BS simblified!

I, V, M. Yeah, I see OG gang, right? It's nice to get these young, you know, when a company, you know, these startups especially, you know, when they start growing, you know, to retain talent, they will rebrand these guys as co-founders. So you have three years down the line, somebody becoming a co-founder.

So that's the way simplified has become because of these miscreants who have warmed their way into a system. So it's nice to have the, when was the last time just the two of us recorded, don't tell me it was infamous one 50 episode of which went on forever. Yeah, it was, I mean, years, literally years ago, we've been in all possible combinations, but yeah, just the two of us are like a good old days. Like the good old days.

No, actually, I don't know, like the old days. I don't know. Yeah, like the old days. You know, while we've been doing this for a while.

Pretty sure that she gave and told me I'll bring much needed to increase in the quality and lack of bullshit, which is what we're going to talk about today. Yeah, so quality segue. So this is very likely what we're doing right now is very likely to be the last recording that we do for this year. Next week we have something special that's going to come out for you and you'll be able to see what that is.

Oh, yeah, it's kind of poignant that it's just the two of us to do what might be the last actual recording for this year. Yeah, when we were brainstorming, what can we talk about to be summarised a year to be talk about our personal journey this year and or, you know, something grand, something poignant. And then you said, no young, we should talk about bullshit. So now, can you take it away?

Yeah. I think we should call it. I don't know what the censorship rules on the podcast are right now. So if you keep saying bullshit, you might just get a lot of these.

So it's called for now on. Yeah. So the thing is, you know, there is a lot, a lot of BS that goes around. I guess it was always around.

It's just that we have so many more channels for it that it seems to be everywhere all the time. And one of the biggest contributors to be is the need people feel to hold an opinion on everything. Right? So you, I've seen this in my personal experience.

I'm pretty sure you guys have to, but literally anything, you know, everyone has an opinion, regardless of whether they know anything about it or not. Right. And so people raised to comment on new stories on incidents. Recently, someone was telling me on how the recent skirmish in the Arma Chil Pradesh was very bad and Modi government was trying to cover it up because of something like that.

And I was, how do you know? And he really doesn't, right? So I don't know whether it's true or not. And that to my mind is the quintessential quality of BS that you comment regardless of whether it is true or a lie.

You just say something. You just say for some kind of signaling, right? It could be worth it. It could be to show what I tried to belong to or it could be to kind of show that I am a thinker in this kind of direction or something.

The quintessential LinkedIn bullshitter, right? Where you make an entire long post out of your phone, falling down or your cat, meowing on your face in the morning or something, and then drawing an entire management person out of that. So that I suppose is, there is a very fine line for those who are asking between BSing and ultra-crepidarianism, which is what we have done on Simplify, but that is for another episode. We do not do BS.

We have any problems. Yeah. We are ultra-crepidarian. I think we are so upfront about the fact that we don't know anything that you can't call it BS.

I think that's another quintessential quality of bullshitters, right? That they don't know or they won't admit to the fact that they are BSing. Even if they are hot or they know that they are, could this be another? Because it's not a matter if your friend actually said whatever he or she did out of conviction that there was some logic to what they were saying.

It's a statement of fact. It's a statement of fact, right? So the statement is that there was a skirmish on the Arunachal Pradesh border, okay? And the news that we have got is some 30 Indian soldiers were injured and some maybe 30 or more than 30 Chinese soldiers were injured.

There was no loss of life. And then they had a meeting to de-escalate the conflict. That was what everyone knows about it. Because obviously no one's been there.

Whatever the government reports is what you know. And what this gentleman is saying is that no, no, it's actually a full-scale war. But the government doesn't want to tell you that because it doesn't want you to panic. So that to my mind is just bullsh In the British American slang and came into popular usage only during World War II.

There we go. Another thing that World War II has given us. The word bull itself may have derived from the old French bull meaning fraud and deceit. The term horseshit is in here synonym.

And occasionally used South African English equivalent, although more common in Australian slang is bulldust. So this is kind of interesting. So the French etimology is true. Then the bullshit, the bullshit is not exactly the bull wine.

