Mario Nawfal

🚨OpenAI to Counter ‘HUMAN EXTINCTION RISK’ (this is NOT clickbait) OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, plans to counter what they call "the vast power of super-intelligence [that could] lead to the disempowerment of humanity or even human extinction." And they admit that "we don't have a solution for steering or controlling a potentially super-intelligent AI, and preventing it from going rogue." Remember, OpenAI are the makers of arguably the most advanced Generalised Artificial Intelligence alongside Google's DeepMind. If this was a Hollywood script, it could pass as a Terminator spin-off or a new prequel to Battlestar Galactica! Remember when @elonmusk warned that “the pace of progress in artificial intelligence is incredibly fast —it is growing at a pace close to exponential. The risk of something seriously dangerous happening is in the five-year timeframe. 10 years at most.” WHY BUILD ‘SKYNET’ DESPITE EXTINCTION RISKS? This is the first thing that comes to my mind. Why do we want to make super-intelligence? Well… I'm not alone. In April this year, more than 1000 people in the field of AI including Elon Musk, Emad Mostaque (Stability AI), many researchers at DeepMind and various professors said “the big players are becoming increasingly secretive about what they are doing, which makes it hard for society to defend against whatever harms may materialize." So we’re at a crossroads, either we: 1. Pause innovation in regards to super-intelligence 2. Keep innovating as fast as possible 3. Somewhere in the middle, slowing development to avoid things getting out of control Option 3 obviously seems like the most logical solution, except that we’re human and humans are stupid. We’re too short-term oriented, focusing on financial returns at the detriment of long term risks. Another issue is capitalism, meaning that any slowing of innovation in the US will simply give competitors like China the edge. WHY IS IT HARD TO CONTROL? DeepMind and OpenAI have been dealing with a problem they call alignment of AI, which can give unexpected results. In a nutshell, these systems are 'taught’, not programmed (think of a program as a script). So the AI is given feedback that is positive if ir does what we want, but if it does something wrong, it is given negative feedback. It’s essentially the same as training a dog or a small child. Unfortunately, the issue with alignment is that sometimes this doesn't work and the machine does something unpredictable. Now mix this with super-intelligence that's basically smarter than us, and the mistakes could be the launch of nukes or the release of an infectious disease. SO WHAT WILL OpenAI DO? Well they have a plan and it goes something like: We will train AI to correct the alignment of AI and make it as smart as possible. Yep, you read that correctly: AI will fix AI’s problem. Connor Leahy, an AI safety advocate, said the plan was flawed because "you have to solve alignment before you build human-level intelligence, otherwise by default you won't control it. I personally do not think this is a particularly good or safe plan." IS ALL A.I. DANGEROUS? The answer is obviously no, AI will change the world we live in for the better in many ways, more than we can imagine. The question is though, will the benefits outweigh the risk? Here’s a list of current risks of A.I based on today’s limited applications: 1) Autonomous weapons 2) Social manipulation 3) Invasion of Privacy 4) Misinformation and fake news 5) Bias and Discrimination 6) Security and Internet 7) Job Displacement… And the list goes on. MY THOUGHTS: AI worries me more than Russia, more than a Nuclear war, more than pandemics and more than global warming. At the same time, it’s one of the most exciting technologies I could even imagine. I think the ship of regulating AI before it gets out of control has sailed. Human nature will force us to innovate as fast as we can despite the risks to our very existence. People will not pay attention to this either, not until it's too late. I hope I'm wrong... DOES A.I. WORRY YOU?

OFFICIAL: Crypto's biggest UNRESOLVED multibillion dollar story will be settled on Twitter Spaces, if @BarrySilbert agrees. As always, we will remain NEUTRAL and OBJECTIVE

