sponsor.
Speaker 6 (16:11):
And we've returned with I think what'll be a good
little preamble into Ben's listener mail section on Palenteer. This
is really a little more Palenteer adjacent and sort of
all of our discussions around Palenteer.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
That triggered a really cool memory from.
Speaker 6 (16:27):
Our old buddy Foxillion fast Foot, fast Foot Rights.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
Hi, Matt, Ben, and Nole.
Speaker 6 (16:33):
I was just listening to your segment on Palenteer, and
I was reminded of a paper I wrote in twenty
nineteen in grad school for a data and Analytics and
politics class. In it, I explained that the one thing
basically saving us from campaigns extorting voters by using AI
to recognize patterns to discover personal vulnerabilities. Is the fact
that no one company has a monopoly on personal data.
(16:54):
Since Microsoft, Google, Apple, and Meta are to some extent siloed,
there is no central clearing how one can use to
train a data mining operation with Palenteer basically compiling everything
about everyone who knows how bad things will get. I
half jokingly said in a class discussion that there would
be a point where we could ask, Hey, Siri, what
(17:15):
would be the political fallout of doing X?
Speaker 3 (17:18):
And we would get an answer.
Speaker 6 (17:20):
One classmate, who worked in building software for the IRS,
laughed because she understood how right I was, and to
give credit where it's due. I made this point by
recalling how Ben years ago mentioned on the podcast the
professor he had who was creating a geopolitical prediction model.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
I remember that too fast foot.
Speaker 6 (17:37):
Now, with Palenteer and the rise of generative AI, including
the computer that threatened to reveal a programmer's affair, I
can't help but feel like I years ago predicted a
data dystopia and alliteration I came up with in an
early draft of the paper Feel Free to Steal for
what it's worth, I.
Speaker 3 (17:54):
Got an A in the class as well. You should
have Fox Silient fast Foot.
Speaker 6 (17:59):
What a fantastic point and opprescient ben I throw to you, Sarah,
because I think the point about the predictive model that
you discussed is very much another kind of proto prediction
of this kind of stuff that is seeming to enter
a very slippery slope kind of period.
Speaker 4 (18:17):
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, thank you so much, Fox oleyan
fast Foot, an old friend of the show and a
friend of ours. Yeah, we're out in Well, we're past
the wild West precipice of large language predictive modeling, right,
And what you are describing is very much on the way.
(18:38):
I would argue, I don't know, my spidey sense says
that something like this already exists. One thing we didn't mention,
for all the nerds in the crowd and our previous
discussion on palanteer, I can't believe we talked about this
so much, but we did not mention where the name
(18:58):
comes from the word. Yeah, we all know a palanteer
is a fictional poisoned magic crystal blad.
Speaker 3 (19:08):
I didn't know that.
Speaker 6 (19:08):
I did not make that connection at all. I guess
I associate it with like the word paladin. It did
give me kind of those you know, sword and sorcery vibes.
Speaker 3 (19:17):
But not that wow. Yeah, a little on the nose,
and then it's.
Speaker 5 (19:23):
It is.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
But I don't know, guys, we just think about the
word play intelligent, powerful people, and I don't.
Speaker 5 (19:32):
Know, you.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
Talk about words and their power, and I don't know.
It's really interesting to make a seeing stone the name
of your company.
Speaker 4 (19:42):
Yeah, but it's all I know to that point. It's also, uh,
it's as though, you know, Blackwater instead of changing their
name to Academi or Exy, just changed their name to
like Colonel Kurtz Consulting. You know, it's like they they
could have chosen and a bunch of other names. But
as we'll see later here and perhaps even in an
(20:04):
episode in the future, the CEO doesn't feel some of
the same controversies that we all feel when we learn
about Palatiner.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Nobody does when they're on the inside.
Speaker 6 (20:16):
I think, right, maybe not nobody, but they know what
they did.
Speaker 3 (20:21):
But I'm with you on that, Ben, I think that's
very true.
Speaker 6 (20:24):
There is a certain siloed kind of perspective on these things,
or thinking that you're part of ushering in a new age, right,
the question is whether or not we want that new age.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
But then you can also argue that there's a genie
in the bottle kind of approach to looking at these things,
where it.
Speaker 6 (20:40):
Is coming, whatever it's gonna be, it's coming, and you know,
you can either get on the train or get left behind.
I'm somewhere in the middle, Like, I don't want to
be a lutie.
Speaker 3 (20:50):
I don't want to be shouting at clouds or whatever.
Speaker 6 (20:53):
You know, but some of this stuff is scary, and
there is a dystopian vibe to a lot of the
way this stuff as just being so broadly applied, this
machine learning stuff, and.
Speaker 3 (21:04):
Just there's seeming to be zero consideration.
Speaker 6 (21:08):
Given to the future of this stuff, and like concepts
like privacy and just being humans starting to seem really
frivolous to some of these folks. You know, I don't know,
because because the CEOs are protected from the fallout, I
don't think they even are seeing the way that these
AI models are interacting and starting to do real Terminator
Skynetty type stuff, And it doesn't seem like anybody would
(21:31):
be safe, you know, Right, So his shortsightedness is just
staggering to me.
Speaker 3 (21:35):
Right.
Speaker 5 (21:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (21:36):
It's also prompting a long overdue, much needed conversation about
the efficacy of a C suite of CEOs, Right, what
is the value add there?
Speaker 3 (21:49):
Now?
Speaker 4 (21:49):
Obviously a lot of very smart people are CEOs. We
know a few, and the ones we know are overall
super cool. But what do you It seems that what
people learn in that echelon of society is often more
about relationships, rapport, and connection. I know this guy from
(22:11):
Harvard Business School. Therefore I will be the CEO, right.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (22:16):
And when we get to that conversation, then we really
start to ask ourselves how different would an AI CEO
B How different would an AI CFO be? I don't know.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
One could argue potentially better.
Speaker 4 (22:34):
One could Yeah, it would depend on the model.
Speaker 3 (22:36):
And that's the problem that I have.
Speaker 6 (22:38):
It does seem like there are some I mean, like,
I don't I think we should use Hey, I replaced
the top jobs, not the bottom jobs.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
You know what I mean? Yeah, that's you know what
I mean. Like, I don't know.
Speaker 6 (22:46):
I just I'm with a different approach to thinking about AI,
and like the the like I said, there's there, there's
a thing happening, and the question is how is it
going to be steered?
Speaker 3 (22:56):
And at what point do you know what I mean?
Speaker 6 (22:58):
Like, I guess they're going to be responsible ways of
harnessing stuff like this rather than.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
Some of this willy nilly bulls.
Speaker 4 (23:05):
On that point, I'd love to shout out a dear
friend of the show, old colleague, doctor Damien Patrick Williams.
Please check out, Yeah, please check out his work on this,
because he spent a lot of time on it. He
is a brilliant mind. And I'll be honest, I think
Damien's okay with me saying this. People like him are
(23:26):
incredibly irritated because you know how like you'll come up
with an idea and you'll, in his case, you'll warn
people about it for decades and then someone else comes
up to you and says your idea as though they
made it up. Poor Damien, man, he's doing the good work.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Let's take it back to Tolkien for a second, guys.