It's coming from something else. I suppose. There's another word for this called Buncombe. It's called Buncombe.

So Buncombe comes from a place called Buncombe, B-U-N-C-O-M-B-E. And Buncombe is a county in North Carolina. It's a place in North Carolina. And the reason it's called Buncombe was there was a representative from that place named Felix Walker.

So what Felix Walker did, this was in 1820, he stood up and gave a completely pointless and long speech in the House of Representatives. Which was so bad that finally his own party people told him, you know, was please shut up and sit down. They made up the actually oldest quote and made him sit down. And ever since in America it's known as Buncombe.

Of course it's been superseded by the far more elegant term bullshit. But Buncombe is also what it used to be called. So what drew you to speaking about this? We were basically a few friends were discussing this tendency of politicians especially, but everyone in general, to speak about something as if they knew about it without any regard to whether whatever they were saying lies or truth.

So there is a difference between lying and bullshitting. So lying is when I deliberately tell you a lie. So for example, I don't know, you asked me if you know are you going to be in town on Friday and I say I am going to be in town but I'm telling you a lie. No, I'm traveling on Friday.

So that is a deliberate lie. Bullshit would be, I mean it's never specific. So I will tell you something I heard from someone that there's an asteroid going to hit the earth on Thursday night. So it doesn't matter whether I'm going to be on Friday or not because all of us are going to be gone, something like that.

So if I knew for sure then that would be different. Or if I knew for sure it's not going to hit that also would be a lie. This is just bullshit and it becomes a problem and people start using this in the political discourse. It leads to it rouses the worst in people.

There are a lot of emotions which are needlessly charged. Just because there are standard thing is you have stories about one particular community. In the US it will be black people or maybe black people make up stories about white people. I don't know how it goes.

But there's really no truth in it. And even the teller of those stories has no idea whether it's true or not. So the question is how do you identify bullshit? So before you get into that, I'm trying to reconcile the difference between lying and bullshitting.

Is it something like a lie leads to bullshit later? Initially something might start off spreading up ease that they know is deliberately false. Hence they're lying. They're somebody who might send me, believe in it and add their own biases and beliefs to it.

Much like how you might conquer the story to say you're not in town or whatever it is. Then it moves to the realm of bullshit or they use that as a base to further amplify their own beliefs. I'm just trying to... I think that the originator of the lie would possibly have an agenda.

It would... Yeah. They want certain things to happen or something not to happen. Which is why they're telling the lie in the first place.

But the propagators of that thing, you told me something a lie and I go somewhere else and tell it as a fact without any regard to whether it's true or not. Then I become a bullshitter. That's one kind of bullshitter. The second kind is what we find a lot on in professional circles is people giving opinions on things which they know nothing about.

And even that is pretty injurious. So for example, you are in the digital marketing space and you are in an organization. You're working and there's something you know a little bit about. And somebody is letting off on that topic which you know isn't true at all.

It's not specifically false either. But a lot of it is wild stuff. Yeah. So I've actually done this nice.

Yeah. So that could be one kind of bullshit. Yeah. I found like a nice little table with three differences.

So liars versus BSS and I cannot believe that we are actually in a state category discussing this. The simplified has done was liars in case in a conscious act of deception whereas BSS don't consciously deceive. Interesting. To liars know the truth but are then to hide it.

I think that's important. And BSS don't know or care about the truth. That's again kind of interesting. And lastly liars spread untruths but still accept the distinction between the between truth and false.

Whereas BSS ignore or inject the distinction between truth and falsity all together. And I think all of those are very nice. I can almost picture you know where Trump falls and fair amoking guy on victim falls and stuff like that. So yeah.

For the purpose of this, let's stop doing semantics and come back to guessing itself. Other thing is you would you know from all the ongoing discussion you would think that we don't like bullshitting. Right. So we don't like people who bullshit or we don't like the bullshit itself.

But it's so there is there is this author named Eric Ambler. He's a turn of the century author writer of detective story. The author wrote detective story. So he had a story called Dirty Story.

