Imagine limitless, virtually free energy from geothermal fusion lasers! This episode explores groundbreaking advancements in geothermal energy, spotlighting a revolutionary laser technology capable of drilling through the Earth's crust to tap into superheated rocks. We discuss the transformative potential of setting up geothermal power plants anywhere, examine the risks like potential volcanic activity, and compare this to other futuristic energy solutions such as wave power and plasma-based fusion energy. Join us for a deep dive into the practicality and environmental impact of these pioneering technologies.
Next, we shift our focus to a fascinating debate: Are grand cathedrals still relevant today? One side argues that these architectural marvels offer sublime beauty and spiritual experiences akin to natural wonders, using the Cathedral of the Light in Oakland as a modern example. The other side questions whether the resources invested in such monumental structures could be better spent on practical community improvements like planting trees or addressing homelessness. We explore both perspectives, weighing the inspirational value against ethical considerations of funding such projects.
To wrap things up, we delve into political reform with a discussion on sortition—randomly selecting representatives as an alternative to traditional elections. Could this method democratize politics and reduce the influence of money? We discuss the potential benefits, like eliminating partisan conflicts and making political roles more accessible, alongside the risks, such as having unqualified candidates. We also consider sortition's application beyond politics, in contexts like companies and cities. Tune in for thought-provoking insights that challenge conventional thinking on energy, architecture, and governance!
Help these new solutions spread by ...
- Subscribing wherever you listen to podcasts
- Leaving a 5-star review
- Sharing your favorite solution with your friends and network (this makes a BIG difference)
Comments? Feedback? Questions? Solutions? Message us! We will do a mailbag episode.
Email: solutionsfromthemultiverse@gmail.com
Adam: @ajbraus - braus@hey.com
Scot: @scotmaupin
adambraus.com (Link to Adam's projects and books)
The Perfect Show (Scot's solo podcast)
The Numey (inflation-free currency)
Thanks to Jonah Burns for the SFM music.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well, hey, hey, hey, funny seeing you here in the
Multiverse TransportationNetwork Transit Hub.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
It's where I hang out .
It's cheaper than Starbucks.
It's the hang Cheaper than anyother hang for the Wi-Fi.
I just come for the Wi-Fi.
Speaker 1 (00:21):
They have very fast Wi-Fi.
Oh yeah, At the hub oh great,that's right I I have a.
I've been reading the news.
I don't think this is a wholesolution episode, but I've been
reading the news about this uh,geothermal fusion laser thing.
Have you heard about this?
(00:42):
Uh?
Geothermal fusion laser so theytook the lasers that they use
to heat up hydrogen doing to dofusion, sure, and they think
this guy at mit was likeshooting it at random shit for
fun he was like hey, I wonderwhat sounds good, sounds good.
And he figured out that it burnsthrough rock faster than a
(01:03):
drill does like faster than likea drilling rig.
Okay, and so they're using itnow to try to drill through the
Earth's crust down to the magma.
Oh, and if you can do that,then you can make geothermal
power plants anywhere in theworld.
Right and geothermal powerplants are just free energy.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
All you have to do is shoot a laser down to the core,
the center of the earth.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
That's it, oh, well, that doesn't seem that bad.
Not the center, it just has togo through, like uh, 10 to 20
kilometers of rock it just hasto breach volcano level.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
So you have to create a hole, you have to down to
where the lava is, which,famously, is what makes
volcanoes happen.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
So you think this might cause volcanoes?
It sounds like you're creatingvolcanoes, right, but it's not
really down to magma.
It's down to what are calledsuperheated rocks.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
What are those?
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Those are between the magma, like the liquid magma
and like the cool crust.
There's like you know, themagma heats up the bottom of the
crust a lot.
Are they solid?
They're solid, but they're like600 degrees Okay, and then you
can just dump water down thehole and then the water boils
(02:21):
immediately Because it's 600degrees Sure, or hotter, 800
degrees 1000 degrees.
And then the steam comes up.
And you catch, the steam runs,a turbine makes electricity it
always just makes steam it'salways steam it's always boil
water and turn a fan.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
That's all this is that's it.
You're using freaking lasers.
You're using lasers Again.
We have nuclear power.
What do we do with it?
We heat up water.
We turn a fan with steam.
We have lasers.
What are we going to do withthese lasers powerful enough to
go to the like to cut through aplanet and we're like cool,
we're going to use it to heat upwater and turn a fan.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
Yeah, it's so okay, I have two.
Do you want two sorts of energythat don't turn a fan with
steam?
I have two yes one is a way togo.
Wave to the bicycle wave power,wave power, so wave power.
The thing bobs up and down, andas it bobs up and down, yeah,
it turns a thing that makeselectricity.
(03:20):
So it's not a steam with a fan,right, it's up and down, right
and as it goes up, it turns oneway it's the same thing.
Speaker 2 (03:30):
It turns the other way.
It's moving the fan with thewith particles okay, I've got
one that is sci-fi there is afusion.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
There's a fusion energy company in the bay here
that has tons of money.
They're called, uh, they'recalled, uh uh, helium, okay I
like it already.
Nothing about steam heliumshoots two fusion reactions at
each other that's what I'mtalking about when the fusion
reactions hit, they compress,creating a ton of fusion, a lot
(04:02):
of fusion.
They were doing a little fusionout there on the edge, then
they could do a lot of fusion ina lot of fusion.
They were doing a little fusionout there on the edge, then
they could do a lot of fusion inthe center, the energy they
release as fusion becomes plasma.
Plasma has a magnetic effect.
They then harness that magneticeffect directly and create
electricity.
No fan, no steam.
Now see, was that so hard?
(04:22):
Was that so freaking hard?
Speaker 2 (04:23):
Yeah, and guess what color the fusion so hard?
Was that so freaking hard?
Yeah, all right.
And guess what color the?
Speaker 1 (04:27):
fusion is.
Guess what color?
The fusion is Bright pink.
Yes, it's bright pink.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Tang, well, better be .
Speaker 1 (04:33):
So it looks like total sci-fi.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
Woo Woo Ectoplasm.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
It's ectoplasmic Dads .
Okay, now I'm happy.
Speaker 2 (04:39):
That's okay.
Speaker 1 (04:49):
Now that, but I'd rather do geothermal, because
all that fusion stuff is verycomplicated.
Where are you getting all thiswater that you're pouring down?
You're probably going to pourdown bottled water, aren't you?
There's plenty of water.
You're going to getindividually bottled waters and
then you're going to throw thosebottles.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
You're not even going to recycle them.
You're probably going to throwthem in a landfill aren't you
Throw them in a landfill?
Speaker 1 (05:08):
yeah, I think there's a terrible plan out of it.
If you have free energyeverywhere, that's good.
That's good.
So you could and actually youknow the guys who are doing this
, don't reactors that apple madefor me expensive energy, that's
oh sorry I didn't realize I hadthe cheap planet laser energy
(05:29):
which is that's the thing.
That's the thing there.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
So they still have to figure out a few engineering
problems, though I learned howlong you think it's going to
take before someone uses thoseand like bolts them onto the
front of a of a car, uh-huh, andthen like just starts driving
around lasering things in halfthat's.
Speaker 1 (05:48):
That would be a danger, wouldn't it?
It's the big, it's one of thebiggest right, I don't well,
maybe, uh, the biggest danger tothis.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
There aren't very many dangers to this okay,
jurassic park, you, you make it,you make a laser that's
powerful enough to cut throughthe earth, and you didn't ask,
you didn't stop to ask whathappens if someone points it at,
not the earth, it, can cutthrough the earth at 60 like
like 10 centimeters an hour okay, how fast does it cut through?
Say like you know a goose, howfast, very quickly, yeah, it'd
(06:20):
be okay, it'd be very hot, it'sa hot laser.
Speaker 1 (06:23):
This is a hot laser, okay, but I don't think it goes
very far, like you have to beright up against the rock to
burn through it oh yeah, lasersare notorious for limited like
length they definitely don'tcontinue so you think that maybe
these guys are creating like adeath heat ray, like literally
what the bad guys have?
Speaker 2 (06:40):
in what does it sound ?
Speaker 1 (06:42):
like lord of the world, of war of the worlds it
sounds like yes I think that'swhat they're creating I'm well,
they've already created.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
I was saying, this already exists.
They saw all they've done is.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
They've taken that technology and they just pointed
at rock, that's it yeah, sothis already all exists.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
Dude the that val kilmer movie real genius.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
I've never seen it making a big way heat ray in
that too.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Yeah, they make a big laser.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
Anyway, never mind.
But yeah, I'm very hopeful.
This is what now has given memore hope than anything else
that we might actually be ableto not completely destroy the
entire Earth with climate change.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
Because this technology sounds very credible.
The other thing about it that'sreally cool is they can dig it
anywhere.
So where do they want to digthe holes?