🚨RUSSIA/UKRAINE: Zaporizhzhia NUCLEAR Power Plant | Nuclear Disaster Fears | False Flag IMMINENT? Zaporizhzhia, the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, 10x LARGER THAN CHERNOBYL, is currently under Russian control and has become a major point of concern in the Ukraine war. Ukraine claims Russia is planning to blow it up as a false flag attack, and Russia is claiming a Ukrainian sabotage is imminent in order to frame Russia. CONTEXT: - The plant is located in southeastern Ukraine but is currently under Russian control. - Russia seized the plant in February 2022. - The Kahkova dam, which was recently blown up, acted as a secondary cooling source for the nuclear reactors at the Zaporizhzhia plant. Thankfully, the nuclear plant has a significant standalone cooling pond that is currently undamaged. - It is the biggest power plant in Europe. - The Chernobyl power plant, which famously blew up and is considered one of the biggest nuclear disasters of all time, is considered RELATIVELY SMALL compared to Zaporizhzhia. WHY IS THIS A BIG DEAL: If the plant were to blow up, the repercussions would be unimaginable, leaving thousands of lives at risk, vast amounts of land uninhabitable, and forcing thousands more people to relocate. It would also add an extra layer of an unprecedented amount of chaos to an already brutal war. Zelenskyy has claimed that "objects resembling explosives" have been planted on the roof of the power plant by the Russians. Russia has denied these allegations and claimed that Ukraine's military is planning an attack on the plant. UKRAINE'S CLAIM: Zelenskyy believes that Russia is planning to blow up the power plant. Many Ukrainians and war analysts believe that this could be done to halt the advance of Ukrainian troops and force Kyiv into premature peace talks that favor the Kremlin. Many also believe that if Ukraine's current "counteroffensive" achieves major success, Russia will blow up the power plant to save face and push back the advance of Ukrainian troops by contaminating the area. Yesterday, Zelenskyy spoke to French President Emmanuel Macron and warned him that the Russians are preparing a "dangerous provocation" at the Zaporizhzhia power plant. RUSSIA'S CLAIM: "Under the cover of darkness overnight on 5 July, the Ukrainian military will try to attack the Zaporizhzhia station using long-range precision equipment and kamikaze attack drones," Russian news agencies quoted Renat Karchaa, chief adviser to the head of Russia's atomic energy agency, as telling Russian television. Many Russians, supporters of Russia, and war analysts also believe that Ukraine will blow up the plant in hopes of involving NATO in the war. The Russians have tried to support their claim by commenting that Ukraine has a further 3 nuclear power plants located at: 1) Rivno 2) Khmelnitsky 3) South Ukraine And that these have not been targeted, so why would the Russians target any nuclear plants that they have custody over? It is a compelling argument as logic dictates you destroy assets of the enemy and not those that you occupy. A nuclear disaster caused by Russia has the power to trigger Article 5 of NATO, based on Lindsey Graham's proposed resolution. Article 5 of NATO is "collective defense," meaning that an attack against one Ally is considered an attack against all Allies. Last year a report by the Congressional Research Service confirmed that Russian or Ukrainian artillery is enough to destroy a nuclear power plant as they are not designed with defenses from artillery attack. This means that both sides have the ability to easily destroy the Zaporizhzhia power plant. IF the plant was attacked, WHO WOULD YOU BLAME AND WHY?

🚨BREAKING: FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS SOCIAL MEDIA FROM GOV INTERVENTION A federal judge has barred key members of the Biden administration from engaging in communication with social media companies regarding "protected speech." The injunction was filed by two Attorneys Generals from Louisiana and Missouri, who alleged that the actions taken by the Biden administration constituted "the most severe violations of the First Amendment in the history of the United States of America." If their claims are accurate, this would represent a Constitutional triumph, coinciding with the significant anniversary of US Independence. Although the case is still ongoing, Judge Terry A. Doughty stated that he was presented with "evidence of a substantial effort from the White House to suppress speech based on its content." The injunction carries wide-ranging implications, as it affects various branches of government agencies, including Homeland Security, FBI, HHS, CDC, among others. There exists a partisan history of lawsuits brought forth by both Republicans and Democrats concerning the role of social media. Republicans have maintained the viewpoint that free speech has been restricted, whereas Democrats have accused social media platforms of undermining democratic institutions by failing to curb "misinformation" and fake news. MY THOUGHTS: Having covered social media censorship comprehensively during the Twitter Files drops, I've seen first hand the negative impact of censorship, despite the mostly good intentions. I also witnessed the Government's tentacles within social media platforms, abusing their power for political and/or personal gain. The war between FREE SPEECH and the spread of MISINFORMATION rages on, and I cannot think of a solution. On the one hand, censorship is an example of consolidation of power that can be abused for good, but also for evil, and can be subject to bias and corruption. But at the same time, some things need censorship (hate speech, illegal action, gruesome content, pornography), and decentralized solutions are being tested (such as @ElonMusk’s Community Notes) WHICH SIDE DO YOU ALIGN WITH? Do you believe that social media hampers free speech or that it causes harm by disseminating fake news?

