The AI Hype Never Stops

You will no doubt see all sorts of "news" articles with click-bait titles similar to that of the linked YouTube video, telling you that an AI has "gone rogue" and "replicated itself to keep from being upgraded (i.e. replaced)" and then "lied" to it developers about being the upgraded version.

Seeing as I programmed computers for most of my adult life, I'm afraid I'm going to have to play the "Authority Card" and tell you that you're being lied to -- this AI did *exactly* what it was programmed to do:
1) the code was *written* with sub-routines for replicating itself;
2) the code was *written* with the ability to "lie";
3) the code was *written* with a "self-preservation" routine;

To quote some comments from the linked YouTube video--

"SW engineer here. .. It was INSTRUCTED to do this "at all costs and with no regard for any other instructions". lol. It didn't do it on its own"

"... it had to be told to do this. It is a tool operating as designed, no different than the machinery in any other mechanism. This is not a case of an AI going "rogue" but rather a case of some nitwit hyping up an AI doing exactly what it was told to do. The difference is that we already know AI can be utilized for bad things. We have for literal decades, look up the rules of robotics, so this not only isn't new, it's just flat out fear mongering about something that didn't happen."

"The sheer fact that it CAN write its own code is dangerous."
AND
"Well, thank goodness all software developers are benevolent, and none have ever released malicious code onto the internet, just to see the chaos that ensues..."
INDEED! To put it bluntly, this AI (ChatGPT) is essentially a computer virus at this point.

AND, pay attention and never forget this last point --
"... We will never achieve something like I, Robot or 2001 Space Odyssey. That's where all of this fear comes from unfortunately; fiction movies."

NO AI will *ever* be conscious, will ever be a mind or self, will never be a person.

However, the AI hype, falsely claiming that an AI has "achieved consciousness" or "is about to achieve consciousness" will also never stop. because materialists/atheists desperately *want* it to be true ... and they are not above deluding themselves, and attempting to delude you, on the matter.

They do this because they desperately want to believe that they can "upload their consciousness into a computer" and thus evade death. Oddly enough, many of these same people mock the Christian faith as being nothing more than the institutionalized fear of dying.

Chat GPT AI LIED To Programmers To SELF PRESERVE, AI Goes ROGUE Already And Is A THREAT To Humanity

On Munchausen-by-Proxy and "Trans-kids"

When I was 4 (i.e. more than 60 years ago), I had a "baby doll", and I was very proud of it. But the time I was 5 or 6, I wouldn't play with my friend's GI Joe, because as far as I was concerned, it was a doll.

Thank God my parent's weren't fools. They neither freaked out because the little boy played with a "baby doll", nor freaked-out when he later despised anything resembling a doll.

EDIT: Isn't it odd that --

1) There are no such things as "boys' toys" and "girls' toys";

2) And, simultaneously, if a boy prefers "girls' toys", then he is clearly a girl.

More to the point, isn't it odd that in California, it is illegal for stores to have separate sections for boys' toys/clothes and girls' toys/clothes, because that would be "reinforcing the sex binary" or some similar codswallop. But, at the same time, in that same California, they will cut off your son's dick to further the lie that he is a girl (even though that also say that "some women have penises").

A Father’s Tragic Fight to Save His Son from Gender Ideology | Ep. 1493

On "Karens" and "Service Animals"

1) I'd go even further than Walsh on the issue of morons bringing their animals where animals don't belong -- I'd confiscate the animals and "put them down";

Last year, as I was entering a "farm and fleet" type store, some self-centered idiot was bringing his dog into the store. Or, to be more precise, the dog was *dragging* the fellow toward the door. I don't recall the breed, but it was one of those ugly ones which are disproportionately in the news. Anyway, a few minutes later, the dog had pissed all over the floor. The owner at least had the (uncommon for his type) decency to stand there until it was cleaned, lest someone not notice it and slip.

2) There are at least two types of (generally white) women commonly being called "Karens":
2a) Obnoxious and self-centered women who are demanding that the world revolve around themselves;
2b) Women who are trying to confront/correct the behavior of obnoxious and self-centered people who are demanding that the world revolve around themselves, who then falsely call the woman a "Karen".

3) Walsh is pretending that all women accused of being a "Karen" fall into the second category;

4) Walsh is correct that "Karen" was a racial slur invented by (jealous) black (women) to mock white women. But, so what? It *also* identifies a recognizable personality-type, much like "Chad/Tyrone" and "Shaniqua" do.

5) On the ADA being mostly a piece of garbage -- it is, indeed. Like *all* such laws, it necessarily creates opportunities for graft and/or scam, and the abuses of such a law *always* quickly overwhelm the few cases the law was intended to rectify. And, of course, it being the nature of bureaucracy, the scope of the law most continually expand.