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Antarctica.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
No, that makes no sense.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Although there's a lot of water there, it's the
coldest place.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
You get the hottest stuff and then you, you mix them
together and mix electricity.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Yeah, man, yeah, a little tropical, a little
Antarctica spot.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
No, they want to take established coal power plants
that are already coal powerplants are they want to take
established coal power plantsthat are already coal power
plants they're already runningcoal and then just drill down
and replace, make the, becausethe fins are already spinning
with steam right, so there'salready the water and
everything's all there.
Spin it up so this they couldjust, instead of burning coal,
they could just start using thesuperheated rocks.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
Right, and if you have these super powerful lasers
, you can take over a coal mine,no problem.
You just go in there, point thelaser, everybody put down, go,
everyone get down, stop mining,right, stop mining.
And everyone come back up and,um, you know, take a break, it's
not a mine, it's a power plant,but I know what you mean yeah,
I got you stop putting coal intothat furnace yes and everybody
(08:22):
start shooting this laser down.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
Oh, we could do it as a heist movie.
We should do it as a heistmovie.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
We should do this solution for real in, yeah, in a
movie, yeah yeah, okay.
Speaker 1 (08:33):
Well, that was just like a side solution okay, I
like your side solution, we cantalk about another one you got
another side solution for me.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
I got, I got side I got so many solutions.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
It's just crazy I just I feel like they're always
big and then I want to do thebig ones, I don't want to do the
small ones maybe I should justdo two other small ones, just do
two more small ones.
What do you think?
Speaker 2 (08:52):
give us a smattering, okay here's a little small one.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
We should build more cathedrals.
We should have never stoppedbuilding cathedrals hmm, okay, a
hard disagree.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
So solutions are.
So the cathedrals are thesolute this.
Okay.
Now what is it a pro?
Hmm, okay.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
Hard disagree.
So the cathedrals are thesolution.
Okay, now what's the problemthat cathedrals solve?
Speaker 2 (09:14):
There's not one, they create them.
They create problems.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
No, I think they solve problems.
So here's what I think.
Here's what I think.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
I think a cathedral, so this is where I got this idea
.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
I was walking in Muir Woods, which is a beautiful
forest.
Oh, they have like a forest,one right, and they call it a
cathedral, a forest cathedral,because when you're there it
feels like you're in a cathedral, but it's all trees, which made
me think.
Wait a second.
(09:44):
If people in one of the mostbeautiful places in the world
say this feels like a cathedral,then that means cathedrals are
some of the most beautifulplaces in the whole world and
(10:04):
you can't make mere forest, likemere woods is thousand years
old.
You can't make it.
But we could build a cathedral.
Cathedrals can actually bebuilt.
So what you're saying is youcan build more places that make
you feel as good as you feel inmere woods.
Let's do that.
That would be more cathedralsso let's build.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
They're saying.
I think you're reverse applyingthis logic.
They're saying that whatthey're experiencing in the
woods is like a, like areligious-ish type experience.
Speaker 1 (10:31):
Yeah, that they're feeling just by the nature of
where they're at because thesoaring trees and then trees,
and the beautiful canopies andthe light filtering in and the
association with where that'swhat cathedrals do, what is a
Well?
Speaker 2 (10:46):
no, that's not what cathedrals do Cathedrals have
soaring walls Okay.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Light the light comes through Beautiful ceilings Okay
.
I think we like cathedralsbecause they resemble grandiose,
sublime places in nature.
No, they're so we should buildmore of them.
They should be everywhere.
We should be able to walk intocathedrals any counterpoint.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
They're enormous monuments to excess and terrible
eyesores and they should be.
Yes, and they should you'resaying, you're not existing as
much.
The ones that are around, fine,go look at them, keep them
maintained.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
We don't need to build more so if you lived by
Notre Dame, Notre Dame in.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
Paris, you would not go in and just enjoy how
beautiful it is.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
Well, they'll refurbish it.
I'm sure I'd go, look at it,you'd go inside and you'd say
this is goddamn beautiful, thisis sublime.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
Well, I'd say like wow, it's an impressive thing.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
So why don't we?
Speaker 2 (11:41):
build more.
Let's build more of them.
Why do we stop?
I also went to BuckinghamPalace and thought that was
impressive, but I don't think weshould build more palaces.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
But palaces don't really give you.
No one says Muir Woods feelslike a palace, they say it feels
like a cathedral.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Yeah, but they're just talking about the idea of
having a quiet religiousexperience that is then
associated with.
Where would that happen?
In a cathedral, but that's notsaying that cathedrals all have
that.
I don't think there's a-.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
Let's build them, then let's build them, build
cathedrals.
Yeah, let's build morecathedrals.
Why don't we just build morenice woods?
Speaker 2 (12:17):
You're taking the wrong lesson.
We should be planting moretrees and building more large
wooded areas.
That's more useful than a bunchof buildings that are based on
old designs from like a thousandyears ago.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
So that's the thing.
They don't have to be old.
We could make new cathedrals,but they have the same effect.
There you go.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
There's a new one in Oakland that's right around Lake
Merritt.
Have you been to that one?
Speaker 1 (12:42):
No, no, do you know about this?
No, I don't think so.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
It's like a giant it's called I think called
Cathedral of the Light orsomething.
It looks completely different.
It's a giant glass structurewith glass and concrete.
Have you seen this place?
Oh, I'm seeing the pictures now.
It's on Lake Merritt.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
It's highly rated.
Yeah, it does look reallybeautiful.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
Oh, the outside doesn't look beautiful, the
inside looks beautiful.
They're both.
The outside looks like a weird.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
It is weird, but it's impressive.
But yeah, it's beautifulbecause it's been built with
tons of money.
That's how you build beautifulstructures.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
Nothing wrong with that.
Where does the money go?
Well, okay let's.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Why don't we, why don't we, why don't we trace
back where's that money comefrom?
Uh oh, we, I mean people gaveit to the church?
I don't know okay, we don't haveto get down this, because I
will definitely get I willdefinitely get into my zone but,
like the money comes frompeople who give it, the people
who give it, the people who giveit based on to me, false
promises and sort of stuff,where it's like you need to do
(13:45):
this to help, and then the moneyis also retained through a
system of we don't have to paytaxes and we sort of skirt, so
we have lots of this cash flow.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
Okay, all granted, all granted, but let's just say
how else?
Who else?
Speaker 2 (13:59):
could you give?
How else would you use?
Speaker 1 (14:00):
tons of money to help people other than building a
giant elaborate structure.
Speaker 2 (14:02):
What giving it to?
In unhoused, unhoused problemsthat, why would?
Speaker 1 (14:07):
I agree.
I agree.
Yeah, we should build housingtoo.
I'm not saying this is not in.
This is not like saying like,oh, the pie is the adam who says
we should help unhoused people.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
I know this is not me .
Speaker 1 (14:20):
This is different than the Adam who says we should
be building a millioncathedrals per square block.
So let me put it this way.
This is interesting to me.
People generally consider theage of cathedrals right, the age
of cathedrals when all overEurope people were building like
tons of cathedrals all over.
Europe people were building liketons of cathedrals.
Like you go to the Cathedral ofSeville, the Mont-Mont-Dame, or
you go, there's cathedrals allover.
(14:41):
People generally consider thattotally crazy.
Like now, in modern times,people are like that's totally
crazy.
Yes, why would you spend like ahuge part of your GDP just
building these enormousstructures that don't do
anything right?
They don't like make money forcorporations or house people or
do anything.
Speaker 2 (15:00):
Why would someone do that?
Because we're humans and we actbased on cause and effect and
motivation.
So why?
Speaker 1 (15:08):
Well, I think, because they were like the most
amazing thing you couldexperience in your life then
Going into one was like amazing,the same way, going to mere
woods, which very few people inthe world can do is go to mere
woods because it's only here innorth, northern california that
is certainly an opinion.
Speaker 2 (15:26):
Yes, so you think it's all about power and like
manipulation of the peopleyou're saying like a thousand
years ago, why do I think thatthe church had a iron grip on
people and people wanted tobuild the cathedrals.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
They wanted to.
They said this is great, let'sbuild the cathedrals, right?
They loved it same thing withthe pyramids.
Did you know that the pyramidswere not built with slave labor?
That's false.
I learned that recently I did.
They were not built with slavelabor connected people who were
built the pyramids were wereworkers who were paid.
Okay, they showed up to workbecause they were paid.
(16:00):
They were paid mostly in beerbut, they showed up, got paid in
beer and you know, hauled therocks around and made the
pyramids because they thought itwas amazing.
Speaker 2 (16:08):
They thought it was great to have pyramids so the
people who built it a thousandyears ago built the cathedrals
were because the people whoworked in the cathedrals said
you should probably do this orelse you might go to hell
forever, and doing this willhelp you, not do that I don't
know about the rich people.
Speaker 1 (16:29):
Maybe you don't think they were saying that.
I think everybody believed it.
I don't think it's like somepeople convinced other people I
think everybody was like weshould build this giant and they
said.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
They said you know well, if you're say you know a
person who does some bad things,there is a way to get around
that you could like give us alot of money and then you'll not
be on the record for havingdone those bad things.
