Biden's Pic With Kids Sets People Talking‚ As He Tells Another Bizarre Story and Lie About the Race

Self-Inflicted Wound: Google's Pro-Hamas Employees Wage Sit-In Until It Drops Business with Israel

It's a bizarre 600-year-old puzzle.

The iconic mystery has a shocking origin.

Unexpected weapons to fight superbugs.

James Hetfield resonates with Pete Townshend's rhythm guitar and lyrical themes. The post James Hetfield’s favourite song by The Who: “It reminds me of me” first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

As humanity descends into digital madness‚ the air crackles with strange prophecies. We’re told “godlike” artificial intelligence will soon arrive. Techno-cultists assure us that artificial intelligence will solve the world’s problems‚ such as writer’s block and climate change. AI may even calculate the meaning of the universe. These Silicon Valley sects are like UFO cults for people who don’t believe in aliens but do believe in magic computers. Before long‚ I fear‚ the masses will begin praying to AI gods. They will ask machines to answer their deepest questions. Their glowing oracles will reply with things like: “buy more Google stock” or “tell your sexbot you love her.” In time‚ the rise of techno-religions will create a new set of problems — even as frustrated writers continue to have nothing to say and the climate continues to change. Subscribe to The American Spectator to receive our latest print magazine‚ which includes this article and others like it. OpenAI executive Sam Altman is a prime example. In late 2022‚ his company set off a cultural firestorm with the release of ChatGPT‚ a large language model capable of conducting a person’s research and analysis. By most metrics — including the USA Biolympiad and the LSAT — ChatGPT outperforms average humans at fact-retrieval and writing. Emboldened by this technical achievement‚ Bill Gates and Sal Khan say every child should have an AI tutor. More importantly‚ such programs provide a direct interface with etheric digital minds. For the credulous‚ it feels like speaking to another soul. Chatbots‚ used to power social robots‚ form a bridge between artificial intelligence and the physical world. In that sense‚ an AI’s “soul” can be made incarnate.  Back in 2013‚ two years before he co-founded OpenAI‚ Altman shared a quote on his blog: “Successful people create companies.… The most successful people create religions.” The idea drips with implicit cynicism. “It got me thinking‚” Altman mused‚ “the most successful founders do not set out to create companies. They are on a mission to create something closer to a religion‚ and at some point it turns out that forming a company is the easiest way to do so.” This article is taken from The American Spectator’s latest print magazine. Subscribe to receive the entire magazine. This corporate religiosity — a world where logos are sacred symbols‚ mission statements are creeds‚ and top executives are saints — was born of American optimism. Today‚ that gilded faith is accelerating toward some dismal omega point in the Future. Artificial intelligence advances just ahead of robotics. Brain-computer interfaces are catching up to genetic engineering. Digital currency pulses through the system like electric blood. Mammon-worship is coming to full realization through technology. The average consumer may not believe any of it‚ but that hardly matters. The people selling them the Future are true believers.  Last year‚ billionaire investor Marc Andreessen wove this infernal thread into his “Techno-Optimist Manifesto.” The document is a “materialist” declaration of religious aspiration. “We can advance to a far superior way of living‚ and of being‚” the manifesto promises. “We believe Artificial Intelligence is our alchemy‚ our Philosopher’s Stone — we are literally making sand think. We believe Artificial Intelligence is best thought of as a universal problem solver.” Lest the reader be tempted to ascribe leftist or globalist intent to Andreessen‚ it should be emphasized that he’s an American nationalist and intensely anti-communist. “We believe in accelerationism‚” the manifesto goes on‚ “to ensure the techno-capital upward spiral continues forever.” This Promethean ascent hinges on a total transformation of our species “as people form symbiotic relationships with machines.” The manifesto concludes with a list of “Patron Saints of Techno-Optimism‚” featuring such conservative icons as Paul Johnson and Thomas Sowell. Ray Kurzweil is also on the list. The Google director is best known for his prediction that digital intelligence will soon surpass human intelligence a trillion fold‚ forcing us to fuse our