Podcasts about nics

Episode 275-Pretti’s Law  Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 275 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, Minnesota protest, Firearm Policy Coalition, natural rights, government officials, political opportunity, federal law, carry rights, red flag laws, gun rights, law enforcement, public carry, constitutional rights, gun policy, political reaction. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Speaker 1, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:18 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:20 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:21 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we’ve been following the events in Minnesota, and I’m sure you have as well. And, you know, this is troubling. It’s created quite an interesting political situation, and it’s kind of strange to see sides shifting. Yet, it appears that this may, in fact, be a political opportunity to help the Second Amendment get strengthened. Let me tell you where I’m going with this. Take a look here at the Firearm Policy Coalition’s recent statement. (https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-statement-rights-are-not-privileges) I don’t know if you’re familiar with the FPC, but they do a lot of great work in litigating through the court system, Second Amendment challenges. As a national group, they do good work, and they put out a statement that I thought was very interesting. It’ll lay the groundwork as we get a little bit more into depth about where I see some potential here that should be taken, frankly, advantage of in this interesting moment in time. Evan Nappen 01:50 So, what the FPC wrote in their statement is this. “Recent events in Minnesota underscore a recurring and deeply troubling theme: Government officials and commentators treating natural rights as privileges.” Now that’s an important statement right there about treating rights as privileges. As they mentioned in the article, the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth, is merely codification of pre-existing rights. They don’t create the rights. The Supreme Court has long recognized that the right to keep and bear arms is not a right granted by the Constitution. The Constitution simply is a guarantee of those rights and puts limits on Government, not the people. That’s why, if someone ever asked you, what rights are you given by the Constitution? The answer is none! Because those rights pre-exist the Constitution. The Constitution is there as a guarantor, guaranteeing those rights against the Government. And it puts limits on the Government to ensure that our rights stay respected. It doesn’t grant us rights. Only God granted us our rights, or natural law has granted those rights. Fundamental, fundamental natural laws. That’s what we’re talking about when it comes to actual rights. Page – 2 – of 9 Evan Nappen 03:18 So, this gets distorted politically by politicians who apparently seem to forget that. And here we end up in Minnesota, where this individual, (Alex) Pretti, came to this protest with a gun. The FPC points out that the mere presence of a firearm does not erase a person’s rights. It doesn’t turn lawful conduct into wrongdoing. It does not make someone fair game to be arrested or killed for the Government’s convenience. The Government does not get to flip the legal or moral burden. The fact that one is armed is not a license for the Government to shoot you! Nor is a right to bear arms a license for any person to use unjust force. And that is very strong and very true. This is where this situation now where Pretti ended up getting shot and killed by ICE for essentially bringing his gun to the protest. There’s a lot of dispute now over whether he used it, drew it, or whether he’s being disarmed, whether there was, I mean, there. All that’s out there. Evan Nappen 04:43 But my point isn’t whether Pretti, as a matter of fact, I don’t even support Pretti’s political view here. I’m all for ICE. I’m not. I don’t want to see our country with illegal immigrants but that’s my view. That’s my opinion. Okay, that’s fine. And Pretti had his opinion. He has a First Amendment right, and he has a Second Amendment right. The problem is reaction to the exercise of his Second Amendment right. When you take a look at what happened here, it’s somewhat disturbing that those folks that are supposed to be understanding what the Second Amendment means take an anti-Second Amendment group’s view. So, Politico had an article. It’s “Gun Rights groups blast Trump over Minnesota response”. (https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/27/gun-rights-groups-blast-trump-over-minnesota-response-00748217) And in fact, they did. Evan Nappen 05:47 Let me show you what has happened, where the tables and the issue has turned here. It’s very interesting, because I think it presents an opportunity that we’ll get to in a moment. So, for example, this is right from the Politico article. “FBI Director Kash Patel said Sunday on Fox News. ‘You cannot bring a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It’s that simple. You don’t have a right to break the law.’ DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said Saturday that she didn’t ‘know of any peaceful protester that shows up with a gun and ammunition rather than a sign.’ White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday that ‘any gun owner knows’ that carrying a gun raises ‘the assumption of risk and the risk of force being used against you,’ during interactions with law enforcement.” I mean, come on. What the hell is with these people there? They are feeding into the Second Amendment oppressionists with this, with this stuff. Evan Nappen 07:05 So, gun rights groups pushed back, and a number of them were particularly enraged by Bill Essayli. He’s the acting U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, who posted, “If you approach law enforcement with a gun, there is a high likelihood they will be legally justified in shooting you.” What the “f” is he saying? Are you kidding me? If you approach law enforcement with a gun, there’s a high likelihood that they’ll be “legally justified in shooting you”. The NRA, okay? The NRA said that Essayli’s remarks were “dangerous and wrong” and called for a full investigation, instead of “making generalizations and demonizing law-abiding citizens”. That’s the NRA folks saying that now to this Page – 3 – of 9 character. Aidan Johnston, the Director of federal affairs for Gun Owners of America, called Essayli’s remarks, “absolutely unacceptable”. That’s GOA. I mean, listen this quote from Johnston. “Federal prosecutors should know better than to comment on a situation when he didn’t know all the facts, to make a judgment in a case like this, and then also, just to make a blanket statement, threatening gun owners in that way.” And Johnston is absolutely right. It’s outrageous. And yet, yeah, Teddy. Teddy Nappen 08:48 I will say, just taking a step back and looking at what they’ve kind of just put out of their reaction. You brought a gun and all the other and there’s stupid comments. What they could have said, which would have been a very easy play, is the Second Amendment isn’t your right to attack law enforcement officers. All right.? It has nothing to do with the carry. It had to do with the fact that it is agitators obstructing and attacking ICE. That would have been the very easy statement, but no. Evan Nappen 09:21 They focused just on the action and not the carry. But instead they focus on, oh, you come up to a law officer with a gun, they’re legally justified at shooting you. No, they’re not. They’re not. Unless you’re going to use it wrongly. Okay, we can all. And then the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus chair Bryan Strawser, he said, “We can all see what is on the video” what happened, and he’s not on the side of what the Trump administration is putting out. As a matter of fact, it says, an analysis done by the Washington Post that federal agents appear to have secured Pretti’s gun moments before an agent shot him. Teddy Nappen 10:18 So, just to break it down, a little more from that which they’re ignoring. I love the mainstream media loves to ignore. They take away the first 30 seconds where it’s him getting into it with the officers, where they’re blocking traffic, where he’d been doing that all day, and the woman was also blocking traffic. The officer shoves her out of the way because they’re blocking traffic, obstruction, you know, a crime. And then he tries to be the white knight and gets in it with the officer. They’re trying to pin him down to arrest him. He’s still fighting. He’s still fighting. One of the guys sees a gun and yells, gun. He pulls the gun away. And during it’s like, I didn’t know the timing of that. It’s like only a second or so split, and you hear them shout, gun. And the guy draws his pistol and he fires, because it’s a split second. I think there is a Supreme Court case where you have to look at it from the officer’s perspective, from there. Evan Nappen 11:13 And I can understand that. But what is disturbing is the key administration officials focusing on guns and gun owners and carry, instead of on the behavior of this person, which, arguably, is the real issue, and is what is the problem. Not having the gun. And then you combine that with, for example, Gavin Newsom, who, let’s face it, you know, he’s a Second Amendment oppressionist, right? I mean, he is. But what does he say? He says, “The Trump administration does not believe in the 2nd Amendment. Good to know.” So, okay, granted, he’s an opportunist here. But he’s actually seeing, even though we don’t believe he’s sincere, of course, but who knows? He’s seeing what’s wrong with what they’re saying. Even Newsom sees what’s wrong with their saying and then takes advantage of it in that way. Look, Representative Dave Min and Rep. Mary Peltola, one is a Democrat from California and the other Page – 4 – of 9 is a Democrat from Alaska. This is from the Politico article. They also used the moment to highlight the right to carry. Here’s their quote. “Joining the gun lobby to condemn Bill Essayli was not on my bingo card but here we are, Min said on X. “Lawfully carrying a firearm is not grounds for being killed.” So, there, look at that. A Democrat, Democrat, saying that, and Newsome even pointing out the hypocrisy of it. And here we have them really taking a terrible view of gun owners and carry. Evan Nappen 13:27 If you step back from all this, I see political opportunity, and I’ll tell you why. Because what I think would be very, very good would be to propose what we would call Pretti’s law. It’d be Pretti’s law. And what Pretti’s law would do would be to create a federal, pre-emptive right to carry in public. Going directly at the legal issue, by the way, in the Woolford case, the so-called vampire rule and other forms of public carry. We need a federal law that preempts, preempts, any state from putting forward so-called “sensitive place” laws that interfere with the right to carry that the Left has acknowledged, the Left is acknowledging in their defense of Pretti. This presents an opportunity to tie in with that national reciprocity so that you have your right to keep and bear arms respected, and we push this with the Pretti situation. Evan Nappen 14:52 In other words, why is it the Left always gets to take the situation and turn it to their advantage? Well, this is an opportunity for us to use this situation to our advantage, because you can see from what we just discussed that the Left is putting out that message. The Left is putting out the pro-Second Amendment message. The Left is seeing that carry was a right, that carry was fine for this, believe it or not, white male to be carrying. I mean, we should all be in shock that the Left is defending armed white males. Wow. But here they are. So, instead of letting this moment pass, let’s grab onto it. Let’s get a federal law that can go at and preempt, wiping out, sensitive place restrictions and getting through national reciprocity. We can do both of those things in this bill, because that is a solid focus federally on carry. That’s what we’re talking about here, and that’s what this situation highlights. Now is a chance to do federal protection of our carry rights, and it’s also a chance for the Trump administration to make clear their position in support of it as well. Here’s the common ground, folks. Here’s the common ground that this demonstrated, and I hope that someone takes advantage of it. Teddy Nappen 16:40 Also, just taking a step back on the whole situation here. The one good thing about this administration that everyone can agree on is that they listen. The one thing that they, anyone can just stop and say, like you can have disagreements on different things, but they listen. They hear what the issue is. And I get the sense that Kristi Noem and Kash Patel are not 2A. They never had the 2A mindset. They never had that. You know, people always say, oh, I’m for the Second Amendment. What does that mean? What do they actually believe and stand for, for that? And I think this is a moment for them to realize and learn what that actually stands for, for the people, for us, for what that means for us. The ability to carry and defend ourselves. Where we don’t have security teams. We don’t have, you know, the full backing of the U.S. Government to protect us every single day. So, I think this is a chance for the administration to learn, and heck, they should appoint like a gun czar, a 2A Czar. Someone to advise them on these issues. If they don’t know, don’t just go to X or Truth and post it. Ask and learn, and then you can have be more informed on the issue. Page – 5 – of 9 Evan Nappen 17:55 That’s a great idea, Teddy. It would be really good for them to do it, and I’d be happy to have that role. Speaker 1 18:01 Ha, ha, ha. Wow, yeah, man. Evan Nappen 18:07 Yep, that’s good. Well. Teddy Nappen 18:09 Yeah, he’s saying, like, all right. And then also legalize all machine guns. We’re closing down the ATF. Here’s a lot of recommendations. Evan Nappen 18:17 I’ve got them, but here is one where politically, we are seeing the other side, actually seeing it our way. And that’s an opportunity that we shouldn’t lose. That’s the point of this. Well, let me tell you about our friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is a range in Lakewood. An indoor range where both Teddy and I shoot, and we love it there. WeShoot is conveniently located right off the Parkway, and they have some cool specials I want to tell you about. They have a Smith M&P 9 M2.0 Compact ready to roll. They have that. They’re also offering the M&P 9 2.0 in Metal. So, you can have your choice in metal or polymer. They have the Vortex Triumph, which is an all new optic, right? It’s pretty cool. Vortex makes some good stuff. I have some Vortex on my guns. They also have the Rost Martin RM1C, which is a striker-fired compact pistol that is really taking the gun world by storm. You should check out the Rost Martin. It’s a really good gun. Evan Nappen 19:37 And, of course, you want to check out the WeShoot girls there. They’re featuring a number of folks, including Kristina Fernicola. Go to their website. Go to weshootusa.com. You can see all these wonderful guns, and the models posing with wonderful guns. And you will be glad that you went to look at all of that. I’m sure of it. Then make sure you check out the range at WeShoot. Go down to the range there. You can get some fantastic training. They have a great pro shop right there in Lakewood, New Jersey. weshootusa.com Evan Nappen 20:26 Also, I want to mention our friends at the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. They’ve been quite busy fighting in the courts and in the legislature in Trenton. Murphy’s gone, and we did get some new laws, of course. This is a very tough environment, but they also were able to get some changes that are critical. And I was glad to see modifications, although completely stopping when the folks have all the power, is tough, but they made a big difference. We are thankful. Because without the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, we would have no unified voice of umbrella organization of our clubs and organizations. You need to be a member of the Association. Go to ANJRPC.org and join today. You’ll get the newsletters that are the best newsletter in the state on guns. Page – 6 – of 9 You’ll see the email alerts. You’ll know everything that’s going on when it comes to our gun rights in New Jersey. anjrpc.org Evan Nappen 21:45 This is also when I shamelessly promote my book, which is New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of New Jersey gun law. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all question and answer. It’s your guidebook to not becoming a GOFU in New Jersey. And man, let me tell you, so many times people call me and it’s after the fact. I’m like if they had only read my book, oy vey. We’ll still fight and defend you, but it would have been a lot better if you never had the problem to begin with. And most of my clients would agree with that, I’m afraid. So, get your copy of my book today. Go to EvanNappen.com, EvanNappen.com, and get your copy of New Jersey Gun Law. At this moment, we have Teddy who’s going to tell us about Press Checks. What have you got for us Teddy? Teddy Nappen 22:45 Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. One of the things I always, I am always astounded by on the Left, because they try to act like they have knowledge and understanding of guns. We know, of course, the closeted hoplosexuals like (Josh) Sugarmann, who actually does know guns, but the vast majority of them do not know guns. I always think back, Dad, to your what was the quote, unquote “firearms expert” on fixed ammunition. Evan Nappen 23:23 Oh, gosh, yeah. Experts testifying under oath that are just flat out lying. Flat out lying. Teddy Nappen 23:32 So, yeah. And here is their new term that they’re trying to push. As I always believe in going to the, going to the gun right suppressors and see what’s their latest message? What are they pushing for? The new term that they have invented is “safeguarding”. That’s their new push. This comes out of The Trace, everyone’s favorite gun rights suppressor organization, written by Fairriona Magee. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/01/safeguard-gun-barber-red-flag-law-suicide/) Safeguarding. “Violence prevention groups and researchers have spent years working on initiatives to get firearms out of the hands of people who may pose a danger to themselves or others.” Hmm, through the risk, through extremist protection laws, known as Red Flag. Oh, yes. So, they’ve been getting so much flack about the legalized swatting that they have created. That they’ve been pushing through these insane Red Flag laws. So, I love this. While these laws have bipartisan support, oh, from a bunch of RINOs that are anti-gun and don’t believe in Second Amendment rights, but now the Second Amendment groups have launched a concerted attack on Red Flag laws in the court system. Gee, I wonder why. Evan Nappen 24:52 No due process. Teddy Nappen 24:53 Yeah, no due process. You get put in, you get locked up, you get labeled and all. Robbed. Firearms stolen and your rights and your life destroyed. Other than that. Page – 7 – of 9 Evan Nappen 25:03 Yeah. Teddy Nappen 25:04 So, in this supercharged political climate, what are the other options? Well, we have it for you. Safeguarding. The process of taking, temporarily taking, control of someone else’s guns, if they have risk of suicide or harming someone else without involving the criminal justice system. So, what does that mean? That means, okay, if you think your friend may want to hurt themselves or hurt others, just simply say, hey, man, why don’t I take your guns? Let me just keep them in my house. I think you’re going through a rough patch. I’m going to take your guns. These ideas are somewhat analogous with laws that allow people to temporarily ban themselves from buying guns. So, Dad, I’m pretty sure they just advocated for someone to commit a crime in New Jersey. Evan Nappen 25:59 In New Jersey that would be absolutely unlawful because of the other anti-gun laws that they helped push, such as Universal Background Check. So, how do you temporarily give guns to somebody when there’s no transfer of guns allowed unless you go through a dealer and go through the permitting system and go through the entire process? You can’t just say to your buddy in New Jersey, hey, let me just take your guns. No, you can’t do it. It’s got to go through a dealer. You’ve got to do all the paperwork, the NICS check, the whole bit. So, good luck with that. Good luck with that. Because if you listen to what they are telling you to do, you will be committing a felony level offense, multiple felony level offenses, in New Jersey. There is no temporary transfer. This is, in fact, officially, this week’s GOFU, Teddy. Evan Nappen 27:03 As far as I’m concerned, that’s the GOFU. Do not ever temporarily give your guns to somebody else in New Jersey, except under two very narrow circumstances. If you’re at the range, there is a law in New Jersey that allows you, only while the person’s in your presence, to let them try your gun at the range. Or if you’re hunting, and everybody’s legal and licensed and they’re there in your presence while hunting. That’s it. But that’s it. That’s the only temporary transfers allowed to adults legally. There is no provision in New Jersey that allows you to temporarily transfer your firearms or to take somebody else’s firearms temporarily because somebody might want to harm themselves, or you perceive that they’re thinking about harming themselves, or they tell you, hey, I’m thinking about harming myself. Or I would just feel better if you had my gun. Again, none of that flies in New Jersey. None of it. It is completely a violation of New Jersey gun laws. A violation of many of the laws that the gun rights oppressors have pushed to put in place in New Jersey. The reason you cannot do what they’re suggesting in New Jersey is because of their anti-Second Amendment gun laws themselves. So they pass and force the passage of these laws through their fellow comrades in the legislature and then give advice on how to violate the very laws, because they’re so clueless as to what they are doing in terms of the actual effect, the actual effect, it has on real people and the real situation. Teddy Nappen 28:59 So, I love how they end this article too. They get this expert, because they always have to. They always lean on the logical fallacy of, oh, I’m an expert, so trust me on this. Catherine Barber out of the Harvard Page – 8 – of 9 Injury Control Research Center, gee, that doesn’t sound biased. She makes this long winded argument, making it so this sounds like if you’re a gun owner, oh, you’re mentally ill, even though gun owners are more than twice at the risk of non gun owners from taking their own lives. And they equated where we should treat Red Flag like suicide prevention. Just this long winded expression, trying to make it seem like, oh, that’s right, if you own a gun, you probably have mental illness. That is the level of disgusting nature that these people are. And they try to argue that. Evan Nappen 29:56 Right. So they, so that. So, this person’s saying, if you own a gun, you’re mentally ill, and we have these administration folks and this U.S. attorney saying, essentially, if you have a gun, you’re a threat immediately to law enforcement. I mean, they’re just making these assumptions on both sides that are just strictly out of bounds when we’re talking about a Constitutional right, a Constitutional right. I mean, just make believe it’s the First Amendment instead of the Second Amendment. Anyone that freely speaks their mind is mentally ill. Anybody who freely talks to police is justified in being shot, and that doesn’t. Neither those statements make any sense, right? Evan Nappen 30:44 Well, we’re talking the Second Amendment. That’s a Constitutional right. It’s not a second class right, either. Just like the First Amendment is a right, and this right is supposed to be guaranteed by the Government. Guaranteed by the Government. Not given by the Government. It needs to get respected and put in the proper perspective of being treated as a right. It’s not a mental illness. It’s not a threat to law enforcement, intrinsically a threat. This all is based on the individual’s behavior. That’s the point, and that’s what the focus has to be on. But yet it’s so easy to just look at it as a symbol, the symbol. Americans always had this thing about going after the symbols. I mean, why were switchblades banned in the ’50s? Well, they were the symbol of juvenile delinquency, right? I mean, what? Why were machine guns banned, oh, the symbol. It was symbolism. It’s just this constant moral crusade by picking an item, an item to go after. We need to look at actions of people. What is not malum prohibitums, where a legislative body just decides this should be banned or that should be banned. But instead, we focus on the malum and say things that are wrong within themselves, and those things are the actions and wrongdoings by people. That’s where laws have to focus. Teddy Nappen 32:41 I think it definitely needs to be a wake up call. Because, look, I understand, and hopefully we do get common ground. And you know what, if Pretti’s law comes into play and we get enough the Democrats to jump on because they want to, you know, look like they’re 2A affiliates or whatever, which, by the way, anytime you hear the news, the CNN, MSNBC, use the words 2A or democracy. You look at the little end, it’ll say, TM, trademark. It’s their version of the Second Amendment, their version of democracy. That is what they always argue. It’s rules for thee, not from rules for thee, not for me. That is how the Left operate. So, just remember that every time they’re trying to coax the Left, the right against the administration. Evan Nappen 33:30 Well, Pretti’s law will have an interesting effect, because it’ll put the Left on the spot, on the vote. Do you support being able to carry a firearm in public the way he did, where you’re claiming to? Well now Page – 9 – of 9 you’re going to have to put your money where your mouth is. So, to speak, you have to vote. You better vote, I think. And within the same question, wait gets made to the other side. Do you support the Second Amendment or not? So, this is why, politically, it’s an opportunity. Teddy Nappen 34:05 I think we joked that Trump should come out against carry, which would force the Left. Like, I think we joked about that exact thing there. You’re right. He should come out against machine guns. Evan Nappen 34:19 Yeah, absolutely. Okay, because actually, the next thing you know, you’ve got Newsom putting out and Democrat Congresspersons putting out, pro-gun statements, pro-Second Amendment statements. I mean, it’s well, that’s why it’s opportunity time, and hopefully someone will take advantage of it. Evan Nappen 34:48 Well, this is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens. Speaker 2 35:01 Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing Evan@gun.lawyer. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E275_Transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.Known as “America's Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it's no wonder he's become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets. Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It's Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham's Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News. As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists. He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America. Email Evan Your Comments and Questions  talkback@gun.lawyer Join Evan's InnerCircleHere's your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America.  Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL.  Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits.   Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