And guess what?
People who were rich also didbad things.
And then they would give lotsof money and then the people who
worked in the cathedrals wouldsay guess what I see, you're not
(17:02):
you're not on the record forthose bad things anymore.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
This is what's called a marxist.
This is marxism.
Right religion is the opiate ofthe masses.
You know it's a class powerinterpretation, but I'm just,
I'm just suggesting maybethere's also an aesthetic.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
You're wondering how could, how could cathedrals have
come about?
To me it is very plain and I gooh, it makes absolute perfect
sense and there's no wondermentinvolved.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
But under that.
Ok, I'm not disagreeing withyou, but I'm saying under that
interpretation.
Let's say that is exactly whathappened.
There was powerful cabal ofpriests and they were able to.
Ok, then I don't think what youwould expect is you would see
cathedrals.
What I think I would expect youwould see would be extremely
ornate, beautiful priest housesand palaces, like palaces for
(17:50):
the priesthood.
That's what you would see.
But cathedrals, they're notpalaces.
They're not comfortable.
They don't have feather beds.
They're they're not palaces.
They're not comfortable.
They don't have feather beds.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
They're just big rock structures they don't have.
Like my friend, you know youmight be confused.
Have you ever been to cold?
Speaker 1 (18:06):
you know cold it is in a cathedral, it's not like a
nice, you know luxurious placeto live.
Have you been to Vatican City?
Okay, vatican, yes, yes, butnot all.
Speaker 2 (18:16):
Have you been to Vatican City?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I've been toVatican City.
Okay, so you might be confusedthen, but I'm so sorry.
Part of being a priest is youtake a vow of poverty, my friend
, so you can't personally own abunch of stuff and have a bunch
of lucrative things, but oh, oh,but if you happen to work
somewhere, that is baller likeI'm talking gold inside it.
Speaker 1 (18:43):
You don't own any of it, but you get to use it all
right.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
But here's the thing I'm poor.
Here's the thing.
Look, I'm a poor priest, buthere's the thing you talk about
the Vatican.
This is just my super powerfulworkplace with all of my ornate
jewels, but guess what?
Speaker 1 (18:52):
Cathedrals, but cathedrals, which I'm not
talking about Vatican City, I'mtalking about cathedrals the
Cathedral of Seville, Notre Dame, et cetera.
Those are not luxurious placesthat priests got to live and
wrap themselves in wonderfulcloth and have big fires in the
hearth and enjoy the big meals.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
No, no, no, that's not what they were used.
Nobody was having a good timewith Gothic architecture, okay.
Speaker 1 (19:18):
Well, just admit, just admit.
Admit, though, there'ssomething there, because if your
explanation was definitely thewhole picture, then you would
only see, like you know, palacesfor the princes or for the
priests.
The priests would have hadthese palaces, the monasteries
would have been golden beautifulmonasteries, but they don't
have that, but they don't havethat.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
They don't have that.
They give fancy churches.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
Okay, new solution.
Speaker 2 (19:41):
Yes, next.
Speaker 1 (19:43):
Hmm, how about?
Okay?
Have you have you heard ofrandomly picking representatives
instead of voting for them,like jury duty?
So like no like for instead ofif you said like if you said
like we're gonna, okay, let'ssay, let's say for the city, we
(20:03):
want City Council members, right.
What do we do now?
We vote for them, so everybodyruns an election and votes for
them, right.
But what if we just picked froma hat?
Speaker 2 (20:17):
But who's in the hat?
Speaker 1 (20:19):
People who wanted to be in the hat, or people who
were nominated to be in the hat.
So you'd nominate, so peoplewould get like maybe you know,
depending on the size of thecity, like San Francisco is like
750,000 people Maybe if you'rein a district, like you're in
district nine, or you docitywide elections for 10 people
, it's 700,000, maybe you needto get 20,000 signatures.
(20:39):
So if you can get 20,000signatures, then you're in the
hat.
Or maybe 10 or 5,000 signaturesyou get 5,000 signatures, then
you're in the hat and then youcan be picked at random to
become city council member.
This is an interesting thing.
It fixes money in politics rightoff the bat.
No money in politics, becauseno one has to run elections.
(21:01):
There are no elections, youjust get your signatures, which
is doable.
You just walk around and getsignatures and then it's just
picked brand random, so no onecan be influenced with money.
Speaker 2 (21:12):
This seems like it has tons of holes in it.
Speaker 1 (21:17):
Okay, yeah, yeah, it seems like it has tons of holes.
It solves money in politics,though, does it?
Though tons of holes in it?
Speaker 2 (21:21):
okay, yeah, yeah it seems like it solves money in
politics.
Though it's a solution, thoughit's true, but it misses it.
You lose the ability to votefor like the person you want to
represent, you don't need tovote.
Well, yeah, if two people arewildly different, you would
probably want to express youropinion that you want one or the
other.
What if, president, would youjust like it to be a random
person for whoever?
Speaker 1 (21:41):
Well, I don't, maybe for president, maybe for
president doesn't work.
That's why I stuck.
I started with city council.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
I know, but I'm I'm starting at the top.
Would president, would you wantit to be that way?
Speaker 1 (21:52):
I think the maybe the way you would apply this to
president is you would say theelectoral Congress is picked at
random, and then they decidewho's president, that would be
cool, but what if they decide so, if you leave?
Speaker 2 (22:05):
and what if they decide differently than the
people one?
Speaker 1 (22:07):
the people wouldn't vote.
We wouldn't even ask the people.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
I mean, if you were applying this, eliminating
voting well, we're eliminatingmoney in politics it sounds like
you're eliminating the votingand you're making it,
concentrating it to like a smallnumber of people, which to me
who are chosen at random as like, easier to uh, easier to
corrupt.
You know corrupt about when youput, when you concentrate power
(22:33):
into fewer hands, thencorruption becomes easier to do
so what if the, what if theelectoral congress was like?
Speaker 1 (22:39):
I don't know how many people are in the electoral
congress now, but what if it waslike 500 people?
Speaker 2 (22:44):
But what's the benefit of having just random
people selected for a job, likejust pulled out of the hat?
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Because right now, to be president, you have to be
like a multimillionaire.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Right, multi-millionaire and to be even
considered for any kind ofposition of power.
You have to raise tens ofmillions, hundreds of millions
of dollars from wealthy people.
And so wealthy people get theirchance to bribe the people
because we make them runelections, whereas if you said
(23:18):
we're going to pick, let's say,the city council member example,
we're just going to pick, youhave to get 5,000 signatures.
Anybody can get 5,000signatures.
A nurse, a part-time, you know,a preschool teacher could get
5,000 signatures, no problem.
Okay, right, and then theycould.
And then they could throw their, get their hat in the in the
thing and get their name in thehat, and then maybe they're
(23:38):
picked.
And now we have a preschoolteacher is because they wanted
to be in their good, that peoplebelieved in them.
They, they'd be, you know itsounds like chaos, it sounds
like absolute chaos but it mightbe less bribery and fewer like
entrenched interests, but alsoless if everything gets kind of
like the person doesn't the you,presumably you rise and learn
(24:02):
something as you do politics,and it's just.
As you do elections or as youhold office, Because people
often say there's two jobs ofbeing a politician running for
office and actually holding it,so this would eliminate the need
to run elections.
You don't need to run anelection, you just get your
signatures and then you get.
Speaker 2 (24:19):
you're there and now you have a lot of you could just
make it so that you can onlyrun for election, you know, like
five weeks before the election.
You can't do it seven monthsahead.
Speaker 1 (24:28):
Oh, I see so it concentrated, just like japan
does.
You mentioned that before so ifyou concentrated.
You can't run, but even thenyou could.
People would be doing all theplanning and all the horse
trading during the time beforeand then they would all run
elections after.
It would still be the same like, hey, come and talk to me.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
You're the guy, you're the guy we're going to
talk.
It doesn't seem pulling someoneat random and then stopping
with the voting part of it.
I feel like we need to maximizethe voting part, not minimize
it.
It feels like we need moreselection, not less.
But I see what you're saying.
Where a random person would be,it would be less corruptible in
(25:08):
the system.
But like that person is goingto be wildly unprepared for
whatever the job it's it's.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
I don't know.
Maybe they need to get like.
Maybe they need to get like.
Maybe they need to get like 10000 signatures.
It's not gonna change.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
That's pretty hard because then if I'm gonna have,
if I'm a radio show withmillions of people, that's not a
thing that exists anymore.
But if I'm like, if I have abunch of people, you're a
podcast I as a lark, I have usall write in different people's
names and then we've got thatperson now as a one in whatever
chance of getting holding officefor like a serious thing that's
(25:46):
, people would do it as a so itsounds like there's some,
there's some, there's someyou're kind of getting to that
You're kind of well.
Speaker 1 (25:53):
So you're talking about two sides.
So I like this, because you'resaying once, on the one side
they might not be, they mightnot actually be capable of doing
the job, on the other side youmight, people might be able to
sort of monkey with the systemand cause negative, negative
outcomes or like unintendedoutcomes.
