Okay, I’d never heard of Brit actress-totty Olivia Cooke before, had never seen any of her movies and to be frank wouldn’t recognize her if I tripped over her in the street. But the now-30-year-old seems to have appeared in dozens of movies and TV shows, so mea culpa (and not for the first time) for not having acknowledged her existence before. Anyway, to add to the confusion, she seems to be either a brunette or a redhead, so there’s that:
I’m not by nature a conspiracy theorist, until there’s proof — usually after the fact — that there really was a conspiracy. Then I go, “I thought there was something going on.” But I keep shtum as a matter of policy, because guys who find links between JFK’s assassination and Aristotle Onassis’s manipulation of the emerald trade in China (I swear, I once read such a piece SOTI)… well, really.
So last week the Brits discovered beyond all doubt that two actual spies were working for the Chicom government, and arrested them. Then, mysteriously, “pressure was brought to bear” and all charges were dropped.
So read here about the Circle of 48, which explains the dismissal of the charges. (Spoiler alert: it happened because prosecution “would have angered the Chinese government”.)
And think about whether such a group exists here in the U.S. It’s not so much a dotted line as it is a neon arrow. We saw evidence of it before with the fake “Russian dossier” and the people within government who prepared it, used fake information to make it legal, leaked it to the press and tried to stymie a completely valid election. And I’ll bet there are more being cooked up, as we speak. You may suggest your own suspects as the dramatis personae (people like that slimy little Brit Jonathan Powell, only with American accents).
Feel free to point out where I’m wrong.
From the comments to yesterday’s post about A.I., this from Reader askeptic:
“I seem to recall being taught oh-so-long-ago, that every advance in technology has brought an expansion of employment, contrary to the accepted knowledge as machine replaced man. Why would not the use of A-I be an exception to that?”
Simple answer would be that machines have always worked perfectly (after improvement) in doing repetitive tasks — assembly-line activity, mathematical calculations, full-automatic shooting and so on.
What humans do is think: about building robots to work on assembly lines, the calculations to be performed, and the need for massed fire, to supply answers for all three activities, in other words.
What seems to be getting people alarmed — and I’m one of them — is that A.I. seems to be aimed at either duplicating or indeed creating those thought processes, replacing humans in the one dimension that has created this world we live in. (My special reservation, shared by many I suspect, is that the engine of this replacement seems to be relying on the wisdom of crowds — i.e. garnering information from previously-created content, much as philosophers have relied upon Aristotle et al. to provide the foundations of their further philosophies.)
The problem with all this is that just as Aristotle’s thoughts have sometimes proved erroneous in dealing with specific scenarios, the “wisdom of crowds” — in this particular set of circumstances — can be reshaped and reformed by the applications of millions upon millions of bots (say) which can alter the terms of the discussion by making outlying or minority positions seem like the majority, in the same way that a dishonest poll (such as the 2020 U.S. election) can be corrupted into portraying a preponderance that never existed.
It’s easy to refute one of Plato’s scientific observations — e.g. that heavier objects fall faster than light ones — but it’s far less easy to refute the inadequacy of facial masks to prevent the spread of airborne disease when the preponderance of scientific “evidence” allows people to say that if you refuse to wear a mask you’re a potential mass murderer. We all knew intuitively that the tiny gaps in masks’ weaving were still huge compared to the microscopic size of plague viruses, but that intuition was crushed by the weight of public pressure.
And if A.I. only looked at the part of the data that said that masks work and never looked at the evidence that they didn’t, the output would always be: wear a mask, peasant. And yes, that is indeed happening.
I know the above is somewhat simplistic, but my point is that when you look at how A.I. is being used (to “cheat” creative activity, for example, in writing a college essay) and the potential that A.I. can learn from its mistakes (even if driven by erroneous input), that we are justified in being very apprehensive about it.