Ashley pulled a diabolical move on social media that duped Joe into thinking that she did this for her grandmother... See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ashley is coming in hot to Sickles High School tonight where she is going to have her first ever concession stand food review.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

One of our co-workers gave Ashley a new nickname... but is it good enough to stick? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This morning Ashley and Jed air out their grievances about kids and should they be allowed at certain places... See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode 274- State Police RPO Cover-Up  Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Gun Lawyer Transcript – Episode 274 SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 and I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:21 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, our good friend, John Petrolino, who writes about many, many important topics, particularly as well concerning New Jersey, has an article that was in Bearing Arms. And I want to talk about what he’s raised here. The article’s title is “New Jersey State Police Tight Lipped Over Retired Police Permits”. (https://bearingarms.com/john-petrolino/2026/01/21/new-jersey-statepolice-tight-lipped-over-retired-police-permits-n1231288) So, what John has done is he’s used the New Jersey form of OPRA (Open Public Records Act), the Freedom of Information Act, asking the authorities in New Jersey for the number of permits issued to retired police officers. Evan Nappen 01:15 You may recall the then Attorney General Platkin did put up that dashboard and released the data of public statistics regarding carry permits, the number of permits issued. There’s been over 92,000 approved applications for carry permits in New Jersey, and of those approvals, 64,000 are non-expired permits. Now it’s interesting that the State puts out that data, but they don’t put out the data as to the RPO permits. The Retired Police Officer permits, and we want to find out how many folks carry that are not law enforcement, right? That are civilian. And let’s face it, Retired Police Officers are still civilians, even though they were formerly law enforcement. Originally carry was outside of being law enforcement and outside of New Jersey’s insane carry permit system back then, where you had to show “justifiable need”, which, as you may recall, meant showing of urgent necessity. This meant showing that a gun was necessary for you to defend yourself from death or serious bodily injury and that carrying a handgun was the only means that could do it. I mean, it was a standard that was so extreme that basically, if you’ve been shot and killed, you then qualified for a New Jersey carry permit. Evan Nappen 03:08 Now that went away thanks to the Bruen decision, and New Jersey jumped from less than 600 carry permits to now 64,000 valid permits and 92,000 valid, approved permits. But it does not include the RPOs. Now, RPOs had the ability to carry before Bruen, and during that time period when regular old civilians who weren’t retired law enforcement could not defend themselves with a firearm and carry in that manner, right? They were deemed to have to be victims instead of defenders. But now, for some reason, the State Police and such will not release the number of RPO permits. We’re not asking for names. John went forward here, and he didn’t ask for names. He didn’t ask for anything. He just wants to know how many? How many of the RPO permits are out there as well. This should be looked at in the aggregate with all the other carry permits that are out there, and yet that doesn’t happen. Page of 1 8 Evan Nappen 04:25 In December of 2025, John sent a request for the number of RPO permits, and it was denied. And the request was denied weirdly and strangely for reasons that just don’t make any sense. And I’m going to tell you. It makes you wonder, why is there a cover up? The reason they denied it, the reason the State Police have put in writing for the denial. Well, get a load of this. “Improper and Overbroad” was the main reason. Can you believe that the information is supposedly improper and overbroad? Why would wanting to know a statistical fact such as the number of RBO permits be considered overbroad? And why would it be considered in any way improper? It is strictly information. It is based on a record. It absolutely should be released. Evan Nappen 05:52 How come they are releasing the numbers for civilian carry permits, right? The 92,000. How come that’s not “improper and overbroad”? No, the Attorney General does it. Go ahead. Why? Tell me. Why do you think? Teddy Nappen 06:10 So, going back to because John also, if I recall, broke the story about denials where, what was it? Blacks were five times more likely to be denied to their carry. Evan Nappen 06:22 Yes, institutionalized racism. That exists in New Jersey. Teddy Nappen 06:31 So, add into the fact that you have the, well, here’s the trick. The Left have always been anti-police. That is a fact. They were the ones that wanted to defund the police. They were the ones for that. So, now we have the first factor of showing the absolute racism of the gun laws. But also the fact that they were supporting the only carry which, by the way, how much you want to bet they were all for the RPOs under all the Democrat Governors who allowed those carries to come into play. How much of that look, if it shows that there’s this massive amount of RPOs being issued. And because the Left are Marxists who absolutely hate police and hate law and order, this would make them look like absolute elitists and hypocrites. Evan Nappen 07:19 So, the fear is that, arguably, in the defund the police mentality, that if retired police are being armed, they don’t want any police armed, even if they’re retired, because of the perceived threat that they put out there that law enforcement creates toward minorities. In their view, not in my view. Not in my view. It’s the opposite. I mean, the fact is, they’re out there as protectors, defenders of the good people of our State. Every retired officer is somebody who’s not only armed, but also is experienced in armed defense, having served as a law enforcement officer. They’re a resource. They’re a positive benefit to our society. Yet, they’re probably scared of the politics. I mean, why else? What? There’s nothing about it that makes it “improper”. And it sure isn’t “overbroad”. It would be overbroad, maybe, if you want to know the name and address and Dox every carry RPO that’s out there. That’s not being requested. We just want the damn number. How many RPO carry permits? Teddy Nappen 08:41 Page of 2 8 It honestly reminds me, Dad, of that poster you had hung up. It was the joke where it shows if the Left could rewrite the Second Amendment. And I think, and I remember, you remember that. They crossed out, remember, they crossed out militia. And it says, like, military and police, employed police only. We’re kind of that logic where like, well, they’re not in the service, so why should they be armed? Not because there’s massive doxing websites, and that’s why ICE has to have their mask on for that exact reason. But. Evan Nappen 09:17 Exactly. Well, the fight is still ongoing and the question is raised. Why not just give us the number so we all know? And I would like to see a huge number of RPOs. I hope there’s lots of them out there. The more trained law-abiding folks that have firearms, the safer we are. And retired police are perfect in that regard. That’s exactly what we want to see. So, whatever their basis is, it just creates more of a conspiracy, and it just politicizes it so unnecessarily. It’s ridiculous. Release the number. Let us know. Let’s join in showing how many armed folks are out there. Maybe that’s another reason. They’re afraid that if that number, you know is even more, now, more and more people are carrying and suddenly the BITS argument they love to make right? Blood In The Streets. BITS. There’ll be blood in the streets with civilian carry, you know. No, it didn’t happen. And it’ll be the Wild West. It’s not the Wild West. And look at how many folks have carries when you combine the numbers. Maybe they’re afraid of that political aspect. But, you know, we have a right to know these numbers. It’s not a secret. It’s not improper. It’s not overbroad. Just let us know, and we deal with the facts. Evan Nappen 10:47 I also want to bring a couple very interesting things out that I’ve recently learned about. An important one here is the old “Bang or Bong – You can’t have both”. Well, shortly, at least a greater degree, you may be able to have both because President Trump, through his administration, folks, keep that in mind. Through the Trump administration, they have proposed, through ATF, revision of their regulation concerning the interpretation of what a “user of drugs” as a disqualifier, what it means. You know, for almost 30 years, ATF has said they treat even a single incident, a single past admission of marijuana use, or a failed drug test, or one misdemeanor marijuana conviction as evidence of a person being an unlawful user. They have now put forward an administrative reg that when it becomes finalized, which should be happening within the next few months, it will make it so that those things no longer will be deeming a person “an unlawful user”. And this should be of great help. Evan Nappen 12:25 From an article in AmmoLand, written by Dean Weingarten, which is entitled “ATF Finally Admits: One-time Drug Use Isn’t Grounds to Strip Gun Rights.” (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/01/atf-finally-admitsone-time-drug-use-isnt-grounds-to-strip-gun-rights/) It makes it really interesting here regarding that. In 2025, NICS denied 9,163 firearm transfers under the “unlawful user” category, okay? So, in other words, denials, denials of over 9,000 transfers, more than half of those denials, more than half, were single-incident drug inferences. Well, under this rule, those will no longer be denials. That’s over what? Four thousand people that will not be denied their gun rights, just in that one year, no less. Of people being denied over this nonsense. And furthermore, in this article, ATF admitted that 8,893 cases, it declined to investigate, prosecute, or retrieve firearms because of a single-drug incident. So, they’re denying individuals and not prosecuting. Yet, they’re using it as a base for denial. So, finally, we’re getting a reg of common sense that clears it up. Evan Nappen 14:05 Page of 3 8 And it even, to me, appears to go further. Now this may take a little bit more analysis, but in my reading of the reg, and I’m going to have to see how it pans out, it also talks about those that use drugs that are lawfully prescribed. That becomes an exemption. I’m going to be looking further into whether this reg also directly impacts individuals with a medical marijuana card. Because if it’s prescribed and it’s legal in the state and it’s by a lawful prescription, then maybe that, too, gets covered by this new regulation. It remains to be seen, but it sure seems like it. So, this is good. It progress in the right direction of helping protect our gun rights. And, of course, it’s happening under the Trump administration. It didn’t, this didn’t happen under, you know, the senile sock puppets for years. This is Trump, and yet it’s in the area of marijuana. I mean, oddly, it’s going to essentially remove what got Hunter Biden in trouble, you know. Now, of course, I don’t think he had a single individual use, but still. It’s that disqualifier that’s being addressed by the Trump administration. Evan Nappen 15:40 I also want to point out something that caught my attention, and I think it is just great when something illustrates the absurdity of the gun laws. As you know, we’re fighting over with the big, beautiful lawsuit with NFA over suppressors. Of course, there’s no more $200 tax, which is nice, and they have made it much more efficient online to be able to get federally registered through the National Firearm Act, when acquiring suppressors. And I appreciate the progress, but we all know that there shouldn’t be any NFA at all. It shouldn’t exist. There should be no registration of suppressors or silencers. And it’s so stupid the way silencers are regulated. And I just love this. Apparently, this fellow here, regarding the National Association for Gun Rights, registered a potato as a suppressor. That’s right, a potato. (https:// www.facebook.com/share/v/1Aadb9chUS/) It’s the classic potato silencer that they used to be, mythologically, I guess, accredited to the IRA even. A potato on the end of a gun will act as a suppressor, and to a certain degree, it does. So, he registered a potato, an actual potato, as a suppressor, and then proceeded to utilize it. The only problem with the potato silencer is it’s good for about one shot, and then you end up with a lot of mashed potatoes after you use it. But there you go. They did, in fact, register the potato as a silencer. Teddy Nappen 17:31 There’s a slang term for it, too it’s called a Paddy can. Evan Nappen 17:35 There you go. A Paddy can. Well, he registered a Paddy can. And you know, ATF, also, in the past, registered a shoelace as a machine gun, because you could wrap it around the trigger and the bolt. Then you could do a quasi bump fire deal with it. So, there is a bona fide, if you go on the internet, see a bona fide ATF registered shoelace as a machine gun. We have potatoes as silencers, and I think it illustrates just how stupid the NFA is. Evan Nappen 18:07 Hey, let me tell you about our friends at WeShoot. WeShoot, as you know, is a range where Teddy and I both shoot, and they have been lately featuring some biographies of their instructors. You see, WeShoot has fantastic instructors, and one of their instructors that they’ve taken a focus on is Todd Friedman. Now, their instructors are fantastic and Lieutenant Todd (Retired) is an elite tactical instructor at WeShoot. He has over 25 years experience with the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office. And he didn’t just serve there. He commanded. He was Special Operations Group, Range Master, PTC Certified Range Instructor. His training and background is really something. He’s completed all the advanced coursework and tactical shot sub gun, tactical rifle, tactical narcotics operations. He is an amazing guy, Page of 4 8 and this is just one of the many fantastic instructors at WeShoot. WeShoot is the place to go. Todd, by the way, also served as a Sergeant First Class in the New Jersey National Guard and supporting the prestigious 82nd Airborne Division. So, this is the kind of guy you want training you, you know, and we shoot has these fantastic trainers. You can take advantage of this by belonging to WeShoot. You can take these courses and really, really learn and hone your skills. You need to check out WeShoot at weshootusa.com, weshootusa.com. It’s a beautiful range right there in Lakewood, conveniently located easy to get to, right off the Parkway, right there in Central Jersey. You have this fantastic resource of a range. So, make sure you check out WeShoot. Evan Nappen 20:24 And of course, our friends at the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs have been very busy. They’ve been battling in the courts. We should see some more progress there, and I’ll be reporting on that. They’ve been keeping an eye on what’s going on in Trenton and letting us know about these fights we’re fighting. We’ve made an impact. We’ve made an impact. But man, it is a tough slog. And without the Association, we would be even worse. So, make sure that you join the ANJRPC.org, the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol clubs. anjrpc.org. They are the premier gun rights group in New Jersey. You need to be a member. You’ll get the email alerts, and you’ll stay on top of what is going on in the crazy state of New Jersey, where the fun just never ends when it comes to oppression of our rights and the fight for our liberties. Evan Nappen 21:22 And by the way, this is where I shamelessly promote my book New Jersey Gun Law, which is the Bible of New Jersey gun law. You’ve got to get a copy. Go to EvanNappen.com. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all question and answer. It is the book used by everybody, and the only book that describes and explains the complex matrix of insanity called New Jersey gun law. Get your copy today. Go to EvanNappen.com. When you get it, scan the front cover. Make sure you get on my private subscriber base, where you can immediately access the archives for any updates. A new update will be coming out very shortly, the 2026 Comprehensive Update of these new laws that Murphy gave us as his farewell present. I’ll be talking about those and explaining those soon. Get your copy today and join in with the subscriber base, which is free, which is free, by the way. So, that your book stays current, and you’ll know what’s going on and be able to keep yourself from becoming a GOFU. Evan Nappen 22:35 Teddy, what do you have for us today? Teddy Nappen 22:38 Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. And I want to remind everyone that the Democrats and the Left are, in fact, the real racists. No matter. They do not care what bounds they have to do. They don’t care about what lines they have to cross. They hate you, and they want to take away your rights. You know. Evan Nappen 23:06 Well, Teddy, historically, historically the KKK were Southern Democrats. That was a KKK. The Democrats. Teddy Nappen 23:15 Yep, and apparently. Page of 5 8 Evan Nappen 23:16 Well, it hasn’t changed, apparently. Go ahead. Teddy Nappen 23:19 Well, even better, they’re getting back to their roots. We had previously discussed how the they tried to do that whole argument against Bruen and even citing to like, you know, all the racist laws that would deny blacks their rights to carry and ability to possess firearms. Well, sure enough, from The Daily Caller by Harold Hutchinson. Justice Jackson defends Jim Crow laws during Second Amendment case hearing. (https://dailycaller.com/2026/01/20/ketanji-brown-jackson-jim-crow-law-during-2a-case-argument/) If you have that on your bingo card today, you win. So. Evan Nappen 23:59 Your bingo card is Judge Jackson defends Jim Crow racist Black Codes. Teddy Nappen 24:05 Black Code. Specifically Black Codes. Yes, yes. So, this is about the Hawaii challenge. Remember, they’re trying to attack Bruen. And this is our opportunity to really strengthen and end that insanity. Evan Nappen 24:20 Your talking about the Wolford case. Teddy Nappen 24:20 Correct. Evan Nappen 24:22 About sensitive places. Which is very important. That can have great impact on New Jersey, too. Teddy Nappen 24:28 Oh, we’re all very too familiar about the various sensitive places in New Jersey. But this was the part that caught me. During the forum, where the justices are allowed to ask questions and probe the issues of the facts of the case of the law. So, Justice Jackson then turned and decided to go on and say. I just laugh every time I read it. So, I guess I really don’t understand your response to Justice Gorsuch on the Black Codes. I mean, I thought the Black Code, this is Jackson, were being offered under the Bruen test to determine the Constitutionality of this regulation, and that, because we have a test, and that asks us to look at the history and tradition, the fact that the Black Codes were at some point determined themselves unconstitutional, it doesn’t seem to me to be relevant to the assessment that Bruen is asking us for anyway. So, can you say more about that? So to. Evan Nappen 25:35 Do you believe this person is a justice? Teddy Nappen 25:40 Well, I can, I can believe it, because Biden said it himself. He was going to appoint a black woman and regardless of that. So, just take a step back though. Let’s unpack that line right there. It’s not relevant to the fact the laws were found unconstitutional, not relevant to the fact of the constitutionality of the Second Amendment and the and the fact that you are citing, and this is the war on Bruen they are Page of 6 8 making, where they try to say history, text and tradition. Where does history begin? Well, to the Left, apparently, the history begins in the 1860s where you have the various Black Codes and racist gun laws, but you know, to us with the, you know, traditionalists and go and have a little bit further knowledge of history, go back to the very foundation of our country and when the Second Amendment was born. And not only that, this shows you the degree that they hate us and hate guns and are willing to pursue a second amendment oppression agenda, even to the degree that they will utilize unconstitutional purely racist laws of the past to justify prohibitions now that are themselves we can show utilizing institutionalized racism in their enforcement, no less. I mean, they don’t care, as long as they can get the guns and take away the rights. So what if they have to be on the side of racism? That’s fine with them there. Teddy Nappen 27:28 Well, and here’s the reason why I pulled from The Trace where, you know, they absolutely loathe Bruen. This is why they hate it, and this is why they don’t care where length they have to go they cite in. This is from The Trace. (https://www.thetrace.org/projects/bruen-tracker-supreme-court-gun-laws/) 1100 plus. The number of people with felony convictions have used Bruen to challenge the ban on the possession of guns. So, in other words, people that were lawful possession and have unconstitutional laws currently putting them in jail? Oh, now there’s a hammer that is Bruen that can actually help them defend themselves and not be prosecuted. Amazing. Well. And it goes back to race, because blacks are six to one felons to whites, and what is the left pushing? Oh, the disqualifier of a felon, you are sure, because it gets a racial discrimination. It’s six to one again, always pushing the one side of their mouth, claiming to fight for civil rights. Teddy Nappen 28:37 And yet, when it really comes down to the truest of civil rights, they immediately sell it out to pursue a second amendment oppression agenda, yeah, and also the fact they highlight, they highlight this rate of 48% of Republican appointed judges have struck down various gun laws under Bruen, as opposed to the 13 Democrat appointees. So there is political bias for that, you where they’re actually applying the law versus them ignoring the Constitution. But you know, that’s a separate but this is something I want to highlight to everyone. The fact is, if the Left ever take power back, and James Carville has said this, they will pack the court. He said, we’re going to pack the court. We’re going to make a gonna make Puerto Rico a state like everything they can to maintain power. Teddy Nappen 29:30 What are they going to do when they pack the court? Go ahead and read the dissenting of Bruen. I pulled the line right here from buyers, which all of them agree with buyers on this. They refuse, when considering the SEC refuse to consider government interests and just and the challenge to gun regulations regarding the compelling interest to be, in our view, when the court interprets the Second Amendment, it is constitutionally proper and in often necessary. Necessary to consider the serious danger and consequences of gun violence that lead states to regulate when you when they consider gun laws, they have to factor in the gun violence. You know, the propaganda they promote, race manufacturers on a daily basis, by the way, right? That’s what they have to consider when exercising. So whenever you want to exercise the First Amendment, always consider the hate speech. This is why Reagan said, you know, freedom is only what one generation away from being lost. You know, paraphrasing, but that’s what it means. If they get power, they get total power. We’re in for it, so be vigilant, folks. Make sure you vote. Make sure you do your part in our republic, in defending our rights. Page of 7 8 Evan Nappen 30:55 Hey, let me tell you about this week’s GOFU, which is the Gun Owner Fuck Up. We always like to talk about GOFUs, because these are expensive lessons, real cases, real individuals have learned. And I don’t want you, my listeners, to have to repeat these mistakes. And this one is, this comes up at any number of cases, even just this week. And here’s the bottom line on this GOFU, folks. Know what you have. Let me tell you what I mean by that. I get cases all the time where people end up with their property seized and their house gets searched. Now you may say, well, no one has searched my house. Yeah, except it’s so easy in New Jersey to have that happen. All it takes is just some allegation by any party. You don’t even get a chance to say anything till afterwards. After they do the search that red flags you, or puts an unjustified restraining order on you, or just your house has a fire, and the firemen come in there. We’ve seen this happen so many times, so many ways, and something gets discovered that you didn’t even remember that you had. Evan Nappen 32:17 Because remember, New Jersey has turned things into crimes where there was no grandfathering. If you had old magazines that held over 10 rounds, in other words, you could even if you complied with Florio way back in the day and made sure your mags only held 15. Well, if you’ve got 15 round Florio mags, you’ve got felony charges on your hands. Even though they were made compliant way back. Because now it’s 10. That’s just one example. If you have firearm that became non-compliant under New Jersey law and didn’t realize it, there’s just a multitude of things that New Jersey can screw you over with. Please make sure you know what you have and not have anything that you shouldn’t. Because it’s so easy to have boxes of accessories, boxes and you know, lo and behold, what’s in it? An old bump stock or an old large capacity magazine or a trigger crank, or any of the things that were legal, but then New Jersey unilaterally decided it is intrinsically evil and must be turned into felonies for possession. So, folks, know what you have. Evan Nappen 33:37 This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens. Speaker 2 33:48 Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing Evan@gun.lawyer. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state. Page of 8 8 Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E274_Transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.Known as “America's Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it's no wonder he's become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets. Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It's Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham's Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News. As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists. He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America. Email Evan Your Comments and Questions  talkback@gun.lawyer Join Evan's InnerCircleHere's your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America.  Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL.  Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits.   Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