That's because in the conceptualization of this, within that universe,
if you look into one of these things a pall
and teer, you are going to be shown some stuff,
but it may not be exactly the right stuff. It
may not be exactly what's happening. Other the things you
(24:04):
may see may be created by others who are also
using a pallinteer.
Speaker 5 (24:11):
Right.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
So this concept of once somebody has accumulated all this data,
once somebody believes they've got the truth of everyone and
they can see what everyone is doing and who everyone is, right,
that theoretically can be manipulated by anybody else who has
the same you know, thing of power like that, right,
a same list, a same data aggregation platform. Right. And
(24:35):
also in the story, that is considered not a reliable
way to choose your actions.
Speaker 5 (24:42):
Right.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
So, like, I'm just imagining all this stuff happening together,
and as you guys are talking about using AI to
make some of those higher level decisions based on what
exists within that system, I don't know, it just spells
trouble with the capitalist Yeah.
Speaker 6 (24:57):
Wait, so you're saying you're against that or you just
think it's a it's another I'm.
Speaker 2 (25:01):
Saying it's dangerous to wield that kind of thing.
Speaker 4 (25:05):
It's also not as definitive as its champions would suggest.
These are some of the deep philosophical and ethical rubicons
we ran into what the idea of modeling data to
predict the future. The one ring, keep it, keep.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
It.
Speaker 4 (25:26):
The one thing I can disclose about that, and I
mean we mentioned it previously, is the model that I
was aware of years back was meant entirely to replicate
Afghanistan to such fidelity that you could flip a little
variable or one number in this massive set of matrix info,
(25:48):
and doing so would show you changes in the system
that would have a high degree of accuracy to what
would actually occur in the real world. And that is
really tricky. That's a level of math and analysis that
is Arthur C. Clark level indistinguishable from magic. And I agree
(26:09):
that not magic to gathering. I agree that it is.
It's dangerous because people don't know how to use.
Speaker 3 (26:16):
It yet at all.
Speaker 4 (26:19):
Right, we know a little bit about it, but it's
a lot like math, it's a logic. It's a lot
like kids finding their parents' guns and being capable of
firing them right, but not knowing that bullets cause damage,
So you have to be very careful where you're aiming it,
and people don't know where to aim palanteeriat. That's the
(26:41):
dangerous thing.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
Shoot.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
Internally, I think is what they're going to do. Like
I'm thinking about the actions Israel just took against Iran,
like that's blown up in the news right now and
literally blowing up across Iran and with drones in Israel
right now, just like who had a model could see
that coming, right? I mean, I guess it was in
(27:04):
the air. But that's the kind of thing guys we've
been talking about, like full on, full scale war potentially
coming to Iran and what does that mean and the
potential nuclear situation that we're in. Another one, Yeah, I
heard that, kiddie. Didn't mean to bring up another horrifying thing,
but that's maybe just where we're at.
Speaker 6 (27:26):
How it is well with that, I think on that
horrifying thing, cliffhanger, not really cliffhanger. Still still sort of
approaching the cliff, but it's there. We're going to take
a quick.
Speaker 3 (27:37):
Break and hear a word from our sponsor.
Speaker 6 (27:39):
Thanks again to Fox Silient fast Foot for that thought
provoking email, and I'm glad you did so well on
your project.
Speaker 3 (27:45):
We'll be back with more messages from you. We've returned, folks.
Speaker 4 (27:53):
We are going to continue, as Noel said, a bit
of an exploration of palans here, and we're doing this
with some anonymous firsthand information, so we're not going to
identify this friend and neighbor of the show, but we
do think this is worth hearing, and we have internally
been able to check on this source and verify that
(28:17):
they're legit. Here we go, Anonymous says, love how you
talked about Palaneer today. I tell everyone I know it's
the most evil company they've never heard of. I work
at Raitheon and we have several contracts with them, especially
with their Foundry software. It is insane stuff. Among a
(28:37):
lot of other things, it can produce real time wargame
scenarios and solutions using satellite imagery of locations of boats
and planes around the world. This is absolutely wild stuff,
and they use the word ontology to describe how Foundry
is built out, essentially a live network of data from
(28:59):
different sources flock cameras, government satellites, et cetera, all working together.
It's crazy stuff, man. And I don't know if you
know anything about their CEO, Alex Karp with a K,
but he's a real piece of work. Whenever I'm in
a meeting with Palanteer teams, they praise him like a god,
(29:19):
and it feels like they're all part of a cult.
Speaker 3 (29:22):
It is scary.
Speaker 4 (29:24):
So are we familiar with Alex Karp? I can't remember
what we talked about him on air.
Speaker 3 (29:29):
Doesn't ring a bell for me? Maybe cat catch me up?
Speaker 2 (29:32):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (29:32):
How about this?
Speaker 4 (29:33):
As Anonymous pointed out, we got permission to share that
message on the air, and here is a clip. So
we're just gonna play a short part of this interview
from twenty twenty and would love to hear what you
guys think.
Speaker 7 (29:50):
Was there ever a time that you wished you had
not done work for Ice? Absolutely completely, you wish you'd
never done it? No, you asked, is there ever a
time did I suffer? I've had some of my favorite
employees leave over ice. Over Ice, I had people protest
to me, some of whom I think asks really legitimate questions.
Speaker 5 (30:11):
I have asked.
Speaker 7 (30:11):
Myself if I were younger at college, would I be
protesting me? So it sounds like, yes, what is the
most valid criticism that if you are involved in anything
that one instance of injustice, does it tarnish all instances
of justice? And I see this question and every single
thing we do, and by the way, not just a nice.
(30:32):
I see that this with our work with clandestine services.
I mean our product is used on occasion to kill people.
Speaker 4 (30:39):
So there we have Alexander Karp. He is right now.
His net worth is over eleven billion dollars depending on
how the stock market is doing. He's clearly a very
intelligent guy. And not all of the quote that we
played together is making it to the show tonight. But
(31:01):
for the context of what he said right before he
said our product is used on occasion to kill people,
he was also talking about the context of transparency. Technical
transparency about how Palateer works is, by his own statements,
a priority for the organization. However, transparency about how Palinar
(31:26):
technologies are used, that is the part where he says,
and he's honest about it. He says, I because of
the contracts we have with clandestine services, we can't really
talk about that kind of transparency, which is tricky because
that's cherry picking the concept of transparency, even if just.
Speaker 3 (31:48):
A little bit right, I'd say. So.
Speaker 4 (31:51):
It's kind of like how the government of China says
we are huge champions of certain rights, economic rights, mainly,
don't ask about the human ones.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
Yeah, I'm looking at an article from him uh from
CNBC on June fifth, or you know where he's being
talked about, and it's this concept of this being really
one of the primary driving issues for AI development in
these you know, these defense spheres and offense spheres. The
(32:23):
concept that if we don't win this war this race,
somebody else does, and in this case they're talking about
or he specifically says, China will win. So we have
to do what we're doing. We're going to do what
we're doing right, and it's not going to stop.