minds and bodies with various devices. Any holdouts will be cast into the dustbin of irrelevance. Kurzweil puts the date for this technological “Singularity” at 2045. By then‚ computers will have become gods. Hardwired cyborgs and uploaded personalities will be functionally immortal. “There will be no distinction‚” he says‚ “post-Singularity‚ between human and machine or between actual and virtual reality.” The skeptic might say Kurzweil and his followers have already lost the distinction between actual and virtual reality. Investors couldn’t care less. At the top of Andreessen’s “patron saint” list is @BasedBeffJezos‚ the X handle for the once pseudonymous Guillaume Verdon. This Diet Coke–guzzling coder started the surprisingly popular “effective accelerationist” (e/acc) movement to combat the degrowth agenda of the well-funded “effective altruists.” Not to get lost in their techie drama‚ but if old-school transhumanists are akin to Catholics‚ think of this young crop of “effective accelerationists” and “effective altruists” as Lutherans and Anglicans fighting a world war online. “For me‚ e/acc is a form of spirituality‚” Verdon writes‚ “it’s about contributing to something greater than one’s self through building technology.” In other posts‚ he elaborated that “e/acc is a meta-culture/meta-religion” that is “compatible with many existing religions.” But it’s also a self-contained belief system meant to replace hopeless atheism. “If we can fill the religion-shaped void with e/acc or similar techno-optimist ideologies‚” he said‚ “we will live in a better world.” Artwork created via AI The latter point is crucial. Traditional religions exalt higher intelligences above the human mind — God‚ angels‚ devas‚ and buddhas. But these religions fare poorly in the developed world‚ especially among the young. Religion’s influence has faded‚ along with its moral limits and responsibilities. For wistful souls‚ the resulting “religion-shaped void” is pretty depressing. The transhuman impulse — the drive to go beyond human limits by way of technology‚ even to the point of abandoning our humanity — arises from a godless cosmos. The evolutionary view begins with atoms and the void. It moves through various organic forms and presently sees the human brain as the highest intelligence in the known universe. Artificial intelligence holds out the promise of a tangible higher power. If God does not exist — and if aliens aren’t coming to save us — then we must create our own gods. The problem is that God does exist. Yet those blind to the divine‚ or impatient for results‚ want their own custom-built gods. This is an old tendency. But unlike ancient statues‚ the new idols speak in a clear robotic voice. Their words descend from the world order’s apex. As AI becomes more sophisticated‚ so will the cults surrounding them‚ until they become full-blown religions. You may refuse to bow to these digital gods‚ just as early Christians denied the Roman emperor’s divinity‚ or Israelites rejected the gods of Egypt and Babylon. In terms of worldly power‚ such doubts may be irrelevant. If today’s techno-cults reach a critical mass of believers‚ we’ll be clinging to our Bibles and guns under a cyborg theocracy. Joe Allen is transhumanism editor at War Room: Pandemic and author of Dark Aeon: Transhumanism and the War Against Humanity. Subscribe to The American Spectator to receive our latest print magazine on the future of religion in America. The post Techno-Religion Will Snare the Unbeliever appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The great historian Victor Davis Hanson titled his book on World War II The Second World Wars because the conflicts that evolved into that global war began as separate wars: Japan versus China; Italy versus Ethiopia; Japan versus Soviet Russia; Soviet Russia and Germany versus Poland; Soviet Russia versus Finland; England and France versus Germany; Italy versus France; Germany versus Soviet Russia; Japan versus the United States and England; and Germany and Italy versus the United States. Similarly‚ in 1912 fighting broke out in the Balkans; then Austria-Hungary went to war against Serbia; Germany declared war on Russia; Russia waged war on Austria-Hungary; Germany attacked Belgium and France‚ and England declared war on Germany. Later‚ Italy and the United States joined the war. Those conflicts also evolved into a global war waged on five continents‚ on the high seas‚ and in the air. Writing in his 1919 geopolitical masterpiece Democratic Ideals and Reality‚ Sir Halford Mackinder noted that “[W]e have had a world war about every hundred years for the last four centuries.” Some historians identify