What did you accidentally sit on? We found out this morning that Ashley sat on something and it left a scar for life! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jed is trying to get an AirBnB booked for Easter Weekend but Ashley is quick to say... NO! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ashley ran into a situation when she was at the liquor store and she wanted to take care of some kids who wanted candy... but is she wrong for doing it? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What is the longest you went without going to bed? Ashley after our team dinner last night still hasn't slept... See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ashley has started a book club at the radio station and she wants you to be part of the fun! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Can you guess which member of THEjoeSHOW received the WORST Christmas Gift of all time? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

La llista dels millors discos de m

Arriba el final de l'any i toca repassar-ne els millors tracks. S

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Com que ahir vam fer curt, avui volem compartir els altres discos memorables dels 90, alguns potser no tan coneguts, per

La d

The UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, has delivered the Autumn Budget 2025. In her much-anticipated second Budget, the Chancellor announced a broad spectrum of tax measures which she said were designed both to secure public finances and make the UK tax system fairer. After much press speculation, rumours and reported U-turns, there is now some welcome clarity on how the government intends to balance the books, with the largest revenue raising measure being a stealth tax increase through the freezing of income tax thresholds. Outside of the headline grabbing measures, the government has published details on new and ongoing business tax reform measures, a number of which will be included in the upcoming Finance Bill. In our latest podcast, Josh Critchlow speaks to May Smith, Emily Szasz and Sam Withnall from our London tax team about the smorgasbord of business tax measures they found most noteworthy in the Autumn Budget 2025, including: headline tax revenue raising measures including extending the freeze on income tax/NICs thresholds and raising income tax rates on dividend, savings and property income; the introduction of a new ‘UK listing relief' from SDRT, providing a 3 year exemption from the 0.5% SDRT charge on agreements to transfer securities of newly listed companies on a UK regulated market; confirmation that an ‘Advance Tax Certainty Service' for major investment projects in the UK will be launched in July 2026; changes to the capital allowances regime, including a new 40% first-year allowance and reduction of writing down allowances for main rate expenditure; broadening an anti-avoidance rule applicable to capital gains rollover relief on share exchanges and reorganisations; an update on proposals to reform behavioural tax penalties; revisions to the UK VAT grouping rules applicable to overseas establishments; confirmation that a permanent revenue-based oil and gas price mechanism will take effect on expiry of the existing Energy Profits Levy; additional measures to tackle tax avoidance; and measures not included in the Budget announcements, including the rumoured ‘partnership NICs' and exit tax.

The team recorded the podcast straight after the Budget to share their instant reactions. They covered the Office for Budget Responsibility's early report release and the pre-Budget leaks. Richard Hattersley shared his view on the announcements and what surprised him. Tom Herbert sank his teeth into some tech news, with e-invoicing and Making Tax Digital making the cut. Paul Baker, tax partner at Buzzacott and speaker at the Finance, Accounting & Bookkeeping Show (FAB), joined to share his take. He discussed the day and what measures stood out. He mentioned the impact of extending the income tax and employer national insurance thresholds, whether this was the way forward and the issue of applying NICs to salary-sacrificed pension contributions of about £2k a year. He concluded the podcast by sharing concerns that he had and the next steps for a tax expert like himself.

This week Tom Goddard and Paul Haywood-Schiefer look at the Government’s possible attempts at fiscal choreography with the potential Income Tax and NICs see-saw. One goes up, one goes down… but as they explain, that doesn’t always mean a neutral outcome for taxpayers. They then discuss what a cap on salary-sacrifice pension contributions would mean: a measure that could be highly attractive to the Treasury while many taxpayers barely feel a ripple. And while pension savers might lose out, families with more than two children could gain significantly if the Child Benefit cap is lifted - though the policy could carry a £4bn price tag. Finally, news of a possible adoption by HMRC of a US-style whistleblower reward scheme, offering up to 30% of tax recovered. A bold, creative and undoubtedly controversial, idea.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode Cando was invited to be a guest on the Trainers Wisdom, a previous guest from our episode "Eat Meat, Lift Weights, Podcast".. In this shared episode we take a deeper dive into fitness and how even working out once a week for 30minutes can improve your life. Check out Nics linktree for all his links including his podcast for more fitness contenthttps://linktr.ee/nicfotifitFor excellent beard or skin care products, click the following link for 18% off https://watsonslade.ca/discount/CANDOPEW Powered by - Blackcell Promotions Set Media Keanu's Corner The Compound Eventshttps://linktr.ee/TheCandoExperiment Email us at - thecandoexperiment@gmail.com Links in no particular order - https://www.battledwarfproductions.com/https://www.instagram.com/op2airsoft/https://ravenevolution.comhttps://thecompoundevents.ca/https://www.instagram.com/canadianairsoftleague/https://open.spotify.com/show/0KZnGH9twkuFoYmTg3CYKU?si=ce4663fea34d461bhttps://www.facebook.com/ElliottLaserCreations/ https://www.facebook.com/CryeWolfAirsoft/ https://instagram.com/seam_ripper_solutions?utm_medium=copy_link https://instagram.com/galeforce_airsoft?utm_medium=copy_link https://instagram.com/crye_wolf_airsoft_?utm_medium=copy_link https://niagaraquartermaster.com/ https://dmzcanada.com/ https://andysairsoft.ca/https://www.instagram.com/thehouseofoakley/https://amplifieddesign.ca/https://www.instagram.com/blackwell_operations_group/https://www.instagram.com/inc.airsoft/https://www.instagram.com/widowmakers_airsoft/

What do you do when your code breaks and the only fix is to dig into the runtime below? Matt Godbolt lives for that. Tile-based renderers, color-coded scanlines, zero-copy NICs—each story is a clue that leads past the abstraction to the real machine. He shares the rule that guides him: master your layer, learn the one below, and know the outline of the layer under that.  Matt Godbolt's journey proves the real breakthroughs are hideen behind the abstrations where you are comfortable and familiar. Episode Page Support The Show Subscribe To The Podcast Join The Newsletter  

Ashley won big last night in sports betting... but she checked her sports betting app this morning and now the owes the money that she took out?! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ashley won big last night in sports betting... but she checked her sports betting app this morning and now the owes the money that she took out?!

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

professorjrod@gmail.comWhat if your “all-in-one” router is doing too much—and your Wi‑Fi “speed” isn't the real bottleneck? We pull back the rack door and trace the digital bloodstream from SOHO setups to enterprise backbones, translating jargon into choices you can actually make. Starting with LANs, WANs, WLANs, and SANs, we map how scope changes design, cost, and risk, then contrast the convenience of a home gateway with the clarity of dedicated roles—routers, switches, firewalls, and load balancers—working like a well-tuned orchestra.We get tactile with the gear: NICs and their 48‑bit MAC addresses, patch panels that keep closets sane, and switches that forward with CAM tables instead of shouting like hubs. You'll hear where managed switches earn their IP address (management only), why VLANs and QoS matter, and how Power over Ethernet (802.3af/at/bt) cuts clutter while powering VoIP phones, APs, and cameras with fewer failure points. From copper categories (Cat6/6A) and clean terminations to testers, toners, and taps, we highlight the unglamorous steps that prevent the worst outages.Then we cut the cord. We chart Wi‑Fi's arc—802.11a/b/g to n, ac, and 6/6E—clarifying bands, channels, MIMO, and OFDMA so your network stops fighting itself. We talk survey tools, interference traps, and when to steer clients to the right lanes. Fiber gets its due as the distance champion—single‑mode for long haul, multi‑mode for shorter runs—with connector gotchas that can burn hours. And because connectivity is more than Wi‑Fi, we touch Bluetooth peripherals, RFID access, NFC payments, and long‑range links that fill gaps where cables can't go.To anchor the learning, we run quick cert‑style questions—switches and MACs, routers and IPs, PoE's true advantage, and Wi‑Fi 5's 5 GHz focus—so you can test yourself in real time. Whether you're building a home lab, prepping for CompTIA, or planning an upgrade at work, you'll leave with practical mental models and checklists you can use today. If this helped you think a layer deeper, follow, share with a friend who's studying, and drop a review with your biggest networking win or question—what should we unpack next?Support the showIf you want to help me with my research please e-mail me.Professorjrod@gmail.comIf you want to join my question/answer zoom class e-mail me at Professorjrod@gmail.comArt By Sarah/DesmondMusic by Joakim KarudLittle chacha ProductionsJuan Rodriguez can be reached atTikTok @ProfessorJrodProfessorJRod@gmail.com@Prof_JRodInstagram ProfessorJRod

Des dels ritmes m

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Igerész: Zsoltár 103,1-2 Lelkész: Hodánics Tamás Lejátszás közvetlen fájlból (hiba esetén): https://krek.hu/media/files/igehirdetesek/20250914_11h_HT_Zsoltár103,1_Áldjad,_lelkem,_az_Urat.mp3 Becsült hossz: 2196 mp Generálta: ScrapeCast by Fodor Benedek UUID: 2e44bda2-476e-40bb-87cf-d1fad3a51837

Check out the new Gun Talk Nation YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@theguntalknationWhat was your first real firearm? On this episode of Gun Talk Nation, Ryan Gresham, Kevin "KJ" Jarnagin, and Chris Cerino go behind the scenes on Gun Talk's brand-new podcast set and dive into a wide range of firearms topics.From reminiscing about their first guns beyond BB guns, to offering key advice on buying suppressors before the 2025 tax stamp change, this episode is packed with valuable insight and humor. Plus, we break down the reality of adjusted NICS background checks, the myths around birdshot and shotguns, and even a few slow-motion shooting moments we'd rather forget.This Gun Talk Nation is brought to you by Safariland, Guns & Gear, Hodgdon Powder, and Range Ready Studios.About Gun Talk NationGun Talk Media's Gun Talk Nation with Ryan Gresham is a weekly multi-platform podcast that offers a fresh look at all things firearms-related. Featuring notable guests and a lot of laughs. Gun Talk Nation is available as an audio podcast or in video format.For more content from Gun Talk Media, visit guntalk.com or subscribe on YouTube, Rumble, Facebook, Instagram, and X. Catch First Person Defender on the new Official FPD YouTube channel. Watch Gun Talk Nation on its new YouTube channel. Catch Gun Talk Hunt on the new dedicated YouTube Channel. Listen to all Gun Talk Podcasts with Spreaker, iHeart, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you find podcasts.Copyright ©2025 Freefire Media, LLCGun Talk Nation 09.18.25Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/gun-talk--6185159/support.

Get ready for your morning reading!

Get ready for your morning reading!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Get ready for your morning reading!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week we welcome one of the leading podcasters from the city who is also a talented artist, Nate Nics, to join us as a special guest host! It's been a while since his last appearance here with his whole podcast team but this was right on time and very entertaining. It was very refreshing to talk with somebody who actually knows how this podding stuff works

Your daily horoscope reading!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Your daily horoscope reading!

In This Episode Erin and Weer'd discuss: LFD Research's release of a new safety video about the SIG P320; SCOTUS denying cert on Snope and Ocean State Tactical; the terror attack in Colorado where Molotov cocktails were used instead of guns; the Trump Administration's long list of reforms for the ATF, all of which are very good; the potential merging of the ATF with the DEA, and why we need to stop it! David reflects on the recent nationwide failure of the NICS system; and Myles sits down with his grandfather to reminisce about guns he has owned. Did you know that we have a Patreon? Join now for the low, low cost of $4/month (that's $1/podcast) and you'll get to listen to our podcast on Friday instead of Mondays, as well as patron-only content like mag dump episodes, our hilarious blooper reels and film tracks. Show Notes Main Topic LFD Research: P320 Update and Safety Check SCOTUS Declines AR-15, Magazine Ban Cases While Kavanaugh Promises Action Soon Justice Kavanaugh to Second Amendment: We're Really Busy Now, Come Back In A Year Or Two Kostas Moros on the Snope Denial Madman launches ‘targeted terror attack' with Molotov cocktails, ‘makeshift flamethrower' — injuring 8 while shouting ‘Free Palestine' — at Israeli hostages event in Boulder, Colorado  ATF Announces Firearms Regulatory Reforms and Renewed Partnership with Firearms Industry ATF Merger with DEA Looking More Likely South Paw Corner Weer'd World:  Family History .222 Remington https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Auto#Firearm_sales Gun Lovers and Other Strangers TBI Troubleshoots TICS Outage TICS NICS NCIC Weer'd World- Lying about the Brady Bill Washington Gun Law: NICS Denial or Delay Brena Bock Author Page David Bock Author Page Team And More  

Send us a textRoyce unveils the many infringements that are built into the background check system, especially in States that interpose themselves between gun retailers and the free NICS system and charge a fee to do what dealers could do without charge (like FL and TN do, among others).Also, it's refreshing to see and hear law enforcement officials openly declare they will not enforce new infringements recently passed in Washington State.Royce also addresses the recent murder of an open carrier in Las Vega by a deranged man who took his openly carried pistol and shot him with it.Tune in and share!Support the showGiveSendGo | Unconstitutional 2A Prosecution of Tate Adamiak Askari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