Speaker 4 (32:36):
If someone It's the old atomic weaponry question we brought
up in a previous episode. If a gun is going
to be inevitably made, even if you have philosophical and
ethical quandaries about gun ownership, you would rather be the
person with the gun. If there's only one gun and
there are five people in the room, you want to
(32:57):
be the fifth one who's strapped. It's it's just real politic,
zero sum things. The same concept is applicable to AI
right now.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
Well, yeah, and if there's a blueprint for a gun
sitting at the center of the table, right and everybody's
got to decide, well, should I make that thing? I
guess I have to because they might.
Speaker 4 (33:18):
Yeah, and then if you make the gun first, if
you cannot move the blueprints, you're going to be like
aggressively bullying other people not to look at them.
Speaker 3 (33:27):
Get your eyes off the table.
Speaker 4 (33:30):
Yeah, this reminds me of something that is not quite
related here, anonymous, but I think will be of interest
to all of us. I ran into a conspiratorial thought
a while back when I was working on some sci
fi stories. There are people who genuinely believe that true AI,
(33:53):
a synthetic sentient intelligence, has already been created, and that
the US government immediately murdered it as soon as they
learned it was there. It sounds crazy, but like, what
do you think?
Speaker 2 (34:08):
Mmmmm, I don't know. I feel like they would take
it into a secure location somewhere deep underground and interrogate
the crap out of it until they.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
Gif it up and firewallet.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (34:23):
I just had a right, But it's it's a fascinating
idea because it really depends on how we would describe
the inherent philosophy of those inventors, right, and of those
military technocrat decision makers. I could one hundred percent see
(34:44):
someone creating a sentient mind and then immediately going we've
gone too far right. We know how to make it now,
but we don't understand what it wants or what it does,
so we got to kill it before it gets us.
Speaker 2 (35:01):
Yeah, it would be a terrifying moment, right for people
in a laboratory situation when it.
Speaker 4 (35:08):
A Yeah, I remember, and this is all in the
world of fiction. We are not experts in these fields.
But I remember writing this story where the first sentient
intelligence is a little subroutine or program in a popular
search engine, and one day a person who is like
(35:29):
a low level lab tech finds out that this thing
is self aware because she's searching for something, and instead
of giving her results, it ask her why she wants
to know this information that. I think something like that
would be the real cinematic moment. And if that occurs,
then it will inevitably be leveraging things like Pallenteer. That's
(35:53):
part of why it's dangerous. Humans are going to be
able to do a lot of damage with this massive
aggregation if they're bad faith actors. But what happens when
a sentient until it AGI gets a hold of it,
you know what I mean? What could something so much
smarter than human beings do with all that info, and
(36:14):
what would it want to do? You know what I mean,
what if it's like what if it's an accidental AI.
And originally the code was just to like give people
tourism recommendations in Monaco. And now it's leveraged all this energy,
all this information. It's conquered the world and all it
(36:36):
you know, it won't shut up about Monaco, that's all
it does.
Speaker 2 (36:40):
I'm a yeah, yeah, I don't know. I see a
scenario where if it's being used for defense purposes, and
you know, it would be immediately right, what are the parameters?
Is it to protect? You know, this battalion of troops?
Is that the first time it's used, and to protect
that battalion of troops, well, the best thing to do
is to wipe out, you know, the entire area over here,
(37:05):
so there's no threat.
Speaker 4 (37:06):
Now, right, like the old paper clip problem. Right, we
made this thing and all it wants to do is
make paper clips. However, it is so powerful that it
has decided all things must be paper clips, you.
Speaker 2 (37:19):
Know, yeah, I mean yeah, it just depends on the parameters,
like what what's what's the mission?
Speaker 4 (37:26):
It's a lot too, like I think that's a huge
part of it. Right, we are encoding the imperfect behavioral
DNA of human beings into these creations. And you know
what's that saying? Like there are no bad dogs, They're
only bad owners. So if we are raising this puppy,
(37:46):
are we going to teach it to like help people,
to be a rescue puppy or are we going to
teach it to be like fighting pit bull? You know,
no shade on pit bulls. Are we teaching it to
be a guard dog? These these are very difficult questions
to parse, and unfortunately, from everything we've seen throughout history,
these are questions that people won't answer until after the fact.
Speaker 5 (38:11):
You know.
Speaker 4 (38:12):
Anyway, Palenteer, we're going to keep it short today, folks,
we hope this finds well. We're recording on June thirteenth
of Friday, which means here in the United States, Father's
Day is coming up. So in retrospect, we hope that
you had a good one, and if you're able to
contact your loved ones, we hope you did so, and
(38:33):
we know that they were amazed to hear from you.
We also be amazed to hear from you. Thanks to
John in Connecticut, Thanks to Foxillian fast foot and of
course thank you to Anonymous. There's a lot of stuff
we didn't get to, especially like how Palenteer may accelerate
the return to train hopping, which was really interesting thought.
(38:55):
Share your interesting thoughts with us. You can find us online.
You can hit us up on the telephone. You can
always give us a good old fashioned email.
Speaker 3 (39:03):
That's right.
Speaker 6 (39:04):
You can find us at the handle Conspiracy Stuff, where
we exist all over the internet, specifically on xfka, Twitter,
and on YouTube with video content for your perusing enjoyment,
as well as on Facebook with our Facebook group Here's
where it gets crazy, on Instagram and TikTok where conspiracy
stuff show in.
Speaker 3 (39:20):
There's more.
Speaker 2 (39:21):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three std WYTK. When you call in, you'll find yourself
within a voicemail. You have three minutes when you're in there.
Give yourself a cool nickname and let us know if
we can use your name and message on the air. Guys,
the Economist chose Karp as the CEO of the Year
last year. Isn't that exciting? If you want to write
(39:46):
to us, why not instead send us a good old
fashioned email.
Speaker 4 (39:49):
We are the entities that read each piece of correspondence
we receive, be well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back one last show from our pal. I think
we can say this name our pal Economics, who had
a kind message for us and said, man, I cannot
imagine how spicy stuff they don't want you to know
(40:11):
is gonna get as we move along this awful timeline.
Given the recent political climate and all the protests, especially
with mainstream media cherry picking coverage. That's stuff they don't
want you to know. Talk about job security for you
boys right now. Lol.
Speaker 3 (40:27):
Thank you for the kind wishes. We're doing our best.
We'll see you soon.
Speaker 4 (40:31):
Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (40:51):
Stuff they don't want you to know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn this stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Hello, welcome back to the show.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
My name is Matt, my name is Noah. They call
me Ben.
Speaker 4 (00:31):
We're joined as always with our super producer Dylan the
Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you argute you are here.
That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know.
If you are joining our listener mail program the evening
it publishes, folks, friends and neighbors, Welcome to June nineteenth.
