October 13, 2025 • 66 mins
The United States Treasury moves to print current President Trump's face on a new coin, prompting an exploration of why the US officially doesn't put living people on the money. Qatar and the US reach a new level in what Lady Gaga would call a "Bad Romance." (Ben here: we recorded this before the news of the Idaho military base hit; the gang and I are currently in international waters -- wish us luck!) Microsoft has a 'come-to-Jesus' moment with Azure. Chinese authorities leverage AI to improve their censorship regulations for Western films. All this and more in this week's strange news 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 (00:26):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noah.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
They call me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer Dylan the Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you
are you. You are here, and that makes this the
stuff they don't want you to know. Fellow conspiracy realist,
we welcome you to October thirteenth. If you're hearing this
the day it comes out, we are recording on October eighth.
(00:54):
This catches us mid way or on the very cusp
of exploring the high ices. As we've mentioned in the past.
We're all excited. We spend some time off air kind
of just bonding together over some stuff. I made a
pretentious poetry reference, obviously, And guys, how are we feeling
(01:15):
before we get into the news here?
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Beaten down by the world and it's happenings.
Speaker 4 (01:22):
I feel gently massaged by the world and it's happenings.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
That's you know, well, I mean, you go on the
front page of well, the front page, the homepage of
the Guardian, and you just see the global conflict that's
happening right now, and you see the number, like you
see the numbers of people being killed daily in these conflicts,
and it just that feeling that there's nothing you can
(01:47):
actually do about any of that stuff, that it's that
it's that malaizing. It's still got a hold of me, man.
And then just watching what's happening here on the home front,
just trying so hard to stay positive. Dude, are you
guys doing anything to keep positive?
Speaker 3 (02:01):
Yes, I'm wearing a silly hat.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
That's all. Sometimes that's all it takes. Sometimes you just
got to walk with a little pep in your step,
wear a silly hat, do a downward facing dog in
the street. You know, I don't know, man.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
Well, then you have to come to terms with the
fact that you're just kind of being I don't know. Sorry,
there's not nosi.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
But no, I hear you. Yeah, and no, no, I
hear you. And I'm listening. The issue you're describing is
universal because at this point in time, as we've discussed earlier,
the idea of normalcy is insidious, right, and it is
also ephemeral, and people look around and often feel gas
(02:44):
lit and say, am I the only one who thinks
this is weird? And the truth is, You're not the
only one. This is a universal thing. They're very very
few people on the planet right now who look around
and say, oh, this is going great? Ten ten no.
Speaker 4 (03:00):
Notes, that's true. I envy those people, but also also
not It is a gift to be able to explore
some of the stuff with people who you love and
people who you share perspective with, and that obviously includes
the two of you as far as I'm concerned, and
all of you in the audience.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
And thank you so much for joining us, folks. We
couldn't be more pleased that you are here. We also
always have to thank our super producer Tennessee for putting
up with our shenanigans. And I got to tell you, you know,
is really feeling that malaise, folks a certain demographic that
we predicted in our previous Strange News air traffic controllers.
(03:45):
The US government is currently in a shutdown. My silly
hat is an old relic. It is from a communist
regime I used to mess with. It's actually a naval
hat from them. But the air traffic controllers shortages that
we lightly predicted are coming to pass. Like right now,
flights are being delayed in the US, Flights are being
(04:08):
canceled because the ATC folks legally cannot strike, but because
they are essential workers, they have to function on unpaid labor. So, uh,
if you are ATC, you might be hearing this on
a sick day. That's last resort. Did you guys hear
about that you have to use a sick day as
(04:29):
a protest?
Speaker 4 (04:30):
No, it doesn't. It makes sense though.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
You gotta work six days in a row, you know,
and you you you're not getting paid and you're not
sure if you're going to get paid. And then the
official messaging coming out of the White House is, oh, well,
you guys aren't going to be owed back pay right
the government shuts down?
Speaker 4 (04:46):
Yeah, guys, I'm gonna be completely honest. I didn't know
air traffic controllers or government employees. This is this is
news to me, and I'm just maybe there are others
out there who also didn't know. But I'm just raising
my hand to say that was the case. So thanks
for educating me.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
I mean, now, are we gonna get to Miami?
Speaker 2 (05:02):
Guys, I'm not.
Speaker 3 (05:04):
Kidding part of why I've asked you.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Yeah, as of Wednesday, October eighth, according to flight Aware,
there are no major delays happening at the Atlanta Harsfield
Jackson Airport. However, however, in like Knoxville and right over
in Texas, a lot of places around us and a
lot of the you know, it's just all of the airports.
Speaker 3 (05:22):
There was a airport out west in the United States.
I mean that literally had the tower empty, yes on Monday.
And so these these things do matter. We want to
shout out all our fellow aviation fans and people who
rely on it. We also want to shout out our
friends air traffic controllers, and we want to shout out
(05:48):
you folks. This strange news program is going to hit
a lot of things that were on our minds, both
locally and more importantly abroad, and we want to hear
what you think. So first off, maybe we do it
this way. Have you ever wanted your face on money,
fellow conspiracy realist, like Jay z or like Ben Bucks
(06:12):
or Matt Money or Noel Nichols.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
I was gonna say Ben Bucks was a real thing.
There for a minute.
Speaker 3 (06:17):
It was it's still hey, very active in my parents'
house in several rooms. Their negotiations are ongoing to function
in the kitchen, but we got the living room beautiful.
Speaker 4 (06:32):
You just Ben, and I think none of us probably
fully understand the megalomania of wanting to have your face
appear on legal tender well whilst still living.
Speaker 3 (06:45):
Ah, that's a perfect setup. All right, we're going to
an ad break and we have returned. Our breaking news
right now is coming from a tweet, which we're still
going to call a tweet and not an x what
(07:07):
would they call what does Xelon want us to call it?
Speaker 4 (07:09):
Call him? Ye? At least it's not a truth.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
Oh gosh.
Speaker 4 (07:13):
Yeah, you know what happens when you erase a truth.
It says this truth does not exist anymore.
Speaker 3 (07:19):
Oh oh, that's our old Pentagon line, right, We mentioned
that earlier. We don't lie. The truth changes. All right.
This is from the US Treasurer, Brandon Beach. We're going
to read it to you verbatim. No fake news here.
These first drafts honoring America's two hundred and fiftieth birthday.
(07:40):
Go Team and potus are real looking forward to sharing
more soon once the obstructionist shutdown of the United States
government is over. And then he's retweeting or reexing whatever
a thing from Steve Guests that says, attention, all patriots,
America is back, and so is the one dollar coin.
(08:03):
Potis or he tags potis and tags real. Donald Trump
will forever be the face of America's two hundred and
fiftieth birthday thanks to sex Scott Besant and at Treasurer Beach.
Let's describe this coin. It says in God We Trust
seventeen seventy six to twenty twenty six, and it's got
the classic presidential profile of the current living president and
(08:27):
Mary Alfred.
Speaker 4 (08:28):
Hitchcock's presents ESK I have to point out.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, yeah, that's a good point to make. And it
has Liberty along the top portion of the coin in
the background, and if you turn it over to the obverse,
it has a picture of the current president waving flag
behind him, right hand held up in a fist looking
toward the sky and what I call America face. I
do that. You know, it's just a good pose.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
What's that iconic image from when that dude shot him
in the head or the ear anyway, and he got
caught in that moment with the blood coming out of
his ear and his fist up. That is what that
image is pulled from.
Speaker 3 (09:04):
Yeah, and it has on the bottom arc of it
it says United States of America epluribus utum. We all
know the Latin there h And then in the top
arc it says fight, fight, fight, so, which.
Speaker 4 (09:16):
He said while pumping his fist in that mid right.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
Yeah, so it's it's not a subtle nod. If not,
it may be. And can we just making him seem
like a war hero? Yeah? Yeah, And so this met
with a bit of press, a bit of concern because
this has not happened yet. There are one dollar coins
(09:40):
in the past, right, This is coming from the US Treasury.
It is a pitch that is confirmed by the Treasury,
and they say this is going to be a twenty
twenty six commemorative one dollar coin. Now, I think we
all remember here in the US the one dollar, the
precedent for the one dollar coin, right, like the Sacajawea dollar,
(10:02):
which never worked at vending machines. You would get it
in certain government things like a post office or a
train station.
Speaker 4 (10:10):
Yeah. I do remember vaguely seeing some of those in
circulation back in the day.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
Yeah, those are so fun and exciting. I remember when
you used to go to Marta here in Atlanta and
you put you put cash in to get one of
their tickets, like back in the back in the day,
you get a little paper ticket or a coin.
Speaker 4 (10:30):
Wouldn't there a Susan b Anthony one too?
Speaker 3 (10:33):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (10:33):
Yes?
Speaker 4 (10:33):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Or is that fifeat No, that's Susan Anthony dollar.
Speaker 4 (10:36):
Yeah, it's an another one. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
But the Marta stations would dispense change in dollar coins
and it was one of the coolest things.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
It was one of the coolest things because it was
like non consensually getting memorabilia or collector's items, because where
are you going to use them? You know, you're going
to go to a vending machine and you're going to
try to put it in your a Saka jawea or
your Anthony anyway, and both and we're not Disney those
In both cases, the saka juweya and the Anthony coins,
(11:07):
the people that they're commemorating have long since passed before
those coins were ever struck. And this reminds us of
the I mean, we teased it at the end of
a recent listener mail program. This reminds us of the
conversation we had about Mount Rushmore. We had our trustee
Minnesota officer, longtime conspiracy realist write in and tell us
(11:32):
why no one has made another face a fifth face
on Rushmore since due to the instability of the mountain
at certain points. But also talked a little bit with
the guy about currency, and it turns out this idea
of making a coin is very controversial for a living president,
(11:56):
former or current, regardless of political party, be on the currency.
We've got to tell you a little bit of a story.
This is how, this is why it is technically illegal, Dylan,
Can we get a little bit of like an innocuous
history channel music, you know, yeah, like the kids are
(12:19):
learning the substitute teachers there perfect, Here we go. Once
upon a time there was a fellow named Spencer Morton.
Clark was born in Vermont. As a businessman, he eventually
rose to the heights of political power, bureaucratic political power
(12:40):
here in these United States. He was the Superintendent of
the National Currency Bureau from eighteen sixty two to eighteen
sixty eight. And the story goes that the United States
was trying to figure out how to, how to money,
(13:02):
how to do money. So they started having a shortage
of coins. Because coins are metal, you can melt them down,
you can do all kinds of stuff with them. And
the US Treasury from eighteen sixty two to eighteen seventy
six had started issuing what they called fractional money paper
bills to combat a growing coin shortage. People were hoarding
(13:26):
money because they were hoarding coins, especially because the Civil
War was beginning, right, so they were very frightened and
rightly so to avoid this crisis of a money shortage
or a specie shortage, the Treasury started introducing paper money
bills that would represent an amount of cents rather than
(13:48):
amount of dollars. So you would have a bill that
is not five dollars, but it's like five cents and
its legal tender. WHOA, that's kind of weird, right, lill weird. Yeah,
we're to us now.
Speaker 4 (14:01):
Said I don't understand the reasoning. They had pennies. Why
would they do this, right, because of a material shortage?
Is that what the deal is?
Speaker 3 (14:08):
Yeah? And people were who the petties. So these bills
were smaller than the dollars of the time, and they
came in a couple denominations three cents, five cents, ten cents,
twenty five cents, fifty cent notes. There's always pr with currency, right,
always a little bit of a spin. So Uncle Sam
(14:29):
was trying to figure out who should be on the
face of these paper bills, you know, because they can't
just say screw you, guys, we're in trouble. Five cents.
This is a coupon for five cents. So they wanted
it to, you know, seem patriotic and call back to
the narrative of the American Dream, and so on the
(14:49):
five cent note. They asked for the note to honor
William Clark of the Lewis and Clark Explorations. Okay, and
they send this to spend Sir Morton Clark his outfit
and allegedly per him there was just a crosswire. The
Treasury only told him the new bill should honor Clark,
(15:13):
and they didn't clarify who. So Spencer said, okay, we'll
put my face on the money.
Speaker 4 (15:20):
A bit of a leap there, Spencer, But why not?
Speaker 3 (15:24):
Says, but why not? It's like, guys, I'm not a
monster or a megalomaniac. I'm honestly confused. And he was
already disliked because of some different scandals he had done.
Congress didn't like him. A House of Reps person had
investigated his department after saying that under his auspice, the
(15:49):
place had become a house for orgies and back and
All's like he was a character. He was accused of
hiring women based on, you know, whether or not he
wanted to with him, and he was. Female employees later
described how Spencer Clark quote plied them with oysters and
ale amazing proper overtures to them. Yeah. So this guy,
(16:12):
this guy, Yeah, he had a rep coming in sore oysters.
Oysters for sure, them with oysters.
Speaker 4 (16:23):
And this sounds so inky to me for something applying
someone with oysters.
Speaker 3 (16:27):
Yeah, it reminds me of that scene in the film
adaptation of Dick Tracy where the bad guys just slurping
oysters as he's talking.
Speaker 4 (16:36):
That's an underrated flick, man, I dig that. I think
we've talked about it off here before.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
Ben.
Speaker 4 (16:40):
It's a very interesting stylized comic book movie that does
not get its flowers.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
Yeah, and the missophonia. If you have missophonia like us,
don't watch the oyster scene. Anyway, Congress was pissed, but
they were not surprised. This guy had a jacket on
them already, and so they went and made a law.
Their law from eighteen sixty six is called the Fayer Amendment.
(17:06):
It means that the United States government, any money it makes,
can only feature people who are dead, because they don't
want another oyster plying oyster plying Shenanigan fan out there
just in the streets on the money.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
Well, and then there was wasn't there even a further
ring of that in eighteen eighty six that sort of
really outlaid. It's pretty interesting. You can check it out
at Cornell Law School website. They've got the whole thing
in kind of annotated form where it says that the
minting of money is limited in series to deceased presidents.
