Episode 100: Sam's final episode

In this episode of the RM podcast, hosts Matt, Sam, and Shawn engage in a lively discussion sparked by listener questions. They explore the impact of foreign relations on the growth of the church, the role of workplace safety regulations like OSHA, and the implications of government regulation on AI-generated content. The conversation highlights the complexities of these issues and the varying perspectives of the hosts, providing listeners with a thought-provoking experience. In this conversation, the hosts explore the themes of truth in media, the implications of cybersecurity laws, and the health risks associated with alcohol consumption. They discuss the importance of discerning truth in a digital age, the role of government in addressing youth cybercrime, and the evolving understanding of alcohol's health impacts. The conversation culminates in reflections on the Word of Wisdom and the need for public disclosures regarding health risks.

Chapters

00:00 Introduction and Listener Engagement
01:24 Foreign Relations and Church Growth
06:21 Workplace Safety and OSHA
11:09 Government Regulation and AI Disclosure
18:28 The Quest for Truth in Media
21:52 Cybersecurity and the Role of Government
27:35 Alcohol Consumption and Health Risks
38:05 Conclusions and Reflections

Transcript

Matt (00:00.939)
Hello everybody and welcome to the RM podcast with Sean, Sam and Matt. We are all back together again. It's exciting, Sam. It's good to have you back. I have to say you look, you look tan. You look like sculpted, like

Sam  (00:10.902)
It's good to be back.

Shawn (00:15.532)
Thanks.

Sam  (00:17.066)
I always look tan sculpted and whatnot. Come on, it's us. It's the three of us. I play the opposite side of all those things every week.

Matt (00:25.609)
Yeah, but Sam, it looks to you like your, your new year has been good to you. Hey, Sean. Yeah, it's good to have you back. Okay. So there was this listener, actually it's my wife. She wrote it into the mail bag, like three months ago. She's like, I have a question that I need the three of you to answer. And, Sam hasn't been with us ever since she wrote this email and she's like, why won't you read my email?

Shawn (00:30.508)
You

Sam  (00:31.064)
Yes, very good.

Shawn (00:34.048)
We have missed you, Sam. We have missed you, Sam, and you look great.

Sam  (00:37.432)
Thank you, thank you.

Sam  (00:52.494)
So you've been holding it.

Matt (00:55.553)
I'm well, I'm waiting for Sam. So now that Sam's back, my wife is going to be happy. We'll finally read her her mailbag question. So this is her question. Do you think that the foreign relationships the United States government has with other countries, economic or otherwise, influence the growth of the church in other countries? If economic or military relationships are strong, are missionaries more able to teach and our temples more likely to be built? If relationships become strained, does it hinder growth, the growth of the church?

Sam  (00:58.892)
Yes.

Sam  (01:03.374)
Okay.

Matt (01:24.897)
Do you think that foreign policy decisions bleed over into the church's mission to spread the gospel to all the world? If so, what is our obligation as members of the church?

Sam  (01:34.656)
Such a good question. Wow.

Matt (01:36.701)
Yeah, yeah, yeah, don't butter her up. That's just an adequate question. She knows what I think, so I'll wait to say what I think.

Sam  (01:43.118)
I used to always think and believe that the growth and prosperity of the United States and the success of our military was a direct reflection on, you know, the ability of the church to grow. And so I always kind of felt like, the US was the land of promise. Therefore, it would continue to take over the world. Therefore, missionary efforts would continue.

I'm not so sure about that anymore. There seems to be a Delta between our foreign policy and the church's missionary efforts in particular. I mean, you think about Russia, right? Ukraine, we've got a temple there, although it was built before things went bad. you know, I, I, I love that question. I don't have a full answer. Sean probably does.

Matt (02:25.665)
Yeah, what do you... What do think, Sean?

Shawn (02:29.228)
I'll take the other side. disagree. think that that is the reason why, like I just read an article that in the new Congress, there's like nine LDS people. And I looked at all their profiles and kind of know what I know about them. Good people, like good people. And so the more we can get involved, the more faithful Christians can get involved, the better relations I'm assuming we'll have with foreign powers and the more missionary work can roll forward, right? What did Joseph Smith say?

Sam  (02:41.326)
Mmm.

Shawn (02:59.328)
What did say? was the famous? Matt, you can memorize these things.

Matt (03:02.207)
Yeah, the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly and independent till it is visited every something and swept every something and sounded in every ear. Yeah.

Shawn (03:09.024)
Yes.

Sam  (03:09.454)
Climb, every climb, yes, yes. And then that's where Julia Child sings on a hilltop. The sound of music. Is it Julia Roberts? No, who is it? Who's the lady in The Sound of Music? Ding every da da da da da da. I can't think of it. No, it's not Julia Andrews. Julie Andrews, there you go.

Shawn (03:15.357)
Julia Childs, the cook?

Matt (03:18.675)
No, no, it's...

Shawn (03:23.506)
It's not the large cook, Julia Childs.

Matt (03:28.007)
It's Mary Poppins, right? Julie?

Shawn (03:29.888)
Yeah. Julie Andrews. But I like that you said Julia Childs, the large woman who is the cook person for 70 in the 70s.

Matt (03:33.025)
Julie, Julie Andrews. Well, she she's seeing sometimes while she's making her chicken. I don't know where I actually come down on this one, because when I meet people from other countries who do not have US passports, they're able to go places I'm not able to go. They can go to Cuba. They can travel to like the Middle East. Like there's countries where we have the United States has bad relationships.