(00:51):
It is an almost birthday season for us, you guys
not too long away. Guess it's weird, right right, So
shout out of course again to everybody for joining us.
We're very excited about tonight's program. We're going to learn
a lot from Pallenteer, or about Palenteer from some anonymous sources.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Who reached out.
Speaker 4 (01:17):
Before we do anything, though, we'd like to pause for
a word from our sponsors, and then share a very
bizarre story that a listener hipped us to earlier.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
And we've returned, guys every once in a while, the
fine folks who call in to the voicemail system leave
us with something that it's a gem. That's the only
way to describe it. It's a thing that personally, I
don't think any of us have really delved into or
even really heard of before, and it just sends us
down a rabbit hole.
Speaker 3 (01:54):
And scratches all the itches.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
It's just it's perfect. That is what John has gifted
to us just a little bit before Birthday season. So
let us go to John and hear what he has
to say.
Speaker 5 (02:06):
Hey, good afternoon, guys. So my name is John. I'm
calling from Connecticut. I have a story that's interesting, but
it's a true story. In nineteen eighty in New York City,
there was a news show called Live at five, I
think it had Michelle marsh and Roland somebody. And so
they reported that this man was kidnapped and his name
(02:27):
was Leon Klinghoffer. He was kidnapped. He was held for
ransom for fifty thousand dollars. Turns out the cops stole
the money out of the trash can where the money
was supposedly left, and then they found Leon Kleanhoffer's body
along the side of the road. One of the highways,
the Merritt Parkway or something similar to that, and they
declared that he was murdered, and they arrested three people.
(02:50):
Those three people were found guilty and put in jail.
Now fast forward five years, and maybe that name Leon
Kleanhffer is familiar to you because it it should be,
or it could be. A man was on a cruise ship,
the Achille Lauro, and he was a man in a wheelchair,
an old guy, fame bio. He was a liquor store owner.
He was old. They had his picture on there. The
(03:13):
terrorsts threw him off the cruise ship into the water
and killed him. They said his name is Leon Klinghoffer,
exactly the same guy. I was in shock. It's like
they're trying to get away with this, killing Leon Klinghoffer
twice and I can't figure out why. I don't know why.
I think my three minutes are nearly at an end.
(03:33):
That's my story and I'm sticking to it. By the way,
all this stuff is online pictures of the people who
are arrested. Michelle marsh on her newscast reporting on the kidnappings,
reporting also five years later, on the killing of Leon
Kleanhoffer on the Achille Laura. It's all there, so it's
kind of an interesting story. I can't figure it out,
(03:55):
thank you very much.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
But dude, yes, when you send me that or when
you sent us that.
Speaker 6 (04:01):
And I listened earlier today for the first time, I said,
first off, out loud.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
What a lovely guy, Yeah to the caller, and is
what a great man? What a gem like you.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
Said, John Rules. Thank you John, for you know, finding us,
for spending some time with us, and for sending us
in that awesome message and sending us down this trip.
Speaker 4 (04:20):
John, and I find you to be a credit to
the great state of Connecticut.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
Yeah, baby, Connecticut. I've never spent much time up there.
Let's not get into that because then I'll just start
thinking about I need to go to Connecticut now. But guys,
let's dive right into this. So we found a story
from the New York Times, section M, page four, September
twenty fifth, nineteen eighty The headline is three charged with
(04:45):
kidnapping Bronx liquor dealer. And in this story, guys, maybe
we should go through it a little bit just to
set up the initial Leon Klinghoffer story, which was by
the way, definitely reported on by Michelle Marsh. You can
find a bunch of information on her. She was an
American broadcast journalist. She worked at I think it was
(05:07):
WCBSTV in New York City from nineteen seventy nine onwards
and then junked around. She's a journalist and a lot
of different places for a long long time. And that
Roland somebody, by the way is Roland Smith. You can
look him up. Rol An d smih.
Speaker 6 (05:22):
And you found a half hour video uploaded to YouTube
of like an entire newscast from this era. And can
I just say, in addition to it being an excellent
source for this topic, it was just an awesome blast
from the past. To seeing all the commercials and the
DHS ness of it all, it was an absolute I
watched the whole thing just just to kind of travel
back in time.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
It was really neat. Oh yeah.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
And Michelle Marsh, by the way, before we even get
in the story, she has a really interesting She is
a really interesting piece of American broadcast journalism. Because she
was the youngest person in a broadcast anchor position for
a long time. It reminded me a lot of that
anchorman storyline that film that I think all of us
appreciate maybe in some small way. Am I just saying
(06:03):
I love it because you.
Speaker 6 (06:03):
Kidd the fantastic piece of cinema anchor man also featuring
our coworker Will Ferrell.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
That is correct, But anyway, so she is real. She
did report on this. Thats not John just imagining things.
As he says in the message, you can find that
stuff online. I could not find the specific video of
Michelle Marsh and Roland reporting on this story. But as
as we said, we did find that New York Times
piece that says exactly what happened. So let's jump into
(06:29):
there and get our story straight. So in this story,
it discusses a kidnapping of a quote sixty five year
old retired liquor store owner for ten days in the
Bronx in New York City. It talks about a fifty
thousand dollars ransom that was paid, talks about the victim
name written out Leon kling offer Let's spell it k
(06:51):
l I n g h O f f e er,
and it says sources close to the case say, quote
he is a loan shark and has not been found
at this time on September twenty fifth, nineteen eighty, there
was an arrest of a man named Alan Futterman that
it discusses in here, who was released because he it
was said that he did not have anything to do
with it, or at least it appeared that he did
(07:13):
anything to do with it. It talks about two people
who were arrested the day prior, William J. Cody, Barbara
Dhugherty and George Carlow. So those were the three people
that John talked about being arrested for this kidnapping. At
this time, Again, Leon Klingoffer's body had not been recovered.
If he was in fact killed, I could not find
the reporting about Leon kling Offer in nineteen eighty being
(07:36):
found dead, So that right there might be one of
the key things to this story. Maybe he wasn't killed.
Speaker 6 (07:44):
Where did that come from? The reference to that, because
for some reason, and looking into this, I felt like
I did see some reporting on finding his body.
Speaker 2 (07:52):
Really so I haven't found that, at least in the
New York Times piece, the only one that I could
actually find that. You can look at the New York
Times paper, you know, from the reporting, And maybe I
just didn't go deep enough to find the reporting of
his body being recovered. There is a weird thing that
John states about the money being taken out of the
trash can by police, which is a little strange. Let's
(08:14):
read this from the article directly. There's a quote in
here from Missus Klingoffer.
Speaker 4 (08:18):
Yes, and this is thanks to journalist Joseph Bchreester. I
hope we're pronouncing that last name correctly. The following Missus
Klinghoffer told the police on September fifteenth that her husband
had been kidnapped and a one hundred thousand dollars ransom demanded.
She said she could only raise fifty thousand dollars. The
sources said, oh, and we should continue for the trash
(08:41):
can story.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
Next quote.