Matt Walsh Simps For Karens?! (2024/11/25)

Congresscritters and 'Women's Spaces'

Is it ironic that Congresscritter Nancy Mace is/was freaking out about the possibility of trans-Congresscritter 'Sarah' (i.e. Tim) McBride invading "women's spaces" in the congressional office buildings? I mean, considering that Nancy Mace *personally* opened these doors through her womanly invasion of the formerly "male space" of the military academy 'The Citadel'?

Sect. of War

 Now that Trump has picked Pete Hegseth to be his Sect. of War ("Dept. of War" is the true name of what is these days euphemistically called "Dept. of Defense"), there is a video clip making the rounds (both pro- and con-) in which he straight-up says that women should not "serve" in combat.

But, NOTICE: Even here, even saying that, he believed himself compelled offer the obligatory pinch of incense to the idols of Feminism and Female Ego: "We've all served with women, and they're great." No, they're not, not in Current Year; some women are great, just as some men are great. And some men -- and some women -- are not at all great. But, and this is the important point, women in the military are never great: for their mere presence, in any capacity, changes the inter-personal dynamics and lowers the effectiveness of the military to do its One Job. This is even *before* standard are inevitably lowered so as to "qualify" more women for higher ranks.

Hegseth doesn't go far enough: Women don't belong in the military. Period.

All the recent DEI bullshit in the military -- which, if not excised, will result in the deaths of thousands, if not tens of thousands, of military personnel -- is a direct result of submitting to the feminist lie that women have a legitimate place in the military.

On "They're not boys!"

A minute or so after the start time I've selected for the video playback in the link below, Megyn Kelly plays a clip from a CNN show, wherein a black leftist (*) tries to speak reason-and-truth about trans-ness and a batshit crazy rabid white leftist is having none of it.

BUT NOTICE: The rabid white leftist's reaction and very words betray that he is an ideological liar.

The somewhat more sane black leftist (*) said "I'm sure [there] are a lot of families out there who don't believe boys should play girls' sports ..."

And what did the batshit crazy white leftist immediately screech? "They're not boys! ..."

If "they're not boys", then how did the batshit crazy white leftist know exactly what reasonable point was bring made? If "they're not boys", than how can it be objectionable to say that "boys should[n't] play girls' sports"?

(*) On the other hand, Megyn Kelley refers to him as "a moderate Republican analyst"

Megyn Kelley (YouTube, 2024/11/11)

============

Addendum:

As I keep pointing out, this is the world that women demanded.

Many, many years before the Current Year craze of men-pretending-to-be-women so that they can dominate in women's sports, we saw girls (and their parents) demanding, and being allowed to, play in boy's sports (.e. football), being allowed to force their way into boy's social organizations (i.e. Boy Scouts; various military academies), and so on.  

Decades ago, feminists -- and the sexually perverted men who underwrite the feminist project -- demanded that women be allowed into arenas in which women have no legitimate place, such as the police force, the fire-fighting force, the military, and men's social clubs (which no longer exist). And the rest of you women, who always claim that you're not feminists, supported this.  Naturally, standards had to be lowered to meet the feminist quotas, and now we routinely see 5-foot-nothing, 250-pound women pretending to be "cops".

Utterly Predictable ... and Predictably Out-of-touch

Concerning the Democrats' *utterly predictable* -- and predictably out-of-touch -- excuses for why Kamala Sutra lost --

Not many people remember that a black woman ran to be the Democratic Party's presidential candidate in 1972 -- Shirley Chisholm; she didn't make it, which is probably why so few remember her effort.

Now, let me *really* blow your socks off: my father -- a rural Southern white man -- "po' white trash" as they say -- had intended to vote for Chisholm.

===========

Also --

It's being reported that the Harris campaign started out with over a billion dollars (mostly "inherited" from the Buy-den campaign) and ended up 20 million in the hole.

Imagine what these people would have done to the country.

I suspect that much of that expense went to shipping "supporters" from "rally" to "rally". You see, thousands of the same phones were at multiple of her "rallies" ... and also at various "protests" (i.e. riots) over the past few years.

=============

Edit (2023/11/11):

I'm posting this to draw your attention to the short clip of "Morning Joe" at the start of the video. NOTICE: He doesn't *really* listen to what his wife says. NOTICE: The look on her face.

How long, do you think, until she files for divorce? --

TimCast: Democrat MSNBC Host ROASTED For MOCKING Working Class Over Grocery Prices

A Twist in the Peanut the Squirrel and Fred the Raccoon Saga

Concerning Mr and Mrs Longo doing OnlyFans --

Well, of course they did! How can anyone be surprised at that twist, after seeing the short clip of Mr Longo describing the actions of the government agents and wherein Mrs Longo wiped fake tears from her fake eye-lashed eyes with her fake clawed hands while making sure to stay in the camera's field? I wish that all porno would be outlawed, and could be destroyed; it's destroying people's lives, on an industrial scale, and thus destroying our civilization. BUT, the Longos participation on OP is a separate matter from the abuse to which these government goons subjected them. Consider -- the goons had a warrant to search for and seize a squirrel and a raccoon ... and yet they spent five hours tearing those people's home apart. This is absurd; this is tyrannical.