the Seven Years War (1756≠1763) as the first global conflict — a war that began on the North American Continent between Britain and France (we know it as the French and Indian War) and spread to continental Europe and beyond. The wars of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars (1789–1815) likewise began as separate wars between Britain and France and spread throughout continental Europe and on the high seas. There was nothing inevitable about those separate regional conflicts spreading to other parts of the globe. Statesmen and political leaders made decisions that collectively led to global wars. Few could have imagined that skirmishes in western Pennsylvania in 1754 would set the continent of Europe ablaze two years later‚ and that the fighting would last until 1763. No one foresaw that France’s revolution in 1789 would produce wars for the next 25 years. None of Europe’s late-19th century statesmen‚ with the exception of Bismarck‚ imagined sparks from the Balkans igniting four years of total war. Likewise‚ it was only Winston Churchill and a handful of other observers in the 1930s who sensed that a rearmed Germany and militaristic Japan could engulf the world in its most terrible and tragic war. Today‚ we see separate wars in Eastern Europe and the Middle East‚ and a gathering storm in the western Pacific. Russia is at war with Ukraine‚ which is being aided by NATO countries‚ including the United States. Iran through proxies (Hamas and Hezbollah) and now directly is waging war against Israel‚ which is being aided by the United States and other countries. China‚ like Germany in Europe the 1930s‚ is increasingly aggressive in the western Pacific‚ repeatedly threatening and pressuring Taiwan‚ which is supported by the United States‚ Japan‚ and other nations in the region. Respected scholars and observers of international politics express concerns that these separate conflicts may evolve into World War III. The countries involved in these separate conflicts include the nuclear armed powers of Russia‚ the United States‚ France and England (as part of NATO)‚ China‚ Israel‚ and possibly Iran. That fact should focus the minds of the political leaders of these countries‚ but there are other factors involved that could trump the fears of nuclear war. Iran’s leaders and their proxies are committed to the destruction of Israel. Russia views Ukraine as a wayward province. China sees control of Taiwan as the unfinished business of the Communist Revolution. The United States is committed to maintaining the geopolitical pluralism of Eurasia. Thucydides famously wrote that wars are produced by fear‚ honor‚ and interest. But statesmen must be reminded that global war is not inevitable. The policies and decisions of political leaders — not historical inevitability — will determine the outcome of these conflicts and whether the world is engulfed in a more terrible war than the Second World War. It is in times like these that stability and order must take precedence over anything else‚ including democracy promotion and ideological campaigns against “autocracy.” Cooler heads must prevail or we all will suffer the consequences. This doesn’t mean appeasement — which history teaches can lead to war instead of preventing it. But it also doesn’t mean unbridled belligerence‚ which can transform separate regional wars into global catastrophes. What the United States needs today are statesmen of the caliber of Bismarck or Disraeli‚ John Quincy Adams or Count Sergei Witte‚ Metternich or Castlereagh‚ Nixon or Kissinger. Alas‚ you will find none among the Biden national security team‚ who have for three years prioritized climate change‚ diversity‚ equity and inclusion‚ and a Wilsonian approach that emphasizes feel-good ideology over global order and stability. It would benefit all of the statesmen involved in today’s separate conflicts to read Robert Kaplan’s The Tragic Mind‚ which teaches that in international politics order and stability are the highest values‚ that there are no final solutions to international rivalries‚ that diplomacy must often aim at accepting lesser evils instead of perfect or ideal outcomes‚ that Utopian notions of universal freedom and liberty are chimeras‚ and that  a sense of the tragic — which comes from knowledge of both history and great literature — is an indispensable element of prudent statecraft. READ MORE from Francis P. Sempa: PBS Uses the Life of William F. Buckley Jr. to Highlight the ‘Dark Side of Conservatism’ ‘Where Do We Get Such Men&;#63;’: Lou Conter‚ Last USS Arizona Survivor‚ Dies at 102 The post How World Wars Begin appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