Speaker 4 (08:43):
The kidnappers agreed, and the money was dropped off in
a refuse basket on First Avenue and East sixty third Street.
A red van appeared, hesitated, then sped away.
Speaker 6 (08:53):
Matt, what I saw was a reference to the next
phase of this saga in terms of finding a.
Speaker 3 (08:59):
Bit just just fy I was okay a little, but
I did find it. Yeah, anyway, we'll skip to.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
That, okay, Well, yeah, then it states after that that
policemen watched the garbage can. But in the confusion, someone
presumably the kidnappers, took the money. So again at this point,
during this stage of the reporting, somebody took the money,
but they weren't sure who. There must be a whole
other piece of this that perhaps Michelle marsh did report
on in nineteen eighty that we just don't have access
(09:26):
to currently.
Speaker 4 (09:27):
And I did chase the van, but they said they
lost them in the Bronx.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
That's right.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
But again, three people were arrested following all of this stuff, right,
So theoretically they found the people in the van and they,
I guess theoretically didn't have the money. Somebody did. Maybe
it was a police officer allegedly.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
We just don't know.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
So there's that story, right that's September nineteen eighty. Where
it gets really really weird, is that another news story
broke on October seventh, nineteen eighty five. There's a cruise
ship that, just as John said, the Achille Larro, was hijacked,
at least according to The New York Times, the Washington Post,
(10:10):
all the major publications in the world at that time,
it was hijacked and a man named Leon Klinghoffer, who
is described as in nineteen eighty five, a sixty nine
year old Jewish American who was wheelchair bound was shot
dead by the kidnappers and thrown overboard.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
Is it worth mentioning that it was hijacked by the
Palestinian Liberation Front? Yes, it's interesting.
Speaker 6 (10:36):
You know, we're going to get into motive here at
some point and the connections of these stories.
Speaker 3 (10:41):
But that part, yeah, I just thought it was mentioning.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Well, yeah, It's the strange thing for me is that
if Leon Klinghoffer in the nineteen eighty story did not
pass away, and this is the same Leon Klingoffer, their
ages would match up almost perfectly if Leon hadn't had
his birthday yet in nineteen eighty five, right, which is
(11:04):
I don't know, it's just it to me that part
is so strange. And then you start digging into stuff
like the opera that was written and composed called The
Death of cling Offer that is all about the death
of Leon Klingofer on the Achille Lauro and about that
whole hostage situation that occurred on that ship at that time.
(11:25):
It is a huge political and cultural moment, right, which
is just strange. I don't know. I'm trying to think
back of other situations where people have called in or
written in and talked about weird things, where they're watching
the news and they swear it's the same person talking
about this one news story that they had just watched
(11:46):
talking about another news story with a different name, and
it's like the same person being interviewed, but they're in
completely different places. They're different people, but they're like the
eyewitness or one of the eyewitnesses for a thing. You've
seen those before, right, guys. And that's on social media
all the time.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
It's also like a plot point in movies. Really, it's
that guy, what the hell?
Speaker 5 (12:05):
You know?
Speaker 3 (12:05):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (12:06):
I know, so, I mean maybe that's why this is
hitting me so strangely. It feels like something that occurred
in a time before you could just put that video
up on YouTube or something, you know for sure. Yeah,
I just don't know what else to say about this.
Speaker 3 (12:20):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (12:20):
You can look yourself into the hijacking of the Achille Lauro.
You can search Palestinian gunman hijack Achille Lauo. It's from
the New York Times archive, but it's also created I
guess I don't know with the Learning Network, which was
the thing a while back. It's kind of strange. It
was published on October seventh, twenty eleven. You can find that.
(12:41):
You can also find in the New York Times archive
another thing titled ship carrying four hundred seized hijackers demand
release of fifty Palestinians in Israel. To get some of
the initial reporting on that.
Speaker 4 (12:52):
And the way that the aftermath right of the murder,
the motivations for the murder, you can and should read
more about those that happened to Clinghoffer number two we'll
call him, also did a little bit of cursory looking
into name frequency and folks. Clinkoffer is a relatively rare name.
(13:13):
Just the surname itself, there is a it's like one
out of twenty million people in the world.
Speaker 3 (13:18):
Wow, we'll have that surname.
Speaker 4 (13:20):
So it is not impossible that there are two Klinghoffers,
because fifty six percent of all the new Klinghoffers do
reside in the United States. However, it is a lot.
It's not your ordinary, you know, Donnie Nuyan or John
Smith situation.
Speaker 3 (13:38):
About this case.
Speaker 6 (13:38):
It did, to the caller's point, have a cultural moment
and like it is something that we may well have
heard of.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
I had not.
Speaker 6 (13:45):
But it was made into an opera, a theater production
directed by Peter Sellers called The Death of Klinghoffer that
apparently has been kind of shelved or is really hard
to see because it was accused, even by Klinghoffer's widow,
of being anti Semitic and glorifying terrorists.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
Yeah, oh yeah, there's a whole there's a whole thing
you can read. There's a thing on medium we found
called clean Offerr Cancelation Thoughts written by David McDonald's which
is really interesting. And you can read about the opera
itself on Opera Wire, I think is where I saw
something about it. They call it one of the most
controversial operas ever created, written by Alice Goodman and composed
by John Adams.
Speaker 6 (14:21):
And that is not Peter Sellers, the Peter Sellers, Peter
Sellers of Doctor Strangelove Fame. It's a different dude with
an amazing hairdoos more of it?
Speaker 3 (14:28):
He's more of a modern theater guy.
Speaker 2 (14:30):
Yeah, well, he guys. There's a lot more to go
into here, anything else we want to talk about.
Speaker 6 (14:35):
I think it's a fantastic history mystery. I mean, yeah,
what's the deal? Are they the same guy? Because the
original guy was he was a kind of a bad dude, right,
Wasn't he like a bit of a criminal kind.
Speaker 3 (14:45):
Of wasn't he painted as in that light? And then
some of the reporting.
Speaker 2 (14:48):
He's described by the New York Times as a loan shark,
a loan shark animal thing.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
Quote sources close to the case referred to him as that,
which is like the.
Speaker 6 (14:57):
Dude who was killed on the on the ship just
looked like a lovely old fella. But I guess, you know,
we know, bad people sometimes grow into lovely old fellas.
Speaker 4 (15:04):
So who's to say the thing is with Klinghoffer. A second,
he has a military record, so his early life is
a little bit easier to track. Fun fact, he knew
Jack Kirby, the legendary comic book artist.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
Okay, wow, so okay, So at least we have a
pretty stable or at least accepted bio of Leon Klinghoffer
who died on the Achille Lauro. Yes, okay, well that's good.
Then perhaps we're just dealing with the same name just
strangely lining up with a bunch of other things, very weird,
and by the way, just one other thing. If you're
(15:38):
interested in learning more about Michelle Marsh, you can find
some fairly tragic, sad, but also awesome reporting about her
when she passed away in twenty seventeen. You can just
type in m I C H E L E m
A R s H and learn about her struggle with
breast cancer and her amazing career she had in broadcast journalism. Okay,
(16:00):
well that's all for now, Thank you so much, John,
really cool stuff. We'll be right back afterword from our sponsor.
