NEW: Vance Warns Trump May 'Take Further Action To End Iranian Enrichment'

The indignity of being chundered to death.

A study of different calcium atoms suggests we are missing something.

It doesn't even live in saltwater.

If it did work, it would break a few important laws of the universe.

A study of large language models (LLM) has shown that popular AI systems from OpenAI and Google organize information on their own and in unexpected ways, even though they were not trained to do so, The Independent reports. The authors of the paper, experts from the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the South China University of Technology, concluded that such models “have deep similarities with how humans construct concepts.” This challenges the common belief that artificial intelligence only reproduces answers by recognizing patterns. In the experiment, OpenAI’s ChatGPT-3.5 and Google’s Gemini Pro Vision were asked to perform a task to find the odd object out. As a result, the models created 66 conceptual dimensions for classifying objects. “These dimensions could be understood and described, indicating that large language models and multimodal LLMs form human-like representations of objects,” the researchers noted. “This provides a strong argument that although these representations are not identical to human ones, they share common foundations and reflect key features of human knowledge of the world.” The authors hope that these results will help create artificial intelligence with more “human” cognitive abilities – one that can collaborate better with people. At the same time, systems even closer to human nature are already being developed around the world. For example, a startup from Australia recently presented the world’s first commercial biological computer based on living brain cells. The Cortical Labs system is a “body in a box”: it is based on lab-grown neurons located on a silicon wafer that can receive and transmit electrical signals. According to the developers, this combination of biology and electronics allows them to learn and adapt much faster than conventional computers. Even at an early stage, 800 thousand neurons in humans and mice were able to independently master the game Pong. As reported in a paper in the journal Cell, the neurons showed signs of consciousness when interacting with the game environment. “We combine biology with classical computing to create a universal learning engine,” the company’s website says. “The neuron is self-tuning, has nearly infinite flexibility, and is the product of four billion years of evolution.” The study detailing the research, titled ‘Human-like object concept representations emerge naturally in multimodal large language models’, appears in the scientific journal Nature Machine Intelligence. The post Artificial Intelligence Can Think Like Humans: Scientists Find First Evidence appeared first on Anomalien.com.