(17:47):
No coin issued under the subsection may bear the image
of a living former or current president, or of any
deceased former president during the two year period following the
date of the death of that president. So it goes
even further than that. Actually your cool down period before.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
Right, Yeah, And so this is why it's it's controversial
to our to our fellow history nerds and to people
who are you know, fans a rule of law and
all that buff and stuff. The issue is that the
or the argument I should say, is that there was
(18:23):
already move in twenty twenty passed by Congress that says
the Treasury Secretary has given authority to issue one dollar
commemorative coins during the twenty twenty sixth calendar year because
this will be emblematic of the United States semi quinn centennial.
Speaker 4 (18:40):
That's two fifty right, Yeah, it's just.
Speaker 3 (18:43):
It's a weird word, but it works.
Speaker 4 (18:44):
I guess it's a two hundred and fiftieth anniversary.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
Is that?
Speaker 4 (18:46):
Is that not correct?
Speaker 3 (18:47):
Yeah? Yeah, you're absolutely correct. And so technically this is illegal,
but it goes back to the issue of the federal
law and who prints what. So federal law, the one
we're talking about from eighteen sixty six, prohibits the US
Treasury from issuing currency with you know, living former current presidents.
(19:08):
Commemorative coins are produced by the US Mint. Currency is
produced by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. So there's
a there's a bureaucratic loophole.
Speaker 4 (19:20):
So commemorative coins that I don't really see them advertised
as much anymore. But I also don't watch like cable
regular TV. Remember when they used to be those infomercial
type things, and they'd come in a nice little case
with enla you know, where you set the coins in
your little display, put it on your mantle. Were those
legal tender? Could you spend a commemorative coin or weren't
they just more like collector's items.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
It depends. Yeah, some of them could be spent, I believe,
But I mean any of them could be spent if
the cashier was foolish enough.
Speaker 4 (19:47):
Well, can we also just add that this is another
one of the examples of like, it's more governed by
decorum even than it is absolutely and this is just
a dude just being like, put me on the money.
I want to be on both sides, which is another
aspect of decorum. There are no coins where the same
dude is on both sides. It's like very self aggrandizing.
Speaker 3 (20:06):
Definitely not living dudes, for sure. We know the US
Men's has put out commemorative quarters. We're taking too long
with this. I'm just fascinated with it. We've got other
stuff to get to. But this is worrying, right.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
It's weird. It is weird, but we don't have to
worry for long. And here's why. Guys in the background
doing a little something over here, if you don't mind
it is a bit of a tangent. Bill Clinton ran
the United States from nineteen ninety three to two thousand
and one. Okay, George W. Bush ran the United States
from two thousand and one to two thousand and nine.
(20:41):
Donald J. Trump ran the country from twenty seventeen to
twenty twenty one, and now again is running it in
twenty twenty five. Do you know what all three of
those guys have in common? They're all seventy nine years
old right now. Oh wow, isn't that weird to think about?
All three of those guys could have been in the
same class in high school. If they all went to
(21:01):
high school together at the same time.
Speaker 4 (21:02):
It is not a public school, but just that school.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
Just something something about three men of the exact same age,
you know, have run the country for that many years.
That separated out too. And the life expectancy, according to
the CDC in the National Center for Health Statistics for
a male in the United States is seventy five point
eight years. So you won't have to wait long until
(21:29):
at least one of these guys there we go could
be eligible for the about any problems.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
I love you for that one. Yes, it's true. Also
because I've been trying to be positive despite looking like
an old Baltic sailor. Right now, there is good news.
We asked about this years ago, and I guess the
US Treasury finally listened to us. They're going to halt
the production of the penny. Thank you.
Speaker 4 (21:54):
I'm cool with that. I know you don't thanks God
to handle let me, yeah, for sure. Can I just
walk back something really really cool. It is rare for
the same person to be depicted on both sides of
a coin, but there are examples, and one that is
sort of almost like an easter egg. One is the
standard penny itself, where you can see old Abe Lincoln
(22:15):
in his seated throne position at the Lincoln Memorial. On
the other side, he's just this skiny, little ghost ghostly
figure in the center. But then there's like the New
Jersey State quarter that shows Washington crossing the Delaware on
the back, as well as Washington's bust on the front.
We have a Lincoln birth bi centennial coin where it
shows Lincoln in the typical profile in the front and
(22:36):
the back sitting on a log with like a hammer.
And then we've got like a Marquis de Lafayette coin
where he's like profile on the one side and a
top horseback on the other.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
So this is unusual. I'm not going to do the
rap met.
Speaker 4 (22:51):
This is unusual but not unheard. But all these dudes
were definitely definitely well dead, well very much dead, unless
we want to make it up as yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
Lincoln famously had a terrible night at the THEATA, but
do support the arts. We went long on this part
because I think we're all very interested in it. We'd
love to hear your thoughts, and as we as before,
I throw us to an ad break Dylan dollars. What
do you think he's beating? My shout out to y
(23:22):
k u k uh Dylan, Yeah, give it, give us
your two cents or ten cents.
Speaker 5 (23:27):
Have you ever the PNY. We there will never be
a Dillon dollar. That's my promise. That's my presidential campaign promise, honestly.
Speaker 4 (23:40):
Through it.
Speaker 3 (23:40):
Well, that's a rude of big guy I could get behind.
All Right, we're gonna pause for a word from our sponsors,
and then we'll be back with more strange news.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
And returned. I wonder if there's anybody listening that doesn't
get that reference, the on weed.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
Reference from Half Baked, the cinematic masterpiece Half Baked. They're
calling it another vibes, Oh.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Yes, exactly, and knowing that it's Sir Jonathan Stewart, John Stewart,
who is playing that character, right, the guy.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
Future president John.
Speaker 4 (24:15):
Stewart, Yeah, the same scene. Half Baked is also very
well known for a lovely, uh made for TV version
of some lines. One is have you ever.
Speaker 3 (24:25):
Sucked toes for weed? Well, shout out to oh gosh,
what is that?
Speaker 4 (24:31):
John Sewart said that as well. I believe that's John
Stewart's character who's talking about.
Speaker 3 (24:34):
Oh no, it's the guy who, oh gosh he played.
He was in the show.
Speaker 4 (24:41):
Toes they're sucking for weed?
Speaker 3 (24:42):
Is all right. I don't want to get lost in it,
but it's it's about like three guys living together and
they're raising the Olsen Twins. Yeah, Bob, Bob Saget was
absolutely a filthy boy.
Speaker 4 (24:57):
If you listen to his stand up, which is pretty
good The Aristocrats, the documentary, Yeah, he wasn't sucking toes
for weed, is what we're saying.
Speaker 3 (25:05):
Half Baked was always well. The point of the bit.
Speaker 4 (25:07):
Though, is that one would never suck toes for weed.
It's too innocuous for that. He was doing the hard stuff.
That's what makes you suck.
Speaker 3 (25:15):
Because before he went to Ridya, Dave Chappelle's character in
Half Baked tried to go to a drug addiction meeting
and people didn't respect him because he said he was
addicted to cannabis. Anyway, did he go railed this?
Speaker 2 (25:29):
Did he go do that thing? He did?
Speaker 3 (25:32):
Yeah, he was a big part of it. He said
he had more free speech in Saudi Arabia than he
did in the United States. I don't want to re
litigate this because talked about it on Daily Zeite guys.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
But yeah, yeah, yeah, well you're not re litigating it here.
Speaker 3 (25:45):
True. But yes, yes, Matt, he did go. Bill Burr
also went, which was a bummer to a lot of people,
And then a lot of other folks stood their ground
and a lot of other folks didn't.
Speaker 4 (25:57):
Friend of the podcast Suko is the one who released
the contract that showed all of the censorship aspects of
what was to be expected of performers at this event.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
So we're saying it's a bad thing that people went
to Saudi Arabia and did comedy.
Speaker 3 (26:14):
I like this setup here. We do need to remember
that we're talking about one distinct country in a region,
and I think this is an excellent setup for a
story that we've all been tracking about. A ginormously inconvenient
gift and aviation gift yes from our buddies a while back.
(26:38):
Over in the Middle Eastern region, there is a relatively
small peninsular country that has made enormous geopolitical impact and
it's currently moving or the aspiration is for it to
become the Switzerland of the Middle East.
Speaker 4 (26:54):
We know those folks.
Speaker 2 (26:57):
Oh, are you talking about Qatar?
Speaker 4 (26:59):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (27:00):
Yes, kind cool?
Speaker 2 (27:01):
Okay, Well thanks for setting it up, Ben, Let's jump
to Qatar, where, guys it's really exciting. The US President
signed an executive order vowing to use all measures, including
US military action, to defend the energy rich nation of Qatar,
although it remains to be seen what that exactly means,
(27:22):
because only one thing has happened. This is coming to
us from AP News. You can look up US President
signs an executive order vowing to defend Qatar in the
wake of Israel's strike. This was posted on October first
of this year, twenty twenty five. A little while ago.
We've been talking about other stuff. This kind of slipped
under the radar. Guys. It's really exciting. It means the
(27:45):
United States has a new solid ally like NATO style
contracted ally in Qatar. I guess that's it. Nothing else
to say about that. It's just exciting. We've got a
new friends are cool.
Speaker 4 (27:59):
I guess I'm gonna twist back a little bit on
the NATO aspect.
Speaker 3 (28:05):
We don't have to get in the weeds of it,
but they don't. You don't know the proof of the
putting until the rubber hits the road. Since I'm just
thrown around idioms in English, but Matt Noel Dylan folks
at home, I cannot, I cannot separate this from that
(28:27):
controversial and super inconvenient airplane sale.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
I was about to say the same thing.
Speaker 3 (28:32):
Yeah, see little quid pro quo clarice sish.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
You know, I'm having a little fun with this because
there is clear stuff going on here between individuals and
not countries, and that is why this is really upsetting
and the reason why I use the NATO reference. There
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is because the contract, the
language within the contract is eerily similar to the NATO contract,
(28:56):
and you can find quotes from the treaty all over
the place. There's an official press release that was put
out by the White House. You can look at CNN's
reporting why the president's pledge to defend Qatar is so extraordinary,
and here's some quotations. Quote in the event of such
an attack, the United States shall take all lawful and
appropriate measures, including diplomatic, economic, and, if necessary, military, to
(29:20):
defend the interests of the United States and the State
of Qatar to restore peace and stability. And that language
closely resembles the security guarantee that the that NATO gives
its member country.
Speaker 4 (29:33):
Isn't Trump like on the regular pissing off NATO and
bad mouthing NATO and kind of anti NATO. Is he
trying to start his own NATO esque arrangement, sorting a
new evil empire. I mean, I'm sorry, I know, maybe
that's maybe that's hyperbolic, but you know what I'm.
Speaker 3 (29:46):
Saying, building bilateral relations and then from there growing connective
tissue to other places in the region. I mean, that's
the textbook stuff, and Cutter has been in unofficial trade
relations with Israel, for instance, since nineteen ninety six, when
Atlanta had a relatively okay Olympics fine other than a
(30:10):
couple of speed bumps along the way. And that's why
I keep going back to the concept of Cutter Cutter's
aspiration to be the Switzerland of the Middle East. This
is where negotiations happen. That's what they're aiming for, and
that's part of the calculus here.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
Absolutely. I think one of the primary differences in CNN
points this out is that when NATO is bringing in
a new member or something like that, it's a big
to do. Everybody has to decide, everybody has to vote
on that, there has to be a consensus.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
Right, and there's a high standard of vetting for NATO membership.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
So it's very difficult to become a new member of
NATO and have that kind of contract right that defensive
people will come to your aid if you need it.
In this case, it was done unilaterally with an executive
order by a sitting president, So it's one guy says, hey,
you get a NATO contract. Essentially with the United States.
(31:07):
If someone attacks you, they attack us right, So that
is just I don't know, it's worrisome. It's a it's
that flexing of power, and it's just these it seems
to be these continual tests to test right, is what
can happen?
Speaker 4 (31:21):
Would it even hold? Like is it right? It doesn't
seem above board at all.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
And Ben a congressional approval, and Ben, as you're stating,
and as everybody like who's reporting on this sees and knows,
and everybody I think at this point is aware because
you've got Jon Stewart's, you've got Jimmy Kimmel's, You've got
people out there commenting on things like the guitar plane. Right,
it's in the zeitgeis. People are aware of this stuff.
(31:47):
And it is very strange that there is personal gift
giving happening with the person, the individual who decided to
put forth this declaration. It just makes you wonder what
else is going on, And it makes you wonder is
it that easy? You know, to gain like that level
of favor with somebody, I don't know, freaks me out.
Speaker 3 (32:11):
You guys, I've got opinions. Maybe we could talk about
them once we get into international waters.
Speaker 4 (32:17):
Okay, just goes to show you how little checks and
balances actually do anything, you know, if there are evenity
that apply to this. Again, it's all about folks just
blatantly flouting tradition, and it shows how much of what
we've done to see and expects, you know, from a
government is based on just that, like good manners and tradition.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
My favorite part of the EO, if you go the
primary statement of it from White House Doc dov is
the very last provision, which says the cost for publication
of this Order shall be borne by the Department of State.
So also, we're not paying for printing this. It's really weird.
(33:05):
Nothing to see here. There is no whistle like a
graveyard whistle. There is no humor like gallows humor. A
lot of stuff is in the mix. Those smoky backrooms
are real.