Sam  (03:42.2)
Hmm, yep.

Matt (04:02.603)
that aren't necessarily bad places. And so sometimes I think it'd be good if the church was less U.S. because it could actually.

Sam  (04:09.39)
Wait, you do know you can go to Cuba. Yes, you can. Yes, you can. Yes, you can. 100%. Here, should do this. We should do this one more time. Yes, you can. No, can't. Yes, you can. No, you can't. No, I know people recently who have floated little Fullatillas over and they've docked in Cuba. The whole...

Shawn (04:13.388)
Yeah.

Matt (04:13.587)
No you can't! You can't go to Cuba! Now you can't! Now you're gonna have... Sam...

Shawn (04:18.528)
I'll trust Sam over Matt on this, I have the feeling Sam has been to Cuba.

Matt (04:24.929)
Sam have you been to Cuba? Have you tried to go to Cuba?

Matt (04:32.989)
Hahaha!

Sam  (04:34.434)
There's the whole thing about there's the whole thing about whether or not the Cubans are poisoning Americans with some sort of sonar radiation or something. are two, I'm just, challenging your point because I think there's very few countries legitimately where Americans can't go. Like most countries you can go. I do think you're right. That it seems over the last decade, our public persona has soured so that when you go visit Russia, people aren't very excited to see you. can't go to Russia right now.

Like France went to France 10 years ago. People don't necessarily like us in France. Like the optimism that used to exist about the United States and the excitement and curiosity about what we delivered to the world used to be much greater than it is today. It's definitely changed over the last five, 10 years. And it's not all Trump for you Trump haters. It's, it's, I don't even know what it is. It was Obama. It was Obama. No, it's Obama and it's Hillary Clinton and it's Biden. Nobody likes them.

Matt (05:06.922)
Mm-hmm.

Matt (05:25.057)
It's, it's 80 % Trump, 80 % Trump.

Matt (05:33.109)
Honestly, it's just Americans, right? I don't even think it's our foreign policy. It's just Americans. We're a little bit obnoxious. We're a little bit bratty. We're a little bit not the kind of people you want to have over to your European party. Like Americans are not awesome guests in other countries.

Sam  (05:39.018)
Okay. Yeah.

Sam  (05:48.726)
my gosh, wait, have I missed this or what? You hate the American dream. You don't like what we have to offer the world. What do mean we're bratty, terrible people? The world, the promise.

Shawn (05:50.326)
So wrong.

Matt (05:53.601)
Just saying. Just saying when I go to other countries it's... Maybe it's because I visit the world on cruise ships. Cruise ship passengers perhaps are not the best representatives of America. yeah. Okay another listener writes, this by the way is the first time Alexis has written in to us, Alexis is studying industrial hygiene at Utah State and so as part of their program

Sam  (06:03.852)
Yeah.

That's funny. That's funny.

Shawn (06:06.956)
There you go.

Matt (06:21.855)
Alexis takes classes about health and safety and OSHA is mentioned in almost every single class. So OSHA is, it was passed under a bipartisan bill, the Williams-Steiger Act. Sean and Matt's brief discussion about OSHA a couple of weeks ago helped spark this question. Is workplace health and safety ever going to be bipartisan again? Will we ever come to a consensus that the principle of having a safe working environment is important?

Sam  (06:29.452)
Mmm.

Matt (06:50.505)
or has the economics of creating that environment become more important? As someone who's working in this field, it's very clear to me that regulations still don't stop companies from creating a safe environment, even though it shouldn't be about regulations. It should be about doing the right thing for the right reasons.

Sam  (07:06.158)
All right, before any of you can answer that question, do you actually know what OSHA stands for? Because you are anti-business and I doubt any of you know this. Sean just Googled it.

Matt (07:14.505)
I do. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Yeah, yeah. I have done OSHA training at almost every job I've ever worked at.

Shawn (07:14.902)
of anti-business.

Sam  (07:18.75)
Okay, all right, you got it, nevermind. Okay, continue. You stuttered around it, so I was curious.

Shawn (07:23.36)
Hey, hey, me, let me, let me point out that, let me point out that when Sam asked that question, two minutes, he was Googling. I noticed you pulled your phone up.

Matt (07:26.761)
Hahaha!

Matt (07:32.713)
Hahahaha

Sam  (07:33.134)
No, I know what it is because I would dispute what she's saying. Like OSHA goes to great lengths to ensure a safe workplace. Like there are onerous restrictions, there are onerous guidelines and requirements placed on business almost to the point where it's excessive in many cases. yeah.

Matt (07:40.12)
huh.

Matt (07:44.479)
Yes.

Matt (07:54.241)
But shouldn't it be bipartisan? Shouldn't everybody agree that OSHA is a good thing? Shouldn't we all be thankful for OSHA?

Sam  (08:00.43)
I think generally it is bipartisan where the argument comes into place is the excess. So people would debate what is excessive and then what is reasonable and one side. Yeah, one side is going to say it's reasonable. Let's like making five year olds put their fingers into, you know, nail hammer makers or something like nobody wants that right? Nobody's but, know, requiring that there be, you know,

Shawn (08:08.78)
That's right. Well, good answer, Sam.

Matt (08:20.545)
Go on, go on.

Sam  (08:30.542)
I can't even think of something recently. We run into this in automotive all over the place. It's crazy. Yeah. Yeah.

Shawn (08:32.586)
I can think of one Sam. Sam, so recently, yeah, I run into it all the time with my clients. We got recently a photograph was taken for a client on their website in their manufacturing shop and they weren't wearing just the right type of glove or soldering something and they got busted. That's ridiculous. That's overreach. No, they should not mad. That's stupid.