As the new financial year begins, John and Ele explore the real impact of April’s tax changes from rising employer NICs and the scrapping of EV tax breaks to the end of holiday let perks. They discuss the Government’s sweeping new tax reform package, including 39 proposals to simplify the system, reduce compliance costs, and even shrink HMRC’s London footprint. Also, this week, milkshakes may soon face sugar tax, Liverpool sidesteps legislation to bring in a tourist levy, and Wetherspoons fails to convince a tribunal that cider isn’t booze and a £400k R&D clawback case puts HMRC’s stricter claims regime in the spotlight.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We are calling for the world's best AI Engineer talks for AI Architects, /r/localLlama, Model Context Protocol (MCP), GraphRAG, AI in Action, Evals, Agent Reliability, Reasoning and RL, Retrieval/Search/RecSys , Security, Infrastructure, Generative Media, AI Design & Novel AI UX, AI Product Management, Autonomy, Robotics, and Embodied Agents, Computer-Using Agents (CUA), SWE Agents, Vibe Coding, Voice, Sales/Support Agents at AIEWF 2025! Fill out the 2025 State of AI Eng survey for $250 in Amazon cards and see you from Jun 3-5 in SF!Coreweave's now-successful IPO has led to a lot of questions about the GPU Neocloud market, which Dylan Patel has written extensively about on SemiAnalysis. Understanding markets requires an interesting mix of technical and financial expertise, so this will be a different kind of episode than our usual LS domain.When we first published $2 H100s: How the GPU Rental Bubble Burst, we got 2 kinds of reactions on Hacker News:* “Ah, now the AI bubble is imploding!”* “Duh, this is how it works in every GPU cycle, are you new here?”We don't think either reaction is quite right. Specifically, it is not normal for the prices of one of the world's most important resources right now to swing from $1 to $8 per hour based on drastically inelastic demand AND supply curves - from 3 year lock-in contracts to stupendously competitive over-ordering dynamics for NVIDIA allocations — especially with increasing baseline compute needed for even the simplest academic ML research and for new AI startups getting off the ground.We're fortunate today to have Evan Conrad, CEO of SFCompute, one of the most exciting GPU marketplace startups, talk us through his theory of the economics of GPU markets, and why he thinks CoreWeave and Modal are well positioned, but Digital Ocean and Together are not.However, more broadly, the entire point of SFC is creating liquidity between GPU owners and consumers and making it broadly tradable, even programmable:As we explore, these are the primitives that you can then use to create your own, high quality, custom GPU availability for your time and money budget, similar to how Amazon Spot Instances automated the selective buying of unused compute.The ultimate end state of where all this is going is GPU that trade like other perishable, staple commodities of the world - oil, soybeans, milk. Because the contracts and markets are so well established, the price swings also are not nearly as drastic, and people can also start hedging and managing the risk of one of the biggest costs of their business, just like we have risk-managed commodities risks of all other sorts for centuries. As a former derivatives trader, you can bet that swyx doubleclicked on that…Show Notes* SF Compute* Evan Conrad* Ethan Anderson* John Phamous* The Curve talk* CoreWeave* Andromeda ClusterFull Video PodLike and subscribe!Timestamps* [00:00:05] Introductions* [00:00:12] Introduction of guest Evan Conrad from SF Compute* [00:00:12] CoreWeave Business Model Discussion* [00:05:37] CoreWeave as a Real Estate Business* [00:08:59] Interest Rate Risk and GPU Market Strategy Framework* [00:16:33] Why Together and DigitalOcean will lose money on their clusters* [00:20:37] SF Compute's AI Lab Origins* [00:25:49] Utilization Rates and Benefits of SF Compute Market Model* [00:30:00] H100 GPU Glut, Supply Chain Issues, and Future Demand Forecast* [00:34:00] P2P GPU networks* [00:36:50] Customer stories* [00:38:23] VC-Provided GPU Clusters and Credit Risk Arbitrage* [00:41:58] Market Pricing Dynamics and Preemptible GPU Pricing Model* [00:48:00] Future Plans for Financialization?* [00:52:59] Cluster auditing and quality control* [00:58:00] Futures Contracts for GPUs* [01:01:20] Branding and Aesthetic Choices Behind SF Compute* [01:06:30] Lessons from Previous Startups* [01:09:07] Hiring at SF ComputeTranscriptAlessio [00:00:05]: Hey everyone, welcome to the Latent Space podcast. This is Alessio, partner and CTO at Decibel, and I'm joined by my co-host Swyx, founder of Smol AI.Swyx [00:00:12]: Hey, and today we're so excited to be finally in the studio with Evan Conrad from SF Compute. Welcome. I've been fortunate enough to be your friend before you were famous, and also we've hung out at various social things. So it's really cool to see that SF Compute is coming into its own thing, and it's a significant presence, at least in the San Francisco community, which of course, it's in the name, so you couldn't help but be. Evan: Indeed, indeed. I think we have a long way to go, but yeah, thanks. Swyx: Of course, yeah. One way I was thinking about kicking on this conversation is we will likely release this right after CoreWeave IPO. And I was watching, I was looking, doing some research on you. You did a talk at The Curve. I think I may have been viewer number 70. It was a great talk. More people should go see it, Evan Conrad at The Curve. But we have like three orders of magnitude more people. And I just wanted to, to highlight, like, what is your analysis of what CoreWeave did that went so right for them? Evan: Sell locked-in long-term contracts and don't really do much short-term at all. I think like a lot of people had this assumption that GPUs would work a lot like CPUs and the like standard business model of any sort of CPU cloud is you buy commodity hardware, then you lay on services that are mostly software, and that gives you high margins and pretty much all your value comes from those services. Not really the underlying. Compute in any capacity and because it's commodity hardware and it's not actually that expensive, most of that can be sort of on-demand compute. And while you do want locked-in contracts for folks, it's mostly just a sort of de-risk situation. It helps you plan revenue because you don't know if people are going to scale up or down. But fundamentally, people are like buying hourly and that's how your business is structured and you make 50 percent margins or higher. This like doesn't really work in GPUs. And the reason why it doesn't work is because you end up with like super price sensitive customers. And that isn't because necessarily it's just way more expensive, though that's totally the case. So in a CPU cloud, you might have like, you know, let's say if you had a million dollars of hardware in GPUs, you have a billion dollars of hardware. And so your customers are buying at much higher volumes than you otherwise expect. And it's also smaller customers who are buying at higher amounts of volume. So relative to what they're spending in general. But in GPUs in particular, your customer cares about the scaling law. So if you take like Gusto, for example, or Rippling or an HR service like this, when they're buying from an AWS or a GCP, they're buying CPUs and they're running web servers, those web servers, they kind of buy up to the capacity that they need, they buy enough, like CPUs, and then they don't buy any more, like, they don't buy any more at all. Yeah, you have a chart that goes like this and then flat. Correct. And it's like a complete flat. It's not even like an incremental tiny amount. It's not like you could just like turn on some more nodes. Yeah. And then suddenly, you know, they would make an incremental amount of money more, like Gusto isn't going to make like, you know, 5% more money, they're gonna make zero, like literally zero money from every incremental GPU or CPU after a certain point. This is not the case for anyone who is training models. And it's not the case for anyone who's doing test time inference or like inference that has scales at test time. Because like you, your scaling laws mean that you may have some diminishing returns, but there's always returns. Adding GPUs always means your model does actually get. And that actually does translate into revenue for you. And then for test time inference, you actually can just like run the inference longer and get a better performance. Or maybe you can run more customers faster and then charge for that. It actually does translate into revenue. Every incremental GPU translates to revenue. And what that means from the customer's perspective is you've got like a flat budget and you're trying to max the amount of GPUs you have for that budget. And it's very distinctly different than like where Augusto or Rippling might think, where they think, oh, we need this amount of CPUs. How do we, you know, reduce that? How do we reduce our amount of money that we're spending on this to get the same amount of CPUs? What that translates to is customers who are spending in really high volume, but also customers who are super price sensitive, who don't give a s**t. Can I swear on this? Can I swear? Yeah. Who don't give a s**t at all about your software. Because a 10% difference in a billion dollars of hardware is like $100 million of value for you. So if you have a 10% margin increase because you have great software, on your billion, the customers are that price sensitive. They will immediately switch off if they can. Because why wouldn't you? You would just take that $100 million. You'd spend $50 million on hiring a software engineering team to replicate anything that you possibly did. So that means that the best way to make money in GPUs was to do basically exactly what CoreWeave did, which is go out and sign only long-term contracts, pretty much ignore the bottom end of the market completely, and then maximize your long-term contracts. With customers who don't have credit risk, who won't sue you, or are unlikely to sue you for frivolous reasons. And then because they don't have credit risk and they won't sue you for frivolous reasons, you can go back to your lender and you can say, look, this is a really low risk situation for us to do. You should give me prime, prime interest rate. You should give me the lowest cost of capital you possibly can. And when you do that, you just make tons of money. The problem that I think lots of people are going to talk about with CoreWeave is it doesn't really look like a cloud platform. It doesn't really look like a cloud provider financially. It also doesn't really look like a software company financially.Swyx [00:05:37]: It's a bank.Evan [00:05:38]: It's a bank. It's a real estate company. And it's very hard to not be that. The problem of that that people have tricked themselves into is thinking that CoreWeave is a bad business. I don't think CoreWeave is explicitly a bad business. There's a bunch of people, there's kind of like two versions of the CoreWeave take at the moment. There's, oh my God, CoreWeave, amazing. CoreWeave is this great new cloud provider competitive with the hyperscalers. And to some extent, this is true from a structural perspective. Like, they are indeed a real sort of thing against the cloud providers in this particular category. And the other take is, oh my gosh, CoreWeave is this horrible business and so on and blah, blah, blah. And I think it's just like a set of perception or perspective. If you think CoreWeave's business is supposed to look like the traditional cloud providers, you're going to be really upset to learn that GPUs don't look like that at all. And in fact, for the hyperscalers, it doesn't look like this either. My intuition is that the hyperscalers are probably going to lose a lot of money, and they know they're going to lose a lot of money on reselling NVIDIA GPUs, at least. Hyperscalers, but I want to, Microsoft, AWS, Google. Correct, yeah. The Microsoft, AWS, and Google. Does Google resell? I mean, Google has TPUs. Google has TPUs, but I think you can also get H100s and so on. But there are like two ways they can make money. One is by selling to small customers who aren't actually buying in any serious volume. They're testing around, they're playing around. And if they get big, they're immediately going to do one of two things. They're going to ask you for a discount. Because they're not going to pay your crazy sort of margin that you have locked into your business. Because for CPUs, you need that. They're going to pay your massive per hour price. And so they want you to sign a long-term contract. And so that's your other way that you can make money, is you can basically do exactly what CoreWeave does, which is have them pay as much as possible upfront and lock in the contract for a long time. Or you can have small customers. But the problem is that for a hyperscaler, the GPUs to... To sell on the low margins relative to what your other business, your CPUs are, is a worse business than what you are currently doing. Because you could have spent the same money on those GPUs. And you could have trained model and you could have made a model on top of it and then turn that into a product and had high margins from your product. Or you could have taken that same money and you could have competed with NVIDIA. And you could have cut into their margin instead. But just simply reselling NVIDIA GPUs doesn't work like your CPU business. Where you're able to capture high margins from big customers and so on. And then they never leave you because your customers aren't actually price sensitive. And so they won't switch off if your prices are a little higher. You actually had a really nice chart, again, on that talk of this two by two. Sure. Of like where you want to be. And you also had some hot takes on who's making money and who isn't. Swyx: So CoreUv locked up long-term contracts. Get that. Yes. Maybe share your mental framework. Just verbally describe it because we're trying to help the audio listeners as well. Sure. People can look up the chart if they want to. Evan: Sure. Okay. So this is a graph of interest rates. And on the y-axis, it's a probability you're able to sell your GPUs from zero to one. And on the x-axis, it's how much they'll depreciate in cost from zero to one. And then you had ISO cost curves or ISO interest rate curves. Yeah. So they kind of shape in a sort of concave fashion. Yeah. The lowest interest rates enable the most aggressive. form of this cost curve. And the higher interest rates go, the more you have to push out to the top right. Yeah. And then you had some analysis of where every player sits in this, including CoreUv, but also Together and Modal and all these other guys. I thought that was super insightful. So I just wanted to elaborate. Basically, it's like a graph of risk and the genres of places where you can be and what the risk is associated with that. The optimal thing for you to do, if you can, is to lock in long-term contracts that are paid all up front or in with a situation in which you trust the other party to pay you over time. So if you're, you know, selling to Microsoft or something or OpenAI. Which are together 77% of the revenue of CoreUv. Yeah. So if you're doing that, that's a great business to be in because your interest rate that you can pitch for is really low because no one thinks Microsoft is going to default. And like maybe OpenAI will default, but the backing by Microsoft kind of doesn't. And I think there's enough, like, generally, it looks like OpenAI is winning that you can make it's just a much better case than if you're selling to the pre-seed startup that just raised $30 million or something pre-revenue. It's like way easier to make the case that the OpenAI is not going to default than the pre-seed startup. And so the optimal place to be is selling to the maximally low risk customer for as long as possible. And then you never have to worry about depreciation and you make lots of money. The less. Good. Good place to be is you could sell long-term contracts to people who might default on you. And then if you're not bringing it to the present, so you're not like saying, hey, you have to pay us all up front, then you're in this like more risky territory. So is it top left of the chart? If I have the chart right, maybe. Large contracts paid over time. Yeah. Large contracts paid over time is like top left. So it's more risky, but you could still probably get away with it. And then the other opportunity is that you could sell short-term contracts for really high prices. And so lots of people tried that too, because this is actually closer to the original business model that people thought would work in cloud providers for CPUs. It works for CPUs, but it doesn't really work for GPUs. And I don't think people were trying this because they were thinking about the risk associated with it. I think a lot of people are just come from a software background, have not really thought about like cogs or margins or inventory risk or things that you have to worry about in the physical world. And I think they were just like copy pasting the same business model onto CPUs. And also, I remember fundraising like a few years ago. And I know based on. Like what we knew other people were saying who were in a very similar business to us versus what we were saying. And we know that our pitch was way worse at the time, because in the beginning of SF Compute, we looked very similar to pretty much every other GPU cloud, not on purpose, but sort of accidentally. And I know that the correct pitch to give to an investor was we will look like a traditional CPU cloud with high margins and we'll sell to everyone. And that is a bad business model because your customers are price sensitive. And so what happens is if you. Sell at high prices, which is the price that you would need to sell it in order to de-risk your loss on the depreciation curve, and specifically what I mean by that is like, let's say you're selling it like $5 an hour and you're paying $1.50 an hour for the GPU under the hood. It's a little bit different than that, but you know, nice numbers, $5 an hour, $1.50 an hour. Great. Excellent. Well, you're charging a really high price per GPU hour because over time the price will go down and you'll get competed out. And what you need is to make sure that you never go under, or if you do go under your underlying cost. You've made so much money in the first part of it that the later end of it, like doesn't matter because from the whole structure of the deal, you've made money. The problem is that just, you think that you're going to be able to retain your customers with software. And actually what happens is your customers are super price sensitive and push you down and push you down and push you down and push you down, um, that they don't care about your software at all. And then the other problem that you have is you have, um, really big players like the hyperscalers who are looking to win the market and they have way more money than you, and they can push down on margin. Much better than you can. And so if they have to, and they don't, they don't necessarily all the time, um, I think they actually keep pride of higher margin, but if they needed to, they could totally just like wreck your margin at any point, um, and push you down, which meant that that quadrant over there where you're charging a high price, um, and just to make up for the risk completely got destroyed, like did not work at all for many places because of the price sensitivity, because people could just shove you down instead that pushed everybody up to the top right-hand corner of that, which is selling short-term. Contracts for low prices paid over time, which is the worst place to be in, um, the worst financial place to be in because it has the highest interest rate, um, which means that your, um, your costs go up at the same time, your, uh, your incoming cash goes down and squeezes your margins and squeezes your margins. The nice thing for like a core weave is that most of their business is over on the, on the other sides of those quadrants that the ones that survive. The only remaining question I have with core weave, and I promise I get to ask if I can compute, and I promise this is relevant to SOF Compute in general, because the framework is important, right? Sure. To understand the company. So why didn't NVIDIA or Microsoft, both of which have more money than core weave, do core weave, right? Why didn't they do core weave? Why have this middleman when either NVIDIA or Microsoft have more money than God, and they could have done an internal core weave, which is effectively like a self-funding vehicle, like a financial instrument. Why does there have to be a third party? Your question is like... Why didn't Microsoft, or why didn't NVIDIA just do core weave? Why didn't they just set up their own cloud provider? I think, and I don't know, and so correct me if I'm wrong, and lots of people will have different opinions here, or I mean, not opinions, they'll have actual facts that differ from my facts. Those aren't opinions. Those are actually indeed differences of reality, is that NVIDIA doesn't want to compete with their customers. They make a large amount of money by selling to existing clouds. If they launched their own core weave, then it would be a lot more money. It'd make it much harder for them to sell to the hyperscalers, and so they have a complex relationship with there. So not great for them. Second is that, at least for a while, I think they were dealing with antitrust concerns or fears that if they're going through, if they own too much layers of the stack, I could imagine that could be a problem for them. I don't know if that's actually true, but that's where my mind would go, I guess. Mostly, I think it's the first one. It's that they would be competing directly with their primary customers. Then Microsoft could have done it, right? That's the other question. Yeah, so Microsoft didn't do it. And my guess is that... NVIDIA doesn't want Microsoft to do it, and so they would limit the capacity because from NVIDIA's perspective, both they don't want to necessarily launch their own cloud provider because it's competing with their customers, but also they don't want only one customer or only a few customers. It's really bad for NVIDIA if you have customer concentration, and Microsoft and Google and Amazon, like Oracle, to buy up your entire supply, and then you have four or five customers or so who pretty much get to set prices. Monopsony. Yeah, monopsony. And so the optimal thing for you is a diverse set of customers who all are willing to pay at whatever price, because if you don't, somebody else will. And so it's really optimal for NVIDIA to have lots of other customers who are all competing against each other. Great. Just wanted to establish that. It's unintuitive for people who have never thought about it, and you think about it all day long. Yeah. Swyx: The last thing I'll call out from the talk, which is kind of cool, and then I promise we'll get to SF Compute, is why will DigitalOcean and Together lose money on their clusters? Why will DigitalOcean and Together lose money on their clusters?Evan [00:16:33]: I'm going to start by clarifying that all of these businesses are excellent and fantastic. That Together and DigitalOcean and Lambda, I think, are wonderful businesses who build excellent products. But my general intuition is that if you try to couple the software and the hardware together, you're going to lose money. That if you go out and you buy a long-term contract from someone and then you layer on services, or you buy the hardware yourself and you spin it up and you get a bunch of debt, you're going to run into the same problem that everybody else did, the same problem we did, same problem the hyperscalers did. And that's exactly what the hyperscalers are doing, which is you cannot add software and make high margins like a cloud provider can. You can pitch that into investors and it will totally make sense, and it's like the correct play in CPUs, but there isn't software you could make to make this occur. If you're spending a billion dollars on hardware, you need to make a billion dollars of software. There isn't a billion dollars of software that you can realistically make, and if you do, you're going to look like SAP. And that's not a knock on SAP. SAP makes a f**k ton of money, right? Right. Right. Right. Right. There aren't that many pieces of software that you could make, that you can realistically sell, like a billion dollars of software, and you're probably not going to do it to price-sensitive customers who are spending their entire budget already on compute. They don't have any more money to give you. It's a very hard proposition to do. And so many parties have been trying to do this, like, buy their own compute, because that's what a traditional cloud does. It doesn't really work for them. You know that meme where there's, like, the Grim Reaper? And he's, like, knocking on the door, and then he keeps knocking on the next door? We have just seen door after door after door of the Grim Reeker comes by, and the economic realities of the compute market come knocking. And so the thing we encourage folks to do is if you are thinking about buying a big GPU cluster and you are going to layer on software on top, don't. There are so many dead bodies in the wake there. We would recommend not doing that. And we, as SF Compute, our entire business is structured to help you not do that. It's helped disintegrate these. The GPU clouds are fantastic real estate businesses. If you treat them like real estate businesses, you will make a lot of money. The cloud services you can make on that, all the software you want to make on that, you can do that fantastically. If you don't own the underlying hardware, if you mix these businesses together, you get shot in the head. But if you combine, if you split them, and that's what the market does, it helps you split them, it allows you to buy, like, layer on services, but just buy from the market, you can make lots of money. So companies like Modal, who don't own the underlying compute, like they don't own it, lots of money, fantastic product. And then companies like Corbeave, who are functionally like really, really good real estate businesses, lots of money, fantastic product. But if you combine them, you die. That's the economic reality of compute. I think it also splits into trading versus inference, which are different kinds of workloads. Yeah. And then, yeah, one comment about the price sensitivity thing before we leave this. This topic, I want to credit Martin Casado for coining or naming this thing, which is like, you know, you said, you said this thing about like, you don't have room for a 10% margin on GPUs for software. Yep. And Martin actually played it out further. It's his first one I ever saw doing this at large enough runs. So let's say GPT-4 and O1 both had a total trading cost of like a $500 billion is the rough estimate. When you get the $5 billion runs, when you get the $50 billion runs, it is actually makes sense to build your own. You're going to have to get into chips, like for OpenEI to get into chip design, which is so funny. I would make an ASIC for this run. Yeah, maybe. I think a caveat of that that is not super well thought about is that only works if you're really confident. It only works if you really know which chip you're going to do. If you don't, then it's a little harder. So it makes in my head, it makes more sense for inference where you've already established it. But for training there's so much like experimentation. Any generality, yeah. Yeah. The generality is much more useful. Yeah. In some sense, you know, Google's like six generations into the CPUs. