Roundup
Another day, another roundup:
(1) Here’s a link to commenter “Cornhead” (Dave Begley’s) impressions of Ron DeSantis’ recent appearance in Cedar Bluffs, Iowa.
(2) Biden’s hard fall the other day has sparked renewed calls for open Democrat debates so that challengers get a hearing. Those wanting the debates seem scared – and rightly so – that Biden will do something that really heightens voters’ doubts about him. Biden’s supporters know that the less exposure to Biden the better, and that open debates would almost certainly reflect poorly on him. But Biden’s main opponent at the moment, Robert Kennedy Jr., is perceived as a loose cannon who won’t do their bidding.
(3) Wray says he’ll provide the whistleblower document to Comer. I wrote a post yesterday about Wray’s stonewalling; I guess we’ll see how much of the document is redacted if and when he turns it over.
(4)Where do failed and rejected leftist public officials go? Why, to mold young minds at the university, that’s where. You may recall that Chesa’s mother followed her lengthy prison term with a Columbia professorship.
(5) Glenn Reynolds discusses the history of the law of libel against public figures as developed in New York Times v. Sullivan and later related cases. I’ve never been in agreement with Sullivan, and apparently SCOTUS is poised to revisit it.
Twitter and censorship: “What Is a Woman?”
There’s been a recent brouhaha on Twitter about perhaps not showing “What Is a Woman?” because a few speakers in the Matt Walsh documentary “misgender” some trans people (I’ve seen the film and it’s very good, by the way). Ace has the Twitter story here. It seems that the problem was caused by workers making the decision, and Musk ended up overruling it.
To me, these events are a reminder that there still are probably plenty of Twitter employees who are aching to go back to their old leftist ways, and who will do so unless forced to abandon these practices by Musk or someone else. On the other hand, as a blogger, I know how out-of-control things can get if it’s a complete free-for-all on a website. Some way to filter out spam is necessary, but not just that. Egregious racial and sexual insults as well as porn and obscenities and death threats will actually take over if some standards aren’t set.
But misgendering is certainly not anywhere near where I think the line should be drawn. It’s a reflection of the leftist “words are violence” mantra – that is, any words with which they don’t agree. The trans movement has declared that not using a person’s preferred pronoun is tantamount to actual violence against that person, which is an absurd claim. But it’s an important one, because censorship is one of the left’s main tools – one to fight when they are the ones being censored, and one to implement once they get into power.
Jordan Peterson first rose to prominence by sensing the danger of compelling a person to use certain pronouns. To many people, it seemed a minor issue at the time: why not be polite and call someone what he or she – or they – want? Here’s a video from about five years ago in which Peterson addresses the subject:
Can AI be taught morality?
I wonder.
There’s this supposed incident (hat tip: commenter “Snow on Pine”); the original story as reported went this way:
Hamilton described a scenario at a summit hosted by the United Kingdom-based Royal Aeronautical Society in which Air Force researchers trained a weaponized drone using AI to identify and attack enemy air defenses after receiving final mission approval from a human operator. But when an operator told the drone to abort a mission in a simulated event, the AI instead turned on its operator and drove the vehicle to kill the operator, underscoring the dangers of the U.S. military’s push to incorporate AI into autonomous weapons systems, he added.
But now the Air Force is saying that it never happened. It was merely a hypothetical thought experiment.
On the other hand, ChatGPT seems to be a BS artist. Beware relying on it. Some New York attorneys did in researching a case, and the helpful bot just made s*** up.
This discovery came to light when the defense counsel, during their due diligence, could not locate the cited cases in any standard legal databases…[T]he supposedly precedent cases were utterly fabricated.
And this other example of fabrication by AI seems to be BS-ing just for the fun of it:
Tony Venhuizen, a smart guy from South Dakota, operates a web site where he writes about the history of the governors of that state. He asked ChatGPT, “Please write a blog post discussing South Dakota’s oldest and youngest governors.” Chat GPT responded with a competent description of South Dakota’s oldest governor, Nils Boe. It then went on to write about the state’s youngest governor, Crawford H. “Chet” Taylor.