Sam  (08:44.91)
Oh, they got busted. Yeah. Yeah. Of course they did. Yeah.

Matt (08:48.873)
Yeah, as they should. I don't know.

So there's a sugar company out there. think it's called Imperial Sugar and OSHA requirements. Like when you're when you're producing sugar, it creates this dust that's flammable and you're only allowed to have like an eighth of an inch of dust. And these people had four feet of sugar dust and their factory exploded and killed lots of people because OSHA failed in its mission to regulate them right when the regulators would come. They would go out for drinks, probably smoke some weed.

Shawn (09:20.556)
Where is your freaking references here, man? You're just making up.

Sam  (09:23.282)
come now give me a break. This is you just made this up. But by the way, that was the one feedback. That was the one feedback I was going to have for Alexis is she's she's citing unsafe workplace. Like show evidence of that show me that like, do you guys remember being in Donetsk, Ukraine, I'll show you unsafe workplace. Do you remember going into the steel the steel mill, the steel mill in Donetsk?

Matt (09:27.947)
Google it. Google it.

Shawn (09:42.7)
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Matt (09:45.353)
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Sam  (09:46.892)
Like I walked around and I was like, I'm pretty sure if I step on a rusty nail, I'll have a problem for the rest of my life, right? And I wasn't totally sure something wouldn't just hit you like that is an unsafe workplace in the United States of America OSHA has created and people's commitment to safety and respect for other people and, the economics of free market have created a generally very safe workplace, the conditions that would exist were it not for that and decency.

Matt (09:52.757)
You

Sam  (10:13.602)
would be much, much worse. So I'd be curious to hear what Alexis is really thinking on that point.

Matt (10:17.185)
I'll tell you, Google Imperial Sugar 2006 I think it is, George W Bush administration. You'll, well no, there's many, that was a factory that exploded. No, no, almost 20 years ago.

Sam  (10:23.202)
That's your most recent citation is for that's that's hey, I heard I heard of a sugar plant once. No, that's longer than that. Yeah. You know what? 20 years ago, there was a sugar plant that once sparked a little. Give me a break.

Shawn (10:25.622)
Hahaha!

Shawn (10:30.154)
Nine years ago.

Shawn (10:34.587)
yeah, 20 years ago.

Matt (10:37.697)
That's just the one that, that's just on my ear.

Shawn (10:38.604)
But Sam nailed it. Sam nailed it. think Sam you absolutely perfectly nailed it. And the issue that people have is the overreach and the limits to which they go. That was well said Sam.

Sam  (10:43.32)
Give me a break.

Sam  (10:51.362)
Yeah. Yeah.

Matt (10:52.531)
All right. Well, thank you listeners for writing in. I forgot. I never read the end of Alexis's question. She said, love the podcast and hearing everyone's perspective because yeah, we're great. We're awesome. Okay, Sam, you're up with the thought provoker this week. You get to go first.

Sam  (11:02.51)
Hmm.

Sam  (11:09.548)
All right, I'm gonna do a mic drop, because I have no thought provoker, because I was not able to prepare today. So I'm gonna pass the baton quickly to Matt. Sean, Sean, Sean. Okay. Uh-oh. No, don't talk about OSHA still. Really? Okay. Okay.

Matt (11:17.313)
No, no Sean Sean's up. Yeah

Shawn (11:17.868)
It's me. Let me give just a quick anecdote since we have a little time on the OSHA. One of my favorite things, yeah, I know. No, no, you'll like it. You'll like it. You'll like it. You'll like it. One of my favorite things in a prior career was I would put my suit on and I'd show up at our job site with our employees of our company who didn't know me and I'd pretend to be an OSHA. Is there a law against impersonating an OSHA? I broke the law. Okay. But it was fun to pretend to be an OSHA employee.

Matt (11:43.007)
Yes. Yeah.

Shawn (11:47.852)
and watch these guys, these poor, because it would watch these guys squirm. Like they'd be doing this big project and I'd show up and be like, yeah, I'm a pro, and they'd be like, oh crap. I didn't like though how they got so freaked out. Like, oh, she shouldn't be this like creepy big brother over their shoulder, freaking them out about stuff.

Sam  (11:48.343)
Why?

Sam  (11:53.091)
my gosh.

Sam  (12:03.47)
So OSHA has a history of excess. The other one is the, what's the error? EPA, EPA is a classic example currently of militarizing a government entity, right? It's not created by the legislature. It's just excess, it's pure excess.

Shawn (12:17.74)
Preach ya, Sam.

Matt (12:21.697)
I have an anecdote similar to Sean's. It's every Halloween, people dress up in costumes and they frighten people in their costumes. And that should be wrong.

Shawn (12:21.792)
Preach it, Sam. Nice.

Sam  (12:29.91)
I dressed up as Matt last year and that was terrifying. People are like, what are you doing? Right? Right? Right? Yes.

Shawn (12:34.55)
Ha ha ha.

Matt (12:35.649)
We shouldn't have things where people dress up and scare other people. Halloween's bad. Halloween's bad like OSHA.

Shawn (12:42.942)
Alright, okay, I'll go. Thank you for indulging. Alright, I live in the great, great state of California.

Matt (12:49.087)
Woohoo!

Sam  (12:49.422)
Mmm.

Shawn (12:50.814)
Now, a ton of new laws to my ire have just gone into effect.