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, cool. Maybe we should go into SF Compute now. Sure. Yeah.Alessio [00:20:37]: Yeah. So you kind of talked about the different providers. Why did you decide to go with this approach and maybe talk a bit about how the market dynamics have evolved since you started a company?Evan [00:20:47]: So originally we were not doing this at all. We were definitely like forced into this to some extent. And SF Compute started because we wanted to go train models for music and audio in general. We were going to do a sort of generic audio model at some points, and then we were going to do a music model at some points. It was an early company. We didn't really spec down on a particular thing. But yeah, we were going to do a music model and audio model. First thing that you do when you start any AI lab is you go out and you buy a big cluster. The thing we had seen everybody else do was they went out and they raised a really big round and then they would get stuck. Because if you raise the amount of money that you need to train a model initially, like, you know, the $50 million pre-seed, pre-revenue, your valuation is so high or you get diluted so much that you can't raise the next round. And that's a very big ask to make. And also, I don't know, I felt like we just felt like we couldn't do it. We probably could have in retrospect, but I think one, we didn't really feel like we could do it. Two, it felt like if we did, we would have been stuck later on. We didn't want to raise the big round. And so instead, we thought, surely by now, we would be able to just go out. To any provider and buy like a traditional CPU cloud would sell offer you and just buy like on demand or buy like a month or so on. And this worked for like small incremental things. And I think this is where we were basing it off. We just like assumed we could go to like Lambda or something and like buy thousands of at the time A100s. And this just like was not at all the case. So we started doing all the sales calls with people and we said, OK, well, can we just get like month to month? Can we get like one month of compute or so on? Everyone told us at the time, no. You need to have a year long contract or longer or you're out of luck. Sorry. And at the time, we were just like pissed off. Like, why won't nobody sell us a month at a time? Nowadays, we totally understand why, because it's the same economic reason. Because if you if they had sold us the month to month or so on and we canceled or so on, they would have massive risk on that. And so the optimal thing to do was to only to just completely abandon the section of the market. We didn't like that. So our plan was we were going to buy a year long contract anyway. We would use a month. And then we would. At least the other 11 months. And we were locked in for a year, but we only had to pay on every individual month. And so we did this. But then immediately we said, oh, s**t, now we have a cloud provider, not a like training models company, not an AI lab, because every 30 days we owed about five hundred thousand dollars or so and we had about five hundred thousand dollars in the bank. So that meant that every single month, if we did not sell out our cluster, we would just go bankrupt. So that's what we did for the first year of the company. And when you're in that position. You try to think how in the world you get out of that position, what that transition to is, OK, well, we tend to be pretty good at like selling this cluster every month because we haven't died yet. And so what we should do is we should go basically be like this broker for other people and we will be more like a GPU real estate or like a GPU realtor. And so we started doing that for a while where we would go to other people who had who was trying to sell like a year long contract with somebody and we'd go to another person who like maybe this person wanted six months and somebody else on six months or something and we'd like combine all these people. Together to make the deal happen and we'd organize these like one off bespoke deals that looked like basically it ended up with us taking a bunch of customers, us signing with a vendor, taking some cut and then us operating the cluster for people typically with bare metal. And so we were doing this, but this was definitely like a oh, s**t, oh, s**t, oh, s**t. How do we get out of our current situation and less of a like a strategic plan of any sort? But while we were doing this, since like the beginning of the company, we had been thinking about how to buy GPU clusters, how to sell them effectively, because we'd seen every part of it. And what we ended up with was like a book of everybody who's trying to buy and everyone is trying to sell because we were these like GPU brokers. And so that turned into what is today SF Compute, which is a compute market, which we think we are the functionally the most liquid GPU market of any capacity. Honestly, I think we're the only thing that actually is like a real market that there's like bids and asks and there's like a like a trading engine that combines everything. And so. I think we're the only place where you can do things that a market should be able to do. Like you can go on SF Compute today and you get thousands of H100s for an hour if you want. And that's because there is a price for thousands of GPUs for an hour. That is like not a thing you can reasonably do on kind of any other cloud provider because nobody should realistically sell you thousands of GPUs for an hour. They should sell it to you for a year or so on. But one of the nice things about a market is that you can buy the year on SF Compute. But then if you need to sell. Back, you can sell back as well. And that opens up all these little pockets of liquidity where somebody who's just trying to buy for a little bit of time, some burst capacity. So people don't normally buy for an hour. That's not like actually a realistic thing, but it's like the range somebody who wants, who is like us, who needed to buy for a month can actually buy for a month. They can like place the order and there is actually a price for that. And it typically comes from somebody else who's selling back. Somebody who bought a longer term contract and is like they bought for some period of time, their code doesn't work, and now they need to like sell off a little bit.Alessio [00:25:49]: What are the utilization rates at which a market? What are the utilization rates at which a market? Like this works, what do you see the usual GPU utilization rate and like at what point does the market get saturated?Evan [00:26:00]: Assuming there are not like hardware problems or software problems, the utilization rate is like near 100 percent because the price dips until the utilization is 100 percent. So the price actually has to dip quite a lot in order for the utilization not to be. That's not always the case because you just have logistical problems like you get a cluster and parts of the InfiniBand fabric are broken. And there's like some issue with some switch somewhere and so you have to take some portion of the cluster offline or, you know, stuff like this, like there's just underlying physical realities of the clusters, but nominally we have better utilization than basically anybody because, but that's on utilization of the cluster, like that doesn't necessarily translate into, I mean, I actually do think we have much better overall money made for our underlying vendors than kind of anybody else. We work with the other GPU clouds and the basic pitch to the other GPU clouds is one. So we can sell your broker so we can we can find you the long term contracts that are at the prices that you want, but meanwhile, your cluster is idle and for that we can increase your utilization and get you more money because we can sell that idle cluster for you and then the moment we find the longer, the bigger customer and they come on, you can kick off those people and then go to the other ones. You get kind of the mix of like sell your cluster at whatever price you can get on the market and then sell your cluster at the big price that you want to do for long term contract, which is your ideal business model. And then the benefit of the whole thing being on the market. Is you can pitch your customer that they can cancel their long term contract, which is not a thing that you can reasonably do if you are just the GPU cloud, if you're just the GPU cloud, you can never cancel your contract, because that introduces so much risk that you would otherwise, like not get your cheap cost of capital or whatever. But if you're selling it through the market, or you're selling it with us, then you can say, hey, look, you can cancel for a fee. And that fee is the difference between the price of the market and then the price that they paid at, which means that they canceled and you have the ability to offer that flexibility. But you don't. You don't have to take the risk of it. The money's already there and like you got paid, but it's just being sold to somebody else. One of our top pieces from last year was talking about the H100 glut from all the long term contracts that were not being fully utilized and being put under the market. You have on here dollar a dollar per hour contracts as well as it goes up to two. Actually, I think you were involved. You were obliquely quoted in that article. I think you remember. I remember because this was hidden. Well, we hid your name, but then you were like, yeah, it's us. Yeah. Could you talk about the supply and demand of H100s? Was that just a normal cycle? Was that like a super cycle because of all the VC funding that went in in 2003? What was that like? GPU prices have come down. Yeah, GPU prices have come down. And there's some part that has normal depreciation cycle. Some part of that is just there were a lot of startups that bought GPUs and never used them. And now they're lending it out and therefore you exist. There's a lot of like various theories as to why. This happened. I dislike all of them because they're all kind of like they're often said with really high confidence. And I think just the market's much more complicated than that. Of course. And so everything I'm going to say is like very hedged. But there was a series of like places where a bunch of the orders were placed and people were pitching to their customers and their investors and just the broader market that they would arrive on time. And that is not how the world works. And because there was such a really quick build out of things, you would end up with bottlenecks in the supply chain somewhere that has nothing to do with necessarily the chip. It's like the InfiniBand cables or the NICs or like whatever. Or you need a bunch of like generators or you don't have data center space or like there's always some bottleneck somewhere else. And so a lot of the clusters didn't come online within the period of time. But then all the bottlenecks got sorted out and then they all came online all at the same time. So I think you saw a short. There was a shortage because supply chain hard. And then you saw a increase or like a glut because supply chain eventually figure itself out. And specifically people overordered in order to get the allocation that they wanted. Then they got the allocations and then they went under. Yeah, whatever. Right. There was just a lot of shenanigans. A caveat of this is every time you see somebody like overordered, there is this assumption that the problem was like the demand went down. I don't think that's the case at all. And so I want to clarify that. It definitely seems like a shortage. Like there's more demand for GPUs than there ever was. It's just that there was also more supply. So at the moment, I think there is still functionally a glut. But the difference that I think is happening is mostly the test time inference stuff that you just need way more chips for that than you did before. And so whenever you make a statement about the current market, people sort of take your words and then they assume that you're making a statement about the future market. And so if you say there's a glut now, people will continue to think there's a glut. But I think what is happening at the moment. My general prediction is that like by the winter, we will be back towards shortage. But then also, this very much depends on the rollout of future chips. And that comes with its own. I think I'm trying to give you like a good here's Evan's forecast. Okay. But I don't know if my forecast is right. You don't have to. Nobody is going to hold you to it. But like I think people want to know what's true and what's not. And there's a lot of vague speculations from people who are not that close to the market actually. And you are. I think I'm a closer. Close to the market, but also a vague speculator. Like I think there are a lot of really highly confident speculators and I am indeed a vague speculator. I think I have more information than a lot of other people. And this makes me more vague of a spectator because I feel less certain or less confident than I think a lot of other people do. The thing I do feel reasonably confident about saying is that the test time inference is probably going to quite significantly expand the amount of compute that was used for inference. So a caveat. This is like pretty much all the inference demand is in a few companies. A good example is like lots of bio and pharma was using H100s training sort of the bio models of sorts. And they would come along and they would buy, you know, thousands of H100s for training and then just like not a lot of stuff for inference. Not in any, not relative to like an opening iron anthropic or something because they like don't have a consumer product. Their inference event, if they can do it right. There's really like only one inference event that matters. And obviously I think they're going to run into it. And Batch and they're not going to literally just run one inference event. But like the one that produces the drug is the important one. Right. And I'm dumb and I don't know anything about biology, so I could be completely wrong here. But my understanding is that's kind of the gist. I can check that for you. You can check that for me. Check that for me. But my understanding is like the one that produces the sequence that is the drug that, you know, cures cancer or whatever. That's the important deal. But like a lot of models look like this where they're sort of more enterprising use cases or they're so prior to something that looks like test time inference. You got lots and lots of demand for training and then pretty much entirely fell off for inference. And I think like we looked at like Open Router, for example, the entirety of Open Router that was not anthropic or like Gemini or OpenAI or something. It was like 10 H100 nodes or something like that. It's just like not that much. It's like not that many GPUs actually to service that entire demand. But that's like a really sizable portion of the sort of open source market. But the actual amount of compute needed for it was not that much. But if you imagine like what an OpenAI needs for like GPT-4, it's like tremendously big. But that's because it's a consumer product that has almost all the inference demand. Yeah, that's a message we've had. Roughly open source AI compared to closed AI is like 5%. Yeah, it's like super small. Super small. It's super small. Super small. But test time inference changes that quite significantly. So I will... I will expect that to increase our overall demand. But my question on whether or not that actually affects your compute price is entirely based on how quickly do we roll out the next chips. The way that you burst is different for test time.Alessio [00:34:01]: Any thoughts on the third part of the market, which is the more peer-to-peer distributed, some are like crypto-enabled, like Hyperbolic, Prime Intellect, and all of that. Where do those fit? Like, do you see a lot of people will want to participate in a peer-to-peer market? Or just because of the capital requirements at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter?Evan [00:34:20]: I'm like wildly skeptical of these, to be frankly. The dream is like steady at home, right? I got this $15.90. Nobody has $15.90. $14.90 sitting at home. I can rent it out. Yeah. Like, I just don't really think this is going to ever be more efficient than a fully interconnected cluster with InfiniBand or, you know, whatever the sort of next spec might be. Like, I could be completely wrong. But speaking of... I mean, like, SpeedoLite is really hard to beat. And regardless of whatever you're using, you just like can't get around that physical limitation. And so you could like imagine a decentralized market that still has a lot of places where there's like co-location. But then you would get something that looks like SF Compute. And so that's what we do. That's why we take our general take is like on SF Compute, you're not buying from like random people. You're buying from the other GPU clouds, functionally. You're buying from data centers that are the same genre of people that you would work with already. And you can specify, oh, I want all these nodes to be co-located. And I don't think you're really going to get around that. And I think I buy crypto for the purposes of like transferring money. Like the financial system is like quite painful and so on. I can understand the uses of it to sort of incentivize an initial market or try to get around the cold start problem. We've been able to get around the cold start problem just fine. So it didn't actually need that at all. What I do think is totally possible is you could launch a token and then you could like subsidize the crypto. You could compute prices for a bit, but like maybe that will help you. I think that's what Nuus is doing. Yeah, I think there's lots of people who are trying to do things like this, but at some point that runs out. So I would, I think generally agree. I think the only thread in that model is very fine grained mixture of experts that can be like algorithms can shift to adapt to hardware realities. And the hardware reality is like, okay, it's annoying to do large co-located clusters. Then we'll just redesign attention or whatever in our architecture to distribute it more. There was a little bit buzz of block attention last year that Strong Compute made a big push on. But I think like, you know, in a world where we have 200 experts in MOE model, it starts to be a little bit better. Like, I don't disagree with this. I can imagine the world in which you have like, in which you've redesigned it to be more parallelizable, like across space.Evan [00:36:43]: But assuming without that, your hardware limitation is your speed of light limitation. And that's a very hard one to get around.Alessio [00:36:50]: Any customers or like stories that you want to shout out of like maybe things that wouldn't have been economically viable like others? I know there's some sensitivity on that.Evan [00:37:00]: My favorites are grad students, are folks who are trying to do things that would normally otherwise require the scale of a big lab. And the grad students are like the worst pilots. They're like the worst possible customer for the traditional GPU clouds because they will immediately turn if you sell them a thing because they're going to graduate and they're not going to go anywhere. They're not going to like, that project isn't continuing to spend lots of money. Like sometimes it does, but not if you're like working with the university or you're working with the lab of some sort. But a lot of times it's just like the ability for us to offer like big burst capacity, I think is lovely and wonderful. And it's like one of my favorite things to do because all those folks look like we did. And I have a special place in my heart for that. I have a special place in my heart for young hackers and young grad students and researchers who are trying to do the same genre of thing that we are doing. For the same reason, I have a special place in my heart for like the startups, the people who are just actively trying to compete on the same scale, but can't afford it time-wise, but can afford it spike-wise. Yeah, I liked your example of like, I have a grant of 100K and it's expiring. I got to spend it on that. That's really beautiful. Yeah. Interesting. Has there been interesting work coming out of that? Anything you want to mention? Yeah. So from like a startup perspective, like Standard Intelligence and Find, P-H-I-N-D. We've had them on the pod.Swyx [00:38:23]: Yeah. Yeah.Evan [00:38:23]: That was great. And then from grad students' perspective, we worked a lot with like the Schmidt Futures grantees of various sorts. My fear is if I talk about their research, I will be completely wrong to a sort of almost insulting degree because I am very dumb. But yeah. I think one thing that's maybe also relevant startups and GPUs-wise. Yeah. Is there was a brief moment where it kind of made sense that VCs provided GPU clusters. And obviously you worked at AI Grants, which set up Andromeda, which is supposedly a $100 million cluster. Yeah. I can explain why that's the case or why anybody would think that would be smart. Because I remember before any of that happened, we were asking for it to happen. Yeah. And the general reason is credit risk. Again, it's a bank. Yeah. I have lower risk than you due to credit transformation. I take your risk onto my balance sheet. Correct. Exactly. If you wanted to go for a while, if you wanted to go set up a GPU cluster, you had to be the one that actually bought the hardware and racked it and stacked it, like co-located it somewhere with someone. Functionally, it was like on your balance sheet, which means you had to get a loan. And you cannot get a loan for like $50 million as a startup. Like not really. You can get like venture debt and stuff, but like it's like very, very difficult to get a loan of any serious price for that. But it's like not that difficult to get a loan for $50 million. If you already have a fund or you already have like a million dollars under your assets somewhere or like you personally can like do a personal guarantee for it or something like this. If you have a lot of money, it is way easier for you to get a loan than if you don't have a lot of money. And so the hack of a VC or some capital partner offering equity for compute is always some arbitrage on the credit risk. That's amazing. Yeah. That's a hack. You should do that. I don't think people should do it right now. I think the market has like, I think it made sense at the time and it was helpful and useful for the people who did it at the time. But I think it was a one-time arbitrage because now there are lots of other sources that can do it. And also I think like it made sense when no one else was doing it and you were the only person who was doing it. But now it's like it's an arbitrage that gets competed down. Sure. So it's like super effective. I wouldn't totally recommend it. Like it's great that Andromeda did it. But the marginal increase of somebody else doing it is like not super helpful. I don't think that many people have followed in their footsteps. I think maybe Andreessen did it. Yeah. That's it. I think just because pretty much all the value like flows through Andromeda. What? That cannot be true. How many companies are in the air, Grant? Like 50? My understanding of Andromeda is it works with all the NFTG companies or like several of the NFTG companies. But I might be wrong about that. Again, you know, something something. Nat, don't kill me. I could be completely wrong. But the but you know, I think Andromeda was like an excellent idea to do at the right time in which it occurred. Perfect. His timing is impeccable. Timing. Yeah. Nat and Daniel are like, I mean, there's lots of people who are like... Sears? Yeah. Sears. Like S-E-E-R. Oh, Sears. Like Sears of the Valley. Yeah. They for years and years before any of the like ChatGPT moment or anything, they had fully understood what was going to happen. Like way, way before. Like. AI Grant is like, like five years old, six years old or something like that. Seven years old. When I, when it like first launched or something. Depends where you start. The nonprofit version. Yeah. The nonprofit version was like, like happening for a while, I think. It's going on for quite a bit of time. And then like Nat and Daniel are like the early investors in a lot of the sort of early AI labs of various sorts. They've been doing this for a bit.Alessio [00:41:58]: I was looking at your pricing yesterday. We're kind of talking about it before. And there's this weird thing where one week is more expensive of both one day and one month. Yeah. What are like some of the market pricing dynamics? What are things that like this to somebody that is not in the business? This looks really weird. But I'm curious, like if you have an explanation for it, if that looks normal to you. Yeah.Evan [00:42:18]: So the simple answer is preemptible pricing is cheaper than non-preemptible pricing. And the same economic principle is the reason why that's the case right now. That's not entirely true on SF Compute. SF Compute doesn't really have the concept of preemptible. Instead, what it has is very short reservations. So, you know, you go to a traditional cloud provider and you can say, hey, I want to reserve contract for a year. We will let you do a reserve contract for one hour, which is the part of SFC. But what you can do is you can just buy every single hour continuously. And you're reserving just for that hour. And then the next hour you reserve just for that next hour. And this is obviously like a built in. This is like an automation that you can do. But what you're seeing when you see the cheap price is you're seeing somebody who's buying the next hour, but maybe not necessarily buying an hour after that. So if the price goes up. Up too much. They might not get that next hour. And the underlying part of this of where that's coming from the market is you can imagine like day old milk or like milk that's about to be old. It might drop its price until it's expired because nobody wants to buy the milk that's in the past. Or maybe you can't legally sell it. Compute is the same way. No, you can't sell a block of compute that is not that is in the past. And so what you should do in the market and what people do do is they take. They take a block. A block of compute. And then they drop it and drop it and drop it and drop into a floor price right before it's about to expire. And they keep dropping it until it clears. And so anything that is idle drops until some point. So if you go and use on the website and you set that that chart to like a week from now, what you'll see is much more normal looking sort of curves. But if you say, oh, I want to start right now, that immediate instant, here's the compute that I want right now is the is functionally the preemptible price. It's where most people are getting the best compute or like the best compute prices from. The caveat of that is you can do really fun stuff on SFC if you want. So because it's not actually preemptible, it's it's reserved, but only reserved for an hour, which means that the optimal way to use as of compute is to just buy on the market price, but set a limit price that is much higher. So you can set a limit price for like four dollars and say, oh, if the market ever happens to spike up to four dollars, then don't buy. I don't want to buy that at that price for that price. I don't want to buy that at that price for that price for an hour. But otherwise, just buy at the cheapest price. And if you're comfortable with that of the volatility of it, you're actually going to get like really good prices, like close to a dollar an hour or so on, sometimes down to like 80 cents or whatever. You said four, though. Yeah. So that's the thing. You want to lower the limit. So four is your max price. Four is like where you basically want to like pull the plug and say don't do it because the actual average price is not or like the, you know, the preemptible price doesn't actually look like that. So what you're doing when you're saying four is always, always, always give me this compute. Like continue to buy every hour. Don't preempt me. Don't kick me off. And I want this compute and just buy at the preemptible price, but never kick me off. The only times in which you get kicked off is if there is a big price spike. And, you know, let's say one day out of the year, there's like a four dollar an hour price because of some weird fluke or something. If there are other periods of time, you're actually getting a much lower price than you. It makes sense. Your your average cost that you're actually paying is way better. And your trade off here is you don't literally know what price you're going to get. So it's volatile. But your actual average historically has been like everyone who's done this has gotten wildly better prices. And this is like one of the clever things you can do with the market. If you're willing to make those trade offs, you can get a lot of really good prices. You can also do other things like you can only buy at night, for example. So the price goes down at night. And so you can say, oh, I want to only buy, you know, if the price is lower than 90 cents. And so if you have some long running job, you can make it only run on 90 cents and then you recover back and so on. Yeah. So what you can kind of create as like a spot inst is what other the CPU world has. Yes. But you've created a system where you can kind of manufacture the exact profile that you want. Exactly. That is not just whatever the hyperscalers offer you, which is usually just one thing. Correct. SF Compute is like the power tool. The underlying primitives of like hourly compute is there. Correct. Yeah, it's pretty interesting. I've often asked OpenAI. So like, you know, all these guys. Cloud as well. They do batch APIs. So it's half off of whatever your thing is. Yeah. And the only contract is we'll return in 24 hours. Sure. Right. And I was like, 24 hours is good. But sometimes I want one hour. I want four hours. I want something. And so based off of SF Compute's system, you can actually kind of create that kind of guarantee. Totally. That would be like, you know, not 24, but within eight hours, within four hours, like the work half of a workday. Yes. I can return your results to you. And then I can return it to you. And if your latency requirements are like that low, actually it's fine. Yes. Correct. Yeah. You can carve out that. You can financially engineer that on SFC. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think to me that unlocks a lot of agent use cases that I want, which is like, yeah, I worked in a background, but I don't want you to take a day. Yeah. Correct. Take a couple hours or something. Yeah. This touches a lot of my like background because I used to be a derivatives trader. Yeah. And this is a forward market. Yeah. A futures forward market, whatever you call it. Not a future. Very explicitly not a future. Not yet a futures. Yes. But I don't know if you have any other points to talk about. So you recognize that you are a, you know, a marketplace and you've hired, I met Alex Epstein at your launch event and you're like, you're, you're building out the financialization of GPUs. Yeah. So part of that's legal. Mm-hmm. Totally. Part of that is like listing on an exchange. Yep. Maybe you're the exchange. I don't know how that works, but just like, talk to me about that. Like from the legal, the standardization, the like, where is this all headed? You know, is this like a full listed on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange or whatever? What we're trying to do is create an underlying spot market that gives you an index price that you can use. And then with that index price, you can create a cash settled future. And with a cash settled future, you can go back to the data centers and you can say, lock in your price now and de-risk your entire position, which lets you get cheaper cost of capital and so on. And that we think will improve the entire industry because the marginal cost of compute is the risk. It's risk as shown by that graph and basically every part of this conversation. It's risk that causes the price to be all sorts of funky. And we think a future is the correct solution to this. So that's the eventual goal. Right now you have to make the underlying spot market in order to make this occur. And then to make the spot market work, you actually have to solve a lot of technology problems. You really cannot make a spot market work if you don't run the clusters, if you don't have control over them, if you don't know how to audit them, because these are super computers, not soybeans. They have to work. In a way that like, it's just a lot simpler to deliver a soybean than it is to deliver it. I don't know. Talk to the soybean guys. Sure. You know? Yeah. But you have to have a delivery mechanism. Your delivery mechanism, like somebody somewhere has to actually get the compute at some point and it actually has to work. And it is really complicated. And so that is the other part of our business that we go and we build a bare metal infrastructure stack that goes. And then also we do auditing of all the clusters. You sort of de-risk the technical perspective and that allows you to eventually de-risk the financial perspective. And that is kind of the pitch of SF Compute. Yeah. I'll double click on the auditing on the clusters. This is something I've had conversations with Vitae on. He started Rika and I think he had a blog post which kind of shone the light a little bit on how unreliable some clusters are versus others. Correct. Yeah. And sometimes you kind of have to season them and age them a little bit to find the bad cards. You have to burn them in. Yeah. So what do you do to audit them? There's like a burn-in process, a suite of tests, and then active checking and passive checking. Burn-in process is where you typically run LINPACK. LINPACK is this thing that like a bunch of linear algebra equations that you're stress testing the GPUs. This is a proprietary thing that you wrote? No, no, no. LINPACK is like the most common form of burn-in. If you just type in burn-in, typically when people say burn-in, they literally just mean LINPACK. It's like an NVIDIA reference version of this. Again, NVIDIA could run this before they ship, but now the customers have to do it. It's annoying. You're not just checking for the GPU itself. You're checking like the whole component, all the hardware. And it's a lot of work. It's an integration test. It's an integration test. Yeah. So what you're doing when you're running LINPACK or burn-in in general is you're stress testing the GPUs for some period of time, 48 hours, for example, maybe seven days or so on. And you're just trying to kill all the dead GPUs or any components in the system that are broken. And we've had experiences where we ran LINPACK on a cluster and it rounds out, sort of comes offline when you run LINPACK. This is a pretty good sign that maybe there is a problem with this cluster. Yeah. So LINPACK is like the most common sort of standard test. But then beyond that, what you do is we have like a series of performance tests that replicate a much more realistic environment as well that we run just assuming if LINPACK works at all, then you run the next set of tests. And then while the GPUs are in operation, you're also going through and you're doing active tests and passive tests. Passive tests are things that are running in the background while somebody else is running, while like some other workload is running. And active tests are during like idle periods. You're running some sort of check that would otherwise sort of interrupt something. And then the active tests will take something offline, basically. Or a passive check might mark it to get taken offline later and so on. And then the thing that we are working on that we have working partially but not entirely is automated refunds, which is basically like, is the case that the hardware breaks so much. And there's only so much that we can do and it is the effect of pretty much the entire industry. So a pretty common thing that I think happens to kind of everybody in the space is a customer comes online, they experience your cluster, and your cluster has the same problem that like any cluster has, or it's I mean, a different problem every time, but they experience one of the problems of HPC. And then their experience is bad. And you have to like negotiate a refund or some other thing like this. It's always case by case. And like, yeah, a lot of people just eat the cost. Correct. So one of the nice things about a market that we can do as we get bigger and have been doing as we can bigger is we can immediately give you something else. And then also we can automatically refund you. And you're still gonna experience it like the hardware problems aren't going away until the underlying vendors fix things. But honestly, I don't think that's likely because you're always pushing the limits of HPC. This is the case of trying to build a supercomputer. that's one of the nice things that we can do is we can switch you out for somebody else somewhere, and then automatically refund you or prorate or whatever the correct move is. One of the things that you say in this conversation with me was like, you know, you know, a provider is good when they guarantee automatic refunds. Which doesn't happen. But yeah, that's, that's in our contact with all the underlying cloud providers. You built it in already. Yeah. So we have a quite strict SLA that we pass on to you. The reason why