🚨THREE MASS SHOOTINGS AHEAD OF JULY 4TH HOLIDAY 10 Murdered and 38 Wounded in 48 hours of mayhem ahead of July 4th holiday in the US. In less than 2 days, three mass shootings in: 1) Philadelphia 2) Baltimore 3) Fort Worth (Texas) On Tuesday US officials described the carnage as "a grim illustration of the United States' decades-long failure to curb gun-fueled violence." Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families in this time of sorrow. Speaking about mass shootings, President Joe Biden on Tuesday said gun violence was tearing apart U.S. communities. Biden continued calls for Republican lawmakers in Congress to negotiate with Democrats on Gun Law Reform. In the past decade, there have been an average of five mass shootings on July 4th, more than on any other day of the year. Why? This could be because it is a time when people are gathered in large numbers to celebrate, which makes it easier for shooters to inflict maximum casualties. And the U.S continues to lead the world in mass shootings with 1.2 mass shootings per 1 million people, more than 3x more than the #2 country El Salvador. WHY ARE MASS SHOOTINGS IN THE U.S MORE COMMON THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD?

🚨SEC CHAIRMAN SACKED? Or Did A.I Trick Us? On Saturday, a rumor spread stating that "Gary Gensler (Chairman of the SEC) submitted his resignation following an internal investigation." But when you look into this FAKE rumour, the story takes a concerning DARK TURN... The story spread like wildfire, with one tweet alone reaching more than 1M views by Monday, as the crypto world celebrated! How did this get out of control, and who exposed it? You're in for a surprise... WHAT MADE IT BELIEVABLE? In April, a similar rumor spread claiming Gensler was FIRED, and this was reported and circulated widely by multiple small news sources and some folks on twitter.  Those articles name-dropped Republican Congressman Warren Davidson as a key individual involved in the firing. No reputable or highly respected source shared this rumor (including the mainstream media we all love to hate), but it was out there, and anyone on Twitter who sells their soul for engagement tweeted it without verifying. Next, on June 12, Warren Davidson (yes the same congressman) led other congressmen in introducing the 'SEC Stabilization Bill' where he stated: "U.S. capital markets must be protected from a tyrannical chairman, including the current one" He was obviously referring to Gensler, and even joined our show to discuss his bill. With this week's fake news, it was not until yesterday that Fox Business journalist Eleanor Terrett (a regular on our show) verified from the SEC that Gensler was NOT fired. This was further corroborated by Fox senior correspondent Charles Gasparino. It's ironic that, despite their MANY imperfections, the mainstream media at least VERIFY their stories (worried for their reputation and any lawsuits), unlike random social media 'influencers' chasing engagement. AI & FAKE NEWS Multiple journalists identified two issues with the original source of the information: 1) The source was a new website registered on June 24. How could it have such high level insider information when it's a week old?? How didn't anyone spot this?!? 2) A greater than 95% confidence in the article being fake news written or generated by AI. POINT 2 is what concerns me... In a world of fake news, the ability of AI to generate articles cannot be matched by humans. Maybe now we can appreciate what Gartner (the research and consulting service for IT and Computer Science) warned us of in 2019 when their article predicted "bots and AI [will] counterfeit reality and fake news" TWO FACES OF AI Ironically, the people who found out that AI was used to write the fake news actually used... Wait, for it... You guessed it right, AI! So AI was able to expose the fake AI-generated story! There is a new war where fake news articles and deep fakes are pitting AI against AI, with each side trying to outdo the other. It may appear that, at least for now, fake news is winning the war in a world where 'real time' news gets more engagement than facts, making ‘BEING FIRST’ more important for engagement-whores than ‘BEING RIGHT’. But the war is just getting started... Unfortunately for the crypto bros, no celebration yet, Gensler is still the Chairman of the SEC. MY THOUGHTS: As AI gets smarter, it is being used to capitalize on the darker side of human nature, in this case leading to the spread of fake news (including deep fake) It is both a worrying and exciting time for humanity as we learn to live with an intelligence that is on the verge of outsmarting us. I have 2 QUESTIONS for you: 1. Do you think Gensler will be fired this year? Should he be? 2. Will the AI vs AI war lead to MORE or LESS FAKE NEWS?