Sam  (12:56.526)
How many are a ton, just so I can quantify that quickly? Okay, very good, thank you. Okay, go ahead, sorry Sean, 2,000 laws, all right.

Matt (12:58.849)
£2,000. £2,000 of laws.

Shawn (13:11.06)
Okay, so one of these laws requires large online platforms to remove deep fakes and other deceptive material. You all know what deep fakes are. Yeah, you do? Okay, so the law doesn't ban satire or parody, for example, that kind of content. Instead, it requires the disclosure of the use of AI to be displayed when the altered videos or images are put out there. So is this an appropriate use of government? Is this good? Or does it go too far?

Sam  (13:19.404)
Yes, that's fantastic.

Matt (13:39.967)
Yes, yes, more regulation of social media companies, I say. This is good.

Shawn (13:40.266)
Is this overreach?

Shawn (13:44.294)
That's not the question, you dumb dumb. That's not the question, Matt. You can't just jump to, yes, more regulations. The specifics of this regulation matter more than anything. It's not, yes, more regulation. I'm not punching your face right

Sam  (13:44.514)
the dumbest, dumbest thing I've ever heard of.

Matt (13:57.203)
Okay, so wait, if I use AI to create a video and put it on social media, they have to label it as AI generated. That's a good thing.

Shawn (14:08.406)
Yeah, if I create, so Matt, if you create a company and come to me and be like, hey man, I've got this prototype, but I need it, it's of a, it's a new kind of chalk, and it's blue, and I need you to just create the image I don't have it made yet. So now you on your website have to put up a message that says, this was AI generated, not the real product. You think that's appropriate?

Matt (14:26.067)
Yeah, AI generated prototype. think that's a thing. we should know. Listen, I'm the one that told you guys about the time that I was watching YouTube and I thought it was real and it turned out to be fake. I should have known in advance that this thing was fake. I should have had, I should have been able to choose like.

Shawn (14:42.23)
So Sam, this big campaign... Yeah, go ahead.

Sam  (14:42.254)
Okay, can, can I can I give you my take on this? Can I give you my take on this? I go back to it is dangerous for a government to say you got to label everything that's not right, right, wrong, and everything that is right, right. Then who who gets to decide truth, I think the individual person needs to be empowered to decide that individually. If I see something that's a fake, I prefer to be able to assess what I'm seeing, I can go to other sources to see if it's accurate or not.

I don't want to depend on some sort of government disclosure to always tell me it's a fake, because then I'm going to lose my ability to make reasonable judgments. Because what happens when a government or another entity decides to stop labeling or they start mislabeling, like, let's just if that technology exists, and it does, and I've played with AI, and I've played with the ability to create generated video and whatnot, allow individuals to make their own judge.

If we depend on another entity to tell us what is right and wrong, I think that takes away our own ability to make those judgments. And it's going to get tougher, not easier as we go down the road. I, by the way, in full disclosure, am an AI generated image.

Matt (15:58.771)
Nobody sees him, so he really can't tell and judge for yourself. You just have to believe him that he's an AI-generated image.

Sam  (16:05.368)
Correct. Correct.

Shawn (16:06.358)
Sam, a good example of that in your industry is the Jaguar campaign, the rebrand that launched a little while ago in this big campaign. They rebranded themselves.

Sam  (16:13.292)
Yeah, that was a terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible campaign. Yeah. Did you like it? Yeah.

Shawn (16:17.162)
It really was, but no, I didn't like it, but it's been interesting to see as they've leaked their designs for their cars. That's all AI, think. That's all, right? That's all.

Sam  (16:25.996)
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Matt (16:28.191)
Yeah, but you shouldn't be allowed to. OK, you shouldn't be allowed to take a photo because you can. I've seen this in the news where people will do this, especially high school kids. They'll get some girls photo. They'll create a deep fake of her that's nude and then they'll put this on social media and they'll say here's this photo of so and so that's nude.

Sam  (16:43.65)
Well, so that's different because that's pornography. That's minor pornography and there are different laws to address that.

Shawn (16:48.821)
and a slander.

Shawn (16:53.558)
It's also slander.

Matt (16:53.633)
But the social media platform is not held accountable for posting that kind of stuff on their platform.

Sam  (17:00.312)
For, for, for creating and distributing a minor pornography, that's a terrible offense. They are, absolutely be held accountable for that.

Matt (17:08.619)
But they would say that it's not minor pornography because it's a deep fake. It's an AI generated image. So then

Sam  (17:14.272)
Well, it's the face of a real live 15 year old person. That absolutely is prosecutable.

Shawn (17:15.478)
But Matt, how would a label that...

But Matt, how would a label that says, hey, this isn't actually her, this is just fake pornography, how does that, I mean, that obviously affects her. Well, it helps her.

Matt (17:25.695)
That helps a lot. It helps a lot because she can say, because everybody now knows that it's not her image, that it's somebody created that image.

Shawn (17:32.192)
Yeah. Yeah. No, mean.

Sam  (17:34.507)
I think the laws would be stronger against minor pornography, not labeled as AI versus AI.

Matt (17:39.541)
Well, well, so like, let's say it's not pornography, but you just do some other thing, right? You, you take some minor and you make it look like they're shooting somebody in the head or you make it look like they're doing some really inappropriate, like they robbed a gas station or something like that. You can use AI to create videos that make it seem like people are saying or doing things that they're not doing. So forget about pornography. Like you have to have some way of letting people know like this video is not real.

Sam  (18:03.768)
So in that case, isn't the shooting slander and prosecutable by...