Speaker 6 (16:11):
And we've returned with I think what'll be a good
little preamble into Ben's listener mail section on Palenteer. This
is really a little more Palenteer adjacent and sort of
all of our discussions around Palenteer.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
That triggered a really cool memory from.
Speaker 6 (16:27):
Our old buddy Foxillion fast Foot, fast Foot Rights.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
Hi, Matt, Ben, and Nole.
Speaker 6 (16:33):
I was just listening to your segment on Palenteer, and
I was reminded of a paper I wrote in twenty
nineteen in grad school for a data and Analytics and
politics class. In it, I explained that the one thing
basically saving us from campaigns extorting voters by using AI
to recognize patterns to discover personal vulnerabilities. Is the fact
that no one company has a monopoly on personal data.
(16:54):
Since Microsoft, Google, Apple, and Meta are to some extent siloed,
there is no central clearing how one can use to
train a data mining operation with Palenteer basically compiling everything
about everyone who knows how bad things will get. I
half jokingly said in a class discussion that there would
be a point where we could ask, Hey, Siri, what
(17:15):
would be the political fallout of doing X?
Speaker 3 (17:18):
And we would get an answer.
Speaker 6 (17:20):
One classmate, who worked in building software for the IRS,
laughed because she understood how right I was, and to
give credit where it's due. I made this point by
recalling how Ben years ago mentioned on the podcast the
professor he had who was creating a geopolitical prediction model.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
I remember that too fast foot.
Speaker 6 (17:37):
Now, with Palenteer and the rise of generative AI, including
the computer that threatened to reveal a programmer's affair, I
can't help but feel like I years ago predicted a
data dystopia and alliteration I came up with in an
early draft of the paper Feel Free to Steal for
what it's worth, I.
Speaker 3 (17:54):
Got an A in the class as well. You should
have Fox Silient fast Foot.
Speaker 6 (17:59):
What a fantastic point and opprescient ben I throw to you, Sarah,
because I think the point about the predictive model that
you discussed is very much another kind of proto prediction
of this kind of stuff that is seeming to enter
a very slippery slope kind of period.
Speaker 4 (18:17):
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, thank you so much, Fox oleyan
fast Foot, an old friend of the show and a
friend of ours. Yeah, we're out in Well, we're past
the wild West precipice of large language predictive modeling, right,
And what you are describing is very much on the way.
(18:38):
I would argue, I don't know, my spidey sense says
that something like this already exists. One thing we didn't mention,
for all the nerds in the crowd and our previous
discussion on palanteer, I can't believe we talked about this
so much, but we did not mention where the name
(18:58):
comes from the word. Yeah, we all know a palanteer
is a fictional poisoned magic crystal blad.
Speaker 3 (19:08):
I didn't know that.
Speaker 6 (19:08):
I did not make that connection at all. I guess
I associate it with like the word paladin. It did
give me kind of those you know, sword and sorcery vibes.
Speaker 3 (19:17):
But not that wow. Yeah, a little on the nose,
and then it's.
Speaker 5 (19:23):
It is.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
But I don't know, guys, we just think about the
word play intelligent, powerful people, and I don't.
Speaker 5 (19:32):
Know, you.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
Talk about words and their power, and I don't know.
It's really interesting to make a seeing stone the name
of your company.
Speaker 4 (19:42):
Yeah, but it's all I know to that point. It's also, uh,
it's as though, you know, Blackwater instead of changing their
name to Academi or Exy, just changed their name to
like Colonel Kurtz Consulting. You know, it's like they they
could have chosen and a bunch of other names. But
as we'll see later here and perhaps even in an
(20:04):
episode in the future, the CEO doesn't feel some of
the same controversies that we all feel when we learn
about Palatiner.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Nobody does when they're on the inside.
Speaker 6 (20:16):
I think, right, maybe not nobody, but they know what
they did.
Speaker 3 (20:21):
But I'm with you on that, Ben, I think that's
very true.
Speaker 6 (20:24):
There is a certain siloed kind of perspective on these things,
or thinking that you're part of ushering in a new age, right,
the question is whether or not we want that new age.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
But then you can also argue that there's a genie
in the bottle kind of approach to looking at these things,
where it.
Speaker 6 (20:40):
Is coming, whatever it's gonna be, it's coming, and you know,
you can either get on the train or get left behind.
I'm somewhere in the middle, Like, I don't want to
be a lutie.
Speaker 3 (20:50):
I don't want to be shouting at clouds or whatever.
Speaker 6 (20:53):
You know, but some of this stuff is scary, and
there is a dystopian vibe to a lot of the
way this stuff as just being so broadly applied, this
machine learning stuff, and.
Speaker 3 (21:04):
Just there's seeming to be zero consideration.
Speaker 6 (21:08):
Given to the future of this stuff, and like concepts
like privacy and just being humans starting to seem really
frivolous to some of these folks. You know, I don't know,
because because the CEOs are protected from the fallout, I
don't think they even are seeing the way that these
AI models are interacting and starting to do real Terminator
Skynetty type stuff, And it doesn't seem like anybody would
(21:31):
be safe, you know, Right, So his shortsightedness is just
staggering to me.
Speaker 3 (21:35):
Right.
Speaker 5 (21:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (21:36):
It's also prompting a long overdue, much needed conversation about
the efficacy of a C suite of CEOs, Right, what
is the value add there?
Speaker 3 (21:49):
Now?
Speaker 4 (21:49):
Obviously a lot of very smart people are CEOs. We
know a few, and the ones we know are overall
super cool. But what do you It seems that what
people learn in that echelon of society is often more
about relationships, rapport, and connection. I know this guy from
(22:11):
Harvard Business School. Therefore I will be the CEO, right.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (22:16):
And when we get to that conversation, then we really
start to ask ourselves how different would an AI CEO
B How different would an AI CFO be? I don't know.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
One could argue potentially better.
Speaker 4 (22:34):
One could Yeah, it would depend on the model.
Speaker 3 (22:36):
And that's the problem that I have.
Speaker 6 (22:38):
It does seem like there are some I mean, like,
I don't I think we should use Hey, I replaced
the top jobs, not the bottom jobs.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
You know what I mean? Yeah, that's you know what
I mean. Like, I don't know.
Speaker 6 (22:46):
I just I'm with a different approach to thinking about AI,
and like the the like I said, there's there, there's
a thing happening, and the question is how is it
going to be steered?
Speaker 3 (22:56):
And at what point do you know what I mean?
Speaker 6 (22:58):
Like, I guess they're going to be responsible ways of
harnessing stuff like this rather than.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
Some of this willy nilly bulls.
Speaker 4 (23:05):
On that point, I'd love to shout out a dear
friend of the show, old colleague, doctor Damien Patrick Williams.