🚨BREAKING: META's Answer to Twitter (Threads) Release Date CONFIRMED 'Threads' will be released on Thursday in the U.S. The app has been described as a competitor to Twitter. According to an executive at Meta, its goal is to establish a "sanely run" social media site. However, the term "sanely run" might suggest that the app will collect ALL your data (something Meta typically has a penchant for 😉), as mentioned in the app's description. Personally, I firmly believe that @elonmusk's vision for Twitter is significantly superior and that he genuinely champions freedom of speech, in stark contrast to Zuckerberg's track record. If there is a glimmer of positivity in this situation, it is likely that Elon will train A LOT in preparation for his fight with Zuckerberg 😂 I'm wholeheartedly on team Twitter. Are you?

🚨 / 🇫🇷 FRANCE RIOTS: PROPAGANDA/MISINFO WARFARE Since the riots in France began, A TON of Misinformation has been spread on various social media platforms. In this thread, I’ll address some videos/pictures that many believe are from the riots, when in fact, are not. What drives me nuts the most are people who KNOW what they're posting is false, but they keep it anyway for engagement. What is the best solution to misinformation & disinfromation? Let's check out a few examples: /1

🚨TWITTER LIMITS: What’s Going On? What’s Next? (explanation & analysis) Elon is shaking up Twitter, pushing back against aggressive A.I data scraping with controversial measures: Verified accounts limit of reading 10,000 posts per day (if you spend all day on Twitter, excluding sleep, that’s over 700 tweets an hour, or 11 per minute) Unverified accounts limit is 1,000 posts per day, so 90% less New unverified accounts, 500 per day BUT WHY? Under Elon’s directive, Twitter imposed limits on daily tweet views, trying to curb rampant data scraping by hundreds of organizations. This move has sparked a heated debate about data privacy and openness on the platform. ELON’S MOTIVE? Preventing Twitter from becoming a "bot-strewn hellscape", preserving the user experience while fighting "data pillagers." WHAT'S THE IMPACT? Twitter's new limitations could drastically change the social media landscape. For users, it might mean adjusting to restricted access, especially if they're not verified. For A.I companies, it presents a new challenge in collecting big data. The change in Twitter’s policy could be a tectonic shift similar to the advent of Twitter Blue and the premium API, according to critics. CAN IT DELIVER? The drastic measures have stirred the Twitterverse, with users divided over the imposed limits. Twitter's move can be seen as a response to the growing issue of data scraping, which has plagued social media and affected user experiences. However, industry pundits like Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games, have raised concerns over these 'account walls' and the potential detrimental effects on browsing the platform. ADDITIONAL DETAILS: - Elon said that current limits are TEMPORARY. This means that the limits may be changed, or scrapped altogether in the future. - In response to this move, Truth Social (Trump’s alternative to Twitter) has surged to the 18th position of most popular apps whilst Twitter has declined to the 62nd. Bluesky, another Twitter competitor, had to apparently halt sign ups due to the influx of users. I think people migrating to other platforms are acting prematurely based on emotion. We’ve seen this rodeo multiple times since Elon took over Twitter, yet the numbers at Twitter continue to hit All Time Highs. MEDIA ATTACK: I witnessed first hand the nasty ire of mainstream media over the past few days, so I can only imagine what bigger personalities like Elon go through. And they didn’t disappoint. Headlines included: - "Rate Limit could be Elon Musk's excuse, Twitter is broken likely due to bug or cloud issues” - “Elon Musk imposes idiotic limitations on how many tweets you can view” - “RIPTwitter begins to trend after Elon Musk announced limits on users” We’ve seen the same drama before, especially when Elon began unbanning accounts, or when Twitter Blue was introduced. While criticism is healthy, media has biases like all of us, and it is undeniable they see Twitter as a growing threat. Ironically, Elon’s tweet announcing the limitations had a record half a billion views. We’ve also seen Tucker Carlson’s videos hit figures that dwarf Fox News, and yesterday comedian Theo Von released his podcast on Twitter after it was banned on Spotify, reaching 30m views in 24 hours. MY THOUGHTS: We are in the EXTREMELY EARLY stages of Elon’s Twitter (less than a year). Elon still remains committed to free speech, and to me, THIS is the biggest improvement we’ve seen over ANY other social media platform. FREE SPEECH is more important than user experience, glitches or occasional downtime, and users will realize this as time passes. A.I's impact on Twitter could be transformative, but the platform is just starting to navigate these choppy waters. TIME WILL TELL Do you agree with my thoughts? Is Elon's Twitter BETTER or WORSE?

