In the hopes of encouraging a more civil, and illuminating, discourse, here is another episode of William F. Buckley, Jr.’s “Firing Line”.
The question of crime and what to do about it often seems simple when we listen to politicians or people on social media, but things are often far more complex. William F. Buckley, Jr. lead a discussion concerning realistic insights into crime and punishment with John C. Goodman, Pierre S. Du Pont, Charles W. Colson, Stephen B. Bright, and Jean Harris.
Another “quick takes” on items where there is too little to say to make a complete article, but is still important enough to comment on.
The focus this time: That is not dead that can DEI, and with woke eons, even DEI bans may die.
First, a little mood music:
Carrying on…
California is often called the land of “fruit & nuts”; it certainly is the land of DEI, particularly at U.C. Santa Cruz.
“The University of California, Santa Cruz’s Art’s Dean is awarding diversity, equity, and inclusion grants of up to $3,000 to students who demonstrate their commitment to DEI principles.
“One question the school wishes students to pursue in applying for the grant is, “What steps are you taking on in intellectually interrogating your own personal story and your institution’s history in investigating and generating impactful actions towards DEI?”
“Those who receive the grant are tasked with work on helping the division ‘lead the nation in Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) through the arts.’ The grant is titled ‘University of the Future, Now!’ The deadline to apply is Friday, December 13.
“‘These grants encourage our students to participate in the division’s aspirations to lead the nation in Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) through the arts,’ the school’s advertisement says.”
There is an almost emotional need in politics to not only know that elected officials are fighting for you, but to feel that they loudly doing so with no holds bared. But sometimes that need to feel clearly and unambiguously that the politicians are fighting for them and against their enemies, that this performative act obfuscates the substative work to the point where the murkiness can lead to unexpected consequences. Such is the case in Wyoming.
“A state judge on Monday struck down Wyoming’s overall ban on abortion and its first-in-the-nation explicit prohibition on the use of medication to end pregnancy in line with voters in yet more states voicing support for abortion rights.
“…
“In the Wyoming case, the women and nonprofits who challenged the laws argued that the bans stood to harm their health, well-being and livelihoods, claims disputed by attorneys for the state. They also argued the bans violated a 2012 state constitutional amendment saying competent Wyoming residents have a right to make their own health care decisions.
“As she had done with previous rulings, Owens found merit in both arguments. The abortion bans ‘will undermine the integrity of the medical profession by hamstringing the ability of physicians to provide evidence-based medicine to their patients,’ Owens ruled.
“The abortion laws impede the fundamental right of women to make health care decisions for an entire class of people — those who are pregnant — in violation of the constitutional amendment, Owens ruled.”
So, who proposed that state constitutional amendment and why?
One of the fathers of A.I. believes that artificial intelligence as we know it is innately limited and could not even measure up to a pet, such as a kitty cat.
“Yann LeCun helped give birth to today’s artificial-intelligence boom. But he thinks many experts are exaggerating its power and peril, and he wants people to know it.
“…
“LeCun thinks that today’s AI models, while useful, are far from rivaling the intelligence of our pets, let alone us. When I ask whether we should be afraid that AIs will soon grow so powerful that they pose a hazard to us, he quips: ‘You’re going to have to pardon my French, but that’s complete B.S.’
“…
“‘In the future, when people will talk to their AI system, to their smart glasses or whatever else, we need those AI systems to basically have human-level characteristics, and really have common sense, and really behave like a human assistant,’ he says.
“But creating an AI this capable could easily take decades, he says—and today’s dominant approach won’t get us there.”
But there is another way, and a way that your mad science endorsing author has repeatedlypointed out as the way forward: Why not combine both artificial intelligence and a pet (such as a cat)—in other words: A catgirl!
After the recent election, the question of the Working Class and Unions has been raised. Once, and still in part, a champion of Right to Work laws which prevent Unions from stealing the money of workers who don’t support them, the GOP has been becoming more friendly with Unions and antagonistic towards businesses.
Your humble author has had to live and work where there was no Right to Work law, and forcibly had money taken from a meager paycheck to pay for a Union that screwed over many of the workers in the name of “fairness”.
A reminder that this is all about the Union bosses enriching themselves and engrossing themselves with power.
This Thanksgiving, let us eschew politics for at least one day while we enjoy the company of kith & kin… and even more Thanksgiving themes shots of alcohol.
A century and a half ago, James FitzJames Stephen said something rather prescient:
People came in time to regard their rulers rather as their own agents and the depositaries of their own power than as antagonistic powers to be kept in check, and it did not occur to them that their own power exercised through their own agents might be just as oppressive as the power of their rulers confined within closer or wider limits.
— James FitzJames Stephen
It is our duty as informed citizens to be skeptical of anyone in power.
Such a misconception can be multiplied in effect by going full “Bialystock & Bloom”…
Trump promised 80% of his agenda to 100 different people like it's "The Producers"
In the hopes of encouraging a more civil, and illuminating, discourse, here is another episode of William F. Buckley, Jr.’s “Firing Line”.
When it comes to crime and punishment, we seem to go through cycles where high crime lead inevitably to tough on crime measures which lower crime… which results in the softening of anti-crie legislation, until the cycle repeats again. California, via initiative went from tough anti-crime “3 Strikes” laws to practically legalizing theft, and has now returned to more tough on crime policies. Let us look back thirty years ago when some went so far in opposing tough on crime legislation that they questioned if we needed prisons at all, with John C. Goodman, Jean Harris, Stephen B. Bright, Charles W. Colson, Pierre S. Du Pont and William F. Buckley, Jr.