Speaker 2 (33:15):
Yeah they are. So we talked about the relationship between
one man and an entire country. Let's talk about the
relationship between one corporation and one country. Let's jump to
a story we talked about a little while ago regarding
Microsoft's Asure systems, the giant storage repositories of data that
(33:36):
Microsoft keeps and allows you the user, or you the country,
or you the Defense Force to use if you pay,
if you pay real good, they'll let you use those
and you can gather mass amounts of data and store
them on their servers. Well, a little update from the Guardian,
who we referenced a couple of weeks ago when we
talked about this story here. It is Microsoft Israel's use
(34:01):
of its technology and mass surveillance of Palestinians. You guys
recall this thing that we talked about where Israel's defense
forces and a specific unit within that defense force, Unit
eighty two hundred, was performing. At least according to an
investigation by the Guardian and several other outlets in the
Middle East, they were engaging in mass surveillance of all
(34:23):
of the Palestinians in the West Bank, as well as
every single person existing in and around Gaza. And not
only were they keeping the information about phone calls, they
were keeping the actual audio of phone calls, keeping them
for a certain amount of time to be analyzed by
an AI system, and then using that to do all
(34:45):
sorts of things. Allegedly, according to this investigation, they were
using the contents of those calls to target people for
strikes within Gaza during in this ongoing conflict that they've
got going on, where tens of thousands of human beings
have been killed all.
Speaker 3 (35:00):
Right, right and continue to die, especially with the movement
orders imposed by by the governments. We I think we've
all had eyes on this issue. One of the things
you have to know, regardless of how you feel in
the area. And we've got a lot of Israeli conspiracy
realists in the crowd tonight. Remember that surveillance may start
(35:22):
in one place, but it always ultimately applies to everyone.
Speaker 2 (35:26):
Well, yeah, let's talk about that. Allegedly, the reason why
this Microsoft Azure server system that was kept in the Netherlands,
that's where the actual data center is, was allowed to
be used by Israeli's military was to attempt to find
hostages that were taken on October seventh, right on that attack.
(35:46):
That is why, that's why that relationship with that specific
service was made to collect a ton of information on
people who were suspected of possibly holding hostages or being
a part of the ring, the network that was keeping
those hostages. But then it appears, at least according to
the investigation, that that spread out into basically monitoring everybody
(36:07):
in the West Bank, spread out into everybody in Gaza.
Let's jump to this new report from the Guardian. It
says Microsoft told Israeli officials late last week. Again, this
is on September twenty fifth, so you got to go
back in time. But that Unit eighty two hundred, the
military's elite spy agency, had violated the company's terms of
(36:28):
service by storing the vastrove of surveillance data in its
Azure cloud program, and it continues. According to several sources,
this enormous repository of intercepted calls which amounted to as
much as eight thousand terabytes of data. Eight thousand terabytes,
you guys. It was held at a data center in
the Netherlands, and within days of the Guardian publishing the
(36:49):
investigation when we were talking about it, because I think
we reported it on it like immediately after it came out,
Unit eighty two hundred appears to have moved the surveillance
data out of the country and is actually it appears
that they're now going to use Amazon Web Services in
the cloud platform there to start all of that data.
Speaker 3 (37:10):
And for all of us playing along at home, Unit
eighty two hundred, if you're not aware, is think of
it like Israel's an essay.
Speaker 2 (37:17):
Yes, precisely, precisely, and remember what the NSA did and does.
Remember that whole thing. A couple of whistleblowers might spark
couple things in your mind right here, you know.
Speaker 4 (37:29):
Whistle like a whistleblower. Whistle.
Speaker 3 (37:31):
Yeah. This, from what we understand Microsoft's move is. I
don't know if it's financially motivated or ideologically motivated, but
it seems like there was a lot of pressure from
their investors and from employees. Yeah. Yeah, invest So it
wasn't like a I'm saying, it wasn't like a hard
limit on data storage or something. They didn't say the
(37:53):
deal was too expensive.
Speaker 2 (37:55):
No, No, there were alarm bells going off of for
several investigators and employees and people who were paying attention.
Years ago, there was another investigation, I think twenty twenty
one that was looking at how the State of Israel
was using these Microsoft services and their allegations going around.
There was an internal investigation by Microsoft, and they came
(38:16):
away saying, hey, we haven't seen any evidence in our
investigations that the country, or the Ministry of Defense or
any of these groups are using our services in a
way that would violate those terms of service, right only
now under all this pressure, as you said, from employees, investors,
a lot of ruckists being made about this going on,
(38:38):
because you know, there was a United Nations Commission of
Inquiry and they're saying that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza.
Speaker 3 (38:46):
It's like not, oh wow, another strongly worded letter from
the UN.
Speaker 2 (38:51):
Yes, But when the world, or at least you know,
a key organization in the world says something like that
out loud, it may change the calculus for a giant
corporation like Microsoft.
Speaker 3 (39:06):
Right, the money moves.
Speaker 2 (39:09):
So all of this is happening. It is weird to
think that it's been a three year period where Israel's
intelligence arm has been operating the surveillance program there in Gaza.
Speaker 3 (39:23):
Sure, and that's just the beginning of the mass surveillance
as well. You know, there was an excellent, excellent interview
I saw recently from our pal friend of the show,
Jake Hanrahan talking about UK surveillance state aspects and this
we have to understand that surveillance, invasive, pervasive surveillance is
(39:46):
the world norm. Now, It's going to happen in times
of swords or plowshares. In this case, the ongoing conflict
in Gaza and Israel is like it is going to
historically be a textbook example of how surveillance can be weaponized.
(40:08):
That's just the truth.
Speaker 2 (40:10):
Absolutely. You can go to Al Jazeera. You can find
an interesting article titled why has Microsoft cut Israel off
from some of its services? And if you go through here,
you're going to discover a couple of different apps and
databases that I think we may have mentioned once, maybe twice,
but I don't know how much I'm gonna mention those
(40:30):
in a second. But the rumors, and I would say
theories that have been floating around for a long time,
the concept that human beings living in Gaza have been
essentially it's been the test space for specific technology like Pegasus.
Remember that software of Pegasus? Yes, so the contact, Yes,
we did.
Speaker 3 (40:50):
So.
Speaker 2 (40:50):
The concept is that a new software is developed and
then you've got a group of human beings that you're
going to test that software on that and if it
works well, you're going to use it on journalists, political members,
enemies of the state, activists, anybody.
Speaker 3 (41:05):
And then citizens, yes, anybody. And then what's that multiple
choice format? E all of the above.
Speaker 2 (41:12):
Yes, yeah, yes, well so there's that concept, right. Then
You've also got this thing called red Wolf that you
guys I had never heard of before. I don't think
this is the facial recognition program that is happening in
several places that the State of Israel is using to
keep an eye on Palestinians who go into places like Hebron, Hebron,
(41:34):
I don't know how to say it, East Jerusalem. They
use this to facially identify human beings so that they
can prevent those human beings from taking certain routes right,
certain roads, certain areas. You won't allow that person because
now they're on facial recognition, that person can't get in.
There's a whole other thing called Blue Wolf, which is
an app that pulls from this thing called the wolf
(41:55):
Pack Database, which is a huge database of human beings
Palace Indians, their addresses, their family members, their connections, all associates,
all of that kind of stuff. It just it seems wrong,
It seems very strange, But again it's more complicated than
being right or wrong. It's a threat assessment situation. It's
(42:17):
just taken to an extent that is maybe beyond what
it was meant to be. That's all I've got. I
will end this now, we'll go to commercial, and.
Speaker 4 (42:31):
We were turning with one final strange news segment for
today's episode. Got a bit of a two for for
y all an ai two for that also has a
lot to do with censorship and the way American films
play overseas, specifically in China. Have either of you seen
the Dave Franco Alison bree Body horror film together? I have, yes,
(42:56):
I have not seen it. It's up my Alley Cronenberg.
I really love the substance. People are comparing it to that,
So for anyone listening that hasn't seen it, it's about
a couple that's struggling their marriage. They go for a
bit of a getaway to the country and then end
up running a foul. I suppose of this force that
(43:17):
essentially causes their bodies to fuse together in length these
horrific kind of ways. It might seem like a bit
of a heavy handed metaphor for you know, what happens
in relationships and sort of toxic codependency and all that,
but apparently it's quite good. So I can't speak to that.
What I can speak to is how the film has
been treated in mainland China, and Ben, I think you'll
(43:39):
particularly find this interesting. AI censorship of horror film together
raises new fears for a future of Chinese LGBTQ films.
Say it right up front here, being gay is not
outlawed anymore in this part of the world. However, it
is still very much frowned upon. Maybe Ben, can you
(44:02):
speak a little more to the detail of the cultural
attitude towards queerness in this part of the world. Uh, sure,
not as which may very much differ from the government attitude.
I know it's much much more accepted in terms of
the general population.
Speaker 3 (44:16):
Well, we have to remember, going to the earlier story
we discussed in this segment, the government is never the
people unfortunately, right, So you know, when when elephants make
war the grass, it's the grass that suffers. That proverb
remains true. But to your point, here in East Asia
is typically going to be what the West would consider
(44:39):
culturally conservative in quite a few ways, and in China
in particular, you can see things where a law exists, right,
or a guarantee of a certain level of accommodation or respect,
or just acknowledgment of your existence but culturally it will
be very damaged for you to in practice live in
(45:06):
that place.
Speaker 4 (45:06):
To live that truth. And I appreciate that, Ben, that's
excellent perspective. So I'm just going to read from the
South China Morning Post, which is you say, Ben, did
you say off air that this is a state sponsored media? Oh? Yeah,
well I don't know. This is this article here? I
guess this is an editorial. It would appear to be
not particularly pro state. So that's fascinating. Let's do read
(45:28):
from this and then we'll look at a couple of
other sources as well. We've got several here, so this
is reading, you know, let's take this one with a
grain of salt, but just by Meredith chan here. When
the horror film Together reached Chinese cinemas in mid September,
a scene featuring a same sex wedding did not survive intact.
One of the two men's faces was digitally altered to
turn him into a woman. Although film censorship is nothing
(45:49):
new in China, this incident sugared a fierce backlash and
calls for a boycott, both for the attempts to erase
LGBTQ identity and allegations that artificial intelligence had been used
to make the change. This was done by the distributors
of the film without the permission of the studio behind
the film, Neon Films. Neon is fighting this and have
(46:10):
called for it to be removed, and I believe the
latest news is that the film has been entirely removed
from Chinese market. Though it's been a while since this
movie was in theaters. So I just want to keep
reading from this because it's interesting considering what you said. Ben.
Speaker 3 (46:23):
Oh wait before we dive in real quick, just to
clarify here, because I know I may have ruffled some
feathers accusing SEMP of being state sponsored. They're based in
Hong Kong, but I will call them controlled opposition. Their
website is often blocked by the Great Firewall, but their
parent company is Ali Baba, which is Chinese based in
(46:45):
Super Deep with Uncle gh. So that's why that's the
context that matters. That's why I'm saying state supported, controlled opposition.
Speaker 4 (46:52):
Completely appreciate that, Ben, and you're definitely more in tune
to a lot of these things in me, so I
do appreciate the context. I'm going to keep reading from
this source. Homosexuality was decriminalized and ceased to be classified
as a mental disorder more than two decades ago, but
LGBTQ communities are often stigmatized and have come under increasing
pressure in recent years as the authorities intensify their efforts
(47:13):
to promote traditional family values and social conformity. A Chinese
film industry insider, speaking on condition of anonymity, said he
could confirm that AI had been used to edit the clip,
and he said, such use that sends a dangerous signal
and has profoundly troubling implications. And then it goes on
to talk about like the big picture of this in
(47:34):
the hands of a regime or a state that has
this level of control over media and appears to be
doing things to alter works of art and works of
fiction created by others to suit their ideology, this idea
of making Broke Back Mountain the straight movie, or you know,
(47:56):
like removing themes, entire themes and having you know, larger,
bigger picture erasure, you know, taking place an entire cinematic cannon.
Maybe that's an extreme example, that was one that I saw,
but it's certainly there is. It is kind of a
slippery slope situation where if you use it to remove
one scene. What happens when people start using AI as
it gets better and better, to completely alter the way
(48:18):
films are perceived in certain parts of the world, therefore
shaping them to a certain type of propagandistic ideology.
Speaker 3 (48:26):
That's a great Yeah, that's a great point. We talked
to We kind of te leave this a few years
ago when we predicted that there's a world in which, eventually,
and we're on the cusp of it now, you can
just take an existing film program your own changes, or
ask a thing to do the work for you, and
(48:48):
it'll spit out whatever you want, right. You know, you
won't need to cast actors, even you won't need to
write a story. And I remember our earlier episode about
the control that the Chinese market has just economically in
studios and Nola had I don't know about you, Matt,
but I hadn't heard about this particular instance. It is disappointing,
(49:14):
yet it is unsurprising because of what we've seen earlier
with the tight controls around the portrayal of ghost or
the Statue of Liberty, and how those things had to
get cut out of Ghostbusters, which would be a very
confusing movie because then it's just four guys in sick
jumpsuits running around in a station wagon.
Speaker 4 (49:34):
Totally. And I actually I just want to read this
quote that I was sort of referencing the Brokeback Mountain thing,
which actually came from some chatter on the Chinese equivalent
of the Internet movie database. It is called Dubon, and
so this is actually coming from an independent article on Duban.
The Chinese bool of IMDb viewers said they were alarmed
(49:54):
at the digital alterations. One user had this to say,
the evolution of using AI to directly swap face is
truly terrifying. In the future, we won't even know we're
watching the original film. We can re release Brokeback Mountain,
God's own country, land you and Happy Together and use
AI to remake them into heterosexual romances with just one click.
That's faster and better than taking Chinese medicine. They say,
(50:18):
we're so beautiful here, we have hope obviously dripping in
sarcasm there, and these are you know, from folks within
the country, so interesting stuff. There was a previous example,
I think the most well known was removing some gay
overtones or some gay themes from the biopic on Freddie Mercury.
Speaker 3 (50:37):
Yeah, that's right. I hadn't seen that version. Actually, I
haven't seen that biopic at all, but it must be.
It must be a wild ride to look at them.