We're back again! This time we're talking about the DOJ abandoning suppressor ban enforcement but also combining BATFE and DEA, local businesses finally being sick of police not protecting anyone, California using NICS as a gun registry while also , a $22,000 water bill for a widow living alone, and Europe giving Andrew some serious deja vu, along with whatever we stumble into!https://linktr.ee/anarchyamongfriendshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk3KqiaFbF8Find Andrew under InkedAnarchist on both YouTube and TikTok!"InkedAnarchist15" for 15% off at https://www.thebeardstruggle.com/?rfsn=4064657.9a3f66&utm_source=refersion&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_campaign=4064657.9a3f66https://www.reaperapparelco.com/?ref=52cju0Cb Or use "InkedAnarchist" at checkout and get 10% off.Dubby Energy Discount! - https://www.dubby.gg/discount/InkedAnarchist?ref=jwtimwuiJeremy at The Quartering's 'Coffee Brand Coffee': https://coffeebrandcoffee.com/?ref=eryobzq3Check out Road to Autonomy https://rtamagazine.com/Poppins Patches - https://www.facebook.com/poppinspatches or poppinspatches.com Anarchy Among Friends Telegram - https://t.me/AAFRTDAnarchy Among Friends FB - https://www.facebook.com/AAFRTDAnarchy Among Friends Odysee - https://odysee.com/@AnarchyAmongFriendsRoundtableDiscussion:5Anarchy Among Friends Rumble - https://rumble.com/user/ValhallarchistSpotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/0pqbeHBmWPN1sG0e6L28UvPodbean - https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/8yy6n-c5c4e/Anarchy-Among-Friends-PodcastApple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/anarchy-among-friends/id1459037636?ign-mpt=uo%3D4Stitcher - https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/anchor-podcasts/anarchy-among-friendsGooglePodcasts - https://podcasts.google.com/?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy9hNGZmNzQwL3BvZGNhc3QvcnNzBreaker - https://www.breaker.audio/anarchy-among-friendsOvercast - https://overcast.fm/itunes1459037636/anarchy-among-friendsPocketCasts - https://pca.st/CDH3RadioPublic - https://radiopublic.com/anarchy-among-friends-WkzzjlBrandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case, interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio THIS PODCAST IS COVERED BY A BipCot NoGov LICENSE. USE AND RE-USE BY ANYONE EXCEPT GOVERNMENTS OR THEIR AGENTS IS OK. MORE INFO: https://bipcot.org/NICS check records are a defacto gun registry - https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fbi-weaponizes-background-checks-enforce-california-gun-banBusinesses prove that private security is superior to police - https://www.fox6now.com/news/milwaukees-brady-street-businesses-increase-security-improve-safetyUhoh, I've seen this one…https://www.yahoo.com/news/germany-permanently-stationing-troops-another-120250607.htmlhttps://oilprice.com/Metals/Commodities/Germany-Reconsiders-Storing-Gold-in-the-United-States.amp.htmlDOJ may abandon prosecuting suppressors -https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/26/politics/gun-silencers-doj/index.htmlATF and DEA may combine -https://federalnewsnetwork.com/agency-oversight/2025/03/justice-department-eyes-combining-atf-and-dea-as-part-of-broad-restructuring/California judge orders DefDis to stop selling to Cali -https://www.courthousenews.com/texas-ghost-gun-machine-maker-must-stop-selling-to-californians-judge-says/“Unforeseeable consequences” - https://www.newsweek.com/ghost-gun-supreme-court-atf-ruling-clarence-thomas-205089422k water bill -https://nypost.com/2025/03/28/us-news/city-hits-elderly-queens-homeover-with-outrageous-water-bili/Ze Fazerland Does Not Vant You To Be Happy! -https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14569353/colorado-seize-residents-pet-cats-dogs-northglenn.html