Matt (18:10.625)
Yeah, but what are you going to do? You're going to sue a 16 year old kid who created it? Make sure that the social media platforms don't post the content without letting people know that it's not real content.

Shawn (18:14.378)
Yes, that's right. That's correct. Yeah.

Sam  (18:21.614)
I just generally censorship is a challenge in a free society. And whoever gets to control the censorship gets to control the way people think and the way they act. And so if all of a sudden we allow a government agency to tell us what is real and what's not, the moment they decide to start to lie or misrepresent, then people are led down a path. I think that's worse.

Shawn (18:28.3)
it is.

Sam  (18:48.236)
better is not labeling it and allowing people to either figure it out on themselves or you allow technology. There is technology today that can analyze a video or a photo and decide whether it's real or not. And so maybe that's, know, as somebody looking for truth, if I see a video that's disturbing, and I question whether it's true or not, I run it through that generator, and I'm able to tell is that real or not, right? There are other ways I can come to that conclusion.

Matt (18:48.329)
Mm-hmm.

Shawn (19:10.208)
Matt, tell Sam about the Stone of Geyserloh.

Matt (19:14.945)
No, I'm not going to tell him about that. I don't want to. It's in the book. It's in the Book of Mormon.

Shawn (19:16.396)
Tell him, Sam, Sam, in Alba 37, 22, the Lord is talking about how, look, people started to create, they began to work in darkness, right? They began to hide and do these things in darkness. And then it talks about in verse 24, there was, I don't know if he's a prophet, but it says, I will prepare to my servant, Gazelem, a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness into light that I made it.

Sam  (19:18.176)
I'll, Sean, I'll Google it later.

Sam  (19:31.342)
Yeah. Yeah.

Sam  (19:43.414)
Mm-hmm.

Shawn (19:45.76)
that I may discover into my people who serve me, that I may discover into them the works of their brethren and their secret works and their works of darkness.

Matt (19:54.561)
So, Sean wants everyone to have a Urim and Thummim that will help them detect AI.

Shawn (20:01.92)
Yeah, I mean, that no, my point is that that I agree with Sam and Sam gets the points, but there certainly is, but there certainly is scriptural principles about the Lord hates the works of darkness, right? So if someone is behind the scenes, trying to trying to create something that is secretive and fake. But I think Sam's right, there are laws, there are slander laws, there are laws that we can apply to protect against that. don't need the government.

Matt (20:08.801)
come on!

Matt (20:16.031)
Yeah.

Matt (20:30.783)
Well, actually the government enforces those laws. So those laws would be the government, but I'm still giving, I'm giving Sean the points because he advocates for everyone having a stone that will help them.

Shawn (20:34.486)
We don't need a regulation.

Hahaha!

Sam  (20:43.054)
And then you throw the stone if you don't like what you see. Underhanded. Not overhanded.

Shawn (20:45.973)
You

Matt (20:46.507)
That's one of the best ideas I've ever heard. Alright, Sam, are you giving anyone points?

Sam  (20:53.622)
Matt, I give you all the points because you knew what Sean was talking about. I'm super impressed.

Matt (20:55.017)
Yes. Yes. Okay. Here's my question. At age 16, Ricky Handschuhmacher was a high school baseball star. A decade later, he was facing federal prison for stealing cryptocurrency. This is a story in the Wall Street Journal. So it all began when he found a way to cheat in Halo 3 and then he wanted to continue doing this. And so he stumbled into a compelling

Shawn (20:59.916)
Ha

Matt (21:22.313)
and chaotic community, eventually known as the calm that was pushing the limits of online behavior. Over the next 15 years, this group of gamers and hackers would grow up with handshine marker emerging as a major cybersecurity threat. So although Ricky broke the law at 16, prosecutors were reluctant to charge him with cyber crimes as a minor. If they had, he never would have been a part of this group that ended up hacking the MGM resorts in 2023.

So my question is this, should the government prosecutors be more harsh on teenage cyber criminals?

Sam  (22:00.558)
Ooh, I have a good answer for that. I have an interesting answer. I was at a I was a meeting as a meeting with Chase Bank, and there was someone that works for the FBI and cyber crimes. And they had a great conversation about cybersecurity. If you think about my own industry was hacked, a company called CDK was taken offline by hackers. For for several weeks, we were put out of business on a bunch of dealers across the country or put out of business. The MGM hack had a huge cost.

Shawn (22:02.764)
Go Sam, go.

Sam  (22:29.206)
Microsoft got got hacked and it stopped air travel for a long time. Healthcare was hacked and the ability to pay for medical claims was impacted for a long time. Cyber crimes are massive and they're not going anywhere. And this FBI guy said, look, preventing it is about defense. And he said, all the bad guys need to do is find that one interesting idea, find the vulnerability and exploit it.

they have the advantage we have to be right 100 % of the time. They only have to be right once out of 100 to get money. And so guess what the FBI is doing. And this is I think is pretty cool rather than being super aggressive with these miners. They're actually taking them and hiring them. Think of Catch Me if you can. Think of Catch Me if you can. When when the dude was flipped into a FBI employee, right? Like you think of George Costanzas and

Matt (22:57.281)
Mm-hmm.

Shawn (23:14.624)
Ha ha ha ha!

Matt (23:21.558)
Mm-hmm.