In which I don't even say that he was ambling in. Yeah. Yeah. So he did it only for the good jokes.

I mean, it's you Tony. So a character named Arthur Simpson recalls advice that he received as a child from his father. And this is what Simpson's father told him. Although I was only seven when my father was killed, I still remember him very well.

And some of the things he used to say. One of the first things he taught me was never tell a lie when you can bullshit your way through. Yes. Yeah.

Not only is there an important difference between lying and bullshitting but that the latter is preferable to the form. Yeah. So it is a point of view. Right.

It's very difficult to see under what circumstances that might be true. Yeah. But there's also this question about what is truth. So this truth itself, I mean, philosophers have written dreams and dreams or how and there is a school of thought which believes that there is no objective truth.

Right. It's all subjective. And what could be true for me could quite possibly be untrue for you. Yeah.

So in such a world where truth itself is difficult to define or know, can you find someone for bullshitting? Because if you had to, you know, you had to tell the truth all the time and you didn't know what the truth was, you would not be able to say anything at all. Yeah. So I'm going to talk about this philosophy of the name Ludwig Bridget Einstein.

So, which is kind of quite a character and he was a really brilliant guy. He was, I think, in Cambridge. He was one of the, there was a group in Cambridge called the Apostles of Cambridge, turn of the century. And it had people like Bertrand Russell and Bridget Einstein himself and J.H.

Hardy, who is more famously known as Ramanu Jans collaborator. Okay. So, Bridget Einstein had a biographer, one lady, I forget an name, something and she wasn't well. She, she had a sore throat or something.

So this guy goes to visit her and she tells him that I feel awful. I feel like, I like a dog who's been run over. That's what she says. And then Ludwig Bridget Einstein says, but how can you know what a dog who has been run over feels like?

So it will shit completely collapses when you have a nitpicker in the company. Right. So if you, if you bullshit, then yes, a good network can tear you apart in minutes, if not in hours. Yeah.

It's, it's maybe kind of worth thinking about what the role of BS could be from, like we always like to go back to evolutionary sort of perspectives. Right. Like we, like one of the things that we, the famous we mentioned in Sapiens is the role of Gossit in, bringing people closer together, which is important, which is important, which is important, which is important, etc, etc. Yeah.

It's kind of like interesting. So what role could BS really sort of think out loud? At least in my limited experience, people who BS, right, they get a momentary high because they are holding the stage. And they are, they are saying things that no one can directly contradict.

Sure. And that's what basically I suppose the, the high is, you just, you just feel great. You feel your one the day and it takes a while for people to unpackage BS. There is that because if you, if you are constantly BSing, people stop taking you seriously after a while.

Yeah. It's probably a decent short term strategy, but not so much in the long term. Like, once you get caught up and I'm sure everyone listening to this can think of one colleague that seemed impressive at one point of time. But if that turned out to be BS and it has a habit of repeating that, then they would probably not be in everyone's desk to have a great reputation after that.

So that's kind of interesting. It's sort of like, I suppose a way to get ahead without proving the rigor of actual work research thinking, if that makes sense. Or it could also just be a way to kind of cover up saying, I don't know. And a lot of people, especially Indians have trouble saying, I don't know or just the word itself, N O itself.

So BS could just be a way of covering that up. I remember somebody somewhere saying, I think when I was at my account, research professor said that Indians are terrible at saying no. They'll just build some cockamamie excuse of the other to get out of it rather than saying no. They'll say yes and then they'll worry about how to say no later.

Just something that our producer might know once we commit to a time we keep BSing our way out of it. Sorry about that. It's partly imagination. If you look at BS from a slightly positive perspective, it is a little bit of imagination who are conjuring up fictions of some type to account for a situation.

So again, maybe I'm being a little too charitable about BS altogether. But I suppose even all that nonsense that you see on LinkedIn, there is a certain amount of craft in some sense that goes behind it. Oh, yes. So here's the thing.