Speaker 4 (50:50):
And yeah, it's funny you've been though, because that movie
got a lot of blowback because it already downplayed a
lot of Freddie Mercury's.
Speaker 3 (50:58):
That's what I'm thinking. I'm also wondering about the moment
where if you fly internationally, the film's changed depending on
the airline. So before you get over the date line
into the international waters, do you get a little pop
up notification of the screen that says, now you can
watch the American version.
Speaker 4 (51:17):
I think it must just be the flight path, or
maybe just the airline, because I remember when we were
on the Qatari Airlines flights there was some very interesting
censorship that was going on in some of the films, like.
Speaker 3 (51:30):
Words like the booty juice.
Speaker 4 (51:33):
Yeah, crass words were removed, and then some other like
the F word was fine, but the more crass word
for lady parts was censored.
Speaker 3 (51:43):
Yeah, the P word. You know, this is a I
found the episode that this calls back to in twenty
twenty two. You guys, we did an episode called censorship
in China, and it is continuing. And now to your point, Nol,
the new technology or the democratization economy of scale of
AI technology has just further empowered this not just in China,
(52:08):
but indeed throughout other authoritative regimes around the world. And
with this, I got to ask you, guys, I mean, Matt,
you know a little quiet on this one. What kind
of edits would we do to our favorite movies? None?
Speaker 4 (52:23):
I think it's gross, And we're going to get to
a perspective on that. Yeah, I see. I get where
you're getting that bit, I really do. But where I
kind of draw the line with the AI stuff is
when you really start altering works great works of art,
you know, like I had a problem with the whole
sphere thing with the Wizard of Oz using a doll. Wars, Yeah,
you know, Star Wars are sort of George Lucas doing
(52:44):
his thing, waving his magic wand not really understanding maybe
what made the movies good in the first place. But
to have just any Joe Schmo be able to remake
The Godfather, it just it really upsets me. What you're
a centiphile, you're an editor, Like, is this is this
a tool that has a U? Is it all just
bad news and slop?
Speaker 3 (53:04):
Like?
Speaker 4 (53:04):
What are we? What are you thinking?
Speaker 3 (53:06):
Well? Okay, so also I like films, tootal thing.
Speaker 4 (53:09):
And if you do. Matt'ch just comes from a filmmaking
background and as a video editor, we all like films.
Speaker 2 (53:16):
I don't mean to answer the question I wanted you
to ask, but I'm going to please give it a moment.
I've been looking at box office Mojo as we've been
talking about this, trying to make estimates of how much
of an impact would a film actually have to its
bottom line if it was not in China. So looking
at a couple of case studies, like a Minecraft movie,
(53:37):
which was like the smash hit of this year as
far as movie releases and worldwide grosses. Other than a
couple other specific films that were there's like one that
was we talked about it and I can't remember the
name of it. It's based in Chinese mythology. It was
like a movie made for Chinese audiences and then it
came worldwide to the US at all. No hot neat.
Speaker 3 (54:01):
Oh oh oh yeah yeah yeah yeah.
Speaker 4 (54:03):
Animated. You're talking about the animated film.
Speaker 2 (54:04):
The animated film. Yeah, huge knee Naps.
Speaker 3 (54:08):
I think it's one of the most popular.
Speaker 4 (54:09):
Movies ever in the history of movies in terms of like, yeah.
Speaker 3 (54:12):
In terms of butts and seas, Yes.
Speaker 2 (54:14):
But a Minecraft movie made roughly one billion dollars less
than that, but still came in at nine hundred and
fifty seven point eight million dollars gross worldwide. So if
you look at the numbers, uh, China only represents twenty
nine million of those dollars, twenty nine million out of
nine hundred and fifty seven point eight million, which if
(54:35):
you imagine having to alter a huge movie a title
like that to get in that small percentage, like is
that worth it? Is that okay? And then you have
so then it's somebody at the top somewhere making the
decision at a distributor level. I suppose sure it's going
to be worth that extra twenty nine million to make
(54:56):
this change, not that they made changes in a Minecraft movie,
just using that as an example for proceeds.
Speaker 3 (55:01):
Also going back to I'm looking at my research for
censorship in China episode, the US in particular, being such
an exporter of Western culture, took pains in twenty twelve
to negotiate with Ji Jimping before he became President of
China to expand the Chinese market for US films with
(55:24):
some really serious caveats. So to your point, Matt, people
knew money was on the line. I'm looking for. What
was their initialism is sarfed the Chinese, the Chinese authority
on censorship and what can or can't be allowed in
It's what we're saying, Oh, State Administration or Radio, Film
and Television obviously shout out Sarved. The issue is that
(55:48):
this viewership trend is increasing, especially amid the pandemic when
people were going to fewer and fewer films. And Noel,
I know you go to a lot of films, Matt,
I don't know if you go into the theater or
how often do you guys go into the theater? Is
that okay to ask?
Speaker 4 (56:04):
Of course, I like to I love I love, I
love a movie. I love seeing a movie on the
big screen. I just saw one one battle after another
twice in two different formats, so I definitely do it
when I can for sure.
Speaker 2 (56:16):
The last movie I saw was a Minecraft movie, and
that hence why I looked it up as the example.
Speaker 3 (56:21):
The first one, Yeah, that gave it by Dylan. What
about you do you guys go to go to the
THEATA often?
Speaker 5 (56:29):
I am a bit of a no. Actually I don't.
Twice a year more than going to see like box
office big hits from the year, I'll go see remasters,
you know, like the plaza.
Speaker 3 (56:41):
Shout out the plaza, Shout out the plaza.
Speaker 4 (56:44):
That's where I saw the seventy millimeter of one Battle
and it was really great to be able to see
it projected on film. I will say I found an
image pulled a screenshot from the film in question here
together and they just did a really awful job to it.
Speaker 3 (56:59):
Just lets really whack and like early or something.
Speaker 4 (57:03):
And just a dead eyed expression on the figure on
the character's face, though the one that's been turned female,
especially compared to the original, who's portraying much more emotion.
And the update is that the filmmaker, who's a Melbourne
based filmmaker, has officially pulled the film all together together
all together from Chinese markets, understandably, you know, taking a
(57:25):
financial hit, but making a bit of a stand in
favor of you know, not having this level of meddling.
Filmmaker Michael Shanks, he said to completely change the gender
of a character, completely change something that's a representation of
a queer relationship as well as making the plot make
less sense, is just baffling. And if we're doing hot
(57:48):
takes on this kind of thing, I do just want
to pivot really quickly and end with a pretty incredible
perspective from the daughter of incredible iconic Robin Williams, named
Zelda Williams as we set off Air, named after Princess
Zelda of the Legend of Zelda Games, because Williams was
a huge fan of this franchise, and she apparently reached
(58:12):
out on her social media accounts basically appealing to the
humanity of fans of her father to stop sending me
ai slop videos of my dad. Can we just take
a second really quickly say who would why would anyone
do that? First and foremost as a fan, it just
seems like a troll move, like something you would want
(58:34):
to do to upset somebody. I mean, but we'll get
into what she says about it, But don't you guys
think that's a little odd that people would do that
thinking that it was a nice thing to do.
Speaker 3 (58:43):
It's not a little odd, it's Dunbar's number. They're not
thinking of that person as a person.
Speaker 2 (58:48):
Yeah, yeah, I agree with you, guys. I just had
my first experience watching some of these Sora videos, and
I have to tell you, I am kind of mad
at myself because I got enthralled watching some of them.
Speaker 4 (59:04):
Most beautiful if they're done to make something that never existed,
Like there's artists that I've seen that use them, that
make some wonderful stuff, I'm cool with that. But to
recreate an image of a person who is deceased and
sends it to their living air, I mean yeah, not
to mention all of these garbage. We've got a lot
of big musicians pass recently, and we even saw Rod
(59:25):
Stewart did like a really tasteless AI video at one
of his concerts. Rod Stewart is not dead, He's alive,
and this is his concert of like Ozzy Osbourne and
Kurt Cobain hanging out in heaven.
Speaker 3 (59:36):
Did you guys hear about this?
Speaker 2 (59:39):
It it's unbelievable.
Speaker 5 (59:40):
It was non falcon the comment he made that most
of them died from the drugs and then said, but
look at me, I'm still here.
Speaker 4 (59:47):
So seizing him also just old man screaming at clouds,
who doesn't understand what this AI stuff represents.
Speaker 2 (59:54):
So well, So here's my perspective. The reason why I
liked it, it's because I saw the first one I
saw was inner hating and fun, and it reminded me
of that feeling, that horrible feeling I know from just
scrolling through Instagram reels where I get sucked in. I'm like, oh,
what's that? What's this? And it was when it was
a moment that mister Rogers face popped up on the
(01:00:14):
screen and he said, Hi, I'm mister Rogers, Welcome to Jackass.
And then he went down and did an awesome trick
into some water and then popped out and was like, hey,
it was It was genuinely fun. It was not hurting
anybody that was in the moment. But does that make sense?
It wasn't mean spirited. It was silly and fun and
(01:00:35):
I get.
Speaker 3 (01:00:35):
Scratched you behind the ears of the dopamine. It gives
you the nostalgia in two ways what bo Burnham calls
a little exhale out of your nose. Yes, this is
I mean, there's so much beautiful, fascinating science of psychology
behind why these things work. Your body, well, your brain,
(01:00:57):
your mission is built to love them. It knows exactly
what it's like a key in a lock. Right, we're
building better keys because we've learned more about the human loss.
Speaker 4 (01:01:08):
And Matt, I think you're speaking from the perspective of
almost yourself as a test subject, where you're describing how
this hits you and how it triggers those things, but
you also have qualms about the bigger picture of all
of this.
Speaker 2 (01:01:20):
Just Oh, I absolutely hate it, but I get you
get it a fun tool. Yeah right, I understand that,
and I but it. That understanding I think will make
you fully understand the danger it represents.
Speaker 4 (01:01:35):
Well, let me just read Zelda's perspective here, because it's
really fantastic and spot on and one of the better
rants I've seen in a hot minute. And I'm using
that term as a as a positive because she's pissed off.
Please stop sending the AI videos of Dad she posted
on her Instagram stories. Stop believing I want to see it,
or that I'll understand. I don't and I won't if
(01:01:57):
you're just trying to troll me. I've seen way worse.
I'll restraint and move on, But please if you've got
any decency, just stop doing this to him, and to me,
to everyone, even full stop. It's dumb. It's a waste
of time and energy, and believe me, it's not what
he'd have wanted. She continues to watch the legacies of
real people be condensed down to this vaguely looks and
(01:02:18):
sounds like them. So that's enough, Just so other people
can churn out horrible TikTok slop. Puppeteering them is maddening.
You're not making art. You're making disgusting, overprocessed hot dogs
out of the lives of human beings, out of the
history of art and music, and then shoving them down
someone else's throat, hoping they'll give you a little thumbs
(01:02:39):
up and like it. And for the love of everything,
stop calling it the future. AI is just badly recycling
and regurgitating the past to be reconsumed. You are taking
in the human centipede of content and from the very
very end of the line, all while the folks at
the front laugh and laugh, consume and consume.
Speaker 2 (01:03:01):
Whoamthing take?
Speaker 4 (01:03:03):
I had a hot fire right there, and I'm absolutely
in love with this human being. I marry me. Zelda Williams.
No lie blew me away because it's exactly mean. It's
just nailed it, and you can tell it's coming from
a place of genuine frustration. Zelda is also a filmmaker.
This also comes on the heels of this thing that
we haven't talked about. Have you guys heard about the
(01:03:24):
AI actor Tilly Norwood who's maybe getting signed by a
big talent agency.
Speaker 2 (01:03:29):
I heard rumors. I didn't know it's potentially a thing.
Speaker 4 (01:03:32):
It's this sag after has come out and said that
she's not an actor, that she's a character generated by
a computer. But there are agencies apparently circling this AI creation.
From a Norwegian creator, science person, whatever you want to
call people that design these things, this is a person
named Eileen van der Velden, and she said, to those
(01:03:53):
who have expressed anger over the creation of my AI character,
Tilly Norwood, she's not a replacement for human being, but
a creative work, a piece of art. Like many works
of art before her, she sparks conversation, and that in
itself shows the power of creativity. I say to that,
I thumb my nose at you, madam. I think you've
missed the point of what creativity is a little bit.
Speaker 3 (01:04:13):
That's all I got, guys, And we have so much
more on the way, folks. As we said earlier, we
are going to be in in a bit of a
classics phase for a week or so. We're going to
air some of our favorite stories and most terrifying stories
of years past. As we are on the high seas,
(01:04:33):
we can't wait to hear from you. We hope our
contact still works while we're abroad, so help us test
it out together. Fellow conspiracy realist, thank you, as always
so much for joining us for our weekly strange news program.
You can always send us an email. Be aware the
void writes back. You can always give us a call.
(01:04:54):
You can find us on the lines.
Speaker 4 (01:04:55):
That's right, Find us at the handle Conspiracy Stuff, where
we exist on Facebook with our Facebook group Here's where
it gets crazy, on x FKA, Twitter, and on YouTube,
where you can find video content galore to enjoy. On
Instagram and TikTok, however, we're Conspiracy Stuff the show.
Speaker 2 (01:05:10):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three st d WYTK. It's a voicemail system. When you
call in, you've got three minutes to give yourself a
cool nickname and let us know within the message if
we can use your name and message on the air.
If you'd instead like to send us words, why not
send us an email.
Speaker 3 (01:05:27):
We are the entities who read each piece of correspondence
we receive. Be well aware yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back and it doesn't have to be just words. Images.
We love pet pictures. The shout out to everybody who
went to Mount Rushmore, and shout out to the folks
we will not identify who told us the cool spots
to smoke cannabis at that national monument. I think we've
(01:05:49):
all seen those. Also, shout out to Vashlav leon Eatiev
a story we didn't get to. Former publisher of Pravada
had a quote nervous breakdown and plummet it to death
in Russia. What do we mean? We mean, we're at
the edge of the rabbit hole, folks, So walk further
down there with us into the dark conspiracy. At iHeartRadio dot.