Sam  (23:24.238)
Seinfeld used to say, if you only could do something good with that, right, help redirect their energy, their creativity, their time and their ability, help them redirect into something that is more productive. So you could take the threat of prosecution, which would be very real and fair and not a bad thing to do, and then work alongside them. It also makes for a good show. My kids love that show called Black Tie or Red Tie or something about a FBI informant or a

bad guy that turned FBI informant, help them become good. That's my take.

Matt (23:56.331)
Well, so this is the challenge though, Sam, the bad guys, they recruit these 16 year olds who are like hacking video games and they say, hey, come work with us because they know that the FBI doesn't want to go after minors. And so they get like two free years of breaking the law and getting caught where they're not going to get prosecuted to hone their skills and figure out how the FBI does things. So what I'm saying is if

Sam  (24:02.414)
Yeah.

Matt (24:21.803)
They didn't get these like free years as miners to break the law and figure out how to get past the.

Sam  (24:26.413)
Well, what I'm saying, Matt is, is rather than ignore them for two years, I think the FBI should take them under their wing and say, Hey, look, we recognize you have a capability to do incredible, good or bad. And rather than put you in jail, we're going to give you a one time chance to work for us and do good. We're going to pay you like, like Chase Bank, Chase Bank pays kids money to find vulnerability in their system, and then show it to them, and then help them fix it.

Matt (24:44.395)
Hmm. Hmm.

Sam  (24:55.5)
Right? like, good. Yes, yes, yes. And then they'll and then they get a reward if they can hack into it because then they can fix the patch before the real bad guys do it. So rather, you're talking about the FBI saying, hey, we're going to ignore you for two years and then the bad guys come suck them up for money. I'm talking about connect with them, keep them and show them the right way. That's free market, Matt, by the way. This message brought to you by the free market.

Matt (24:57.409)
They're asking the kids to try to hack into their system.

Matt (25:06.109)
Yeah, that's a clever idea.

Matt (25:19.893)
Hmm. Yeah, yeah, that is free market.

I say it's better to throw him in jail. I think so. What bad thing has ever happened to a 16 year old in jail? I think that...

Sam  (25:29.12)
No, that's a idea. That's a bad idea.

Yeah, exactly.

Shawn (25:35.446)
Shut up.

Matt (25:37.867)
What do you say, Sean?

Shawn (25:39.602)
I would go with Sam's with one revision, one revision, right? Like the Book of Mormon, we talked last week about how where there is a law, there has to be punishment because where there's punishment, there's remorse of conscience. And if there's no punishment, Sam, there's no remorse of conscience. So I like your plan revised with, it has to be at risk of punishment. In other words, you go to that hacker 16 year old and say, look, you are going to jail for next seven years.

Matt (25:49.697)
Hmm?

Shawn (26:07.294)
Here's an alternative. You can come work for the government. right, like, like there's, there's got to be some, some punishment involved for them or there's no remorse of conscience. So there's gotta be a, wasn't that what the movie was about?

Sam  (26:10.552)
Yeah.

Sam  (26:18.648)
Wait, as a 16 year old playing Halo, finding a way to exploit a weakness, where's the conscience in that? I'm not sure they would have a fully developed understanding of that type of morality by that point.

Matt (26:24.506)
You

Matt (26:33.707)
So Sam wants carrots, I want sticks, and Shawn wants carrots and sticks. So then Shawn gets the points because he merged our brilliant ideas. You know, this is probably why you're such a good father, Shawn. I think sticks, Sam thinks carrots, and you think carrots and sticks. Yeah. Shawn, really, we could do well if we just put you in charge of our government. You're a good father, you'd be a great...

Shawn (26:33.804)
Hacking, hacking.

Shawn (26:39.51)
Yeah, that's right.

Sam  (26:39.854)
Mmm, that's good. Sean does get the points. He has a broader. Yes, I like it.

Shawn (26:54.924)
You

Sam  (26:56.846)
correct.

Matt (27:03.732)
world leader.

Shawn (27:04.8)
Sam's the next one that's running for office. So he's for me and I'll vote for him.

Sam  (27:07.596)
Yeah, that's not happening.

Matt (27:07.705)
okay. Well, with that, an attitude of carrots for all things, Sam could win the election. If my campaign was throw the 16 year old in jail for cheating in Halo three, I might not get elected on that campaign. Okay. So Sean got the points. Good job, Sean. Okay. The big question.

Sam  (27:15.948)
Yes, free cell phones for everyone and basic income.

Shawn (27:19.018)
HAHAHA

Matt (27:35.399)
I actually altered this as I thought about it a little bit more because I thought this other way of thinking about it could be more fun. So the Surgeon General recently issued a new advisory on the link between alcohol consumption and the risk of getting cancer. The statement says that alcohol consumption is the third leading preventable cause of cancer in the United States. The science related to drinking has changed in recent years, leading to some confusion among consumers.

At one point, moderate drinking was thought to be healthier than not drinking at all because the possible benefits to the heart and bloodstream. But more recent data finds that even moderate drinking can lead to health problems, including cancer. Despite decades of compelling evidence of this connection, too many in the public remain unaware of alcohol's risk. So the big question is this, does this recent reversal in science show that the word of wisdom is correct?

Sam  (28:32.622)
Mmm.

Matt (28:35.445)
because I remember you probably remember this too when they said, it's good to drink a glass of wine every day. It'll help you with your cardiovascular system and things like that. But now the science says that's a bad idea. That's going to cause cancer.