So there is a difference between complex and complicated. So a lot of engineering problems are complicated. But if you drill down, there is, for example, if you're writing some code and there are a lot of really crazy edge cases, use cases, variables passing through or whatever happens in coding. And it takes a team of engineers to really think it through, work it, debug it, test it out and months of effort, if not years, but you figure it out in the end.

It starts up and that is complicated. But it is complex is something different. Complex could be very, it might not have as many layers as the complicated thing. Marketing problems are notoriously complex.

So it's just not so you have a company which sells some goods or services and they used to be selling very well. They don't sell now. And there is no obvious reason. And now you want, everything is going fine, but you just want the sales or you want your sales to increase another 10%, 5% whatever.

And famously as you have good. And there are a dozen knobs you can put in, you don't know which one to put in. Right? Because there is nothing, everything is linked to everything else.

Let us say you're selling pajamas. Do you give discounts? If you give discounts, do you think people will perceive it? What happened if someone like Rolex gave a discount?

They would lose in value, right? Or why Rolex anymore? Like that? So complex is complicated.

That is complicated. That is complex. That is complex. That is what you said right now.

So give me another example. Complicated was complex. It was interesting. Yeah.

Complicated is you have a piece of machinery, like your car, right? So car, the rear wheels, yeah. The car rear wheels have something in one of the differentials. The difference is the rear piece of mechanism.

Right? So when you're taking a turn, the wheel on the outside of the turn has to cover a larger distance than the wheel on the inside. So the wheel on the inside has to, the revolutions have to decrease and the wheel on the outside, the revolutions have to be increased by a proportional amount. Otherwise your car will just get it.

And that gearing system inside the differential does exactly that. Wow. It's pretty complicated. That is complicated.

So that's complicated. Why is that not complex though? Because in casual land, it's the same. It's the same, but it is not complex because it can be worked out.

Complex is, it can't be worked out despite all your efforts. Complex is, it can't be worked out completely. But both of them are equally difficult. They're difficult in different ways.

Like metaverse, for example. Right? So Zuckerberg took the step to convert his Facebook into metaverse for whatever reason it was. And he couldn't work out the implications.

So some people say that it's a great move. Some people say it's a great move. Some people say it's suicide. No one knows.

You know, he's still playing out. No one knows. Like Elon Musk has taken over Twitter. And he has the job of making Twitter a better place.

Get more revenue, make the user experience better. And there are literally hundreds of solutions or suggestions that are coming his way. Which, you know, they're impossible to implement simultaneously. So that's a complicated, so that's complicated.

So that's complicated to be a CEO taking over a firm where the profitability is known, but super difficult. Right? So interesting. I think a lot of interesting semantics over there.

B.S. versus lying and complicated versus complex. So let's take a let's give our ad versus break. Whatever you want to call this.

But before we will discuss more about this on the other side of this ad break, who knows. It feels like everyone's talking about two things right now. Pickleball and Poth us. What happens when someone who's lived her whole life on the court decides to bring those two worlds together?

I'm Sanya Mirza and I'm bringing you a brand new Poth us. Serving it up with Sanya. I've had some incredible conversations with friends, fellow athletes, artists and entrepreneurs. Each episode starts with the game of Pickleball and once the rallies are done, the real topic begins.

Serving it up with Sanya, watch and listen on YouTube and wherever you get your favorite Poth us. Namaste, sashyakal. Good morning, evening afternoon. My Poth us is s that's me Monday to Friday, Sunday, Sunday, Sunday, I'm without kids.

We chat with servants who will never meet traffic jams on streets and people from all professions. Everyone day I go live with the show, ask me anything, AMA, you tell the questions, I know all the questions, I know all the mumbai, I know the panel discussion called Cock and Bull where we dive into current affairs and wonder why anyone even cares at all. And Friday releases are always surprise episodes for you all. So tune into CyberSayers on YouTube and all of your streaming platforms.

Welcome back to this fascinating discussion on a whole lot of things. But before I let Narin, you know what's the one place in Mumbai where it is impossible to find your destination. BKC because it is Bandra Kudla complicated. You had a joke, right?