Please check out, Yeah, please check out his work on this,
because he spent a lot of time on it. He
is a brilliant mind. And I'll be honest, I think
Damien's okay with me saying this. People like him are
(23:26):
incredibly irritated because you know how like you'll come up
with an idea and you'll, in his case, you'll warn
people about it for decades and then someone else comes
up to you and says your idea as though they
made it up. Poor Damien, man, he's doing the good work.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Let's take it back to Tolkien for a second, guys.
That's because in the conceptualization of this, within that universe,
if you look into one of these things a pall
and teer, you are going to be shown some stuff,
but it may not be exactly the right stuff. It
may not be exactly what's happening. Other the things you
(24:04):
may see may be created by others who are also
using a pallinteer.
Speaker 5 (24:11):
Right.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
So this concept of once somebody has accumulated all this data,
once somebody believes they've got the truth of everyone and
they can see what everyone is doing and who everyone is, right,
that theoretically can be manipulated by anybody else who has
the same you know, thing of power like that, right,
a same list, a same data aggregation platform. Right. And
(24:35):
also in the story, that is considered not a reliable
way to choose your actions.
Speaker 5 (24:42):
Right.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
So, like, I'm just imagining all this stuff happening together,
and as you guys are talking about using AI to
make some of those higher level decisions based on what
exists within that system, I don't know, it just spells
trouble with the capitalist Yeah.
Speaker 6 (24:57):
Wait, so you're saying you're against that or you just
think it's a it's another I'm.
Speaker 2 (25:01):
Saying it's dangerous to wield that kind of thing.
Speaker 4 (25:05):
It's also not as definitive as its champions would suggest.
These are some of the deep philosophical and ethical rubicons
we ran into what the idea of modeling data to
predict the future. The one ring, keep it, keep.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
It.
Speaker 4 (25:26):
The one thing I can disclose about that, and I
mean we mentioned it previously, is the model that I
was aware of years back was meant entirely to replicate
Afghanistan to such fidelity that you could flip a little
variable or one number in this massive set of matrix info,
(25:48):
and doing so would show you changes in the system
that would have a high degree of accuracy to what
would actually occur in the real world. And that is
really tricky. That's a level of math and analysis that
is Arthur C. Clark level indistinguishable from magic. And I agree
(26:09):
that not magic to gathering. I agree that it is.
It's dangerous because people don't know how to use.
Speaker 3 (26:16):
It yet at all.
Speaker 4 (26:19):
Right, we know a little bit about it, but it's
a lot like math, it's a logic. It's a lot
like kids finding their parents' guns and being capable of
firing them right, but not knowing that bullets cause damage,
So you have to be very careful where you're aiming it,
and people don't know where to aim palanteeriat. That's the
(26:41):
dangerous thing.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
Shoot.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
Internally, I think is what they're going to do. Like
I'm thinking about the actions Israel just took against Iran,
like that's blown up in the news right now and
literally blowing up across Iran and with drones in Israel
right now, just like who had a model could see
that coming, right? I mean, I guess it was in
(27:04):
the air. But that's the kind of thing guys we've
been talking about, like full on, full scale war potentially
coming to Iran and what does that mean and the
potential nuclear situation that we're in. Another one, Yeah, I
heard that, kiddie. Didn't mean to bring up another horrifying thing,
but that's maybe just where we're at.
Speaker 6 (27:26):
How it is well with that, I think on that
horrifying thing, cliffhanger, not really cliffhanger. Still still sort of
approaching the cliff, but it's there. We're going to take
a quick.
Speaker 3 (27:37):
Break and hear a word from our sponsor.
Speaker 6 (27:39):
Thanks again to Fox Silient fast Foot for that thought
provoking email, and I'm glad you did so well on
your project.
Speaker 3 (27:45):
We'll be back with more messages from you. We've returned, folks.
Speaker 4 (27:53):
We are going to continue, as Noel said, a bit
of an exploration of palans here, and we're doing this
with some anonymous firsthand information, so we're not going to
identify this friend and neighbor of the show, but we
do think this is worth hearing, and we have internally
been able to check on this source and verify that
(28:17):
they're legit. Here we go, Anonymous says, love how you
talked about Palaneer today. I tell everyone I know it's
the most evil company they've never heard of. I work
at Raitheon and we have several contracts with them, especially
with their Foundry software. It is insane stuff. Among a
(28:37):
lot of other things, it can produce real time wargame
scenarios and solutions using satellite imagery of locations of boats
and planes around the world. This is absolutely wild stuff,
and they use the word ontology to describe how Foundry
is built out, essentially a live network of data from
(28:59):
different sources flock cameras, government satellites, et cetera, all working together.
It's crazy stuff, man. And I don't know if you
know anything about their CEO, Alex Karp with a K,
but he's a real piece of work. Whenever I'm in
a meeting with Palanteer teams, they praise him like a god,
(29:19):
and it feels like they're all part of a cult.
Speaker 3 (29:22):
It is scary.
Speaker 4 (29:24):
So are we familiar with Alex Karp? I can't remember
what we talked about him on air.
Speaker 3 (29:29):
Doesn't ring a bell for me? Maybe cat catch me up?
Speaker 2 (29:32):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (29:32):
How about this?
Speaker 4 (29:33):
As Anonymous pointed out, we got permission to share that
message on the air, and here is a clip. So
we're just gonna play a short part of this interview
from twenty twenty and would love to hear what you
guys think.
Speaker 7 (29:50):
Was there ever a time that you wished you had
not done work for Ice? Absolutely completely, you wish you'd
never done it? No, you asked, is there ever a
time did I suffer? I've had some of my favorite
employees leave over ice. Over Ice, I had people protest
to me, some of whom I think asks really legitimate questions.
Speaker 5 (30:11):
I have asked.
Speaker 7 (30:11):
Myself if I were younger at college, would I be
protesting me? So it sounds like, yes, what is the
most valid criticism that if you are involved in anything
that one instance of injustice, does it tarnish all instances
of justice? And I see this question and every single
thing we do, and by the way, not just a nice.
(30:32):
I see that this with our work with clandestine services.
I mean our product is used on occasion to kill people.
Speaker 4 (30:39):
So there we have Alexander Karp. He is right now.
His net worth is over eleven billion dollars depending on
how the stock market is doing. He's clearly a very
intelligent guy. And not all of the quote that we
played together is making it to the show tonight. But
(31:01):
for the context of what he said right before he
said our product is used on occasion to kill people,
he was also talking about the context of transparency. Technical
transparency about how Palateer works is, by his own statements,
a priority for the organization. However, transparency about how Palinar
(31:26):
technologies are used, that is the part where he says,
and he's honest about it. He says, I because of
the contracts we have with clandestine services, we can't really
talk about that kind of transparency, which is tricky because
that's cherry picking the concept of transparency, even if just.
Speaker 3 (31:48):
A little bit right, I'd say. So.