Speaker 2 (01:06:09):
Com, Stuff they Don't want you to know is a
(01:06:30):
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 (00:26):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noah.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
They call me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer Dylan the Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you
are you. You are here, and that makes this the
stuff they don't want you to know. Fellow conspiracy realist,
we welcome you to October thirteenth. If you're hearing this
the day it comes out, we are recording on October eighth.
(00:54):
This catches us mid way or on the very cusp
of exploring the high ices. As we've mentioned in the past.
We're all excited. We spend some time off air kind
of just bonding together over some stuff. I made a
pretentious poetry reference, obviously, And guys, how are we feeling
(01:15):
before we get into the news here?
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Beaten down by the world and it's happenings.
Speaker 4 (01:22):
I feel gently massaged by the world and it's happenings.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
That's you know, well, I mean, you go on the
front page of well, the front page, the homepage of
the Guardian, and you just see the global conflict that's
happening right now, and you see the number, like you
see the numbers of people being killed daily in these conflicts,
and it just that feeling that there's nothing you can
(01:47):
actually do about any of that stuff, that it's that
it's that malaizing. It's still got a hold of me, man.
And then just watching what's happening here on the home front,
just trying so hard to stay positive. Dude, are you
guys doing anything to keep positive?
Speaker 3 (02:01):
Yes, I'm wearing a silly hat.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
That's all. Sometimes that's all it takes. Sometimes you just
got to walk with a little pep in your step,
wear a silly hat, do a downward facing dog in
the street. You know, I don't know, man.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
Well, then you have to come to terms with the
fact that you're just kind of being I don't know. Sorry,
there's not nosi.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
But no, I hear you. Yeah, and no, no, I
hear you. And I'm listening. The issue you're describing is
universal because at this point in time, as we've discussed earlier,
the idea of normalcy is insidious, right, and it is
also ephemeral, and people look around and often feel gas
(02:44):
lit and say, am I the only one who thinks
this is weird? And the truth is, You're not the
only one. This is a universal thing. They're very very
few people on the planet right now who look around
and say, oh, this is going great? Ten ten no.
Speaker 4 (03:00):
Notes, that's true. I envy those people, but also also
not It is a gift to be able to explore
some of the stuff with people who you love and
people who you share perspective with, and that obviously includes
the two of you as far as I'm concerned, and
all of you in the audience.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
And thank you so much for joining us, folks. We
couldn't be more pleased that you are here. We also
always have to thank our super producer Tennessee for putting
up with our shenanigans. And I got to tell you, you know,
is really feeling that malaise, folks a certain demographic that
we predicted in our previous Strange News air traffic controllers.
(03:45):
The US government is currently in a shutdown. My silly
hat is an old relic. It is from a communist
regime I used to mess with. It's actually a naval
hat from them. But the air traffic controllers shortages that
we lightly predicted are coming to pass. Like right now,
flights are being delayed in the US, Flights are being
(04:08):
canceled because the ATC folks legally cannot strike, but because
they are essential workers, they have to function on unpaid labor. So, uh,
if you are ATC, you might be hearing this on
a sick day. That's last resort. Did you guys hear
about that you have to use a sick day as
(04:29):
a protest?
Speaker 4 (04:30):
No, it doesn't. It makes sense though.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
You gotta work six days in a row, you know,
and you you you're not getting paid and you're not
sure if you're going to get paid. And then the
official messaging coming out of the White House is, oh, well,
you guys aren't going to be owed back pay right
the government shuts down?
Speaker 4 (04:46):
Yeah, guys, I'm gonna be completely honest. I didn't know
air traffic controllers or government employees. This is this is
news to me, and I'm just maybe there are others
out there who also didn't know. But I'm just raising
my hand to say that was the case. So thanks
for educating me.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
I mean, now, are we gonna get to Miami?
Speaker 2 (05:02):
Guys, I'm not.
Speaker 3 (05:04):
Kidding part of why I've asked you.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Yeah, as of Wednesday, October eighth, according to flight Aware,
there are no major delays happening at the Atlanta Harsfield
Jackson Airport. However, however, in like Knoxville and right over
in Texas, a lot of places around us and a
lot of the you know, it's just all of the airports.
Speaker 3 (05:22):
There was a airport out west in the United States.
I mean that literally had the tower empty, yes on Monday.
And so these these things do matter. We want to
shout out all our fellow aviation fans and people who
rely on it. We also want to shout out our
friends air traffic controllers, and we want to shout out
(05:48):
you folks. This strange news program is going to hit
a lot of things that were on our minds, both
locally and more importantly abroad, and we want to hear
what you think. So first off, maybe we do it
this way. Have you ever wanted your face on money,
fellow conspiracy realist, like Jay z or like Ben Bucks
(06:12):
or Matt Money or Noel Nichols.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
I was gonna say Ben Bucks was a real thing.
There for a minute.
Speaker 3 (06:17):
It was it's still hey, very active in my parents'
house in several rooms. Their negotiations are ongoing to function
in the kitchen, but we got the living room beautiful.
Speaker 4 (06:32):
You just Ben, and I think none of us probably
fully understand the megalomania of wanting to have your face
appear on legal tender well whilst still living.
Speaker 3 (06:45):
Ah, that's a perfect setup. All right, we're going to
an ad break and we have returned. Our breaking news
right now is coming from a tweet, which we're still
going to call a tweet and not an x what
(07:07):
would they call what does Xelon want us to call it?
Speaker 4 (07:09):
Call him? Ye? At least it's not a truth.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
Oh gosh.
Speaker 4 (07:13):
Yeah, you know what happens when you erase a truth.
It says this truth does not exist anymore.
Speaker 3 (07:19):
Oh oh, that's our old Pentagon line, right, We mentioned
that earlier. We don't lie. The truth changes. All right.
This is from the US Treasurer, Brandon Beach. We're going
to read it to you verbatim. No fake news here.
These first drafts honoring America's two hundred and fiftieth birthday.
(07:40):
Go Team and potus are real looking forward to sharing
more soon once the obstructionist shutdown of the United States
government is over. And then he's retweeting or reexing whatever
a thing from Steve Guests that says, attention, all patriots,
America is back, and so is the one dollar coin.
(08:03):
Potis or he tags potis and tags real. Donald Trump
will forever be the face of America's two hundred and
fiftieth birthday thanks to sex Scott Besant and at Treasurer Beach.
Let's describe this coin. It says in God We Trust
seventeen seventy six to twenty twenty six, and it's got
the classic presidential profile of the current living president and
(08:27):
Mary Alfred.
Speaker 4 (08:28):
Hitchcock's presents ESK I have to point out.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, yeah, that's a good point to make. And it
has Liberty along the top portion of the coin in
the background, and if you turn it over to the obverse,
it has a picture of the current president waving flag
behind him, right hand held up in a fist looking
toward the sky and what I call America face. I
do that. You know, it's just a good pose.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
What's that iconic image from when that dude shot him
in the head or the ear anyway, and he got
caught in that moment with the blood coming out of
his ear and his fist up. That is what that
image is pulled from.
Speaker 3 (09:04):
Yeah, and it has on the bottom arc of it
it says United States of America epluribus utum. We all
know the Latin there h And then in the top
arc it says fight, fight, fight, so, which.
Speaker 4 (09:16):
He said while pumping his fist in that mid right.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
Yeah, so it's it's not a subtle nod. If not,
it may be. And can we just making him seem
like a war hero? Yeah? Yeah, And so this met
with a bit of press, a bit of concern because
this has not happened yet. There are one dollar coins
(09:40):
in the past, right, This is coming from the US Treasury.
It is a pitch that is confirmed by the Treasury,
and they say this is going to be a twenty
twenty six commemorative one dollar coin. Now, I think we
all remember here in the US the one dollar, the
precedent for the one dollar coin, right, like the Sacajawea dollar,
(10:02):
which never worked at vending machines. You would get it
in certain government things like a post office or a
train station.
Speaker 4 (10:10):
Yeah. I do remember vaguely seeing some of those in
circulation back in the day.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
Yeah, those are so fun and exciting. I remember when
you used to go to Marta here in Atlanta and
you put you put cash in to get one of
their tickets, like back in the back in the day,
you get a little paper ticket or a coin.
Speaker 4 (10:30):
Wouldn't there a Susan b Anthony one too?
Speaker 3 (10:33):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (10:33):
Yes?
Speaker 4 (10:33):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Or is that fifeat No, that's Susan Anthony dollar.
Speaker 4 (10:36):
Yeah, it's an another one. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
But the Marta stations would dispense change in dollar coins
and it was one of the coolest things.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
It was one of the coolest things because it was
like non consensually getting memorabilia or collector's items, because where
are you going to use them? You know, you're going
to go to a vending machine and you're going to
try to put it in your a Saka jawea or
your Anthony anyway, and both and we're not Disney those
In both cases, the saka juweya and the Anthony coins,
(11:07):
the people that they're commemorating have long since passed before
those coins were ever struck. And this reminds us of
the I mean, we teased it at the end of
a recent listener mail program. This reminds us of the
conversation we had about Mount Rushmore. We had our trustee
Minnesota officer, longtime conspiracy realist write in and tell us
(11:32):
why no one has made another face a fifth face
on Rushmore since due to the instability of the mountain
at certain points. But also talked a little bit with
the guy about currency, and it turns out this idea
of making a coin is very controversial for a living president,
(11:56):
former or current, regardless of political party, be on the currency.
We've got to tell you a little bit of a story.
This is how, this is why it is technically illegal, Dylan,
Can we get a little bit of like an innocuous
history channel music, you know, yeah, like the kids are
(12:19):
learning the substitute teachers there perfect, Here we go. Once
upon a time there was a fellow named Spencer Morton.
Clark was born in Vermont. As a businessman, he eventually
rose to the heights of political power, bureaucratic political power
(12:40):
here in these United States. He was the Superintendent of
the National Currency Bureau from eighteen sixty two to eighteen
sixty eight. And the story goes that the United States
was trying to figure out how to, how to money,
(13:02):
how to do money. So they started having a shortage
of coins. Because coins are metal, you can melt them down,
you can do all kinds of stuff with them. And
the US Treasury from eighteen sixty two to eighteen seventy
six had started issuing what they called fractional money paper
bills to combat a growing coin shortage. People were hoarding
(13:26):
money because they were hoarding coins, especially because the Civil
War was beginning, right, so they were very frightened and
rightly so to avoid this crisis of a money shortage
or a specie shortage, the Treasury started introducing paper money
bills that would represent an amount of cents rather than
(13:48):
amount of dollars. So you would have a bill that
is not five dollars, but it's like five cents and
its legal tender. WHOA, that's kind of weird, right, lill weird. Yeah,
we're to us now.
Speaker 4 (14:01):
Said I don't understand the reasoning. They had pennies. Why
would they do this, right, because of a material shortage?
Is that what the deal is?
Speaker 3 (14:08):
Yeah? And people were who the petties. So these bills
were smaller than the dollars of the time, and they
came in a couple denominations three cents, five cents, ten cents,
twenty five cents, fifty cent notes. There's always pr with currency, right,
always a little bit of a spin. So Uncle Sam
(14:29):
was trying to figure out who should be on the
face of these paper bills, you know, because they can't
just say screw you, guys, we're in trouble. Five cents.
This is a coupon for five cents. So they wanted
it to, you know, seem patriotic and call back to
the narrative of the American Dream, and so on the
(14:49):
five cent note. They asked for the note to honor
William Clark of the Lewis and Clark Explorations. Okay, and
they send this to spend Sir Morton Clark his outfit
and allegedly per him there was just a crosswire. The
Treasury only told him the new bill should honor Clark,
(15:13):
and they didn't clarify who. So Spencer said, okay, we'll
put my face on the money.
Speaker 4 (15:20):
A bit of a leap there, Spencer, But why not?
Speaker 3 (15:24):
Says, but why not? It's like, guys, I'm not a
monster or a megalomaniac. I'm honestly confused. And he was
already disliked because of some different scandals he had done.
Congress didn't like him. A House of Reps person had
investigated his department after saying that under his auspice, the
(15:49):
place had become a house for orgies and back and
All's like he was a character. He was accused of
hiring women based on, you know, whether or not he
wanted to with him, and he was. Female employees later
described how Spencer Clark quote plied them with oysters and
ale amazing proper overtures to them. Yeah. So this guy,
(16:12):
this guy, Yeah, he had a rep coming in sore oysters.
Oysters for sure, them with oysters.
Speaker 4 (16:23):
And this sounds so inky to me for something applying
someone with oysters.
Speaker 3 (16:27):
Yeah, it reminds me of that scene in the film
adaptation of Dick Tracy where the bad guys just slurping
oysters as he's talking.
Speaker 4 (16:36):
That's an underrated flick, man, I dig that. I think
we've talked about it off here before.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
Ben.
Speaker 4 (16:40):
It's a very interesting stylized comic book movie that does
not get its flowers.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
Yeah, and the missophonia. If you have missophonia like us,
don't watch the oyster scene. Anyway, Congress was pissed, but
they were not surprised. This guy had a jacket on
them already, and so they went and made a law.
Their law from eighteen sixty six is called the Fayer Amendment.
(17:06):
It means that the United States government, any money it makes,
can only feature people who are dead, because they don't
want another oyster plying oyster plying Shenanigan fan out there
just in the streets on the money.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
Well, and then there was wasn't there even a further
ring of that in eighteen eighty six that sort of
really outlaid. It's pretty interesting. You can check it out
at Cornell Law School website. They've got the whole thing
in kind of annotated form where it says that the
minting of money is limited in series to deceased presidents.