We regret to inform you that MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow had another normal one. During an interminable “No Kings” rant to open her eponymous show, she thought she was making fun of Brevard County, Florida Sheriff Wayne Ivey. Instead, she further embarrassed herself in front of her audience. Consider the fundamental lack of self-awareness needed to vomit this hot take out: WATCH: Rachel Maddow tries to mock Brevard County, FL Sheriff Wayne Ivey after protest warnings, ends up beclowning herself with B-roll of protesters standing on the curb and not obstructing traffic: exactly as Ivey intended. pic.twitter.com/j5LOCnAtuH — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) June 17, 2025 MSNBC THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/16/25 9:03 PM RACHEL MADDOW: You might have seen headlines last week about the Brevard County, Florida, sheriff last week who called a press conference to threaten that he would sic dogs on people and his officers would not just put people in jail, they would put people in the hospital. He literally got up at a press conference and said, “We will kill you”, talking about violence he expected at any anti-Trump protests in Brevard county, Florida. After that bizarre show of intimidation from that sheriff in Brevard County, Florida, turns out people in Brevard County, Florida were not at all intimidated by what he said. As you can see from local headlines like this one, quote: “‘ No Kings’ anti-Trump protests draw thousands”, in Brevard County and Cocoa and Palm Bay. I mean, the sheriff gets out there and says, we will kill you and Brevard County, Florida is like, “You know what? We’ve got a right to protest. We have a right to make protest signs of any kind, including ones that show Donald Trump in a big wig made up like Marie Antoinette, saying, let them eat cake and you are not going to stop us from doing it. We are Americans, we have the right to do this, we will protest.” Some of the most unintentionally funny content on MSNBC invariably ends up being Maddow reaching for the smelling salts (or perhaps bath salts) upon discovering some iteration of masculine expression from law enforcement. Whether it is HSI agents in tactical gear or a Florida county sheriff issuing a plainspoken warning to would-be rioters, Maddow predictably overreacts with weak mockery meant to mask her fear and dread.  Perhaps Maddow would prefer the sort of handcuffed law enforcement that stands back as vandals destroy cities under the guise of protest and allow the human feces to flow in our big city streets. But America rejected that sort of thing this past November.  In order to make her dopey point Maddow misrepresents Ivey’s warnings, which were clearly directed to those who would direct deadly force towards law enforcement. Per USA Today: A Florida sheriff warned immigration enforcement protesters that law enforcement would "kill you, graveyard dead" if they become violent toward deputies. "If you hit one of us, you're going to the hospital and jail, and most likely get bitten by one of our big, beautiful dogs that we have here," Brevard County Sheriff Wayne Ivey said at a June 12 news conference. "If you throw a brick, a fire bomb or point a gun at one of our deputies, we will be notifying your family where to collect your remains, because we will kill you, graveyard dead. We're not going to play." Unsurprisingly, the Russia Hoax promoter saw the opportunity to further disinform her viewing public, stretching the narrow warning into a threat against all protesters and a directive not to turn out at all. And this is where Maddow really beclowned herself. Note the b-roll of protesters standing on the curb and not obstructing Florida traffic, as was the case in other states. In other words, doing exactly as they were told by Sheriff Ivey and Governor Ron DeSantis, among many others. People exercised their right to protest, largely without incident because clear boundaries were set. The facts, rather than validate Maddow’s rant, end up making her look like a fool. A fool who is the face of her soon-to-be-spun-off network. We watched MSNBC so you don’t have to. Resist the urge to feel empathy for us, though. As Hyman Roth famously said to Don Michael Corleone: this is the business we’ve chosen.

As Canadians host the 50th annual G7 Summit this week in Kananaskis, Alberta, they can expect a deluge of “climate-saving” proclamations — rhetoric divorced from scientific evidence and economic reality.This elite gathering of the world’s leading economies, along with the European Union, plans to spotlight climate resilience, net-zero targets, green certification, and renewable energy. But the most heavily hyped technology on the agenda will likely be carbon capture — a scheme billed as the silver bullet for saving the planet from carbon dioxide emissions.NASA has credited rising CO2 levels with 70% of Earth’s recent greening. More carbon dioxide, not less, helps feed the world.Carbon capture refers to the removal of carbon dioxide from industrial exhaust or directly from the air. The captured gas is then injected underground or used commercially, such as for boosting oil production. That latter application has proven highly effective worldwide. But the idea of scaling up carbon capture to cool the planet is not just costly — it’s potentially counterproductive.Carbon capture as a climate fix imposes heavy costs with no measurable benefits. It burdens consumers, risks environmental harm, and distracts from more effective energy solutions. Most proposals target emissions from coal- or gas-fired power plants, where the captured CO2 would be pumped underground and stored permanently.With Alberta phasing out coal in favor of natural gas, the cost implications matter. Using data from the U.S. National Energy Technology Laboratory, we examined what it would cost to retrofit gas-fired plants in the province with carbon capture.NETL analyzed two natural gas combined cycle plants: a 727-megawatt and a 992-megawatt facility. The numbers are staggering. For the smaller unit, construction and startup costs would jump from $760 million to $1.4 billion. Annual operation and maintenance would rise from $29 million to $55 million.For the larger plant, the picture is no better. Costs climb from $1.1 billion to $1.9 billion to build and launch, and annual maintenance surges from $39 million to $70 million — an 80% increase.On top of the financial hit, carbon capture reduces energy output by about 11%. That means consumers would pay more — for less electricity.These systems also require an extensive network of pipelines to move CO2 to underground storage sites. One proposal to connect Canada’s oil sands operations with a CO2 transport system estimated the cost at $4 billion. And that’s just for the pipes.Even if money were no object, carbon capture fails the basic test of relevance. The theory that CO2 is the primary driver of Earth’s temperature remains unproven. Natural factors — like changes in solar output, the planet’s orbit, and its axial tilt — play a far greater role. Alarmist climate models, built on faulty assumptions, fail again and again to match observed data.According to the CO2 Coalition, even if the United States had reached net-zero emissions in 2010, the reduction in global temperature by 2100 would amount to just 0.1040 degrees Celsius. That’s not a meaningful impact. Alberta’s emissions, by comparison, are a fraction of the U.S. total.Far from being a pollutant, carbon dioxide is essential to life. It feeds plants, boosts crop yields, and promotes ecosystem health. NASA has credited rising CO2 levels with 70% of Earth’s recent greening. More carbon dioxide, not less, helps feed the world.Instead of obsessing over how to bury carbon, G7 leaders might do better to look around at the Canadian Rockies and ask why they’re trying to deprive the planet of the gas that makes them so green in the first place.