I'm sure it's no surprise to you that AI has been steadily changing the world, but did you know that optics is a key part of its hardware infrastructure? To explain it, fortunately we have a seasoned product manager who knows both the switching side and the optics side. Lucky for us, he sits next to me at the office and agreed to chat about it. In Episode 62, we continue our conversation with Paymon Mogharabi, Senior Product Manager at Cisco's Optics team, also known as the Transceiver Modules Group. We get into smart NICs and future growth affecting optics. Paymon Mogharabi is a networking industry and Cisco veteran of nearly three decades with Electrical Engineering degrees from UC Irvine and USC. After starting at Cisco as a Technical Assistance Center engineer, he became a Technical marketing Engineer for Cisco's Catalyst switches. He then took product management positions for Cisco's Edge Services Router, Nexus data center switches, and UCS server products. He is now a Senior Product Manager in Cisco's Transceiver Modules Group and has sat next to me for the past 7 years, focusing on data center applications. Related links Cisco Optics-to-Device Compatibility Matrix: https://tmgmatrix.cisco.com/ Cisco Optics-to-Optics Interoperability Matrix: https://tmgmatrix.cisco.com/iop Cisco Optics Product Information: https://copi.cisco.com/ Additional resources Cisco Optics Podcast: https://optics.podcastpage.io/ Blog: https://blogs.cisco.com/tag/ciscoopticsblog Cisco Optics YouTube playlist: http://cs.co/9008BlQen Cisco Optics landing page: cisco.com/go/optics Music credits Sunny Morning by FSM Team | https://www.free-stock-music.com/artist.fsm-team.html Upbeat by Mixaund | https://mixaund.bandcamp.com