You had a Bandra Kudla complex or something. Yeah, something. I think it was something like ever since offices started moving from South Bombay to Central Bombay, Narin point had a Bandra Kudla complex. It was very complicated.

It was now an hour ago. This is complicated. A complicated joke about a complex. Actually, most people listening to this will be just say it's a piece of BS, so let's come back.

This is a fascinating thing. I'm sure you have come across as if not read the book already. It's a book called Bullshit Jobs by an anthropologist, I think, David Greba. Greba, Greba, I forget what it is.

It's one of the most stuff. It's one of the most, what do you say? Every time I post about it or I see somebody posting or there are people who are vociferously defending the thesis or people who are like, whatever, whatever. The basic construct is that humans have invented a lot of jobs to keep themselves busy.

And many of these jobs, if you think about it, don't really need to exist. And very likely the more bullshit the job is, the less the smaller and smaller the audience it serves is. Because if you think of something like a doctor, that serves a whole lot of people and that's definitely not a bullshit job. Similarly for teachers.

But then when you come to say arguably lawyers, now you're serving a slightly smaller audience and the bullshit ratio becomes a little more. You go into hedge fund management and that's a lot of bullshit serving a very small audience. So then you have increasingly sharper and sharper jobs. What do you think?

I thought that was an interesting first come out. I would define a bullshit job as one where it's virtually impossible to be measured. Your performance can't be measured. So if you have a production job, you're in charge of producing widgets and every day your factory makes 100 widgets.

And the management says no, you want to make 102. Then you can hire a consultant to tell you how to increase your production, given everything is the same. And you would be a productivity consultant and he'll tell you, oh no, you're getting this stuff from your left hand side and passing it to your right. But if you tell your workers to take it on the right hand pass to the left, you'll get a 2% increase or whatever.

So those things can be measured. And you know, at the end of the period. But there is someone you would hire to increase organizational morale. How do you measure organizational morale?

So it is still there are people who do very good work in this area. I'm not saying they all be bullsht us. But it's very difficult to measure. So my counter to that is I think without getting into value judgment about what is quote unquote BS, the way we spoke about in the first stop of this show.

I think there will always be jobs across the spectrum that can be measured and can't be measured. Like if you take the classical quote unquote bullshit job, like something like what a hedge fund manager does. It's a highly measurable job. Like in terms of how much money you made, this exact most of how much the portfolio will be extremely measurable.

On the other hand, maybe some of what I want to do. Why would it be a BS bullshit job? No, so again, that's why I said quote unquote because the way Graybird defines it is that these are all just jobs that people have invented to keep each other, you know, to keep themselves dizzy and stuff like that. You know, that's where it's coming from.

And the fact that it's increasingly specialized serving the needs of a smaller and smaller audience. I think one way of looking at this is if you were stranded on a desert island, who are the people who you'd want around you would really want. You want to shift you really want to hedge fund manager. So I think that's one, you know, short heuristic of looking at it.

But so the thing is this, right? So take any job that you think is BS this is going to be some aspect of that is measured. Like if you take a non BS job, like a nurse for instance, how do you measure what they do? How do you measure the impact that they have?

Sure, you can break it down. You can really sit down. You can say, okay, tended to this many people. The problem I always feel is when you put numbers to things like that, then the numbers are the things that are optimized for.

Like if suddenly number of patients tended to on a night or on a shift becomes a metric. That possibly means that efficacy for each patient or some patient will suffer. So, you know, there's a very good point because there might be a patient who needs a life and death situation, needs to be monitored constantly to the night and a nurse would have attended to exactly one patient. I think Dr.

Nitin spoke about this a lot when he came onto the show. So that's the thing. So I'm a little bit of a good point. I'm a little bit of a pain.

And at the same time, there are lots of BS jobs across the spectrum again, which you can put numbers just for sake of it. I have been to many meetings, for instance, where team of the team will walk in and present the whole side of impressive looking numbers, giving the illusion that they have developed a lot of work. But in reality, they have it for somebody who does like, I actually think that one of the greatest challenges of jobs, whether they have BS or not, is the non-measurability of a lot of professions that deserve more in some sense. Like teachers, for instance, should they be always charged by the academic performance of their students?