So let's just imagine we cansolve the second part, cause
that's you know, you juststructure it so that that can
(26:15):
happen, right, but the firstpart, the first part though, I
think it.
No.
Yeah, I mean, you just makerules about, you know who can
what signatures count, and dah,dah, dah, dah.
I think you could probably getrid of that.
But the other part, I think, isinteresting.
You raised, so they just aren'tqualified.
So what if they?
If you get chosen this way, youthen have to go to a six month
(26:37):
or even a year long schoolingwhere you're paid the whole time
and you have to attend school,get trained for a year how to
hold office, and then you starta year after you were picked.
That's kind of interesting.
Or six months boot camp,six-month boot camp.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Let me just make sure I have this laid out the steps.
So you are drafted by the stateand then sent to a re-education
camp.
This is what you're talkingabout.
And then once you have beenproperly instructed then you are
allowed to come back andexercise power in the way that
you have been taught.
That's right.
Ah I see.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
What's wrong with that part?
Speaker 2 (27:16):
And there are no longer any pesky voters, so I
see what you are talking aboutsounds like pure freedom.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
Well, I don't understand.
Why isn't it?
Speaker 2 (27:27):
Is this episode going to be on July 4th?
Are we doing a July 4th episoderight now?
Speaker 1 (27:30):
So if you, had a six-month training, a boot camp
that taught you what your ethicsrequirements are and how to do
bills and how to vote for thingsand the history of the city.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
But the complaint is going to be that you're being
instructed by the state, you'rebeing re-educated by the state.
Speaker 1 (27:47):
Oh, I guess because the state provides.
But I mean, it's just allpublic information how to pass a
bill, what the history of thecity is Right, what the
different roles are thedifferent ministers.
Speaker 2 (28:01):
That's all referenced at it.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
You could just, you could just look up that stuff
yeah, but you were saying theywouldn't be qualified to hold
office.
Okay give a boot camp, give aboot camp where you run them
through the kind of standardboom, boom, boom, boom boom.
You know processes that they'regonna have to know, and then
you know maybe it's only threeweeks, or 10, 10 weeks, maybe
it's a short boot camp yeah, doyou like a civics lesson?
Speaker 2 (28:20):
it's basically just civics.
Oh yeah, totally.
I've never had public speakingbefore in my life, so six months
should be able to make youdon't?
Speaker 1 (28:27):
what do you?
You don't have to do publicsnow that much.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
Not a leader like a head of state.
Speaker 1 (28:31):
They would never well , maybe they get a little bit of
public speaking training, but Imean, they can just release
press releases hard, it's nothard, but here you know you
might want to explain how to dothat, you know we have our like
the day at school where theyhave the student be the
principal for the day andthey're like this is principal,
(28:53):
so-and-so, but it's not.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
you know, like they're just yeah, they get that
, they won that as part of theirpizza priority, like Right.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
So this is what's called sortition.
Speaker 2 (29:04):
What is?
Speaker 1 (29:05):
What we're describing .
It's a known thing.
It's called sortition.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
Who knows about it?
Speaker 1 (29:10):
It's a Wikipedia article and everything.
Speaker 2 (29:12):
Sortition.
Speaker 1 (29:13):
Yeah, this is when you pick public officials or
jurors using randomrepresentative sampling.
Oh yeah, and it's been used inmultiple times in history at
ancient athens, lombardi andvenice in the 12th and 18th
century, florence in the 14thand 15th century in the
enlightenment, in switzerland,current current day modern
(29:36):
application.
People have used it in a juryselection okay, that's as well
as that's what I said jury.
It sounds like yeah, it's likejury selection.
Uh, it's also been used inmilitary conscription as one
method of awarding us greencards I think this is how mr
beast decides who to get ohdraft drafting money to draft.
(29:59):
Yeah, yeah, random is draftmilitary drafts, random right
university classes andresidences randomly placed
within organizations.
Sortition has been potentiallyhelpful in large organizations
to govern themselvesdemocratically without the use
of elections.
So say, you have like a co-opwith 200 employees and you don't
(30:20):
want to host elections whichmight create sort of divisions,
partisan divisions.
You just say anyone who can getyou know 50, 20 signatures or
30 signatures gets put in a hatand then they all that someone
gets picked here now there's no,there's no.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
You know elections that yeah, absolutely, we're the
blue party.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
We're the red party.
You know, and tear the companyapart absolutely no problems
could arise from this.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
So completely unrelated.
Completely unrelated.
Just imagine that I came over toyour house, right, and so I'm
going to make dinner and I putall the things you have, I list
them on little slips of paperand I put them in a hat and then
I pull out of that hat.
Everything you have in yourkitchen space is edible right.
Like all the all your food.
(31:04):
It's edible right.
So then I just pull out a fewthings and I start making them
together.
So you know, we have somerandom, you know, peanut butter
and, uh, salmon and probablylike walnuts, okay, okay.
And maybe some peas andpineapples mixed together.
(31:24):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, and blueberrysauce on top of mustard.
Speaker 1 (31:27):
So what?
It's representative.
You want a representativedemocracy.
You want there to be completediversity of opinions.
Speaker 2 (31:32):
That sounds like a good meal to you, because I just
randomly got it out of thesorting hat of the available
options.
Speaker 1 (31:38):
I'm just going to ignore that.
So it also has a few othernames lotocracy, lotocracy,
litocracy, as in lotto, likelottery toccarcy.
It also is called a demarchy.
Demarchy, like the rule, likedemo, like democracy.
But dem Arche just means therule.
(31:59):
The rule.
Well, arche means the rule of,so demarchy would be the rule of
the demos, which is likedemocracy.
It's basically an analog todemocracy.
Same thing.
Some people who are thesetheoreticians of this say that
people should not be volunteers.
Anyone who volunteers shouldnot be allowed to do it, because
we don't want people who wantpower to be in positions of
(32:20):
power.
We want people who kind ofdon't want to be it should be
the ones who actually are forcedto do it.
Speaker 2 (32:26):
That is cool when it works out, but it's not cool.
Yeah, you get someone who'scompletely unsuited, like I go,
I don't want to be a firefighter, and you go, then you're the
perfect firefighter.
I go no, then you're theperfect firefighter.
I go no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
I don't want to be afirefighter, I'm the wrong guy,
right?
Speaker 1 (32:43):
Anyways, I like sortition.
I think we should use it.
I don't think we should use itfor everything, but I think we
should use it more.
I think people should be likehuh, how should we govern this
thing?
Speaker 2 (33:05):
And we yeah sortition that's a good fit.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
Let's do it like.
People should be more open tothat, especially maybe in the
case of companies.
That's a good one.
Speaker 2 (33:09):
It's like omakase, but it's for elected office.
Isn't omakase rigidlyprescribed?
Well, it's just letting thechef.
It's letting the chef.
Oh, the chef gets to just dowhatever.
Speaker 1 (33:13):
Yeah, well that's not really what sortition is at all
, but well, the sorting hat isthe chef in my now.
Don't, don't poke my analogies,it would be a random we're
talking about a random numbergenerator.
Is the is in charge now therandom number generator?
Ah, the sorting hat is like awill we don't want that, ai
lords no, not AI, that wouldalso be a will.
We want random numbers,literally randomness, like you
(33:36):
just roll a dice.
You know there's true randomlist algorithms you could use.
You know there isn't provablerandomness.
That's.
I'm a computer scienceprofessor, so I know this.
There's no such thing asprovable randomness.
You can never prove thatsomething's entirely random.
But there is not me, though.
Not me I do so I still likesuper random stuff sometimes you
do so, you, you do so you couldmaybe be Sometimes Adam.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
I'm so random, you are so random, oh my gosh, oh my
gosh.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
You're so random sometimes.
Speaker 2 (34:05):
Adam, you would not believe how random I am
sometimes.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
I am just like I just come out, Tell me the most
random thing you've done.
Speaker 2 (34:12):
I just do something that's so random I couldn't even
think about it right now, Rightnow.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
this is what you're saying is pretty random.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Oh, okay, I don't think so, that's so random.
Speaker 1 (34:23):
Okay, we did three mini episodes, three mini
solutions today.
It's good we did.
Speaker 2 (34:28):
It's good and everyone's good except the
cathedral one.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
Oh yeah, we did fusion laser drilling.
Yes, we did build morecathedrals because they're great
and there should be more ofthem, and it's a great way to
make more jobs for people.
Speaker 2 (34:42):
Oh, it's a great way to make more jobs.
Yeah, great jobs.
Speaker 1 (34:45):
And beautification of cities, also tourism.
People love to visit the city,go to the cathedral.
That's what everyone does inEurope.
They go to the city, visit thecathedral, it's what everyone
does.
So we could do that here andand then we did sortition,
randomly picking representativesto govern groups of people,
whether small or or maybe larger.
Maybe a small city could do it,or a big city could even try a
(35:07):
little sortition.
Maybe school board could bedone by sortition, which might
be nice, might be easier whydon't we do it on like a
battleship, maybe who, maybesomebody?