The Senate Finance Committee put out its version of the "big, beautiful bill," and support from Republican lawmakers is already beginning to slip.The House version of the bill narrowly passed in a 215-214 vote in May after weeks of tumultuous negotiations. The House then sent the bill over to the Senate, where the Finance Committee made key changes to several tax provisions in the bill, once again provoking various ideological factions within the GOP. 'Yeah, I will not vote for this.'RELATED: SALT Republicans left seething after Senate makes major changes to the 'big, beautiful bill' Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images One of the most contested changes was lowering the SALT cap from the House's $40,000 cap back down to $10,000 in the Senate. The SALT caucus vigorously negotiated for weeks on the House side and quadrupled its original cap, which leaders have said is nonnegotiable. As expected, SALT Republicans came out strongly against the $10,000 cap put forth by the Senate, calling the bill "insulting" and "dead on arrival." The Senate claims that the lower figure is simply a placeholder to negotiate with the House, but SALT Republicans have made clear that they won't accept anything less than $40,000. Given their narrow House majority, Republicans can afford to lose only a handful of votes to pass the bill. Without the support from the SALT caucus, the bill would not pass the House. "I have been clear since Day one: sufficiently lifting the SALT Cap to deliver tax fairness to New Yorkers has been my top priority in Congress," Republican Rep. Mike Lawler of New York said Monday. "After engaging in good faith negotiations, we were able to increase the cap on SALT from $10,000 to $40,000. That is the deal and I will not accept a penny less. If the Senate reduces the SALT number, I will vote NO and the bill will fail in the House."RELATED: House narrowly passes DOGE cuts despite Republican defectors: 'The gravy train is up' Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images The Senate has also taken a gentler approach to rolling back green-energy subsidies first implemented through former President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. Certain solar and wind subsidies are now going to be extended through at least 2030 and in some cases through 2040. Fiscal hawks like Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas fought for more aggressive cuts in the House version of the bill. While the Senate softened up on green-energy subsidies, Roy is insisting on deeper cuts. "Yeah, I will not vote for this," Roy said of the Senate's bill. "The IRA subsidies need [to] end," Roy added. "Period."RELATED: Democrats vote overwhelmingly to allow illegal aliens to continue voting in key district Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images Most critics argue the Senate's bill doesn't go far enough, but with respect to Medicaid, Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri says it went too far. The House version freezes new provider taxes, strengthens work requirements, and puts forth certain cuts to the program in order to ensure only eligible individuals are receiving Medicaid benefits. This was crucial in securing support from fiscal conservatives like Roy, who otherwise were inclined to vote against the bill in the House. The Senate version takes these cuts one step further, capping the expansion states' charges at 3.5% by 2031. Hawley said he was "alarmed" by this provision, noting that many rural hospitals in low-income areas rely on support from the federal government. "This is gonna defund rural hospitals effectively in order to, what, pay for solar panels in China?” Hawley said. “I’ll be really interested to see what the president thinks about this."