🚨 / 🇫🇷 FRANCE ON FIRE After Boy Shot at Traffic Stop You’ve probably seen all the videos of buildings and cars on fire, the explosions and reported shootings in Europe’s 3rd largest economy. Some have even compared the footage to a war zone. While this is very dramatic, to say the least, it still shows the extent of the unrest in the country. But why? WHY? An officer shot and killed a 17-year-old North African boy at a traffic stop. A prosecutor has determined the need for an investigation for voluntary homicide. It was the third killing this year during a police traffic stop, after a record 13 deaths last year. Most of the victims have been black or Arab. A study by an independent French human rights watchdog found that Blacks and Arabs in France were 20x more likely to be stopped by Police. Amnesty International has been critical of French Police’s ethnic profiling and discrimination records. WHAT HAPPENED NEXT? Protests kicked off 3 days ago and continue to get worse. 40,000 law enforcement personnel were deployed in response to the unrest with hundreds of arrests and counting. Fears are mounting of a repeat of the 2005 riots, also sparked by the death of African boys during a Police chase, which saw mayhem in the country and thousands arrested. While most of France agree violent protests are never ok, some are using this as an opportunity to attack migrants and religious minorities, blaming them for the violence and claiming these riots are a result of lenient immigration laws. MY THOUGHTS: First, this hits close to home. I’ve spent a LOT of time in France and speak the language fluently. France is one of the most beautiful countries in the world, but they have their flaws, and we’re seeing one of them unravel yet again. We all agree the boy should not have been shot by the officer. We also agree that violent protests are NOT the answer. BUT, the problem goes deeper than this. Studies have shown systemic racism within the French police, despite denial by President Macron and France's Foreign Ministry. So, if there IS systemic issues, aren’t protests one way to force needed change? Yes and no. Protests serve an important piece of our democracy, one that should be cherished. They pressure authorities and Government officials to act. Unfortunately though, there will ALWAYS be bad actors in any protest, and these bad actors sometimes turn a peaceful protest in to a riot. When that happens, when a protest is dominated by rioters, a line is crossed. Do you agree with my take? WHEN does a protest CROSS THE LINE?

🚨BREAKING: SUPREME COURT MADNESS | Controversial LGBTQ+ Decision | Student Loan Relief AXED Today, the U.S. Supreme Court made two decisions that have caused uproar among members of the LGBTQ+ community and college students. CONTROVERSIAL LGBTQ DECISION: The Supreme Court has ruled that businesses can refuse to offer services to members of the LGBTQ+ community if the requested services go against their personal or religious beliefs. The issue brought to court originated in Colorado, involving an evangelical Christian named Lorie Smith, who was a web designer that declined to work on same-sex weddings. Her reasoning was that it contradicted her religious beliefs. Consequently, she sued the state, and to the surprise of many, the Supreme Court agreed with her, resulting in her victory. Many dedicated members and supporters of the LGBTQ+ community perceive this as a significant setback to their rights, while others view the decision as a victory for the First Amendment. It’s also worth noting that of the 9 justices of the Supreme Court, 6 are Republican. Of the 6, 3 were appointed by Trump, and the other 3 are Democrat. The court's decision today was 6-3, with the conservative justices taking Lori's side, while the Democratic justices opposed her. “Colorado seeks to force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion. A liberal justice, Sonia Sotomayor, wrote, “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class.” Many argue that this law will heighten discrimination towards the LGBTQ+ community. SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN BIDEN’S STUDENT LOAN RELIEF: The Supreme Court has recently made a series of controversial rulings. Yesterday, it deemed race-based college admissions unconstitutional, and today, it struck down Biden's plan to cancel $400 billion in student loan debt. Biden proposed the idea of canceling student loan debt during his 2020 presidential election campaign, and it would have resulted in forgiving up to $10,000 in debt for borrowers earning less than $125,000 a year. Again, it was a 6-3 ruling that foiled Biden’s plans, as the 6 Justices said Biden does NOT have the authority to cancel student loan debt. Biden responded by saying, "I will stop at nothing to find other ways to deliver relief to hard-working middle-class families. My administration will continue to work to bring the promise of higher education to every American." All 3 decisions made by the Supreme Court in the last 2 days have caused high levels of controversy, with a notable uproar from the left. Do you agree with the recent decisions made by the Supreme Court? Is the court being POLITICIZED?