Speaker 2 (35:15):
battleship sort.
Maybe somebody else gets to bethe, someone else gets to be the
general today, you know who'sthe captain now.
I'm the captain now.
Oh the movie.
Speaker 1 (35:25):
I'm the captain now.
You're good at figuring outtimes when sortition would not
work.
Speaker 2 (35:29):
What.
Speaker 1 (35:30):
There are many times when it would work very well.
I am definitely notintentionally doing that.
Speaker 2 (35:35):
Adam, you are.
Speaker 1 (35:36):
You are.
Speaker 2 (35:39):
I just wanted to do my.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
Captain phillips thanks everybody for coming to
solutions from the multiversethanks everybody.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
You will be presenting the captain more
solutions or solution.
Speaker 1 (35:49):
Maybe we'll go back to just one at a time next week.
Speaker 2 (35:52):
Thanks everybody thank you, see you next time.
Bye, thank you.
Well, hey, hey, hey, funny seeing you here in the
Multiverse TransportationNetwork Transit Hub.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
It's where I hang out .
It's cheaper than Starbucks.
It's the hang Cheaper than anyother hang for the Wi-Fi.
I just come for the Wi-Fi.
Speaker 1 (00:21):
They have very fast Wi-Fi.
Oh yeah, At the hub oh great,that's right I I have a.
I've been reading the news.
I don't think this is a wholesolution episode, but I've been
reading the news about this uh,geothermal fusion laser thing.
Have you heard about this?
(00:42):
Uh?
Geothermal fusion laser so theytook the lasers that they use
to heat up hydrogen doing to dofusion, sure, and they think
this guy at mit was likeshooting it at random shit for
fun he was like hey, I wonderwhat sounds good, sounds good.
And he figured out that it burnsthrough rock faster than a
(01:03):
drill does like faster than likea drilling rig.
Okay, and so they're using itnow to try to drill through the
Earth's crust down to the magma.
Oh, and if you can do that,then you can make geothermal
power plants anywhere in theworld.
Right and geothermal powerplants are just free energy.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
All you have to do is shoot a laser down to the core,
the center of the earth.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
That's it, oh, well, that doesn't seem that bad.
Not the center, it just has togo through, like uh, 10 to 20
kilometers of rock it just hasto breach volcano level.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
So you have to create a hole, you have to down to
where the lava is, which,famously, is what makes
volcanoes happen.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
So you think this might cause volcanoes?
It sounds like you're creatingvolcanoes, right, but it's not
really down to magma.
It's down to what are calledsuperheated rocks.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
What are those?
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Those are between the magma, like the liquid magma
and like the cool crust.
There's like you know, themagma heats up the bottom of the
crust a lot.
Are they solid?
They're solid, but they're like600 degrees Okay, and then you
can just dump water down thehole and then the water boils
(02:21):
immediately Because it's 600degrees Sure, or hotter, 800
degrees 1000 degrees.
And then the steam comes up.
And you catch, the steam runs,a turbine makes electricity it
always just makes steam it'salways steam it's always boil
water and turn a fan.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
That's all this is that's it.
You're using freaking lasers.
You're using lasers Again.
We have nuclear power.
What do we do with it?
We heat up water.
We turn a fan with steam.
We have lasers.
What are we going to do withthese lasers powerful enough to
go to the like to cut through aplanet and we're like cool,
we're going to use it to heat upwater and turn a fan.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
Yeah, it's so okay, I have two.
Do you want two sorts of energythat don't turn a fan with
steam?
I have two yes one is a way togo.
Wave to the bicycle wave power,wave power, so wave power.
The thing bobs up and down, andas it bobs up and down, yeah,
it turns a thing that makeselectricity.
(03:20):
So it's not a steam with a fan,right, it's up and down, right
and as it goes up, it turns oneway it's the same thing.
Speaker 2 (03:30):
It turns the other way.
It's moving the fan with thewith particles okay, I've got
one that is sci-fi there is afusion.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
There's a fusion energy company in the bay here
that has tons of money.
They're called, uh, they'recalled, uh uh, helium, okay I
like it already.
Nothing about steam heliumshoots two fusion reactions at
each other that's what I'mtalking about when the fusion
reactions hit, they compress,creating a ton of fusion, a lot
(04:02):
of fusion.
They were doing a little fusionout there on the edge, then
they could do a lot of fusion ina lot of fusion.
They were doing a little fusionout there on the edge, then
they could do a lot of fusion inthe center, the energy they
release as fusion becomes plasma.
Plasma has a magnetic effect.
They then harness that magneticeffect directly and create
electricity.
No fan, no steam.
Now see, was that so hard?
(04:22):
Was that so freaking hard?
Speaker 2 (04:23):
Yeah, and guess what color the fusion so hard?
Was that so freaking hard?
Yeah, all right.
And guess what color the?
Speaker 1 (04:27):
fusion is.
Guess what color?
The fusion is Bright pink.
Yes, it's bright pink.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Tang, well, better be .
Speaker 1 (04:33):
So it looks like total sci-fi.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
Woo Woo Ectoplasm.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
It's ectoplasmic Dads .
Okay, now I'm happy.
Speaker 2 (04:39):
That's okay.
Speaker 1 (04:49):
Now that, but I'd rather do geothermal, because
all that fusion stuff is verycomplicated.
Where are you getting all thiswater that you're pouring down?
You're probably going to pourdown bottled water, aren't you?
There's plenty of water.
You're going to getindividually bottled waters and
then you're going to throw thosebottles.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
You're not even going to recycle them.
You're probably going to throwthem in a landfill aren't you
Throw them in a landfill?
Speaker 1 (05:08):
yeah, I think there's a terrible plan out of it.
If you have free energyeverywhere, that's good.
That's good.
So you could and actually youknow the guys who are doing this
, don't reactors that apple madefor me expensive energy, that's
oh sorry I didn't realize I hadthe cheap planet laser energy
(05:29):
which is that's the thing.
That's the thing there.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
So they still have to figure out a few engineering
problems, though I learned howlong you think it's going to
take before someone uses thoseand like bolts them onto the
front of a of a car, uh-huh, andthen like just starts driving
around lasering things in halfthat's.
Speaker 1 (05:48):
That would be a danger, wouldn't it?
It's the big, it's one of thebiggest right, I don't well,
maybe, uh, the biggest danger tothis.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
There aren't very many dangers to this okay,
jurassic park, you, you make it,you make a laser that's
powerful enough to cut throughthe earth, and you didn't ask,
you didn't stop to ask whathappens if someone points it at,
not the earth, it, can cutthrough the earth at 60 like
like 10 centimeters an hour okay, how fast does it cut through?
Say like you know a goose, howfast, very quickly, yeah, it'd
(06:20):
be okay, it'd be very hot, it'sa hot laser.
Speaker 1 (06:23):
This is a hot laser, okay, but I don't think it goes
very far, like you have to beright up against the rock to
burn through it oh yeah, lasersare notorious for limited like
length they definitely don'tcontinue so you think that maybe
these guys are creating like adeath heat ray, like literally
what the bad guys have?
Speaker 2 (06:40):
in what does it sound ?
Speaker 1 (06:42):
like lord of the world, of war of the worlds it
sounds like yes I think that'swhat they're creating I'm well,
they've already created.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
I was saying, this already exists.
They saw all they've done is.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
They've taken that technology and they just pointed
at rock, that's it yeah, sothis already all exists.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
Dude the that val kilmer movie real genius.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
I've never seen it making a big way heat ray in
that too.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Yeah, they make a big laser.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
Anyway, never mind.
But yeah, I'm very hopeful.
This is what now has given memore hope than anything else
that we might actually be ableto not completely destroy the
entire Earth with climate change.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
Because this technology sounds very credible.
The other thing about it that'sreally cool is they can dig it
anywhere.
So where do they want to digthe holes?
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Antarctica.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
No, that makes no sense.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Although there's a lot of water there, it's the
coldest place.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
You get the hottest stuff and then you, you mix them
together and mix electricity.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Yeah, man, yeah, a little tropical, a little
Antarctica spot.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
No, they want to take established coal power plants
that are already coal powerplants are they want to take
established coal power plantsthat are already coal power
plants they're already runningcoal and then just drill down
and replace, make the, becausethe fins are already spinning
with steam right, so there'salready the water and
everything's all there.
Spin it up so this they couldjust, instead of burning coal,
they could just start using thesuperheated rocks.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
Right, and if you have these super powerful lasers
, you can take over a coal mine,no problem.
You just go in there, point thelaser, everybody put down, go,
everyone get down, stop mining,right, stop mining.
And everyone come back up and,um, you know, take a break, it's
not a mine, it's a power plant,but I know what you mean yeah,
I got you stop putting coal intothat furnace yes and everybody
(08:22):
start shooting this laser down.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
Oh, we could do it as a heist movie.
We should do it as a heistmovie.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
We should do this solution for real in, yeah, in a
movie, yeah yeah, okay.
