I was mayor of Mill Valley in 2020, and that experience led me to sign the resolution. At the time, I also signed onto the Great Barrington Declaration. The powers of the public health officer enshrined in the California Health and Safety Code are shockingly broad, as I noted in a paper I wrote in 2022 excerpted below.

Censorship rarely wears a name tag. It shows up in disguises like government jawboning, a social media tax, and conference security removing researchers for sharing the organizer’s own editorial The costumes change. The principle does not. eternallyradicalidea.com/pub…

My whole timeline is full of millionaires complaining about a trillionaire

How to Earn a Billion Dollars: paulgraham.com/earn.html

Je vais partir du principe que tu es de bonne foi, parce que ton raisonnement est intuitif et que 90% des gens le partagent. Mais il repose sur trois erreurs factuelles, et ça vaut le coup de les regarder calmement. Erreur 1 : la fortune d'Elon n'est pas un tas d'argent. C'est de la propriété d'usines, de fusées et de satellites. "Prendre la moitié de sa tune", concrètement, ça veut dire forcer la vente de la moitié de SpaceX et Tesla. L'argent ne sort pas d'un coffre, il sort des entreprises elles-mêmes, qui passent sous contrôle de fonds étrangers ou d'États. Tu ne redistribues pas du cash, tu démantèles un outil de production. C'est la différence entre récolter des pommes et découper le pommier. Erreur 2 : "ça résout énormément de problèmes dans le monde". Cette expérience a déjà été tentée, en vrai. En 2021, le directeur du Programme Alimentaire Mondial de l'ONU a affirmé que 6 milliards de Musk pouvaient "résoudre la faim dans le monde". Réponse d'Elon : décrivez-moi exactement comment, comptabilité publique à l'appui, et je vends mes actions Tesla immédiatement. Le PAM a publié son plan. Verdict : ce n'était pas "résoudre la faim", c'était nourrir 42 millions de personnes pendant un an. Un an. Puis il faut re-payer, pour toujours. Le PAM avait d'ailleurs levé 8,4 milliards l'année précédente, et la faim était toujours là. Les ONG traitent les symptômes en boucle, jamais les causes, parce que leur financement dépend de l'existence du problème. Erreur 3, la plus importante : tu cherches ce qui sort vraiment les gens de la pauvreté. Bonne nouvelle, on a la réponse, et elle est massive. En 1990, 36% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Plus d'un milliard de personnes sorties de la misère en 30 ans. Par quoi ? Pas par la charité ni par l'aide internationale (plus de 1 000 milliards versés à l'Afrique en 60 ans pour un résultat à peu près nul). Par l'ouverture des marchés, l'industrialisation, le commerce. La Chine seule a sorti 800 millions de personnes de la pauvreté en abandonnant le collectivisme, pas en taxant ses entrepreneurs. Donc fais le calcul complet. Option A : tu confisques 500 milliards, tu finances quelques années de programmes, l'argent est consommé, et tu as détruit la machine qui produisait les fusées, les voitures électriques et l'internet des zones rurales. Option B : tu laisses le meilleur allocateur de capital de sa génération réinvestir 100% de sa fortune dans des industries qui baissent les coûts pour tout le monde et emploient des centaines de milliers de personnes. L'option A soulage ta morale pendant 18 mois. L'option B sort des populations entières de la pauvreté pour toujours. La pauvreté ne se redistribue pas. Elle se résout par la création. C'est contre-intuitif, c'est frustrant, mais c'est ce que disent 200 ans de données.

"... the political left has long had a remarkable lack of interest in how wealth is created. As far as they are concerned, wealth exists somehow and the only interesting question is how to redistribute it." — Thomas Sowell

🚩 TAKE ACTION BEFORE A RED FLAG WARNING 🚩 Critical fire weather conditions are expected from 11 a.m. Wednesday through 5 p.m. Thursday across portions of the Sacramento Valley. Strong winds, low humidity, and dry fuels can cause fires to spread rapidly. Before the wind arrives, do an Ember Check: ✔️ Close windows, garage doors, and pet doors ✔️ Clear leaves and debris from roofs and gutters ✔️ Move flammable items off your patio and at least 5' away from your home Close It. Clear It. Move It. Now is the time to prepare, stay alert, and have an evacuation plan ready. #ReadyForWildfire #RedFlagWarning #CALFIRE #WildfirePreparedness

As mayor in 2020, I was called a white supremacist, "internally colonized," and possibly autistic with no empathy. People would come up to me in the street in tears about how I was being treated. But no one at the time wanted to speak the truth in public and risk becoming a target. Even last month, a couple made a point to thank me for standing strong back then. Live not by lies.

AI is the new Climate Change.

Six years ago today.

Kill the kill switch.

14 yo asked how to prove the Pythagorean theorem so I drew him this.

We're saving science from ideological capture! I am thrilled to announce a first-of-its-kind article type called “Peer Review” in the journal Theory and Society. The journal's editor-in-chief, Kevin McCaffree, and I have been working on this for a while, and it was finally approved by @SpringerNature. The idea is simple: publication should be the beginning of academic scrutiny, not the end of it. A Peer Review article can critique a paper from any scholarly journal. It can address problems with methods, evidence, logic, definitions, theory, or interpretation. But it has to focus on the claims and arguments, not personal attacks. Submissions are capped at 2,500 words and go through a straightforward merit review instead of endless gatekeeping and ideological screening. We ask just one basic question: Is this critique coherent, serious, reasonable, or even popular enough to deserve scholarly attention? If yes, it gets published. And the authors of the original paper get a built-in right of reply, so readers can see the critique and the response in a legitimate academic venue. That’s how science is supposed to work! Science becomes self-correcting only when real people build the mechanisms that allow correction to happen. That’s what we’ve done. Now it’s time for academics to use it. 🔗wsj.com/opinion/a-way-to-cha…

There is no energy transition We simply use more and more of everything — fossil fuels, nuclear, renewables, solar and wind "Rather than replacing fossil fuels, renewables are adding to the overall energy mix" Energy Institute Statistical Review 2025 energyinst.org/exploring-ene… iea.org/data-and-statistics/…

Also not acceptable to make life decisions for those you think are lower IQ than you. @bryan_caplan makes a strong argument that intelligence does not correlate with morality. open.substack.com/pub/betoni…

Climate sanity, finally The extreme climate scenario that gave huge, scary, and unrealistic results (RCP8.5) is officially dead rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p…

Federal law says new cars after 2026 must monitor drivers and shut down if the car disapproves. Your dashboard should not be judge, jury, and executioner. @RepScottPerry @RepChipRoy offered an amendment to defund the automobile kill switch mandate. Here’s our debate:

The Fourth Amendment isn't optional. If the government wants to read your messages, search your data, or spy on you, they need a warrant. Period. My Fourth Amendment Restoration and Protection Act ends warrantless surveillance of Americans.

What is there to prevent your spoken words being picked up by your devices (the way they often are before they feed back targeted ads to you) but instead of ads your words trigger social media posts that seem to have read your mind in some way? Nothing. Nothing prevents that.