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A former Coast Guard officer has been arrested after he allegedly repeatedly fantasized on social media about assassinating President Donald Trump, court documents indicate.On Monday, Peter Stinson of Oakton, Virginia, was arrested for allegedly making threats to kill the president. Court documents revealed a man apparently obsessed with Trump's death.'If we’re planning murders, I’d like to suggest an orange one.'Stinson was a Coast Guard officer from 1988 until 2021, during which time he rose to the rank of lieutenant and received awards for his skill as a sharpshooter. He also conducted trainings for the FEMA Incident Command Systems, described as a series of courses designed to help first responders during disasters and emergencies.'Three inches to the right, and the shot woulda gone through the eyeball.'Since at least April 2020, Stinson has allegedly been ranting wildly on social media about the urgent need to kill Trump, whom he often appeared to refer to using coded words like "orange." The following alleged social media posts are but a small fraction of the statements included in the criminal complaint against Stinson: "The orange must go. At any cost.""Somebody ought to do more than sue the orange mf’s a**," adding, “It involves a rifle and a scope, but I can’t talk about it here.”"Yes, I would pull the trigger. Would you?" he allegedly said in response to a post about Trump and his supporters."If we’re planning murders, I’d like to suggest an orange one."RELATED: 'Politically motivated assassination': Minnesota Democrat rep and husband gunned down — state senator, wife wounded Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty ImagesIn reaction to the near-assassination of Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, in July 2024, Stinson allegedly wrote: "What a**h**e thought he was good enough to complete the mission and then so really f**k up? S**t takes skills. Practice. Etc. Most of us are not capable. As noted before, I’m not a good enough shot. Very few people are. Somebody needs to learn this lesson.""Three inches to the right, and the shot woulda gone through the eyeball. Practice. Practice. Practice. And to die in the process. If you’re going to do something big, get it right [winking emoticon].""Execution is critical."Gunfire was not the only method Stinson allegedly imagined might work to kill Trump. He also allegedly mentioned poisoning Trump, running him over with a car, and stabbing him. "The Ides of March can’t get here fast enough," he allegedly posted in February.'This is war. Sides will be drawn. Antifa always wins in the end. Violence is inherently necessary.'Stinson even allegedly alluded to notorious murder suspect Luigi Mangione, accused of gunning down UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December. Trump "needs to be luigied," Stinson allegedly wrote back in March.RELATED: ‘Saint Luigi’? America’s moral compass couldn’t be more broken Photo by Curtis Means - Pool/Getty ImagesStinson is also apparently affiliated with Antifa, reportedly including "#antifa" in his X profile and "Virginia Antifa" in his Bluesky profile."This is war. Sides will be drawn. Antifa always wins in the end. Violence is inherently necessary," he posted in February, according to the complaint.Stinson has been identified as the interviewee in a YouTube video entitled "THE MAYDAY MOVEMENT - Peter Stinson Interview." In the video, Stinson repeatedly demands Trump's impeachment and removal from office, but stops short of calling for violence."I first swore an oath to the Constitution 45 years ago," he explained to the interviewer. "... I always thought until very recently that the the swearing to protect the Constitution 'against all enemies foreign and domestic,' I thought it was more of a metaphor, and it's not."In a statement posted to Facebook, Mayday Movement USA expressed a "high degree of suspicion" about the allegations leveled at co-founder Stinson: We learned today that Peter is charged with threatening President Trump. We think these charges are exaggerated and overblown. The Peter we know has been very clear that the only solution to Donald Trump's transgressions is impeachment and removal, the Constitutionally sanctioned remedy. We would be surprised if Peter made any comments suggesting he was inclined toward violence.According to ABC News, Stinson did not enter a plea for the charges against him and will remain in custody at least until his detention hearing on Wednesday.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!