Speaker 1 (08:33):
Well, that was just like a side solution okay, I
like your side solution, we cantalk about another one you got
another side solution for me.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
I got, I got side I got so many solutions.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
It's just crazy I just I feel like they're always
big and then I want to do thebig ones, I don't want to do the
small ones maybe I should justdo two other small ones, just do
two more small ones.
What do you think?
Speaker 2 (08:52):
give us a smattering, okay here's a little small one.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
We should build more cathedrals.
We should have never stoppedbuilding cathedrals hmm, okay, a
hard disagree.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
So solutions are.
So the cathedrals are thesolute this.
Okay.
Now what is it a pro?
Hmm, okay.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
Hard disagree.
So the cathedrals are thesolution.
Okay, now what's the problemthat cathedrals solve?
Speaker 2 (09:14):
There's not one, they create them.
They create problems.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
No, I think they solve problems.
So here's what I think.
Here's what I think.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
I think a cathedral, so this is where I got this idea
.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
I was walking in Muir Woods, which is a beautiful
forest.
Oh, they have like a forest,one right, and they call it a
cathedral, a forest cathedral,because when you're there it
feels like you're in a cathedral, but it's all trees, which made
me think.
Wait a second.
(09:44):
If people in one of the mostbeautiful places in the world
say this feels like a cathedral,then that means cathedrals are
some of the most beautifulplaces in the whole world and
(10:04):
you can't make mere forest, likemere woods is thousand years
old.
You can't make it.
But we could build a cathedral.
Cathedrals can actually bebuilt.
So what you're saying is youcan build more places that make
you feel as good as you feel inmere woods.
Let's do that.
That would be more cathedralsso let's build.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
They're saying.
I think you're reverse applyingthis logic.
They're saying that whatthey're experiencing in the
woods is like a, like areligious-ish type experience.
Speaker 1 (10:31):
Yeah, that they're feeling just by the nature of
where they're at because thesoaring trees and then trees,
and the beautiful canopies andthe light filtering in and the
association with where that'swhat cathedrals do, what is a
Well?
Speaker 2 (10:46):
no, that's not what cathedrals do Cathedrals have
soaring walls Okay.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Light the light comes through Beautiful ceilings Okay
.
I think we like cathedralsbecause they resemble grandiose,
sublime places in nature.
No, they're so we should buildmore of them.
They should be everywhere.
We should be able to walk intocathedrals any counterpoint.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
They're enormous monuments to excess and terrible
eyesores and they should be.
Yes, and they should you'resaying, you're not existing as
much.
The ones that are around, fine,go look at them, keep them
maintained.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
We don't need to build more so if you lived by
Notre Dame, Notre Dame in.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
Paris, you would not go in and just enjoy how
beautiful it is.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
Well, they'll refurbish it.
I'm sure I'd go, look at it,you'd go inside and you'd say
this is goddamn beautiful, thisis sublime.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
Well, I'd say like wow, it's an impressive thing.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
So why don't we?
Speaker 2 (11:41):
build more.
Let's build more of them.
Why do we stop?
I also went to BuckinghamPalace and thought that was
impressive, but I don't think weshould build more palaces.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
But palaces don't really give you.
No one says Muir Woods feelslike a palace, they say it feels
like a cathedral.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Yeah, but they're just talking about the idea of
having a quiet religiousexperience that is then
associated with.
Where would that happen?
In a cathedral, but that's notsaying that cathedrals all have
that.
I don't think there's a-.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
Let's build them, then let's build them, build
cathedrals.
Yeah, let's build morecathedrals.
Why don't we just build morenice woods?
Speaker 2 (12:17):
You're taking the wrong lesson.
We should be planting moretrees and building more large
wooded areas.
That's more useful than a bunchof buildings that are based on
old designs from like a thousandyears ago.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
So that's the thing.
They don't have to be old.
We could make new cathedrals,but they have the same effect.
There you go.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
There's a new one in Oakland that's right around Lake
Merritt.
Have you been to that one?
Speaker 1 (12:42):
No, no, do you know about this?
No, I don't think so.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
It's like a giant it's called I think called
Cathedral of the Light orsomething.
It looks completely different.
It's a giant glass structurewith glass and concrete.
Have you seen this place?
Oh, I'm seeing the pictures now.
It's on Lake Merritt.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
It's highly rated.
Yeah, it does look reallybeautiful.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
Oh, the outside doesn't look beautiful, the
inside looks beautiful.
They're both.
The outside looks like a weird.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
It is weird, but it's impressive.
But yeah, it's beautifulbecause it's been built with
tons of money.
That's how you build beautifulstructures.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
Nothing wrong with that.
Where does the money go?
Well, okay let's.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Why don't we, why don't we, why don't we trace
back where's that money comefrom?
Uh oh, we, I mean people gaveit to the church?
I don't know okay, we don't haveto get down this, because I
will definitely get I willdefinitely get into my zone but,
like the money comes frompeople who give it, the people
who give it, the people who giveit based on to me, false
promises and sort of stuff,where it's like you need to do
(13:45):
this to help, and then the moneyis also retained through a
system of we don't have to paytaxes and we sort of skirt, so
we have lots of this cash flow.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
Okay, all granted, all granted, but let's just say
how else?
Who else?
Speaker 2 (13:59):
could you give?
How else would you use?
Speaker 1 (14:00):
tons of money to help people other than building a
giant elaborate structure.
Speaker 2 (14:02):
What giving it to?
In unhoused, unhoused problemsthat, why would?
Speaker 1 (14:07):
I agree.
I agree.
Yeah, we should build housingtoo.
I'm not saying this is not in.
This is not like saying like,oh, the pie is the adam who says
we should help unhoused people.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
I know this is not me .
Speaker 1 (14:20):
This is different than the Adam who says we should
be building a millioncathedrals per square block.
So let me put it this way.
This is interesting to me.
People generally consider theage of cathedrals right, the age
of cathedrals when all overEurope people were building like
tons of cathedrals all over.
Europe people were building liketons of cathedrals.
Like you go to the Cathedral ofSeville, the Mont-Mont-Dame, or
you go, there's cathedrals allover.
(14:41):
People generally consider thattotally crazy.
Like now, in modern times,people are like that's totally
crazy.
Yes, why would you spend like ahuge part of your GDP just
building these enormousstructures that don't do
anything right?
They don't like make money forcorporations or house people or
do anything.
Speaker 2 (15:00):
Why would someone do that?
Because we're humans and we actbased on cause and effect and
motivation.
So why?
Speaker 1 (15:08):
Well, I think, because they were like the most
amazing thing you couldexperience in your life then
Going into one was like amazing,the same way, going to mere
woods, which very few people inthe world can do is go to mere
woods because it's only here innorth, northern california that
is certainly an opinion.
Speaker 2 (15:26):
Yes, so you think it's all about power and like
manipulation of the peopleyou're saying like a thousand
years ago, why do I think thatthe church had a iron grip on
people and people wanted tobuild the cathedrals.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
They wanted to.
They said this is great, let'sbuild the cathedrals, right?
They loved it same thing withthe pyramids.
Did you know that the pyramidswere not built with slave labor?
That's false.
I learned that recently I did.
They were not built with slavelabor connected people who were
built the pyramids were wereworkers who were paid.
Okay, they showed up to workbecause they were paid.
(16:00):
They were paid mostly in beerbut, they showed up, got paid in
beer and you know, hauled therocks around and made the
pyramids because they thought itwas amazing.
Speaker 2 (16:08):
They thought it was great to have pyramids so the
people who built it a thousandyears ago built the cathedrals
were because the people whoworked in the cathedrals said
you should probably do this orelse you might go to hell
forever, and doing this willhelp you, not do that I don't
know about the rich people.
Speaker 1 (16:29):
Maybe you don't think they were saying that.
I think everybody believed it.
I don't think it's like somepeople convinced other people I
think everybody was like weshould build this giant and they
said.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
They said you know well, if you're say you know a
person who does some bad things,there is a way to get around
that you could like give us alot of money and then you'll not
be on the record for havingdone those bad things.
And guess what?
People who were rich also didbad things.
And then they would give lotsof money and then the people who
worked in the cathedrals wouldsay guess what I see, you're not
(17:02):
you're not on the record forthose bad things anymore.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
This is what's called a marxist.
This is marxism.
Right religion is the opiate ofthe masses.
You know it's a class powerinterpretation, but I'm just,
I'm just suggesting maybethere's also an aesthetic.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
You're wondering how could, how could cathedrals have
come about?
To me it is very plain and I gooh, it makes absolute perfect
sense and there's no wondermentinvolved.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
But under that.
Ok, I'm not disagreeing withyou, but I'm saying under that
interpretation.
Let's say that is exactly whathappened.
There was powerful cabal ofpriests and they were able to.
Ok, then I don't think what youwould expect is you would see
cathedrals.
What I think I would expect youwould see would be extremely
ornate, beautiful priest housesand palaces, like palaces for
(17:50):
the priesthood.
That's what you would see.