Or is it like a, you know, we went from here to here. I have benefited a lot by speaking to my therapist, but if I were to ask to wait him, how do I, he gives me this little slider scale, but I find it very weird to say, okay, you help me on a scale of one to five. You find it very weird to assign numbers to something like this. But I think that's a larger conversation.

Can we really quantify the world that we live in? Can we quantify our experiences as humans? People who give us a 4.7 star rating for this podcast on Spotify and other, thank you, all of you, first of all, and the rest of you, please go ahead and do it. But what does that really mean?

Like, you know, I think the whole aspect of rating, I think, is an interesting conversation by itself to have. For another day, but I think one way of thinking about it, I suppose, is how many people does this job have an impact for like how many people's lives? Is this profession really changing or impacting? So that definition, before I go on to that, I have to tell you my favorite therapist joke.

Can I tell you? Yes, please. So this guy is telling his friend, my therapist finally said something which brought tears to my eyes. After 10 years of therapy, no, he said no hablo English.

So what you say, regarding the BS and non-Bias nature of jobs, we are biased towards people whose jobs are very specific, right? Taylor's important, Dr. is very important, teachers important, a cobbler is important, would sports coach be important? I don't know.

Would somebody who puts organizational values into a matrix and give that person to be important? So it's very different. So, you know, I used to have a very low opinion of quote unquote management consultants, right? And then one of my young friends had gotten to a really big consulting firm.

And he challenged me, he says, you know what, I disagree with your sweeping statement that we are all digital. And then he showed me some of his work. And it was about, so they were doing, you know, they were studying somebody's work. And he showed me how insightful he had some 15 slides.

And I was like, yeah, okay man, that is insightful. So with those insights, the CEO of that business will be able to really turn his organization around. I can't really tell you, but I'm not going to tell you that much. That's fair.

And I will use the same situation. They are in a completely different company, a different consultant. Mike, just give the CEO what they want to hear. That happens all the time.

And that happens a lot in the client agency relationship as a result of his work itself is BS in some sense, right? If it's come together for the common good of the company and not necessarily the retainer or the salary, then I suppose there is an element of whatever the opposite of BS is. I don't know how we end up getting into this nice path about. I have an interesting question to ask you.

I haven't been able to really come up with anything. But you know, I mean, you and I, we both work for a living and we constantly encounter bullshitting. And people who are not bullshitting, you tend to have a built-in sort of... Yeah, that's what we have a sort of a BS reader or something.

And that comes with experience. So I remember when I was much younger, just starting out, and someone senior says something and you would listen to it with wide open eyes and it would be gospel truth. And many years later, as your experience grew, you realize that as little about it as you do. So what in your view is a good thumb rule or some thumb rules for detecting bullshit?

I think the person should be able to distill it down to first principles eventually, right? If somebody says something, you ask why, then they should be able to say what advice and then you ask a why for that as well. And then you keep going down, maybe it takes two, maybe it takes five levels to eventually get down to something that is a fundamental truth, you know, consumer think this way or in advertising it would be all men are driven by either want of money or sex or food or whatever. It basically comes with some fundamental truth that way.

If they try to deviate and reflect and say something like, oh, that's the way it's always been done or that's the way the brand has always, then they don't have a very solid answer for whatever it is that they're saying. So that to be is one for sure. I agree with you. I would say this is more for BS, the possibility and not so much BS detection.

If it's something that's coming from a person's lived experience, then I will make that much more credible than somebody who is just like, I work with a lot of people who really haven't gone out on the field and got their hands dirty. They're juniors to send them a report and they're like, okay, see, and then it is admirable to some level how they will then be in meetings as if they were the ones who actually went on to the field and I suppose that's a skill by a certain age, that's what they paid for. But I think that to be is the moment somebody's got their hands dirty. Like, I mean, for instance, you will not be as about the work that you do in the faculty because you have got your hands in some sense literally dirty.