With the spring heat and summer closing in comes a time of excesses‚ unpleasant brushing against male bodies‚ shortness of air‚ and unbridled alcohol consumption. All of these are offensive to the stylish drinker. Communal drunkenness is to be shunned. More so if it includes the sharing of any concoction in the same container and the exchanging of drool on bottles or straws. Getting drunk at popular celebrations has no merit. Drinking when everyone else is drinking is too boring to be classy. The Time and the Place One can drink where one pleases. To comply with the law or not is not incompatible with elegance. But there are glasses that make a beautiful silhouette‚ and others that turn the person holding them into a caricature. During this time of year‚ you should always drink in moderation‚ except when everyone has decided it is time to give up drinking. Stylish drunkenness is never sought or planned. To plan to binge is typical of weak-charactered people with dubious tastes. To get plastered is‚ at the end of the day‚ the objective of those party goers who favor soirees where drinking is on a par with spraying wine all down your shirt‚ where flirting is tantamount to eating until you explode‚ or where the music is drowned out by all the shouting. The stylish inebriation knows neither the time nor date‚ nor the content of its fate. Nor the company‚ nor anything that will come to pass. What’s more‚ the stylish inebriation denies everything the following day. Although some scholars on the matter‚ such as my friend Manolo Portabella‚ consider that the refined thing to do at dawn is to “not deny anything that you are accused of having perpetrated the day before‚ however strange‚ absurd and impossible it may seem to you.” And perhaps Mr. Portabella is not wrong because in every gallant drunken episode‚ there are two key factors: improvisation and an inclination toward the absurd. This means that maybe you shouldn’t try to deny having insisted on leaving the cigarette machine a tip the night before. How to Act Idiots get drunk and chant political slogans‚ becoming even more annoying than they were before they started drinking. The intelligent person’s wit will be sparked by alcohol and will subsequently prefer to embark on a crusade with profound philosophical sermons on the subject of the Asian clam‚ to gather support to dancing the waltz in any modern nightclub‚ or to keep a strict silence‚ immensely eloquent as well as disconcerting for those who do not understand the aristocratic intemperance. Vandalism Apart from singing children’s campfire songs‚ nothing is more to be expected than smashing things up after drinking too much. Towns fail in the fight against vandalism because they try to convince young people that it makes them uncivil and unsympathetic citizens. When all it really does is make them a little bit more of an asshole. The difference between a wino bum and a stylish dipsomaniac is that the former goes around kicking in the doors of stores‚ while the latter tries to repaint worn out zebra crossings with Tipp-ex‚ while taking great care not to stain his suit. Bathroom During very special summer intoxications‚ you can finish celebrating on the beach and even go skinny-dipping in the moonlight‚ a unique pleasure that the West has stupidly dethroned. Of course: the stylish drunkard must bathe fully clothed with no regard to his or her phone or wallet. That’s what’s funny‚ unpredictable‚ and cool. Doing it bare-assed with one arm up so as not to get the cell phone wet is just lame. Moreover‚ talentless lame. The Syllables The drunken lout becomes monosyllabic even in sentences that originally should have half a hundred syllables. They forget consonants‚ endlessly repeat themselves‚ and get so close to your nose to talk to you that it feels like they want to convince you by placing their argument directly in your brain. On the contrary‚ in refined drunkenness‚ one lets slip fleeting consonants‚ but strives to speak naturally to his interlocutor. Of course‚ if their interlocutor is sober‚ the drunken gallant looks for another who is at least playing on equal terms. If there are none‚ he or she will turn to the nearest inanimate object. Better a lamppost than a wastebasket. But the classiest thing to do is to sit on a bench and chat about current events in the world of cricket with the imaginary person next to you. Ideological Discussions In stylish inebriation one does not try to convince others of anything. On the contrary‚ one enthusiastically supports them in their most idiotic witticisms‚ knowing the destructive effect of gaining the support of a despicable drunkard. The Ladies The drunken gallant often returns to when men knew how to speak politely and respectfully to women. And like Don Quixote in his delirium‚ he strolls around the discotheque brandishing a glass and a smile‚ locking eyes with the most beautiful eyes‚ and chatting with the most beautiful women‚ with no other purpose than to avoid at all costs his drunkenness becoming evident. Stomach Bad drunks have stomach aches and evacuate what they have drunk in horrendous spectacles I will not describe so as not to torture you. The good gallant lacks a stomach‚ is unaware that there is a part of the body that takes care of such dirty things‚ and does not know how to conjugate the verb vomit. Verticality If one has miscalculated. If one drinks to be very happy‚ as Chesterton recommended — never drink for sadness — if one loses control of one’s distinguished drunkenness‚ one should officially declare an emergency. This can be done with a timely retreat‚ although this is more typical of cowards than of good men. That is why the guidelines for stylish drunkenness insist on the cult of verticality. The great litmus test. As long as one is able to remain upright‚ with a glass in hand‚ in a relaxed position‚ and able to remember one’s own name‚ the drunken bout proceeds along a path of good manners‚ distinction‚ and elegance. READ MORE: Pelosi and 36 Democrats Were Dying to Kiss the Hand of Hamas How to Have the Perfect Spring Picnic New York Times: The Country Is Going to Hell‚ but Be Happy The post A Guide to Getting Drunk in Style appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.