But cathedrals, they're notpalaces.
They're not comfortable.
They don't have feather beds.
They're they're not palaces.
They're not comfortable.
They don't have feather beds.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
They're just big rock structures they don't have.
Like my friend, you know youmight be confused.
Have you ever been to cold?
Speaker 1 (18:06):
you know cold it is in a cathedral, it's not like a
nice, you know luxurious placeto live.
Have you been to Vatican City?
Okay, vatican, yes, yes, butnot all.
Speaker 2 (18:16):
Have you been to Vatican City?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I've been toVatican City.
Okay, so you might be confusedthen, but I'm so sorry.
Part of being a priest is youtake a vow of poverty, my friend
, so you can't personally own abunch of stuff and have a bunch
of lucrative things, but oh, oh,but if you happen to work
somewhere, that is baller likeI'm talking gold inside it.
Speaker 1 (18:43):
You don't own any of it, but you get to use it all
right.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
But here's the thing I'm poor.
Here's the thing.
Look, I'm a poor priest, buthere's the thing you talk about
the Vatican.
This is just my super powerfulworkplace with all of my ornate
jewels, but guess what?
Speaker 1 (18:52):
Cathedrals, but cathedrals, which I'm not
talking about Vatican City, I'mtalking about cathedrals the
Cathedral of Seville, Notre Dame, et cetera.
Those are not luxurious placesthat priests got to live and
wrap themselves in wonderfulcloth and have big fires in the
hearth and enjoy the big meals.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
No, no, no, that's not what they were used.
Nobody was having a good timewith Gothic architecture, okay.
Speaker 1 (19:18):
Well, just admit, just admit.
Admit, though, there'ssomething there, because if your
explanation was definitely thewhole picture, then you would
only see, like you know, palacesfor the princes or for the
priests.
The priests would have hadthese palaces, the monasteries
would have been golden beautifulmonasteries, but they don't
have that, but they don't havethat.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
They don't have that.
They give fancy churches.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
Okay, new solution.
Speaker 2 (19:41):
Yes, next.
Speaker 1 (19:43):
Hmm, how about?
Okay?
Have you have you heard ofrandomly picking representatives
instead of voting for them,like jury duty?
So like no like for instead ofif you said like if you said
like we're gonna, okay, let'ssay, let's say for the city, we
(20:03):
want City Council members, right.
What do we do now?
We vote for them, so everybodyruns an election and votes for
them, right.
But what if we just picked froma hat?
Speaker 2 (20:17):
But who's in the hat?
Speaker 1 (20:19):
People who wanted to be in the hat, or people who
were nominated to be in the hat.
So you'd nominate, so peoplewould get like maybe you know,
depending on the size of thecity, like San Francisco is like
750,000 people Maybe if you'rein a district, like you're in
district nine, or you docitywide elections for 10 people
, it's 700,000, maybe you needto get 20,000 signatures.
(20:39):
So if you can get 20,000signatures, then you're in the
hat.
Or maybe 10 or 5,000 signaturesyou get 5,000 signatures, then
you're in the hat and then youcan be picked at random to
become city council member.
This is an interesting thing.
It fixes money in politics rightoff the bat.
No money in politics, becauseno one has to run elections.
(21:01):
There are no elections, youjust get your signatures, which
is doable.
You just walk around and getsignatures and then it's just
picked brand random, so no onecan be influenced with money.
Speaker 2 (21:12):
This seems like it has tons of holes in it.
Speaker 1 (21:17):
Okay, yeah, yeah, it seems like it has tons of holes.
It solves money in politics,though, does it?
Though tons of holes in it?
Speaker 2 (21:21):
okay, yeah, yeah it seems like it solves money in
politics.
Though it's a solution, thoughit's true, but it misses it.
You lose the ability to votefor like the person you want to
represent, you don't need tovote.
Well, yeah, if two people arewildly different, you would
probably want to express youropinion that you want one or the
other.
What if, president, would youjust like it to be a random
person for whoever?
Speaker 1 (21:41):
Well, I don't, maybe for president, maybe for
president doesn't work.
That's why I stuck.
I started with city council.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
I know, but I'm I'm starting at the top.
Would president, would you wantit to be that way?
Speaker 1 (21:52):
I think the maybe the way you would apply this to
president is you would say theelectoral Congress is picked at
random, and then they decidewho's president, that would be
cool, but what if they decide so, if you leave?
Speaker 2 (22:05):
and what if they decide differently than the
people one?
Speaker 1 (22:07):
the people wouldn't vote.
We wouldn't even ask the people.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
I mean, if you were applying this, eliminating
voting well, we're eliminatingmoney in politics it sounds like
you're eliminating the votingand you're making it,
concentrating it to like a smallnumber of people, which to me
who are chosen at random as like, easier to uh, easier to
corrupt.
You know corrupt about when youput, when you concentrate power
(22:33):
into fewer hands, thencorruption becomes easier to do
so what if the, what if theelectoral congress was like?
Speaker 1 (22:39):
I don't know how many people are in the electoral
congress now, but what if it waslike 500 people?
Speaker 2 (22:44):
But what's the benefit of having just random
people selected for a job, likejust pulled out of the hat?
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Because right now, to be president, you have to be
like a multimillionaire.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Right, multi-millionaire and to be even
considered for any kind ofposition of power.
You have to raise tens ofmillions, hundreds of millions
of dollars from wealthy people.
And so wealthy people get theirchance to bribe the people
because we make them runelections, whereas if you said
(23:18):
we're going to pick, let's say,the city council member example,
we're just going to pick, youhave to get 5,000 signatures.
Anybody can get 5,000signatures.
A nurse, a part-time, you know,a preschool teacher could get
5,000 signatures, no problem.
Okay, right, and then theycould.
And then they could throw their, get their hat in the in the
thing and get their name in thehat, and then maybe they're
(23:38):
picked.
And now we have a preschoolteacher is because they wanted
to be in their good, that peoplebelieved in them.
They, they'd be, you know itsounds like chaos, it sounds
like absolute chaos but it mightbe less bribery and fewer like
entrenched interests, but alsoless if everything gets kind of
like the person doesn't the you,presumably you rise and learn
(24:02):
something as you do politics,and it's just.
As you do elections or as youhold office, Because people
often say there's two jobs ofbeing a politician running for
office and actually holding it,so this would eliminate the need
to run elections.
You don't need to run anelection, you just get your
signatures and then you get.
Speaker 2 (24:19):
you're there and now you have a lot of you could just
make it so that you can onlyrun for election, you know, like
five weeks before the election.
You can't do it seven monthsahead.
Speaker 1 (24:28):
Oh, I see so it concentrated, just like japan
does.
You mentioned that before so ifyou concentrated.
You can't run, but even thenyou could.
People would be doing all theplanning and all the horse
trading during the time beforeand then they would all run
elections after.
It would still be the same like, hey, come and talk to me.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
You're the guy, you're the guy we're going to
talk.
It doesn't seem pulling someoneat random and then stopping
with the voting part of it.
I feel like we need to maximizethe voting part, not minimize
it.
It feels like we need moreselection, not less.
But I see what you're saying.
Where a random person would be,it would be less corruptible in
(25:08):
the system.
But like that person is goingto be wildly unprepared for
whatever the job it's it's.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
I don't know.
Maybe they need to get like.
Maybe they need to get like.
Maybe they need to get like 10000 signatures.
It's not gonna change.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
That's pretty hard because then if I'm gonna have,
if I'm a radio show withmillions of people, that's not a
thing that exists anymore.
But if I'm like, if I have abunch of people, you're a
podcast I as a lark, I have usall write in different people's
names and then we've got thatperson now as a one in whatever
chance of getting holding officefor like a serious thing that's
(25:46):
, people would do it as a so itsounds like there's some,
there's some, there's someyou're kind of getting to that
You're kind of well.
Speaker 1 (25:53):
So you're talking about two sides.
So I like this, because you'resaying once, on the one side
they might not be, they mightnot actually be capable of doing
the job, on the other side youmight, people might be able to
sort of monkey with the systemand cause negative, negative
outcomes or like unintendedoutcomes.
So let's just imagine we cansolve the second part, cause
that's you know, you juststructure it so that that can
(26:15):
happen, right, but the firstpart, the first part though, I
think it.
No.
Yeah, I mean, you just makerules about, you know who can
what signatures count, and dah,dah, dah, dah.
I think you could probably getrid of that.
But the other part, I think, isinteresting.
You raised, so they just aren'tqualified.
So what if they?
If you get chosen this way, youthen have to go to a six month
(26:37):
or even a year long schoolingwhere you're paid the whole time
and you have to attend school,get trained for a year how to
hold office, and then you starta year after you were picked.
That's kind of interesting.
Or six months boot camp,six-month boot camp.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Let me just make sure I have this laid out the steps.
So you are drafted by the stateand then sent to a re-education
camp.
This is what you're talkingabout.
And then once you have beenproperly instructed then you are
allowed to come back andexercise power in the way that
you have been taught.
That's right.