Over there, so I know you won't be as on that. So to me, these are the two sort of BS detectors, if that makes sense. I can only ask first why the moment you ask your first why you'll understand that's how these directions are doing really. Yeah, so true.

I've had that experience and I've also been, one is too much talk, too much detail, too many anecdotes. And another one I would say, another one I would say is too much adherence to what society or whatever things should be the right answer for this. And for this, the best example I can give you is SOPs on management entrance exam forms. I was on the panel for Micah a few years.

I was asking not on the other side. I was on the other side also twice, but I was on the other side more often. And out of every hundred people who would apply about 50, 60 of them would just write something that Chad GPT probably would be able to do a better job of, you know, right from first. And because this Micah everyone wants to show off the creative, they're saying, okay, I won a essay writing contest in my first standard ever since I thought I would be creative.

I saw add blah, blah, blah, blah. And the moment you then question them on that, okay, what's your favorite ad? And then they give you something and then you ask them, okay, why is that your favorite ad? And then, you know, they really, really stumble and then they try to make up something on the spot, which really comes back to BS, you know.

But then you have some that are really, really honest, which may not follow the standard template of things that parents might be shocked that they've actually written out things like this. I remember one of my seniors, if I'm not mistaken, actually wrote their SOP inverse, which, you know, I mean, it just stands out. It does a job that is supposed to, it's not traditional. But yeah, I think, you know, I think stuff like that is really, if it tries too hard to adhere to what society or, you know, the guidebook says that it should be, then I think the setting is right for BS.

I'm not saying that the outcome will necessarily be BS, but I think it just makes it easier to slip back into the, you know, what the guidebook says should be the answer. It's like, yeah, some situations like a warm, petri dish full of ingredients for bullshitted blooms, right? You have this colony of bullshitted which grow. So I think every organization also needs, especially from the top needs some mechanism to cull the bullshitted out.

Yeah, this is going to be a very important skill in the 21st century. I mean, all jokes about because of many, many reasons. So one article that I read came across recently, I think we have shared it in our group. I forgot whether we did is an English teacher who actually wrote about the potential positive impact of chat GPT on essays.

I forget if it was a sort of her, but they had written that this is not a bad thing necessarily. Like we should accept the fact that we live in a society like now where technology like this exists. And we will be worrying about, oh, this is going to destroy homework. The fact of the matter is if a technology like this is homework pretty in this current form, probably deserves to be destroyed.

And we need to think about how to use this in a different way. So rather than writing, you should be spending your time, you should be teaching students to judge the output of these things and then construct on that. You know, goes on to argue saying that detection whether this was generated by an AI where the poke holes in it and all that is going to become a way more valuable skill than understand the difference between a verb and a objective, for instance, in 2020 onwards. And I think that was quite important for you looking at it.

And I can imagine the same thing about Dali to all that as well. I have an analogy. So when I was studying engineering, we had to do all our drawing. So engineering drawing is a big subject, right?

On paper. You have to use a drafter and set squares and T squares and, you know, and today everything is your own CAD. So the skill aspect is gone. When we were doing, you know, when we had this big board and you had to do a drawing, you needed to be very skilled.

Some people who are skilled, their drawings would look beautiful. They knew how hard to draw a line or how likely to do a cross hatching and so on and so forth. It's all gone now in the CAD. So now people have to focus more on what the drawing represents or what the design is supposed to convey or whatever.

So chat GPT is going to be like that. So when everyone uses chat GPT, the words and the grammar and syntax are in place. You can make it flowery less flowery. But people will be forced to confront what it actually says.

So that's your thought. And that has to be unique. That has to be insightful. That has to be something which is worth something for someone else.

Yeah, exactly. I can go back to BS, right? So BS is not useful to anyone except the speaker itself. I think we've covered a whole ground over here.

Any other angles? Any other aspects of BS? No, this is one of those topics which because it's so complex as opposed to complicated, can go on forever and ever and ever. At some time, I think we have to sort of just let listeners decide for themselves and try and figure out what their own BS in their own universe means.

So folks, signing off here, stay safe, stay uncomplicated and stay simplified. Stay simplified.