Shawn (28:35.564)
I

Shawn (28:49.356)
I mean, obviously we believe in the word of wisdom. So obviously we're going to say, yes, of course, this confirmation bias for what we believe the word of wisdom preaches, right? But the question is more interesting in that it's kind of the whole theme of this topic or this podcast is disclosures, right? Should the government be involved in companies needing to disclose things so that the public is more educated? I hate to say, but I agree with your statement, Matt, that the public at large doesn't believe that alcohol is unhealthy for you. When in reality it is.

Matt (29:17.311)
I know. Yeah.

Shawn (29:19.252)
So, and Matt, I know you believe that once a government says something is immoral or wrong, the people eventually adopt that. And I hate that because I don't want government to that power.

Matt (29:27.168)
Yeah, I think that...

Sam  (29:29.964)
Wait, Sean, how could you disagree with that? So back in the 1920s, prohibition proved, I think, that when the government says you can't do something, people just walk away. There's nothing to see here. Prohibition proved that you could say, hey, nobody can have alcohol. Everybody go back to the life as you were, be productive, and, you know, under

Matt (29:52.501)
But don't you think in time, because people think that marijuana is bad generally, right? Because the government said marijuana is illegal. Tobacco, people think tobacco is bad because there's that Surgeon General warning on tobacco and they're like tobacco is not good for me. I think it has an effect over a long period of time. But no, Sean, I've...

Sam  (30:00.034)
I don't think so, do they?

Sam  (30:11.308)
Wait, how do you deal with prohibition?

Matt (30:15.457)
did pr- yeah, that's a tough one.

Shawn (30:18.806)
I think maybe it wasn't enough time. Naturally, you have people rebelling against the laws and going underground. Then you have mafia rising and delivering it. But eventually, that mafia would have been squashed by the FBI and by police. And eventually, public sentiment would have probably changed. Don't you think, Sam?

Matt (30:34.113)
Prohibus.

Sam  (30:37.294)
Pornography is not considered a positive thing in government spheres. How do you deal with that?

Shawn (30:44.374)
Great point.

Matt (30:44.605)
Yeah, you guys are changing the big question. The big question is, does the science show the word of wisdom is correct? I say, I say, I say it. No, it doesn't. Because the word of wisdom doesn't say anything about how to prevent getting cancer. When the word, like the word of wisdom, when it says, does it, by the way, the word of wisdom even says that, because the people on my mission would tell me this all the time when you read the word of wisdom, right? It says like,

Shawn (30:47.87)
I answered it. I answered it.

I answered it, of course it does. How so?

Sam  (31:04.088)
For your help. For your help.

Matt (31:12.513)
certain kinds of alcohol, like you can make your own beer and then it's okay. Right. That's not the way that we interpret it for like temple recommends and stuff like that. But if you read the word of wisdom, it makes us sound like some kinds of alcohol are okay. So I don't think that, I don't think, I mean, now I have to, yeah, there's some, some things have alcohol in them. Well, and back in the day, they didn't have purified water, right? So if they were going to drink water and not get sick, you had to put a little alcohol in it to make it so that

Sam  (31:16.142)
Mmm. Mmm.

Shawn (31:26.624)
Where does it say that?

Sam  (31:29.09)
Like Nyquil. Like Nyquil. Yeah. Yeah.

Shawn (31:33.196)
You

Matt (31:42.419)
it killed all the germs and stuff like that. Did you know this, by the way, this is why we have water fountains in the United States is that whole temperance movement that wanted to get rid of alcohol. The way you do that is you put clean water for people to drink and then they hopefully won't drink beer. But now you're making me open the doctrine of covenant, Sean.

Shawn (31:57.654)
Well, no, I'll read it. I'll read it. I got it. I got it. Inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold, it is not good. Neither meet to the sight of your father. Period.

Matt (32:02.228)
Okay, read it to me.

Matt (32:11.135)
Okay, but there's something about beer in there. Or barley, or...

Shawn (32:13.9)
There's strong again strong drinks are not for the belly but for the washing of your bodies

Matt (32:18.643)
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Hold on. I'll find it. I mean, I just heard a lot of people share it with me on my mission who didn't want to live the word of wisdom. They're like, wait, wait, it says here that I can drink this new beer. Hold on. Here you go. Verse six, and behold, this should be wine. Yay. Pure wine of the grape of the vine of your own making. There you go. Right. So like, well, I'm not, I'm certainly not teaching that. Right.

Shawn (32:30.08)
That's it.

Sam  (32:40.15)
Hmm. You can make your own. Make your own. Interesting.

Shawn (32:40.236)
So that's the

Matt (32:46.913)
There was a, for a long period of time, people thought that the word of wisdom said, as long as you're making your own, cause the word of wisdom is about buying from your enemies or something like that.

Shawn (32:56.14)
I mean, but it's really easy because the very next verse is the context about what strong wine or your own wine of your own make means. Strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies. So strong is a reference to the alcohol, the fermentation of that grape. So if you're making your own grape wine, you're not fermenting it.

Matt (33:13.515)
But the promise of the word of wisdom is not you will never get cancer. The promise of the word of wisdom is that you'll have spiritual blessings and, other things, right? Great treasures of knowledge, hidden treasures and things like that. I like, think anytime people look at science and say, science shows the word of wisdom is right. I think they're making a mistake.

Shawn (33:17.44)
Yeah, no. Yeah.

Shawn (33:32.628)
Okay, yeah, well, if that's fine, I agree. I don't wanna lean on the arm of the flesh to decide to confirm religious principles. I agree, the spirit does that. I agree with you.

Matt (33:43.788)
huh. What do you say, Sam?