Can you pull off the 'Ashley Nics' challenge on Reels!?! Tag us @LiveWithJoeShow

Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I cover what the latest NICS data show about how much gun sales dropped in 2024. We also discuss another federal appeals court delivering an unchanged verdict on a case remanded by the Supreme Court, this time dealing with the gun rights of a non-violent marijuana user. Plus, we cover House Republicans re-introducing national concealed carry reciprocity in Congress, a new semi-automatic firearm ban proposal in Colorado, and how the major gun-control groups say they're feeling as the new administration gets set to take office.

Send us a text"Remember a couple of episodes ago when I told you about the ATF using the NICS system to spy on gun owners and collect data on them? Turns out, it's much worse than that. You'll have to listen to see what I'm talking about."-RoyceSHOW LINKS:The Shocking Truth About ATF's Secret Online Tracking Scheme!Inside FBI's probe and entrapment of a Michigan militia crew WJS GunsGun and Outdoor Shop, ammo, accessories, fishing tackle, moreThe Gun Site9-Lane 25 yard indoor Shooting Range, Gun Store, Training classesFreedom GunsFirearms, Ammunition, Accessories, Training classes Sicarios Gun ShopFirearms, Accessories, Ammo, Safes, and more!SHOOTINGCLASSES.COMOnline business operations platform for firearms instructors, trainees, and Shooting RangesControl Jiu-Jitsu/MMAJiu-Jitsu/MMA Training in Melbourne, FLGlover Orndorf and Flanagan Wealth Mgmt.Wealth management servicesThe American Police Hall of FameMuseum and Shooting Center (open to public), Law Enforcement and Civilian TrainingCounter Strike TacticalBest Little Gun Store in Melbourne, Florida! Veteran Owned and Operated 321-499-4949Go2 WeaponsManufacturers of AR platform rifles for military and civilian. Veteran Owned and OperatedEar Care of MelbourneNeed hearing aids? Go to the audiologists that gave Royce his hearing back!Quantified PerformanceQuantified Performance, LLC is focused on building safe, high performing keepers and bearers.Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the showAskari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

Send us a textRoyce dives into the NICS background check system and shows how it has been weaponized against lawful firearms purchasers, even to the point of the ATF monitoring individuals and collecting data on them in collusion with the FBI. He also shows how the NICS has done little, if anything, to keep bad people from buying guns.ATF was Monitoring Americans Through FBI's NICS System Support the showAskari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

Today on Armed American Radio hour one, Alan Gottlieb founder of the Second Amendment Foundation re-joins the show after a two week hiatus. Topics of discussion include thew breaking news story of the evening, Joe Biden pardons his son Hunter Biden for his lying on the ATF Form 4473, otherwise known as the NICS background check form to purchase a gun. Why did he pardon Hunter when he did? Was there a strategy? Alan Gottlieb points out the lies and deception from Joe Biden who has maintained for years he would NOT pardon Hunter. Pam Bondi nomination for Attorney General was discussed and Alan reassured listeners not to fear Bondi when it comes to her position on gun rights. Alan mentioned he has recently spoken to her and is confident she will support the Second amendment during her tenure as AG. AWR Hawkins from Breitbart News updated us on his recent 2A columns and gave his opinions on the Biden pardon of his son, as well as covering some local stories around the nation including the ongoing carnage in Chicago.

Nics is a business and personal coach from Edinburgh, Scotland. She is training to be a forest bathing guide and approaches her work and nature connection practice with curiosity, an open heart, and a firm belief in the awesomeness of individuals. Listen to hear more about:The ways that Edinburgh's history and culture intertwine with nature.Life lessons learned from observing nature. Connecting with others in your community with authenticity and intention. Nature journaling as a mindfulness practice.The importance of play. Using different journals and how that can encourage creativity.Nature journaling while on holiday.The beauty of bees.Learn more about Nics' consulting work here: https://www.nxjconsulting.com/.Connect with Nics on Instagram @nics610 and Facebook Nature CoNxtion. -----------------Sign-up for Journaling With Nature's Newsletter to receive news and updates each month. You can support Journaling With Nature Podcast on Patreon. Your contribution is deeply appreciated.Thanks for listening!

The National Shooting Sports Foundation's Jake McGuigan joins Cam to discuss the demise of a "Fix NICS" bill in New Hampshire that would have mandated the reporting of involuntary commitments to the NICS system.