Taylor didn’t exist, although ChatGPT even came up with a fake portrait of the nonexistent governor. The strangest thing about the incident is that of course there really was a youngest governor of the state, who was ignored by the AI.
Can these sorts of things be ironed out? Or is there something inherent in AI that makes such problems – or something worse – inevitable? Those sorts of speculations have been staples of science fiction for just about forever. For example, anyone who’s seen the movie “2001: A Space Odyssey” can probably remember its most colorful and interesting character, the computer Hal, who has a mind of his own and pleads for his life when he sees his end in sight as a result of his transgressions.
Now relatively sophisticated AI has entered into the realm of reality, and must be grappled with. I don’t think most of us have confidence that those who will be doing the grappling know enough to deal successfully with the dilemmas they will be facing.
Open thread 6/2/23
Very Deep Throat: Bidengate and Wray stonewalling
“For some reason, the FBI thinks they’re immune to oversight.”
That’s because there have been no consequences for them for all their wrongdoing; the DOJ and the DC courts protect them.
Here’s Representative Comer speaking about Wray’s defiance of Congress and the need to hold him in contempt:
Who is the whistleblower? I don’t know, but see this:
…[I]n response to Wray’s failure to comply with the subpoena, Grassley, who had previously noted the FD-1023 form was five or six pages long, indicated that the confidential human source (CHS) was “an apparent trusted FBI source.” This is huge because Grassley wouldn’t make that claim unless the whistleblower had. That means the source is not some random guy walking in off the street, but rather an existing “trusted” CHS, which is why the FBI used the FD-1023 form.
In response to Wray’s stonewalling, Comer likewise revealed some significant details, clarifying late last week that the CHS reporting document was dated June 30, 2020, and referenced “the amount of money the foreign national allegedly paid to receive the desired policy outcome” as “five million.” These details could only have come from a whistleblower with deep knowledge of the investigation, meaning the whistleblower’s characterization of the CHS as “trusted” carries more weight. Likewise, the whistleblower’s claim that the FD-1023 “includes a precise description of how the alleged criminal scheme was employed as well as its purpose,” is more credible given the whistleblower’s knowledge of other details.
The whistleblower letter came to the FBI in June 30, 2020. That was after it was clear that Biden would be the Democrats’ nominee for president.
Trump, DeSantis, and COVID (plus the entry of Christie and Pence)
I’ve been observing Trump closely since the summer of 2015, and I think I can safely say I know most of his methods of operating when he’s campaigning. He has long attacked all opponents in his own party when he thinks it makes tactical sense, and his attacks are often personal. Some are even preposterous – remember his insinuation that Ted Cruz’s father was somehow involved in the JFK assassination?
But there was often method to what seemed like madness, and most of the nicknames he gave people – actually, all of them that I can recall – were pretty spot on in terms of locating and targeting their soft underbellies. He seems to have lost that knack, as I’ve described with his nicknames for DeSantis and now McEnany (who is not even an opponent of his, but his extremely bold and competent former press secretary for whom the moniker “milktoast” [sic] is absurdly inappropriate).
Which brings me to ruminating on why on earth Trump would attack DeSantis’ COVID record, when all it does is invite comparisons to Trump’s own COVID record, which is one of his soft underbellies. And in addition, Trump compared DeSantis’ COVID record unfavorably to that of New York’s Cuomo. But as Powerline’s Steven Hayward points out, the metrics demonstrate DeSantis’ superiority.
I’m not a mind-reader, but I submit the following as possible logical or at least somewhat-logical motives for Trump’s accusations:
(1) He knows his own vulnerability on the COVID score, so this is a pre-emptive strike at DeSantis to try to start a counter-narrative, at least among Trump’s own supporters. No matter that it’s incorrect. It reassures them and gives them talking points in arguments against those on the right who have deserted him.
(2) He’s sucking up to Cuomo for some reason. I’ve actually read speculation – probably tongue-in-cheek – that he’ll choose Cuomo as a running mate. But I think that’s absolutely not happening.
(3) Trump believes all attention is good attention, and this brings him attention.