Sam  (33:46.09)
I agree. You know what I, I agree. I don't know what else to say. You know, it is interesting though. I was reading the other day. There's a, there's a new alcohol substitute out and I can't remember all the details behind it, but I wonder what the word of wisdom's take would be on this where it removes, it removes the negative impacts of alcohol, but allows for some sort of a, I'd have to read it up. I don't, yeah, I don't, I don't.

Shawn (33:50.304)
HAHAHAHA

Shawn (34:12.278)
fun parts. It allows the fun parts.

Matt (34:13.653)
Yeah. It removes the bad stuff, but keeps the stuff that gets you drunk.

Sam  (34:14.902)
I don't remember it. So, but, but, but it is interesting. was, I was recently at a yoga class and this yoga class, they handed out, they handed out gummies. So it was in a state where that's legal to all, to everybody, participating in the yoga class. And it was fascinating for me to watch as people took this yoga class to see, you know, they, they just, they just

Matt (34:29.946)
Sam  (34:42.776)
kind of chilled out, guess, and they enjoyed being together and all that. And I was fascinated by A, you know, this, this different type of yoga. I don't know. I don't know. I, I, I would say, yeah, yeah, yeah, I was in the class. So, but, I would say that, I, don't think it's proof of the word of wisdom. think Matt, to your point, the benefit of the word of wisdom is all the promises it makes, not necessarily the scientific proof behind it.

Shawn (34:52.587)
You were participating in.

Sam  (35:11.906)
Because it is interesting too, because the science changes too, doesn't it? you know, to your point, you know, it used to be looked at as a positive to have a glass of wine every single day. Now it's like complete prohibition. Apple, it was good to eat it, now it's bad. Like, in theory, the word of wisdom should be forever and it should not change. the science is interesting.

Matt (35:15.71)
Yes, that's what I'm saying.

Shawn (35:28.939)
Yeah.

Shawn (35:33.74)
And also don't you have to look at the motive of government when they do things like this. Matt will claim that the motive of government is we want healthy citizens. That's not the motive of government, right? That's not the truth. That's not the truth.

Matt (35:45.089)
I know, how dare I suggest such a thing. The surgeon general doesn't care about our health. He's gonna profit off this some way. Is that what you're gonna say, Sean?

Shawn (35:51.434)
Here's, no, but here's where I, no, of course not. But what I can see is this. I know that, for example, almost 50 % of all convicted murderers in our system, the crime was committed with alcohol in their system. I know for a fact that it's like what, the third leading cause of teenagers. I know that it's like this stat here, that it's the third cause of cancer.

Matt (36:05.173)
Sam  (36:08.744)
Interesting. Wait, wait. Alcohol is the third leading cause of teenagers? that what she said?

Shawn (36:15.5)
Why you gotta pick on that one? I don't have a reference to that. Teenage driving, driving, shut up, drunk driving. No, driving, drunk driving. But my point is the motive of the government is probably like, geez man, we can get less criminals, less murderers, less.

Matt (36:15.905)
Teenage, teenage pregnancy.

Sam  (36:19.331)
gotcha, pregnancies. Wait, what? Drunk drive? gotcha. Gotcha. Gotcha. I was confused.

Matt (36:21.771)
Teenage pregnancies.

Matt (36:29.429)
Hold on, Sean. Sorry, I'm thinking again. Shouldn't alcohol be 100 % the cause of drunk driving?

Sam  (36:35.726)
you

Shawn (36:36.108)
You

Yes, but only among teenagers.

Matt (36:41.69)
I see. Some teenagers drive drunk without alcohol.

Shawn (36:43.724)
I'm just saying, I didn't reference any of that crap, but I'm just saying that the government's motive in this is probably more like, well, we need less criminals. We need less murders. We need less deaths. Right? Okay.

Matt (36:51.265)
Ahem.

Matt (36:57.043)
I like it. Yeah. Yeah.

Sam  (36:59.958)
I just think that anytime you outlaw something and you tell people they can't do it, people are going to do that very thing. so prohibition is a great proof of that, right?

Shawn (37:04.46)
I'm gonna do it.

Matt (37:09.835)
Well then we should get rid of all laws, Sam. We should have no laws.

Sam  (37:14.508)
No, you need to be super careful and thoughtful about the laws and only those laws that protect the physical safety of an individual or like you should only implement the laws that you absolutely have to implement, right? Like

Matt (37:24.703)
or your

Shawn (37:27.916)
So then this is a pretty light law, right? It's simply saying that we're gonna put a label on a product that says you could get cancer from this. So you'd be okay with that, Sam, right?

Matt (37:35.957)
Well, no, this one's not even doing that. Yeah, they're not even gonna do that. This is just them saying officially alcohol is bad, causes cancer as a matter of public policy or public health.

Sam  (37:37.56)
Slap it on. Slap it on.

Sam  (37:47.95)
Put it on there. Why wouldn't you do that? There's no harm in that. Do it.

Shawn (37:50.316)
Yeah, I'm fine with that disclosure. I'm totally fine with that disclosure.

Matt (37:54.305)
All right. Hey you guys, this was great. Really good job today. Sam hasn't been around to rate our other episodes, but I've been rating them really high, like eight out of 10, nine out of 10. Sam maybe wants, Sam maybe wants to give us a mediocre rating, but we won't let him do it. We won't let Sam make us feel mediocre. Listener. We're glad you joined with us this week. We hope you'll join us again next week for another exciting episode. Talk to you again soon.

Shawn (38:05.568)
More than mediocre.

Sam  (38:12.534)
My lips are sealed.