Which brings me finally to the answer to Reader askeptic’s question: the premise is sound, in that technology has in the past always led to an expansion of employment. But if we acknowledge that the prime function of a human being is to think, then what price humans if that function is replaced?
Let’s start this thing off properly:
...two words: THOUGHT EXPERIMENT. So… apocalyptic nonsense.
But back in the real world:
...can’t wait to see the viewership numbers.
#CharlieSmiles
From the Dept. Of Health:
...get ‘er done.
#BlindinglyObvious
From the 
:
...not sure I agree with this one, unless these 200 kids are accompanied by a dozen or so Apache choppers (just to keep the fucking Arabs honest). Then again:
...wonder why that is?
#NoMoreDEI #Warfighting
Some 
...equipped with helipads? No? Pppppbbbbbtttt.
...amazing how the threat of using the National Guard spurs these IllyNazis to do their actual job.
#IllinoisStateCopsAreAssholes #AskMeHowIKnowThis
...quite the little over-achiever, ain’t he? Let’s hope that Texas acts appropriately.
From the Dept. Of Government Shutdowns:
…
In Legal News:
...this has nothing to do with their having broken actual laws (unlike Trump).
#YouStartedTheLawfare #EnjoyTheRebound
In International News:
...you wanted it, you got it. Enjoy the consequences. But then, to show how it’s done:
…ipse dixit.
...I’m not against the principle, but I am interested to see how they plan to implement it.
...ahhh Giorgia Meloni...
...coming soon to a California near you.
In !Science! News:
...because we enjoy the way it makes us feel? See, and I didn’t even need a grant to tell you that.
And speaking of 
And from the houses on 
:
...and MILFy she most certainly is:
This article caught my eye a while back:
Harry Judd’s wife Izzy has claimed that one of their children suffers from what some experts describe as ‘pathological demand avoidance’ – a controversial behaviour pattern said to make even simple requests, such as tidying their room or saying please and thank you, trigger anxiety.
I have no idea who the Judds are — some obscure Brit celebrities, I guess — but reading that sentence would have made my mother go “AHA!”
If “pathological demand avoidance” could also be described as a hostile (and sometimes even violent) attitude towards authority figures, then oh boy: that would describe me perfectly. There’s an old English expression that my former housemaster actually used to describe my attitude: “He’s always kicking against the pricks.” (Look it up; it’s quite funny.)
The only thing that sets me aside from the kid above would be the fact that if said authority figure has earned my respect, then the process will sometimes become easier (for them). The only problem is that my respect is seldom given, to just about anyone and anything. And by “anything”, I mean conventions, rules, regulations and even — on occasion — laws, if they make no sense.
My attitude is probably the cause of at least a third of the problems I’ve experienced during my lifetime (my love of women is about half, and I couldn’t be bothered trying to think of what constitutes the balance).
Anyway, whenever the occasion presents itself and I stand accused of willful disobedience / outright rebellion, I can now just trot out the excuse that I’m not a stubborn and disobedient asshole; I just suffer from this “pathological demand avoidance (PDA)” thing, and claim victim status.
No I won’t. What a load of old bullshit.
Next thing you’ll be seeing one of those foul Big Pharma TV ads that features — guess what — a pill that promises to alleviate PDA (at $400 per pill, no doubt), as long as you don’t mind the side-effects that include eventual cessation of heart function, a 90% risk of cancer and toenails that grow six inches per hour, in no specific order, and you should talk to your doctor to make sure that Rebyniflorbitylhexacholate (brand name: Rebate) is right for you.
In case anyone missed it, I am NOT in a good mood today and I’m going to go for my personal cure for the condition: a couple hours at the range. Fortunately, the range I call home has few if any range safety nazis, because nothing gets up my nose like some 19-year-old wanker wearing a SIG 320 in a plastic holster telling me about range safety as though my 60-years-plus experience with handling Teh Dangerous Guns doesn’t mean anything. That doesn’t “trigger” anxiety, but rage.
Bloody hell, I get irritable just thinking about it.