(4) Trump is ambivalent about becoming president again, although he might not be aware of this, and is doing some things to self-sabotage.
Of course, there are plenty of illogical reasons Trump might be making these sorts of statements. But thinking of illogical reasons for them is easy. I’m interested in possible logical ones.
Speaking of which – why are Chris Christie and Mike Pence throwing their hats into the 2024 GOP candidate ring? I suppose they may have their eyes set on a VP spot, but I doubt it – especially for Pence. The simple explanation is ego, and you can hardly go wrong with that one for politicians. Another is that they may be bored, and it’s fun and exciting to become a candidate. Still another is that they’re in it as spoilers to deflect votes from someone else, but it seems to be that that would only help Trump (whose core supporters are very loyal) and hurt DeSantis. Since Pence and Christie don’t seem fond of Trump, I can’t see that as their motive.
We are now officially a low-trust society
Exhibit A – the Walgreens of the future:
Walgreens, which has closed about 750 stores in the last few years, just debuted a theft-resistant format in a redesigned store in downtown Chicago. As CWBChicago reports, it has a lot more staff than a regular store, where customers (and thieves) help themselves to merchandise off the shelves.
In what was once a typical Walgreens, there are now just two short aisles of so-called “essentials,” where “customers may shop for themselves.” If you want anything else — a bottle of booze, a deodorant brand deemed “non-essential” — you’ll need to order it at a kiosk and pick it up at the counter.
So many things are ordered online these days and mailed that perhaps this newer type of in-store shopping won’t seem so strange to most people. It certainly seems both strange and depressing to me, although I’ve already noticed pharmacies in California where nearly everything is locked down. That’s not the case where I live, but I wonder how long it will be before I start seeing the signs.
Although this is only tangentially related, the mall near me is a sad and nearly-deserted place. I was at the Macy’s there the other day, and I saw only one or two other customers in the entire store. I happen to like to browse as well as to try things on, but that may be a pleasure that will be phased out soon. And yet, a week or two earlier I had some business at a different mall about an hour away, in an area that’s similar demographically and only a little more populous, and the mall there was absolutely bustling.
That really surprised me. The stores there are not very different from the stores in the mall nearer to me, although there are a few more of them, and a couple of slightly nicer ones. Otherwise it’s the same. So why the enormous disparity in consumer traffic? I’m not sure, but I think that once a mall starts spiraling down there’s a negative feedback look in which more and more stores start leaving and then it becomes a kind of spooky place where no one wants to shop.
Open thread 6/1/23
Overheard in my favorite restaurant
I was recently in a very blue city, having dinner in a restaurant. There were two couples at a table near me who had fairly loud voices – not obnoxiously so, but loud enough to easily hear because the restaurant was a “cozy” one.
One woman was recounting some health problem she had had while traveling in Germany, and how well she’d been treated there. Then she asked one of the men, who apparently was considered some sort of expert on the subject, “What first-world country has the worst healthcare?”
Sounded like a set-up to me, and I was not surprised when, without a moment’s hesitation or explanation he answered, “The US.”
It was all I could do to keep from springing up, walking the step or two to their table, and asking a few questions, such as, “Then why do so many Canadians who have the money come here for healthcare? And why do I know people with injuries and chronic pain in Canada and the UK who have to wait a year for an MRI? What’s your metric for ‘best’ and ‘worst’?”
I didn’t do it. But I ground my teeth for a while afterwards. It’s the sort of kneejerk US-bashing I hear constantly, and everyone nods as though it’s so obvious that it’s true that there’s no need to even discuss it further.
(Delicious meal, though.)
Trump goes after Kayleigh McEnany
I don’t know about you, but I thought that Trump’s press secretary Kayleigh McEnany was one of the best people in the Trump adminstration. Calm, whip-smart, articulate, mega-prepared, and attractive, she always had an answer and usually a very very good one.
Well, here’s another example of my point that something has gone wrong with Trump ever since around October of 2020:
On Tuesday evening, former President Donald Trump took to his social media platform Truth Social and launched an assault on his former press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany. He leveled accusations against her, claiming that she distorted poll figures during her appearance on Fox News.