(17:47):
No coin issued under the subsection may bear the image
of a living former or current president, or of any
deceased former president during the two year period following the
date of the death of that president. So it goes
even further than that. Actually your cool down period before.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
Right, Yeah, And so this is why it's it's controversial
to our to our fellow history nerds and to people
who are you know, fans a rule of law and
all that buff and stuff. The issue is that the
or the argument I should say, is that there was
(18:23):
already move in twenty twenty passed by Congress that says
the Treasury Secretary has given authority to issue one dollar
commemorative coins during the twenty twenty sixth calendar year because
this will be emblematic of the United States semi quinn centennial.
Speaker 4 (18:40):
That's two fifty right, Yeah, it's just.
Speaker 3 (18:43):
It's a weird word, but it works.
Speaker 4 (18:44):
I guess it's a two hundred and fiftieth anniversary.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
Is that?
Speaker 4 (18:46):
Is that not correct?
Speaker 3 (18:47):
Yeah? Yeah, you're absolutely correct. And so technically this is illegal,
but it goes back to the issue of the federal
law and who prints what. So federal law, the one
we're talking about from eighteen sixty six, prohibits the US
Treasury from issuing currency with you know, living former current presidents.
(19:08):
Commemorative coins are produced by the US Mint. Currency is
produced by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. So there's
a there's a bureaucratic loophole.
Speaker 4 (19:20):
So commemorative coins that I don't really see them advertised
as much anymore. But I also don't watch like cable
regular TV. Remember when they used to be those infomercial
type things, and they'd come in a nice little case
with enla you know, where you set the coins in
your little display, put it on your mantle. Were those
legal tender? Could you spend a commemorative coin or weren't
they just more like collector's items.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
It depends. Yeah, some of them could be spent, I believe,
But I mean any of them could be spent if
the cashier was foolish enough.
Speaker 4 (19:47):
Well, can we also just add that this is another
one of the examples of like, it's more governed by
decorum even than it is absolutely and this is just
a dude just being like, put me on the money.
I want to be on both sides, which is another
aspect of decorum. There are no coins where the same
dude is on both sides. It's like very self aggrandizing.
Speaker 3 (20:06):
Definitely not living dudes, for sure. We know the US
Men's has put out commemorative quarters. We're taking too long
with this. I'm just fascinated with it. We've got other
stuff to get to. But this is worrying, right.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
It's weird. It is weird, but we don't have to
worry for long. And here's why. Guys in the background
doing a little something over here, if you don't mind
it is a bit of a tangent. Bill Clinton ran
the United States from nineteen ninety three to two thousand
and one. Okay, George W. Bush ran the United States
from two thousand and one to two thousand and nine.
(20:41):
Donald J. Trump ran the country from twenty seventeen to
twenty twenty one, and now again is running it in
twenty twenty five. Do you know what all three of
those guys have in common? They're all seventy nine years
old right now. Oh wow, isn't that weird to think about?
All three of those guys could have been in the
same class in high school. If they all went to
(21:01):
high school together at the same time.
Speaker 4 (21:02):
It is not a public school, but just that school.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
Just something something about three men of the exact same age,
you know, have run the country for that many years.
That separated out too. And the life expectancy, according to
the CDC in the National Center for Health Statistics for
a male in the United States is seventy five point
eight years. So you won't have to wait long until
(21:29):
at least one of these guys there we go could
be eligible for the about any problems.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
I love you for that one. Yes, it's true. Also
because I've been trying to be positive despite looking like
an old Baltic sailor. Right now, there is good news.
We asked about this years ago, and I guess the
US Treasury finally listened to us. They're going to halt
the production of the penny. Thank you.
Speaker 4 (21:54):
I'm cool with that. I know you don't thanks God
to handle let me, yeah, for sure. Can I just
walk back something really really cool. It is rare for
the same person to be depicted on both sides of
a coin, but there are examples, and one that is
sort of almost like an easter egg. One is the
standard penny itself, where you can see old Abe Lincoln
(22:15):
in his seated throne position at the Lincoln Memorial. On
the other side, he's just this skiny, little ghost ghostly
figure in the center. But then there's like the New
Jersey State quarter that shows Washington crossing the Delaware on
the back, as well as Washington's bust on the front.
We have a Lincoln birth bi centennial coin where it
shows Lincoln in the typical profile in the front and
(22:36):
the back sitting on a log with like a hammer.
And then we've got like a Marquis de Lafayette coin
where he's like profile on the one side and a
top horseback on the other.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
So this is unusual. I'm not going to do the
rap met.
Speaker 4 (22:51):
This is unusual but not unheard. But all these dudes
were definitely definitely well dead, well very much dead, unless
we want to make it up as yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
Lincoln famously had a terrible night at the THEATA, but
do support the arts. We went long on this part
because I think we're all very interested in it. We'd
love to hear your thoughts, and as we as before,
I throw us to an ad break Dylan dollars. What
do you think he's beating? My shout out to y
(23:22):
k u k uh Dylan, Yeah, give it, give us
your two cents or ten cents.
Speaker 5 (23:27):
Have you ever the PNY. We there will never be
a Dillon dollar. That's my promise. That's my presidential campaign promise, honestly.
Speaker 4 (23:40):
Through it.
Speaker 3 (23:40):
Well, that's a rude of big guy I could get behind.
All Right, we're gonna pause for a word from our sponsors,
and then we'll be back with more strange news.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
And returned. I wonder if there's anybody listening that doesn't
get that reference, the on weed.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
Reference from Half Baked, the cinematic masterpiece Half Baked. They're
calling it another vibes, Oh.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Yes, exactly, and knowing that it's Sir Jonathan Stewart, John Stewart,
who is playing that character, right, the guy.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
Future president John.
Speaker 4 (24:15):
Stewart, Yeah, the same scene. Half Baked is also very
well known for a lovely, uh made for TV version
of some lines. One is have you ever.
Speaker 3 (24:25):
Sucked toes for weed? Well, shout out to oh gosh,
what is that?
Speaker 4 (24:31):
John Sewart said that as well. I believe that's John
Stewart's character who's talking about.
Speaker 3 (24:34):
Oh no, it's the guy who, oh gosh he played.
He was in the show.
Speaker 4 (24:41):
Toes they're sucking for weed?
Speaker 3 (24:42):
Is all right. I don't want to get lost in it,
but it's it's about like three guys living together and
they're raising the Olsen Twins. Yeah, Bob, Bob Saget was
absolutely a filthy boy.
Speaker 4 (24:57):
If you listen to his stand up, which is pretty
good The Aristocrats, the documentary, Yeah, he wasn't sucking toes
for weed, is what we're saying.
Speaker 3 (25:05):
Half Baked was always well. The point of the bit.
Speaker 4 (25:07):
Though, is that one would never suck toes for weed.
It's too innocuous for that. He was doing the hard stuff.
That's what makes you suck.
Speaker 3 (25:15):
Because before he went to Ridya, Dave Chappelle's character in
Half Baked tried to go to a drug addiction meeting
and people didn't respect him because he said he was
addicted to cannabis. Anyway, did he go railed this?
Speaker 2 (25:29):
Did he go do that thing? He did?
Speaker 3 (25:32):
Yeah, he was a big part of it. He said
he had more free speech in Saudi Arabia than he
did in the United States. I don't want to re
litigate this because talked about it on Daily Zeite guys.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
But yeah, yeah, yeah, well you're not re litigating it here.
Speaker 3 (25:45):
True. But yes, yes, Matt, he did go. Bill Burr
also went, which was a bummer to a lot of people,
And then a lot of other folks stood their ground
and a lot of other folks didn't.
Speaker 4 (25:57):
Friend of the podcast Suko is the one who released
the contract that showed all of the censorship aspects of
what was to be expected of performers at this event.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
So we're saying it's a bad thing that people went
to Saudi Arabia and did comedy.
Speaker 3 (26:14):
I like this setup here. We do need to remember
that we're talking about one distinct country in a region,
and I think this is an excellent setup for a
story that we've all been tracking about. A ginormously inconvenient
gift and aviation gift yes from our buddies a while back.
(26:38):
Over in the Middle Eastern region, there is a relatively
small peninsular country that has made enormous geopolitical impact and
it's currently moving or the aspiration is for it to
become the Switzerland of the Middle East.
Speaker 4 (26:54):
We know those folks.
Speaker 2 (26:57):
Oh, are you talking about Qatar?
Speaker 4 (26:59):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (27:00):
Yes, kind cool?
Speaker 2 (27:01):
Okay, Well thanks for setting it up, Ben, Let's jump
to Qatar, where, guys it's really exciting. The US President
signed an executive order vowing to use all measures, including
US military action, to defend the energy rich nation of Qatar,
although it remains to be seen what that exactly means,
(27:22):
because only one thing has happened. This is coming to
us from AP News. You can look up US President
signs an executive order vowing to defend Qatar in the
wake of Israel's strike. This was posted on October first
of this year, twenty twenty five. A little while ago.
We've been talking about other stuff. This kind of slipped
under the radar. Guys. It's really exciting. It means the
(27:45):
United States has a new solid ally like NATO style
contracted ally in Qatar. I guess that's it. Nothing else
to say about that. It's just exciting. We've got a
new friends are cool.
Speaker 4 (27:59):
I guess I'm gonna twist back a little bit on
the NATO aspect.
Speaker 3 (28:05):
We don't have to get in the weeds of it,
but they don't. You don't know the proof of the
putting until the rubber hits the road. Since I'm just
thrown around idioms in English, but Matt Noel Dylan folks
at home, I cannot, I cannot separate this from that
(28:27):
controversial and super inconvenient airplane sale.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
I was about to say the same thing.
Speaker 3 (28:32):
Yeah, see little quid pro quo clarice sish.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
You know, I'm having a little fun with this because
there is clear stuff going on here between individuals and
not countries, and that is why this is really upsetting
and the reason why I use the NATO reference. There
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is because the contract, the
language within the contract is eerily similar to the NATO contract,
(28:56):
and you can find quotes from the treaty all over
the place. There's an official press release that was put
out by the White House. You can look at CNN's
reporting why the president's pledge to defend Qatar is so extraordinary,
and here's some quotations. Quote in the event of such
an attack, the United States shall take all lawful and
appropriate measures, including diplomatic, economic, and, if necessary, military, to
(29:20):
defend the interests of the United States and the State
of Qatar to restore peace and stability. And that language
closely resembles the security guarantee that the that NATO gives
its member country.
Speaker 4 (29:33):
Isn't Trump like on the regular pissing off NATO and
bad mouthing NATO and kind of anti NATO. Is he
trying to start his own NATO esque arrangement, sorting a
new evil empire. I mean, I'm sorry, I know, maybe
that's maybe that's hyperbolic, but you know what I'm.
Speaker 3 (29:46):
Saying, building bilateral relations and then from there growing connective
tissue to other places in the region. I mean, that's
the textbook stuff, and Cutter has been in unofficial trade
relations with Israel, for instance, since nineteen ninety six, when
Atlanta had a relatively okay Olympics fine other than a
(30:10):
couple of speed bumps along the way. And that's why
I keep going back to the concept of Cutter Cutter's
aspiration to be the Switzerland of the Middle East. This
is where negotiations happen. That's what they're aiming for, and
that's part of the calculus here.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
Absolutely. I think one of the primary differences in CNN
points this out is that when NATO is bringing in
a new member or something like that, it's a big
to do. Everybody has to decide, everybody has to vote
on that, there has to be a consensus.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
Right, and there's a high standard of vetting for NATO membership.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
So it's very difficult to become a new member of
NATO and have that kind of contract right that defensive
people will come to your aid if you need it.
In this case, it was done unilaterally with an executive
order by a sitting president, So it's one guy says, hey,
you get a NATO contract. Essentially with the United States.
(31:07):
If someone attacks you, they attack us right, So that
is just I don't know, it's worrisome. It's a it's
that flexing of power, and it's just these it seems
to be these continual tests to test right, is what
can happen?
Speaker 4 (31:21):
Would it even hold? Like is it right? It doesn't
seem above board at all.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
And Ben a congressional approval, and Ben, as you're stating,
and as everybody like who's reporting on this sees and knows,
and everybody I think at this point is aware because
you've got Jon Stewart's, you've got Jimmy Kimmel's, You've got
people out there commenting on things like the guitar plane. Right,
it's in the zeitgeis. People are aware of this stuff.
(31:47):
And it is very strange that there is personal gift
giving happening with the person, the individual who decided to
put forth this declaration. It just makes you wonder what
else is going on, And it makes you wonder is
it that easy? You know, to gain like that level
of favor with somebody, I don't know, freaks me out.
Speaker 3 (32:11):
You guys, I've got opinions. Maybe we could talk about
them once we get into international waters.
Speaker 4 (32:17):
Okay, just goes to show you how little checks and
balances actually do anything, you know, if there are evenity
that apply to this. Again, it's all about folks just
blatantly flouting tradition, and it shows how much of what
we've done to see and expects, you know, from a
government is based on just that, like good manners and tradition.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
My favorite part of the EO, if you go the
primary statement of it from White House Doc dov is
the very last provision, which says the cost for publication
of this Order shall be borne by the Department of State.
So also, we're not paying for printing this. It's really weird.
(33:05):
Nothing to see here. There is no whistle like a
graveyard whistle. There is no humor like gallows humor. A
lot of stuff is in the mix. Those smoky backrooms
are real.