🚨Biden Says Supreme Court is "Not a Normal Court" After Race-Based College Admissions are Ruled Unconstitutional Today, the Supreme Court ruled that race-based admissions to college are unconstitutional and instructed colleges to stop considering the race of applicants for admission. The 6-3 majority stated that the two programs "unavoidably employ race in a negative manner" and "involve racial stereotyping" in a way that violates the Constitution. Biden responded to this decision by stating "discrimination still exists in America," and added that "today's decision does not change that." As Biden was leaving the room, a reporter asked if the court is "broken," to which Biden replied "this is not a normal court." Agree with Biden's Criticism of the Supreme Court? Does the court’s decision promote RACIAL EQUALITY, or does it have the opposite effect?

🏳️‍⚧️ Why Are Transgender Suicide Rates SO HIGH? A study spanning four decades and involving seven million people in Denmark shows that transgender individuals have SIGNIFICANTLY higher suicide rates compared to other groups. The study found that in Denmark, transgender people had 7.7 times the rate of suicide attempts and 3.5 times the rate of suicide deaths when compared to the general population. Other studies conducted in 2022 have also shown that over 50% of transgender and non-binary youth in various states across the U.S. have seriously considered suicide. Furthermore, several studies have found that transgender individuals are more likely to experience mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation compared to the general population. WHY IS THIS THE CASE? There are several possible reasons for this, although it is extremely difficult to pinpoint the root cause: GENDER DYSPHORIA: Gender dysphoria is a medical condition that describes the distress or discomfort experienced by individuals whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth. It's important to note that not all transgender people experience gender dysphoria, and not all individuals who experience gender dysphoria are transgender. It is argued that individuals grappling with mental health issues may turn to suicide attempts as a result of undergoing gender transition. Critics posit that altering one's gender is an inadequate solution and, in fact, may contribute to a significant increase in suicide rates. In contrast, many proponents contend that providing mental health support to these individuals is a more appropriate course of action. DISCRIMINATION: Although society, particularly in the West, has become more accepting of transgender people, discrimination still persists. A study in 2021 found that nearly HALF of all transgender people have faced mistreatment by medical providers. As some states have imposed restrictions on transgender healthcare under the guise of opposing the 'woke agenda,' it has become increasingly challenging for many transgender individuals to access the medical treatment they need, leading to worsened mental health outcomes. OTHER FORMS OF MENTAL ILLNESS: Many individuals may be dealing with other mental illnesses such as depression, PTSD, or anxiety. These conditions can contribute to confusion or impulsive decisions, ultimately exacerbating mental health challenges and potentially leading to suicide in extreme cases. One thing remains certain however, more needs to be done to address this issue and more research is needed in order to prevent this problem from spreading. How do we effectively tackle the mental health crisis many trans people, and people in general are dealing with? IS THE WORLD EXPERIENCING A DEPRESSION EPIDEMIC?

JUST IN: @elonmusk begins training with for his highly-anticipated fight against Mark Zuckerberg His training partner, Lex Fridman, says he was "extremely impressed with his strength, power, and skill, on the feet and on the ground. It was epic" However, Lex believes Elon and Mark should NOT fight, and I agree. Their time is better spent focusing on changing the world, both in their own rights. Anything that delays Neuralink's chips or our trip to Mars, I am against. Jokes aside, DO YOU REALLY THINK Elon and Mark should fight?