““Kayleigh ‘Milktoast’ [sic] McEnany just gave out the wrong poll numbers on Fox News. I am 34 points up on DeSanctimonious, not 25 up. While 25 is great, it’s not 34. She knew the number was corrected upwards by the group that did the poll,” Trump wrote.“The RINOS & Globalists can have her. FoxNews should only use REAL Stars!!!”
Trump meant “milquetoast,” but it’s not his spelling that concerns me. It’s the weird inappropriateness of that particular moniker to describe the bold McEnany, not to mention turning on someone who was one of his biggest and most loyal champions. If she was a few points off on a poll – and I’m going to assume that she was – big deal. She can be corrected without a personal attack and an absurd nickname.
Another result of this kind of behavior on Trump’s part is that if by some miracle he were to be re-elected, I can’t imagine it would make a lot of people especially eager to serve under him. First of all, there’s the risk of prosecution, something that happened to quite a few of his previous associates. And then, at the first opportunity, these stupid attacks. And I submit that this is a particularly stupid attack on Trump’s part.
ADDENDUM: As to what I think motivates Trump to do this, I think he cannot get past what happened in 2020, plus the threat of so many prosecutions that hangs over him. He exhibits bravado about the latter, but it has to be stressful. Plus, he has always reacted strongly to anything he sees as a narcissistic wound and has always held to the principle that the best defense is a good offense. In the past, however, his instincts were better about this although hardly perfect. He’s getting older and I think he must be at least a little weary. In addition, I think something about his COVID illness experience or the treatment he got for it in October of 2020 (including a course of steroids) somehow may have affected him negatively as well, because I noticed a decline in his judgment shortly after that.
ADDENDUM II: It’s very interesting to read the comments at Instapundit on this topic, particularly the attempts to defend Trump versus the ones criticizing him.
Does the right get the word out effectively?
Commenter “stan” writes:
What has the GOP done to enable it to get its message out so that the MSM monopoly is neutralized?
This is the issue. The GOP and conservatives have whined about the unfairness of the news media since Friendly and CBS knifed Goldwater in a particularly despicable way. That’s nearly 60 years.
Perhaps the strongest argument for Trump is that he is capable of getting out his message to his supporters better than anyone else. And he has the courage and the stomach to call out the dishonesty of the MSM and take on all the arrows with a smile.
DeSantis would be well-advised to demonstrate that he can get his message to GOP voters without it being misdirected and slandered by the MSM.
Good question. And yet I see the right doing things all the time to get the word out, some of it involving the MSM and some of it in an effort to bypass it. They hold press conferences and put out press releases, they are on Twitter and other social media, they do public speaking, they have websites, they send out newsletters (I get some of those), and they go on TV shows and podcasts that are willing to have them – which turns out to be mostly ones on the right.
I also have been getting lots of stuff from DeSantis for quite some time: emails and also mailings. I think the mailings are mass mailings because I’m not on any special list, as far as I know, and friends of mine have gotten them too.
The main reason Trump has high visibility is that the MSM has always covered him heavily. Sometimes it’s because they think he’s being offensive, and that highlighting some statement or other of his will make moderates dislike him even more, which will hurt his chances. But sometimes – particularly in primary season – the MSM highlights him because they think it will enhance his standing with GOP voters and they want him to be nominated because they think he’ll lose in the general (this bargain backfired mightily in 2016, of course). Trump also has long been a celebrity and a TV personality even before he became a candidate in 2015, and he’s an entertaining and idiosyncratic guy. That cuts both ways – some people love him for it and some hate him for it.
Lastly, one thing DeSantis has done consistently and repeatedly is to call out the MSM. I’ve seen this from him almost as long as he’s been governor. Just do a search for something like “Desantis refuses to talk to mainstream media” and you’ll get a host of articles on the subject.
It is indeed a huge handicap when virtually the entire MSM is against you; not something to be minimized. And not everyone is a colorful character like Trump. I see many efforts to cut through the problem and go past it, but I think it’s a very difficult thing to do. It remains to be seen what will happen when the primary season really gets going.