Speaker 2 (33:15):
Yeah they are. So we talked about the relationship between
one man and an entire country. Let's talk about the
relationship between one corporation and one country. Let's jump to
a story we talked about a little while ago regarding
Microsoft's Asure systems, the giant storage repositories of data that
(33:36):
Microsoft keeps and allows you the user, or you the country,
or you the Defense Force to use if you pay,
if you pay real good, they'll let you use those
and you can gather mass amounts of data and store
them on their servers. Well, a little update from the Guardian,
who we referenced a couple of weeks ago when we
talked about this story here. It is Microsoft Israel's use
(34:01):
of its technology and mass surveillance of Palestinians. You guys
recall this thing that we talked about where Israel's defense
forces and a specific unit within that defense force, Unit
eighty two hundred, was performing. At least according to an
investigation by the Guardian and several other outlets in the
Middle East, they were engaging in mass surveillance of all
(34:23):
of the Palestinians in the West Bank, as well as
every single person existing in and around Gaza. And not
only were they keeping the information about phone calls, they
were keeping the actual audio of phone calls, keeping them
for a certain amount of time to be analyzed by
an AI system, and then using that to do all
(34:45):
sorts of things. Allegedly, according to this investigation, they were
using the contents of those calls to target people for
strikes within Gaza during in this ongoing conflict that they've
got going on, where tens of thousands of human beings
have been killed all.
Speaker 3 (35:00):
Right, right and continue to die, especially with the movement
orders imposed by by the governments. We I think we've
all had eyes on this issue. One of the things
you have to know, regardless of how you feel in
the area. And we've got a lot of Israeli conspiracy
realists in the crowd tonight. Remember that surveillance may start
(35:22):
in one place, but it always ultimately applies to everyone.
Speaker 2 (35:26):
Well, yeah, let's talk about that. Allegedly, the reason why
this Microsoft Azure server system that was kept in the Netherlands,
that's where the actual data center is, was allowed to
be used by Israeli's military was to attempt to find
hostages that were taken on October seventh, right on that attack.
(35:46):
That is why, that's why that relationship with that specific
service was made to collect a ton of information on
people who were suspected of possibly holding hostages or being
a part of the ring, the network that was keeping
those hostages. But then it appears, at least according to
the investigation, that that spread out into basically monitoring everybody
(36:07):
in the West Bank, spread out into everybody in Gaza.
Let's jump to this new report from the Guardian. It
says Microsoft told Israeli officials late last week. Again, this
is on September twenty fifth, so you got to go
back in time. But that Unit eighty two hundred, the
military's elite spy agency, had violated the company's terms of
(36:28):
service by storing the vastrove of surveillance data in its
Azure cloud program, and it continues. According to several sources,
this enormous repository of intercepted calls which amounted to as
much as eight thousand terabytes of data. Eight thousand terabytes,
you guys. It was held at a data center in
the Netherlands, and within days of the Guardian publishing the
(36:49):
investigation when we were talking about it, because I think
we reported it on it like immediately after it came out,
Unit eighty two hundred appears to have moved the surveillance
data out of the country and is actually it appears
that they're now going to use Amazon Web Services in
the cloud platform there to start all of that data.
Speaker 3 (37:10):
And for all of us playing along at home, Unit
eighty two hundred, if you're not aware, is think of
it like Israel's an essay.
Speaker 2 (37:17):
Yes, precisely, precisely, and remember what the NSA did and does.
Remember that whole thing. A couple of whistleblowers might spark
couple things in your mind right here, you know.
Speaker 4 (37:29):
Whistle like a whistleblower. Whistle.
Speaker 3 (37:31):
Yeah. This, from what we understand Microsoft's move is. I
don't know if it's financially motivated or ideologically motivated, but
it seems like there was a lot of pressure from
their investors and from employees. Yeah. Yeah, invest So it
wasn't like a I'm saying, it wasn't like a hard
limit on data storage or something. They didn't say the
(37:53):
deal was too expensive.
Speaker 2 (37:55):
No, No, there were alarm bells going off of for
several investigators and employees and people who were paying attention.
Years ago, there was another investigation, I think twenty twenty
one that was looking at how the State of Israel
was using these Microsoft services and their allegations going around.
There was an internal investigation by Microsoft, and they came
(38:16):
away saying, hey, we haven't seen any evidence in our
investigations that the country, or the Ministry of Defense or
any of these groups are using our services in a
way that would violate those terms of service, right only
now under all this pressure, as you said, from employees, investors,
a lot of ruckists being made about this going on,
(38:38):
because you know, there was a United Nations Commission of
Inquiry and they're saying that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza.
Speaker 3 (38:46):
It's like not, oh wow, another strongly worded letter from
the UN.
Speaker 2 (38:51):
Yes, But when the world, or at least you know,
a key organization in the world says something like that
out loud, it may change the calculus for a giant
corporation like Microsoft.
Speaker 3 (39:06):
Right, the money moves.
Speaker 2 (39:09):
So all of this is happening. It is weird to
think that it's been a three year period where Israel's
intelligence arm has been operating the surveillance program there in Gaza.
Speaker 3 (39:23):
Sure, and that's just the beginning of the mass surveillance
as well. You know, there was an excellent, excellent interview
I saw recently from our pal friend of the show,
Jake Hanrahan talking about UK surveillance state aspects and this
we have to understand that surveillance, invasive, pervasive surveillance is
(39:46):
the world norm. Now, It's going to happen in times
of swords or plowshares. In this case, the ongoing conflict
in Gaza and Israel is like it is going to
historically be a textbook example of how surveillance can be weaponized.
(40:08):
That's just the truth.
Speaker 2 (40:10):
Absolutely. You can go to Al Jazeera. You can find
an interesting article titled why has Microsoft cut Israel off
from some of its services? And if you go through here,
you're going to discover a couple of different apps and
databases that I think we may have mentioned once, maybe twice,
but I don't know how much I'm gonna mention those
(40:30):
in a second. But the rumors, and I would say
theories that have been floating around for a long time,
the concept that human beings living in Gaza have been
essentially it's been the test space for specific technology like Pegasus.
Remember that software of Pegasus? Yes, so the contact, Yes,
we did.
Speaker 3 (40:50):
So.
Speaker 2 (40:50):
The concept is that a new software is developed and
then you've got a group of human beings that you're
going to test that software on that and if it
works well, you're going to use it on journalists, political members,
enemies of the state, activists, anybody.
Speaker 3 (41:05):
And then citizens, yes, anybody. And then what's that multiple
choice format? E all of the above.
Speaker 2 (41:12):
Yes, yeah, yes, well so there's that concept, right. Then
You've also got this thing called red Wolf that you
guys I had never heard of before. I don't think
this is the facial recognition program that is happening in
several places that the State of Israel is using to
keep an eye on Palestinians who go into places like Hebron, Hebron,
(41:34):
I don't know how to say it, East Jerusalem. They
use this to facially identify human beings so that they
can prevent those human beings from taking certain routes right,
certain roads, certain areas. You won't allow that person because
now they're on facial recognition, that person can't get in.
There's a whole other thing called Blue Wolf, which is
an app that pulls from this thing called the wolf
(41:55):
Pack Database, which is a huge database of human beings
Palace Indians, their addresses, their family members, their connections, all associates,
all of that kind of stuff. It just it seems wrong,
It seems very strange, But again it's more complicated than
being right or wrong. It's a threat assessment situation. It's
(42:17):
just taken to an extent that is maybe beyond what
it was meant to be. That's all I've got. I
will end this now, we'll go to commercial, and.
Speaker 4 (42:31):
We were turning with one final strange news segment for
today's episode. Got a bit of a two for for
y all an ai two for that also has a
lot to do with censorship and the way American films
play overseas, specifically in China. Have either of you seen
the Dave Franco Alison bree Body horror film together? I have, yes,
(42:56):
I have not seen it. It's up my Alley Cronenberg.
I really love the substance. People are comparing it to that,
So for anyone listening that hasn't seen it, it's about
a couple that's struggling their marriage. They go for a
bit of a getaway to the country and then end
up running a foul. I suppose of this force that
(43:17):
essentially causes their bodies to fuse together in length these
horrific kind of ways. It might seem like a bit
of a heavy handed metaphor for you know, what happens
in relationships and sort of toxic codependency and all that,
but apparently it's quite good. So I can't speak to that.
What I can speak to is how the film has
been treated in mainland China, and Ben, I think you'll
(43:39):
particularly find this interesting. AI censorship of horror film together
raises new fears for a future of Chinese LGBTQ films.
Say it right up front here, being gay is not
outlawed anymore in this part of the world. However, it
is still very much frowned upon. Maybe Ben, can you
(44:02):
speak a little more to the detail of the cultural
attitude towards queerness in this part of the world. Uh, sure,
not as which may very much differ from the government attitude.
I know it's much much more accepted in terms of
the general population.
Speaker 3 (44:16):
Well, we have to remember, going to the earlier story
we discussed in this segment, the government is never the
people unfortunately, right, So you know, when when elephants make
war the grass, it's the grass that suffers. That proverb
remains true. But to your point, here in East Asia
is typically going to be what the West would consider
(44:39):
culturally conservative in quite a few ways, and in China
in particular, you can see things where a law exists, right,
or a guarantee of a certain level of accommodation or respect,
or just acknowledgment of your existence but culturally it will
be very damaged for you to in practice live in
(45:06):
that place.
Speaker 4 (45:06):
To live that truth. And I appreciate that, Ben, that's
excellent perspective. So I'm just going to read from the
South China Morning Post, which is you say, Ben, did
you say off air that this is a state sponsored media? Oh? Yeah,
well I don't know. This is this article here? I
guess this is an editorial. It would appear to be
not particularly pro state. So that's fascinating. Let's do read
(45:28):
from this and then we'll look at a couple of
other sources as well. We've got several here, so this
is reading, you know, let's take this one with a
grain of salt, but just by Meredith chan here. When
the horror film Together reached Chinese cinemas in mid September,
a scene featuring a same sex wedding did not survive intact.
One of the two men's faces was digitally altered to
turn him into a woman. Although film censorship is nothing
(45:49):
new in China, this incident sugared a fierce backlash and
calls for a boycott, both for the attempts to erase
LGBTQ identity and allegations that artificial intelligence had been used
to make the change. This was done by the distributors
of the film without the permission of the studio behind
the film, Neon Films. Neon is fighting this and have
(46:10):
called for it to be removed, and I believe the
latest news is that the film has been entirely removed
from Chinese market. Though it's been a while since this
movie was in theaters. So I just want to keep
reading from this because it's interesting considering what you said. Ben.
Speaker 3 (46:23):
Oh wait before we dive in real quick, just to
clarify here, because I know I may have ruffled some
feathers accusing SEMP of being state sponsored. They're based in
Hong Kong, but I will call them controlled opposition. Their
website is often blocked by the Great Firewall, but their
parent company is Ali Baba, which is Chinese based in
(46:45):
Super Deep with Uncle gh. So that's why that's the
context that matters. That's why I'm saying state supported, controlled opposition.
Speaker 4 (46:52):
Completely appreciate that, Ben, and you're definitely more in tune
to a lot of these things in me, so I
do appreciate the context. I'm going to keep reading from
this source. Homosexuality was decriminalized and ceased to be classified
as a mental disorder more than two decades ago, but
LGBTQ communities are often stigmatized and have come under increasing
pressure in recent years as the authorities intensify their efforts
(47:13):
to promote traditional family values and social conformity. A Chinese
film industry insider, speaking on condition of anonymity, said he
could confirm that AI had been used to edit the clip,
and he said, such use that sends a dangerous signal
and has profoundly troubling implications. And then it goes on
to talk about like the big picture of this in
(47:34):
the hands of a regime or a state that has
this level of control over media and appears to be
doing things to alter works of art and works of
fiction created by others to suit their ideology, this idea
of making Broke Back Mountain the straight movie, or you know,
(47:56):
like removing themes, entire themes and having you know, larger,
bigger picture erasure, you know, taking place an entire cinematic cannon.
Maybe that's an extreme example, that was one that I saw,
but it's certainly there is. It is kind of a
slippery slope situation where if you use it to remove
one scene. What happens when people start using AI as
it gets better and better, to completely alter the way
(48:18):
films are perceived in certain parts of the world, therefore
shaping them to a certain type of propagandistic ideology.
Speaker 3 (48:26):
That's a great Yeah, that's a great point. We talked
to We kind of te leave this a few years
ago when we predicted that there's a world in which, eventually,
and we're on the cusp of it now, you can
just take an existing film program your own changes, or
ask a thing to do the work for you, and
(48:48):
it'll spit out whatever you want, right. You know, you
won't need to cast actors, even you won't need to
write a story. And I remember our earlier episode about
the control that the Chinese market has just economically in
studios and Nola had I don't know about you, Matt,
but I hadn't heard about this particular instance. It is disappointing,
(49:14):
yet it is unsurprising because of what we've seen earlier
with the tight controls around the portrayal of ghost or
the Statue of Liberty, and how those things had to
get cut out of Ghostbusters, which would be a very
confusing movie because then it's just four guys in sick
jumpsuits running around in a station wagon.
Speaker 4 (49:34):
Totally. And I actually I just want to read this
quote that I was sort of referencing the Brokeback Mountain thing,
which actually came from some chatter on the Chinese equivalent
of the Internet movie database. It is called Dubon, and
so this is actually coming from an independent article on Duban.
The Chinese bool of IMDb viewers said they were alarmed
(49:54):
at the digital alterations. One user had this to say,
the evolution of using AI to directly swap face is
truly terrifying. In the future, we won't even know we're
watching the original film. We can re release Brokeback Mountain,
God's own country, land you and Happy Together and use
AI to remake them into heterosexual romances with just one click.
That's faster and better than taking Chinese medicine. They say,
(50:18):
we're so beautiful here, we have hope obviously dripping in
sarcasm there, and these are you know, from folks within
the country, so interesting stuff. There was a previous example,
I think the most well known was removing some gay
overtones or some gay themes from the biopic on Freddie Mercury.
Speaker 3 (50:37):
Yeah, that's right. I hadn't seen that version. Actually, I
haven't seen that biopic at all, but it must be.
It must be a wild ride to look at them.
Speaker 4 (50:50):
And yeah, it's funny you've been though, because that movie
got a lot of blowback because it already downplayed a
lot of Freddie Mercury's.
Speaker 3 (50:58):
That's what I'm thinking. I'm also wondering about the moment
where if you fly internationally, the film's changed depending on
the airline. So before you get over the date line
into the international waters, do you get a little pop
up notification of the screen that says, now you can
watch the American version.