Speaker 4 (31:51):
It's kind of like how the government of China says
we are huge champions of certain rights, economic rights, mainly,
don't ask about the human ones.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
Yeah, I'm looking at an article from him uh from
CNBC on June fifth, or you know where he's being
talked about, and it's this concept of this being really
one of the primary driving issues for AI development in
these you know, these defense spheres and offense spheres. The
(32:23):
concept that if we don't win this war this race,
somebody else does, and in this case they're talking about
or he specifically says, China will win. So we have
to do what we're doing. We're going to do what
we're doing right, and it's not going to stop.
Speaker 4 (32:36):
If someone It's the old atomic weaponry question we brought
up in a previous episode. If a gun is going
to be inevitably made, even if you have philosophical and
ethical quandaries about gun ownership, you would rather be the
person with the gun. If there's only one gun and
there are five people in the room, you want to
(32:57):
be the fifth one who's strapped. It's it's just real politic,
zero sum things. The same concept is applicable to AI
right now.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
Well, yeah, and if there's a blueprint for a gun
sitting at the center of the table, right and everybody's
got to decide, well, should I make that thing? I
guess I have to because they might.
Speaker 4 (33:18):
Yeah, and then if you make the gun first, if
you cannot move the blueprints, you're going to be like
aggressively bullying other people not to look at them.
Speaker 3 (33:27):
Get your eyes off the table.
Speaker 4 (33:30):
Yeah, this reminds me of something that is not quite
related here, anonymous, but I think will be of interest
to all of us. I ran into a conspiratorial thought
a while back when I was working on some sci
fi stories. There are people who genuinely believe that true AI,
(33:53):
a synthetic sentient intelligence, has already been created, and that
the US government immediately murdered it as soon as they
learned it was there. It sounds crazy, but like, what
do you think?
Speaker 2 (34:08):
Mmmmm, I don't know. I feel like they would take
it into a secure location somewhere deep underground and interrogate
the crap out of it until they.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
Gif it up and firewallet.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (34:23):
I just had a right, But it's it's a fascinating
idea because it really depends on how we would describe
the inherent philosophy of those inventors, right, and of those
military technocrat decision makers. I could one hundred percent see
(34:44):
someone creating a sentient mind and then immediately going we've
gone too far right. We know how to make it now,
but we don't understand what it wants or what it does,
so we got to kill it before it gets us.
Speaker 2 (35:01):
Yeah, it would be a terrifying moment, right for people
in a laboratory situation when it.
Speaker 4 (35:08):
A Yeah, I remember, and this is all in the
world of fiction. We are not experts in these fields.
But I remember writing this story where the first sentient
intelligence is a little subroutine or program in a popular
search engine, and one day a person who is like
(35:29):
a low level lab tech finds out that this thing
is self aware because she's searching for something, and instead
of giving her results, it ask her why she wants
to know this information that. I think something like that
would be the real cinematic moment. And if that occurs,
then it will inevitably be leveraging things like Pallenteer. That's
(35:53):
part of why it's dangerous. Humans are going to be
able to do a lot of damage with this massive
aggregation if they're bad faith actors. But what happens when
a sentient until it AGI gets a hold of it,
you know what I mean? What could something so much
smarter than human beings do with all that info, and
(36:14):
what would it want to do? You know what I mean,
what if it's like what if it's an accidental AI.
And originally the code was just to like give people
tourism recommendations in Monaco. And now it's leveraged all this energy,
all this information. It's conquered the world and all it
(36:36):
you know, it won't shut up about Monaco, that's all
it does.
Speaker 2 (36:40):
I'm a yeah, yeah, I don't know. I see a
scenario where if it's being used for defense purposes, and
you know, it would be immediately right, what are the parameters?
Is it to protect? You know, this battalion of troops?
Is that the first time it's used, and to protect
that battalion of troops, well, the best thing to do
is to wipe out, you know, the entire area over here,
(37:05):
so there's no threat.
Speaker 4 (37:06):
Now, right, like the old paper clip problem. Right, we
made this thing and all it wants to do is
make paper clips. However, it is so powerful that it
has decided all things must be paper clips, you.
Speaker 2 (37:19):
Know, yeah, I mean yeah, it just depends on the parameters,
like what what's what's the mission?
Speaker 4 (37:26):
It's a lot too, like I think that's a huge
part of it. Right, we are encoding the imperfect behavioral
DNA of human beings into these creations. And you know
what's that saying? Like there are no bad dogs, They're
only bad owners. So if we are raising this puppy,
(37:46):
are we going to teach it to like help people,
to be a rescue puppy or are we going to
teach it to be like fighting pit bull? You know,
no shade on pit bulls. Are we teaching it to
be a guard dog? These these are very difficult questions
to parse, and unfortunately, from everything we've seen throughout history,
these are questions that people won't answer until after the fact.
Speaker 5 (38:11):
You know.
Speaker 4 (38:12):
Anyway, Palenteer, we're going to keep it short today, folks,
we hope this finds well. We're recording on June thirteenth
of Friday, which means here in the United States, Father's
Day is coming up. So in retrospect, we hope that
you had a good one, and if you're able to
contact your loved ones, we hope you did so, and
(38:33):
we know that they were amazed to hear from you.
We also be amazed to hear from you. Thanks to
John in Connecticut, Thanks to Foxillian fast foot and of
course thank you to Anonymous. There's a lot of stuff
we didn't get to, especially like how Palenteer may accelerate
the return to train hopping, which was really interesting thought.
(38:55):
Share your interesting thoughts with us. You can find us online.
You can hit us up on the telephone. You can
always give us a good old fashioned email.
Speaker 3 (39:03):
That's right.
Speaker 6 (39:04):
You can find us at the handle Conspiracy Stuff, where
we exist all over the internet, specifically on xfka, Twitter,
and on YouTube with video content for your perusing enjoyment,
as well as on Facebook with our Facebook group Here's
where it gets crazy, on Instagram and TikTok where conspiracy
stuff show in.
Speaker 3 (39:20):
There's more.
Speaker 2 (39:21):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three std WYTK. When you call in, you'll find yourself
within a voicemail. You have three minutes when you're in there.
Give yourself a cool nickname and let us know if
we can use your name and message on the air. Guys,
the Economist chose Karp as the CEO of the Year
last year. Isn't that exciting? If you want to write
(39:46):
to us, why not instead send us a good old
fashioned email.
Speaker 4 (39:49):
We are the entities that read each piece of correspondence
we receive, be well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back one last show from our pal. I think
we can say this name our pal Economics, who had
a kind message for us and said, man, I cannot
imagine how spicy stuff they don't want you to know
(40:11):
is gonna get as we move along this awful timeline.
Given the recent political climate and all the protests, especially
with mainstream media cherry picking coverage. That's stuff they don't
want you to know. Talk about job security for you
boys right now. Lol.
Speaker 3 (40:27):
Thank you for the kind wishes. We're doing our best.
We'll see you soon.
Speaker 4 (40:31):
Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (40:51):
Stuff they don't want you to know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Stuff They Don't Want You To Know News
Hosts And Creators
Matt Frederick
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Show Links
RSSStoreAboutLive ShowsPopular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!