MY trillion $Dollar Project is finally OUT!
Credibility score: 45/100 — Mixed Credibility. Several questionable claims detected. Watch with healthy skepticism.
BSmeter analyzed "MY trillion $Dollar Project is finally OUT!" and rated it 45/100 for credibility (a BS score of 55/100 — mixed credibility), on 2026-06-06. Its weakest claim — "Claims his AI search is free and private without explaining how" — scored 30/100 and was flagged as sketchy. 10 claims were checked against the video transcript. Scores are produced by BSmeter's AI analysis of the transcript, not independent human verification.
Of 10 claims analyzed: 3 scored under 40, 7 between 40 and 69, and 0 at 70 or above.
Claims analyzed
Video opens with a highlight reel preview — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 0:00
Pewds just rage-quit Google and Adobe in one breath — baby wipes as the new anti-AI flex
Why this score: Just Vibes segment. The first 30 seconds are a rapid teaser montage of the creator announcing his new project Odicus and trash-talking Google and Adobe. No factual claims are made yet — it's pure hype and attitude.
Original quote: “It's over. It's done. I am releasing a project I've been working on for myself today called Odicus. Google, I don't have tissues, but I have baby wipes. No more smoobling. Adobe. More like uh do not be no. No, that's not right. I do be THINKING YOU YOU GET THE POINT. STUPID. OH, this is is my…”
Hates his own project and would delete it if possible — Opinion (50/100)
At 0:30
Classic dev self-roast — top comment even called it out.
Why this score: Subjective frustration with the finished product.
- Common creator sentiment when shipping big solo projects.
- Doesn't affect functionality claims.
Original quote: “The best way I can describe it is Odysius is an AI workspace. ... I hate everything in this project. All of it. If it could go away forever and I have the power to, I would not hesitate.”
More personal data shared with AI = better performance but bigger privacy risk — Opinion (50/100)
At 2:30
Classic privacy trade-off point — nothing new but he actually spells out the exact mechanism.
Why this score: Reasonable framing of data-for-performance exchange.
- Matches how most LLM fine-tuning works
- Doesn't overstate the risk, just flags the principle
Original quote: “The more you share about yourself with AI, the better it becomes. The more it understands you, your preferences, your past experiences, your workflow, your work, your documents, your computer, the more you give it access, the better it works. But the more you do that, the more you're handing over a…”
You have the legal right to get your data deleted from companies — OK (60/100)
At 4:49
True in theory under GDPR/CCPA — actually exercising it is the nightmare he just described.
Why this score: Legally correct in covered regions.
- GDPR Article 17 and CCPA give deletion rights
- Enforcement depends on jurisdiction and company compliance
- No universal global right exists
Original quote: “Because the good news is that it's you have the right to get your data deleted off from these companies.”
Manually deleting your data takes hundreds of hours — Dubious (35/100)
At 4:56
"Hundreds of hours" is marketing math — no evidence given, just vibes.
Why this score: No source cited for the hundreds-of-hours figure.
- Sounds like the sponsor's own estimate
- Real effort varies wildly by how many brokers hold your data
- Classic ad inflation tactic
Original quote: “But the problem is that takes a lot of effort, hundreds of hours. Are you going to do that? You probably have better things to do. You just sign up to Incogn.”
Claims local AI email reader means zero data leaves your machine — Dubious (45/100)
At 6:30
"Local" doesn't automatically mean private — depends on what the model actually phones home.
Why this score: Oversimplifies privacy.
- Local models can still leak via updates or telemetry
- No mention of what base model or sandboxing he used
- Real privacy depends on implementation details he skips
Original quote: “So, I made it so the AI will read your emails and it's okay because it's a local AI, so it doesn't matter. You're not giving away any information.”
Stole deep research feature from Tongyi Labs (Chinese lab) — Dubious (40/100)
At 8:30
"Stole" is doing a lot of work — probably means "was inspired by" their open research.
Why this score: Wording issue on attribution.
- Tongyi/Qwen models from Alibaba are public
- "Stole" implies copying code vs implementing similar architecture
- Common in AI to build on published papers
Original quote: “I stole this, as I mentioned, from Chinese Lab. It was Tongi Labs, by the way.”
Claims his AI search is free and private without explaining how — Sketchy (30/100)
At 10:30
Free + private search that Google 'might not like' sounds like either scraping or something legally gray.
Why this score: Cost and privacy claims need scrutiny.
- Running real-time search at scale costs real money
- 'Google might not like it' hint suggests possible ToS violation or scraping
- No technical details given on how privacy is actually enforced
Original quote: “Search for AI can actually cost a lot of money. So, the fact that it's free, we don't have to talk about how it did that because Google might not like it, but it is free and it's private.”
Cookbook solves all self-hosting AI problems — Sketchy (35/100)
At 12:30
Said Cookbook 'solves all the problems' with self-hosting — then immediately walked it back 4 seconds later
Why this score: Overstated capability. Key issues:
- Speaker claims it 'solves all the problems' then admits 'That is a lie' right after
- No specific metrics or user testing shown to support the claim
- Reduces complex hardware variables to 'just go with the score'
Original quote: “Cookbook solves all the problems with self-hosting AI. BF16, FB8, ABQ, what the is a gagust? There is so much to know when you're trying to self-host AI and I went, this is cookbook is my way to try and make it more simple.”
Odysseus is a completely free AI project fighting big tech — Opinion (50/100)
At 14:30
Free self-hosted AI is the pitch — the "war on big tech" part is pure rhetoric.
Why this score: Opinion, not a testable fact.
- Speaker frames the project as activism against corporations.
- No evidence presented that this launch changes industry power dynamics.
- The "never cost any money" part aligns with the reported free release.
Original quote: “The war on big tech has just begun. We will no longer be abused. This project will never cost any money. That's my return.”
See the full analysis with timestamps →