Speaker 4 (51:17):
I think it must just be the flight path, or
maybe just the airline, because I remember when we were
on the Qatari Airlines flights there was some very interesting
censorship that was going on in some of the films, like.
Speaker 3 (51:30):
Words like the booty juice.
Speaker 4 (51:33):
Yeah, crass words were removed, and then some other like
the F word was fine, but the more crass word
for lady parts was censored.
Speaker 3 (51:43):
Yeah, the P word. You know, this is a I
found the episode that this calls back to in twenty
twenty two. You guys, we did an episode called censorship
in China, and it is continuing. And now to your point, Nol,
the new technology or the democratization economy of scale of
AI technology has just further empowered this not just in China,
(52:08):
but indeed throughout other authoritative regimes around the world. And
with this, I got to ask you, guys, I mean, Matt,
you know a little quiet on this one. What kind
of edits would we do to our favorite movies? None?
Speaker 4 (52:23):
I think it's gross, And we're going to get to
a perspective on that. Yeah, I see. I get where
you're getting that bit, I really do. But where I
kind of draw the line with the AI stuff is
when you really start altering works great works of art,
you know, like I had a problem with the whole
sphere thing with the Wizard of Oz using a doll. Wars, Yeah,
you know, Star Wars are sort of George Lucas doing
(52:44):
his thing, waving his magic wand not really understanding maybe
what made the movies good in the first place. But
to have just any Joe Schmo be able to remake
The Godfather, it just it really upsets me. What you're
a centiphile, you're an editor, Like, is this is this
a tool that has a U? Is it all just
bad news and slop?
Speaker 3 (53:04):
Like?
Speaker 4 (53:04):
What are we? What are you thinking?
Speaker 3 (53:06):
Well? Okay, so also I like films, tootal thing.
Speaker 4 (53:09):
And if you do. Matt'ch just comes from a filmmaking
background and as a video editor, we all like films.
Speaker 2 (53:16):
I don't mean to answer the question I wanted you
to ask, but I'm going to please give it a moment.
I've been looking at box office Mojo as we've been
talking about this, trying to make estimates of how much
of an impact would a film actually have to its
bottom line if it was not in China. So looking
at a couple of case studies, like a Minecraft movie,
(53:37):
which was like the smash hit of this year as
far as movie releases and worldwide grosses. Other than a
couple other specific films that were there's like one that
was we talked about it and I can't remember the
name of it. It's based in Chinese mythology. It was
like a movie made for Chinese audiences and then it
came worldwide to the US at all. No hot neat.
Speaker 3 (54:01):
Oh oh oh yeah yeah yeah yeah.
Speaker 4 (54:03):
Animated. You're talking about the animated film.
Speaker 2 (54:04):
The animated film. Yeah, huge knee Naps.
Speaker 3 (54:08):
I think it's one of the most popular.
Speaker 4 (54:09):
Movies ever in the history of movies in terms of like, yeah.
Speaker 3 (54:12):
In terms of butts and seas, Yes.
Speaker 2 (54:14):
But a Minecraft movie made roughly one billion dollars less
than that, but still came in at nine hundred and
fifty seven point eight million dollars gross worldwide. So if
you look at the numbers, uh, China only represents twenty
nine million of those dollars, twenty nine million out of
nine hundred and fifty seven point eight million, which if
(54:35):
you imagine having to alter a huge movie a title
like that to get in that small percentage, like is
that worth it? Is that okay? And then you have
so then it's somebody at the top somewhere making the
decision at a distributor level. I suppose sure it's going
to be worth that extra twenty nine million to make
(54:56):
this change, not that they made changes in a Minecraft movie,
just using that as an example for proceeds.
Speaker 3 (55:01):
Also going back to I'm looking at my research for
censorship in China episode, the US in particular, being such
an exporter of Western culture, took pains in twenty twelve
to negotiate with Ji Jimping before he became President of
China to expand the Chinese market for US films with
(55:24):
some really serious caveats. So to your point, Matt, people
knew money was on the line. I'm looking for. What
was their initialism is sarfed the Chinese, the Chinese authority
on censorship and what can or can't be allowed in
It's what we're saying, Oh, State Administration or Radio, Film
and Television obviously shout out Sarved. The issue is that
(55:48):
this viewership trend is increasing, especially amid the pandemic when
people were going to fewer and fewer films. And Noel,
I know you go to a lot of films, Matt,
I don't know if you go into the theater or
how often do you guys go into the theater? Is
that okay to ask?
Speaker 4 (56:04):
Of course, I like to I love I love, I
love a movie. I love seeing a movie on the
big screen. I just saw one one battle after another
twice in two different formats, so I definitely do it
when I can for sure.
Speaker 2 (56:16):
The last movie I saw was a Minecraft movie, and
that hence why I looked it up as the example.
Speaker 3 (56:21):
The first one, Yeah, that gave it by Dylan. What
about you do you guys go to go to the
THEATA often?
Speaker 5 (56:29):
I am a bit of a no. Actually I don't.
Twice a year more than going to see like box
office big hits from the year, I'll go see remasters,
you know, like the plaza.
Speaker 3 (56:41):
Shout out the plaza, Shout out the plaza.
Speaker 4 (56:44):
That's where I saw the seventy millimeter of one Battle
and it was really great to be able to see
it projected on film. I will say I found an
image pulled a screenshot from the film in question here
together and they just did a really awful job to it.
Speaker 3 (56:59):
Just lets really whack and like early or something.
Speaker 4 (57:03):
And just a dead eyed expression on the figure on
the character's face, though the one that's been turned female,
especially compared to the original, who's portraying much more emotion.
And the update is that the filmmaker, who's a Melbourne
based filmmaker, has officially pulled the film all together together
all together from Chinese markets, understandably, you know, taking a
(57:25):
financial hit, but making a bit of a stand in
favor of you know, not having this level of meddling.
Filmmaker Michael Shanks, he said to completely change the gender
of a character, completely change something that's a representation of
a queer relationship as well as making the plot make
less sense, is just baffling. And if we're doing hot
(57:48):
takes on this kind of thing, I do just want
to pivot really quickly and end with a pretty incredible
perspective from the daughter of incredible iconic Robin Williams, named
Zelda Williams as we set off Air, named after Princess
Zelda of the Legend of Zelda Games, because Williams was
a huge fan of this franchise, and she apparently reached
(58:12):
out on her social media accounts basically appealing to the
humanity of fans of her father to stop sending me
ai slop videos of my dad. Can we just take
a second really quickly say who would why would anyone
do that? First and foremost as a fan, it just
seems like a troll move, like something you would want
(58:34):
to do to upset somebody. I mean, but we'll get
into what she says about it, But don't you guys
think that's a little odd that people would do that
thinking that it was a nice thing to do.
Speaker 3 (58:43):
It's not a little odd, it's Dunbar's number. They're not
thinking of that person as a person.
Speaker 2 (58:48):
Yeah, yeah, I agree with you, guys. I just had
my first experience watching some of these Sora videos, and
I have to tell you, I am kind of mad
at myself because I got enthralled watching some of them.
Speaker 4 (59:04):
Most beautiful if they're done to make something that never existed,
Like there's artists that I've seen that use them, that
make some wonderful stuff, I'm cool with that. But to
recreate an image of a person who is deceased and
sends it to their living air, I mean yeah, not
to mention all of these garbage. We've got a lot
of big musicians pass recently, and we even saw Rod
(59:25):
Stewart did like a really tasteless AI video at one
of his concerts. Rod Stewart is not dead, He's alive,
and this is his concert of like Ozzy Osbourne and
Kurt Cobain hanging out in heaven.
Speaker 3 (59:36):
Did you guys hear about this?
Speaker 2 (59:39):
It it's unbelievable.
Speaker 5 (59:40):
It was non falcon the comment he made that most
of them died from the drugs and then said, but
look at me, I'm still here.
Speaker 4 (59:47):
So seizing him also just old man screaming at clouds,
who doesn't understand what this AI stuff represents.
Speaker 2 (59:54):
So well, So here's my perspective. The reason why I
liked it, it's because I saw the first one I
saw was inner hating and fun, and it reminded me
of that feeling, that horrible feeling I know from just
scrolling through Instagram reels where I get sucked in. I'm like, oh,
what's that? What's this? And it was when it was
a moment that mister Rogers face popped up on the
(01:00:14):
screen and he said, Hi, I'm mister Rogers, Welcome to Jackass.
And then he went down and did an awesome trick
into some water and then popped out and was like, hey,
it was It was genuinely fun. It was not hurting
anybody that was in the moment. But does that make sense?
It wasn't mean spirited. It was silly and fun and
(01:00:35):
I get.
Speaker 3 (01:00:35):
Scratched you behind the ears of the dopamine. It gives
you the nostalgia in two ways what bo Burnham calls
a little exhale out of your nose. Yes, this is
I mean, there's so much beautiful, fascinating science of psychology
behind why these things work. Your body, well, your brain,
(01:00:57):
your mission is built to love them. It knows exactly
what it's like a key in a lock. Right, we're
building better keys because we've learned more about the human loss.
Speaker 4 (01:01:08):
And Matt, I think you're speaking from the perspective of
almost yourself as a test subject, where you're describing how
this hits you and how it triggers those things, but
you also have qualms about the bigger picture of all
of this.
Speaker 2 (01:01:20):
Just Oh, I absolutely hate it, but I get you
get it a fun tool. Yeah right, I understand that,
and I but it. That understanding I think will make
you fully understand the danger it represents.
Speaker 4 (01:01:35):
Well, let me just read Zelda's perspective here, because it's
really fantastic and spot on and one of the better
rants I've seen in a hot minute. And I'm using
that term as a as a positive because she's pissed off.
Please stop sending the AI videos of Dad she posted
on her Instagram stories. Stop believing I want to see it,
or that I'll understand. I don't and I won't if
(01:01:57):
you're just trying to troll me. I've seen way worse.
I'll restraint and move on, But please if you've got
any decency, just stop doing this to him, and to me,
to everyone, even full stop. It's dumb. It's a waste
of time and energy, and believe me, it's not what
he'd have wanted. She continues to watch the legacies of
real people be condensed down to this vaguely looks and
(01:02:18):
sounds like them. So that's enough, Just so other people
can churn out horrible TikTok slop. Puppeteering them is maddening.
You're not making art. You're making disgusting, overprocessed hot dogs
out of the lives of human beings, out of the
history of art and music, and then shoving them down
someone else's throat, hoping they'll give you a little thumbs
(01:02:39):
up and like it. And for the love of everything,
stop calling it the future. AI is just badly recycling
and regurgitating the past to be reconsumed. You are taking
in the human centipede of content and from the very
very end of the line, all while the folks at
the front laugh and laugh, consume and consume.
Speaker 2 (01:03:01):
Whoamthing take?
Speaker 4 (01:03:03):
I had a hot fire right there, and I'm absolutely
in love with this human being. I marry me. Zelda Williams.
No lie blew me away because it's exactly mean. It's
just nailed it, and you can tell it's coming from
a place of genuine frustration. Zelda is also a filmmaker.
This also comes on the heels of this thing that
we haven't talked about. Have you guys heard about the
(01:03:24):
AI actor Tilly Norwood who's maybe getting signed by a
big talent agency.
Speaker 2 (01:03:29):
I heard rumors. I didn't know it's potentially a thing.
Speaker 4 (01:03:32):
It's this sag after has come out and said that
she's not an actor, that she's a character generated by
a computer. But there are agencies apparently circling this AI creation.
From a Norwegian creator, science person, whatever you want to
call people that design these things, this is a person
named Eileen van der Velden, and she said, to those
(01:03:53):
who have expressed anger over the creation of my AI character,
Tilly Norwood, she's not a replacement for human being, but
a creative work, a piece of art. Like many works
of art before her, she sparks conversation, and that in
itself shows the power of creativity. I say to that,
I thumb my nose at you, madam. I think you've
missed the point of what creativity is a little bit.
Speaker 3 (01:04:13):
That's all I got, guys, And we have so much
more on the way, folks. As we said earlier, we
are going to be in in a bit of a
classics phase for a week or so. We're going to
air some of our favorite stories and most terrifying stories
of years past. As we are on the high seas,
(01:04:33):
we can't wait to hear from you. We hope our
contact still works while we're abroad, so help us test
it out together. Fellow conspiracy realist, thank you, as always
so much for joining us for our weekly strange news program.
You can always send us an email. Be aware the
void writes back. You can always give us a call.
(01:04:54):
You can find us on the lines.
Speaker 4 (01:04:55):
That's right, Find us at the handle Conspiracy Stuff, where
we exist on Facebook with our Facebook group Here's where
it gets crazy, on x FKA, Twitter, and on YouTube,
where you can find video content galore to enjoy. On
Instagram and TikTok, however, we're Conspiracy Stuff the show.
Speaker 2 (01:05:10):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three st d WYTK. It's a voicemail system. When you
call in, you've got three minutes to give yourself a
cool nickname and let us know within the message if
we can use your name and message on the air.
If you'd instead like to send us words, why not
send us an email.
Speaker 3 (01:05:27):
We are the entities who read each piece of correspondence
we receive. Be well aware yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back and it doesn't have to be just words. Images.
We love pet pictures. The shout out to everybody who
went to Mount Rushmore, and shout out to the folks
we will not identify who told us the cool spots
to smoke cannabis at that national monument. I think we've
(01:05:49):
all seen those. Also, shout out to Vashlav leon Eatiev
a story we didn't get to. Former publisher of Pravada
had a quote nervous breakdown and plummet it to death
in Russia. What do we mean? We mean, we're at
the edge of the rabbit hole, folks, So walk further
down there with us into the dark conspiracy. At iHeartRadio dot.
Speaker 2 (01:06:09):
Com, Stuff they Don't want you to know is a
(01:06:30):
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
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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