Ah I see.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
What's wrong with that part?
Speaker 2 (27:16):
And there are no longer any pesky voters, so I
see what you are talking aboutsounds like pure freedom.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
Well, I don't understand.
Why isn't it?
Speaker 2 (27:27):
Is this episode going to be on July 4th?
Are we doing a July 4th episoderight now?
Speaker 1 (27:30):
So if you, had a six-month training, a boot camp
that taught you what your ethicsrequirements are and how to do
bills and how to vote for thingsand the history of the city.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
But the complaint is going to be that you're being
instructed by the state, you'rebeing re-educated by the state.
Speaker 1 (27:47):
Oh, I guess because the state provides.
But I mean, it's just allpublic information how to pass a
bill, what the history of thecity is Right, what the
different roles are thedifferent ministers.
Speaker 2 (28:01):
That's all referenced at it.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
You could just, you could just look up that stuff
yeah, but you were saying theywouldn't be qualified to hold
office.
Okay give a boot camp, give aboot camp where you run them
through the kind of standardboom, boom, boom, boom boom.
You know processes that they'regonna have to know, and then
you know maybe it's only threeweeks, or 10, 10 weeks, maybe
it's a short boot camp yeah, doyou like a civics lesson?
Speaker 2 (28:20):
it's basically just civics.
Oh yeah, totally.
I've never had public speakingbefore in my life, so six months
should be able to make youdon't?
Speaker 1 (28:27):
what do you?
You don't have to do publicsnow that much.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
Not a leader like a head of state.
Speaker 1 (28:31):
They would never well , maybe they get a little bit of
public speaking training, but Imean, they can just release
press releases hard, it's nothard, but here you know you
might want to explain how to dothat, you know we have our like
the day at school where theyhave the student be the
principal for the day andthey're like this is principal,
(28:53):
so-and-so, but it's not.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
you know, like they're just yeah, they get that
, they won that as part of theirpizza priority, like Right.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
So this is what's called sortition.
Speaker 2 (29:04):
What is?
Speaker 1 (29:05):
What we're describing .
It's a known thing.
It's called sortition.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
Who knows about it?
Speaker 1 (29:10):
It's a Wikipedia article and everything.
Speaker 2 (29:12):
Sortition.
Speaker 1 (29:13):
Yeah, this is when you pick public officials or
jurors using randomrepresentative sampling.
Oh yeah, and it's been used inmultiple times in history at
ancient athens, lombardi andvenice in the 12th and 18th
century, florence in the 14thand 15th century in the
enlightenment, in switzerland,current current day modern
(29:36):
application.
People have used it in a juryselection okay, that's as well
as that's what I said jury.
It sounds like yeah, it's likejury selection.
Uh, it's also been used inmilitary conscription as one
method of awarding us greencards I think this is how mr
beast decides who to get ohdraft drafting money to draft.
(29:59):
Yeah, yeah, random is draftmilitary drafts, random right
university classes andresidences randomly placed
within organizations.
Sortition has been potentiallyhelpful in large organizations
to govern themselvesdemocratically without the use
of elections.
So say, you have like a co-opwith 200 employees and you don't
(30:20):
want to host elections whichmight create sort of divisions,
partisan divisions.
You just say anyone who can getyou know 50, 20 signatures or
30 signatures gets put in a hatand then they all that someone
gets picked here now there's no,there's no.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
You know elections that yeah, absolutely, we're the
blue party.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
We're the red party.
You know, and tear the companyapart absolutely no problems
could arise from this.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
So completely unrelated.
Completely unrelated.
Just imagine that I came over toyour house, right, and so I'm
going to make dinner and I putall the things you have, I list
them on little slips of paperand I put them in a hat and then
I pull out of that hat.
Everything you have in yourkitchen space is edible right.
Like all the all your food.
(31:04):
It's edible right.
So then I just pull out a fewthings and I start making them
together.
So you know, we have somerandom, you know, peanut butter
and, uh, salmon and probablylike walnuts, okay, okay.
And maybe some peas andpineapples mixed together.
(31:24):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, and blueberrysauce on top of mustard.
Speaker 1 (31:27):
So what?
It's representative.
You want a representativedemocracy.
You want there to be completediversity of opinions.
Speaker 2 (31:32):
That sounds like a good meal to you, because I just
randomly got it out of thesorting hat of the available
options.
Speaker 1 (31:38):
I'm just going to ignore that.
So it also has a few othernames lotocracy, lotocracy,
litocracy, as in lotto, likelottery toccarcy.
It also is called a demarchy.
Demarchy, like the rule, likedemo, like democracy.
But dem Arche just means therule.
(31:59):
The rule.
Well, arche means the rule of,so demarchy would be the rule of
the demos, which is likedemocracy.
It's basically an analog todemocracy.
Same thing.
Some people who are thesetheoreticians of this say that
people should not be volunteers.
Anyone who volunteers shouldnot be allowed to do it, because
we don't want people who wantpower to be in positions of
(32:20):
power.
We want people who kind ofdon't want to be it should be
the ones who actually are forcedto do it.
Speaker 2 (32:26):
That is cool when it works out, but it's not cool.
Yeah, you get someone who'scompletely unsuited, like I go,
I don't want to be a firefighter, and you go, then you're the
perfect firefighter.
I go no, then you're theperfect firefighter.
I go no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
I don't want to be afirefighter, I'm the wrong guy,
right?
Speaker 1 (32:43):
Anyways, I like sortition.
I think we should use it.
I don't think we should use itfor everything, but I think we
should use it more.
I think people should be likehuh, how should we govern this
thing?
Speaker 2 (33:05):
And we yeah sortition that's a good fit.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
Let's do it like.
People should be more open tothat, especially maybe in the
case of companies.
That's a good one.
Speaker 2 (33:09):
It's like omakase, but it's for elected office.
Isn't omakase rigidlyprescribed?
Well, it's just letting thechef.
It's letting the chef.
Oh, the chef gets to just dowhatever.
Speaker 1 (33:13):
Yeah, well that's not really what sortition is at all
, but well, the sorting hat isthe chef in my now.
Don't, don't poke my analogies,it would be a random we're
talking about a random numbergenerator.
Is the is in charge now therandom number generator?
Ah, the sorting hat is like awill we don't want that, ai
lords no, not AI, that wouldalso be a will.
We want random numbers,literally randomness, like you
(33:36):
just roll a dice.
You know there's true randomlist algorithms you could use.
You know there isn't provablerandomness.
That's.
I'm a computer scienceprofessor, so I know this.
There's no such thing asprovable randomness.
You can never prove thatsomething's entirely random.
But there is not me, though.
Not me I do so I still likesuper random stuff sometimes you
do so, you, you do so you couldmaybe be Sometimes Adam.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
I'm so random, you are so random, oh my gosh, oh my
gosh.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
You're so random sometimes.
Speaker 2 (34:05):
Adam, you would not believe how random I am
sometimes.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
I am just like I just come out, Tell me the most
random thing you've done.
Speaker 2 (34:12):
I just do something that's so random I couldn't even
think about it right now, Rightnow.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
this is what you're saying is pretty random.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Oh, okay, I don't think so, that's so random.
Speaker 1 (34:23):
Okay, we did three mini episodes, three mini
solutions today.
It's good we did.
Speaker 2 (34:28):
It's good and everyone's good except the
cathedral one.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
Oh yeah, we did fusion laser drilling.
Yes, we did build morecathedrals because they're great
and there should be more ofthem, and it's a great way to
make more jobs for people.
Speaker 2 (34:42):
Oh, it's a great way to make more jobs.
Yeah, great jobs.
Speaker 1 (34:45):
And beautification of cities, also tourism.
People love to visit the city,go to the cathedral.
That's what everyone does inEurope.
They go to the city, visit thecathedral, it's what everyone
does.
So we could do that here andand then we did sortition,
randomly picking representativesto govern groups of people,
whether small or or maybe larger.
Maybe a small city could do it,or a big city could even try a
(35:07):
little sortition.
Maybe school board could bedone by sortition, which might
be nice, might be easier whydon't we do it on like a
battleship, maybe who, maybesomebody?
Speaker 2 (35:15):
battleship sort.
Maybe somebody else gets to bethe, someone else gets to be the
general today, you know who'sthe captain now.
I'm the captain now.
Oh the movie.
Speaker 1 (35:25):
I'm the captain now.
You're good at figuring outtimes when sortition would not
work.
Speaker 2 (35:29):
What.
Speaker 1 (35:30):
There are many times when it would work very well.
I am definitely notintentionally doing that.
Speaker 2 (35:35):
Adam, you are.
Speaker 1 (35:36):
You are.
Speaker 2 (35:39):
I just wanted to do my.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
Captain phillips thanks everybody for coming to
solutions from the multiversethanks everybody.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
You will be presenting the captain more
solutions or solution.
Speaker 1 (35:49):
Maybe we'll go back to just one at a time next week.
Speaker 2 (35:52):
Thanks everybody thank you, see you next time.
Bye, thank you.
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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