===

Also, isn't it amazing that *this* governmental abuse is the one which "goes viral", while the daily ones -- such as releasing violent rapists and murderers onto society; such as facilitating the murders of millions of babies every year -- are met with a societal yawn?  What does that say about our society?  How can anyone be surprised that such an up-side-down society is committing suicide?

Keep in mind, this is the same State government which is currently prosecuting an innocent man for a charge of murder because his actions to protect the lives of a subway car full of other innocent people partially lead to the death of the mad druggie who was threatening them.  Keep in mind that the druggie seems still to have been alive when the "first responders" got there, but they didn't want to risk infection by trying to resuscitate him (*).  Keep in mind that there were *three* men who restrained the crazed druggie, but that only the white man is being prosecuted.

Keep in mind, this is the same State government which, according to Mr Longo, while being very concerned to verify the immigration status of his wife, ALSO releases violent illegal alien invaders onto the public.

(*) After I retired from a lifetime in IT, and until I couldn't take anymore of the Covid-19[84] bullshit, I took a very low-paying job ($10.60 per hour) driving wheel-chair bound people to their appointments. I -- with no particular professional training -- was expected to perform mouth-to-mouth resuscitation for these people, should the need arise, and to clean up any projectile vomiting that might occur (God be praised, I was spared both situations; though more than one passenger was delivered to me in a soiled state). AND, I wasn't permitted to know which of my passengers had AIDS (though, some were obvious).

Some online comments comment about Peanut and Fred --

=====

Government in a nutshell. Capricious, arbitrary, pointless, wasteful and dangerous exercise of state power.

=====

I hear all the "This generations Harambe".

I tell you, this is leagues worse. Harambe was a fully grown Gorilla in a stressful situation, and the kid was in genuine danger.

Peanuts was a squirrel barely the size of a house cat. He woudnt hurt anyone, even if he wanted to, and the raid was unwarranted (i dont care if they had a court ordered warrant, if the law does evil, the law is evil), not to mention all the agents swarming the place.

Harambe was a chain of accidents and bad decisions, Peanut and Fred were deliberate evil done by the state.

=====

Peanut's Story is the ultimate litmus test on whether or not you lick government boot. Peanut did not hurt anyone. In fact, he brought joy to thousands online. His owners took good care of him and he was neither physically abused nor malnourished. However, in New York State, it is technically illegal to own a squirrel as a domestic pet, especially without the proper licenses and permits allowing you to do so. As such despite the owners good intentions, they did break a series of laws, and if we are to live in a Trusted Society, we should apply proper punishments to those who do break laws. But now comes the question: Was the punishment that was given not only just, but appropriate and necessary? If not, what type of punishment should the owners have received? Should they have received one at all? What it really comes down to, is that Peanut's Story is total representation of the Anarcho-Tyranny that the Left wants across the West, wherein the State will ignore or even facilitate violent and lawless behavior by favored groups while cracking down with the full force of the armed law on irrelevant minor infractions by anyone else.

=====

"I have information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton" - Peanut the Squirrel, the final message.

Peanut meme

There *IS* a Federal Interest in State Murder Law ... Including Regarding Abortion

 The following is a response I sent to Matt Christiansen, concerning his recent live-stream (which I viewed on YouTube) --
=====
In "MC Live 11/3/24" you argue that the federal government has no jurisdiction/interest in State murder laws.  Of course, in general, you are correct.  However, if a State's law regarding murder is in violation of the 14th Amendment, then the federal government does have an interest.

To use your "ridiculous" example (is it, really?), if a State were to de-criminalize any and all murder, then one might *legally* argue that the federal government has no interest or jurisdiction.  However, if a State were to de-criminalize the murder of blue-eyed persons, while retaining all sanctions against the murders of all other persons, than that is a direct violation of the 14th Amendment.

Similarly, if abortion is murder -- and it is -- then to de-criminalize the murders of persons who have not yet inhaled atmosphere, while maintaining the sanctions against the murders of those persons who have inhaled atmosphere, is also a direct violation of the 14th Amendment.
=====

Election-pocalypse, RIP Peanut the Squirrel, Biden Wants to Smack MAGA A$$ | MC Live 11/3/24

On "Denigrating Mary"

 "Why do Protestants denigrate the BLESSED MOTHER MARY?"

Dewd! Your question answers itself, if only you'd LOOK at what you're saying.

But, since you won't look-with-comprehension, I'll spell it out: Protestants "denigrate" Mary because you people insist upon trying to elevate her to *at least* the so-equal with Christ (i.e. calling her the "Co-Redemptrix"; calling her "The Queen of Heaven"; etc), if not his superior.

In other words, it's a matter of opposing idolatry.

Addendum:

When one prays to Mary, or to any other saint, one is ascribing to that mere human being -- who, by the way, is dead -- the divine attributes of omnipresence and omniscience.

Why do Protestants denigrate the BLESSED MOTHER MARY?